U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

35–589PDF WASHINGTON : 2019

THE STATE DEPARTMENT’S FOREIGN 

POLICY STRATEGY AND 

FY20 BUDGET REQUEST 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 27, 2019 

Serial No. 116–16 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

( 

Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://docs.house.gov, 

or http://www.govinfo.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York, Chairman 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

AMI BERA, California 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York 

TED LIEU, California 

SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania 

DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota 

ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota 

COLIN ALLRED, Texas 

ANDY LEVIN, Michigan 

ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia 

CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania 

TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey 

DAVID TRONE, Maryland 

JIM COSTA, California 

JUAN VARGAS, California 

VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas, Ranking 

Member 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

LEE ZELDIN, New York 

JIM SENSENBRENNER, Wisconsin 

ANN WAGNER, Missouri 

BRIAN MAST, Florida 

FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida 

BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

JOHN CURTIS, Utah 

KEN BUCK, Colorado 

RON WRIGHT, Texas 

GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania 

TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee 

GREG PENCE, Indiana 

STEVE WATKINS, Kansas 

MIKE GUEST, Mississippi 

JASON STEINBAUM, Staff Director 

BRENDAN SHIELDS, Republican Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

WITNESS 

Pompeo, Hon. Michael, Secretary, United States Department of State .............. 7 

ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

Information submitted for the record from Representative Cicilline .................. 45 

Information submitted for the record from Representative McCaul ................... 93, 94 

APPENDIX 

Hearing Notice ......................................................................................................... 97 

Hearing Minutes ...................................................................................................... 98 

Hearing Attendance ................................................................................................. 99 

STATEMENTS FOR THE RECORD 

Statement for the record submitted by Chairman Engel ..................................... 100 

Statement for the record submitted by Chairman Engel ..................................... 102 

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

Response to questions submitted by Chairman Engel ......................................... 103 

Response to questions submitted by Representative McCaul .............................. 222 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Sherman ............................ 223 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Perry ................................. 228 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Sires .................................. 232 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Burchett ............................ 239 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Keating .............................. 240 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Cicilline ............................. 242 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Bera ................................... 262 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Lieu ................................... 272 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Allred ................................ 283 

Response to questions submitted by Representative Houlahan .......................... 285 

(1) 

THE STATE DEPARTMENT’S FOREIGN POLICY 

STRATEGY AND FY20 BUDGET REQUEST 

Wednesday, March 27, 2019 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 12:35 p.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Eliot Engel (chairman 

of the committee) presiding. 

Chairman ENGEL [presiding]. The committee will come to order. 

Without objection, all members may have 5 days to submit statements, questions, and extraneous materials for the record, subject 

to the length limitation in the rules. 

Chairman ENGEL. This afternoon, we will hear testimony from 

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on the Trump Administration’s 

2020 international affairs budget request and a range of other 

issues dealing with the Administration’s foreign policy and management of the State Department. 

Welcome back to the House, Mr. Secretary. I know you spent 

many good days here, and I appreciated your reaching out shortly 

after the election when you were first nominated as Secretary of 

State. I value our open line of communication. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ENGEL. Welcome to the public and members of the 

press as well, especially our friends from C-SPAN who are celebrating its 40th birthday this week. 

So, let me, first of all, start with the budget. The Administration’s first budget request before you were Secretary, Mr. Secretary, was deeply disappointing. Slashing investments in diplomacy and development by nearly a third, it met resounding bipartisan rejection here in Congress. 

The second budget was baffling. After Congress made it clear we 

would not gut American diplomacy, the Administration made essentially the same request to do just that. Again, it was rejected. 

And the third budget, which, once again, in my opinion, seeks to 

hobble the State Department and other agencies, this, in my view, 

demonstrates contempt for diplomacy and diplomats and contempt 

for the Congress, frankly, whose job it is to decide how much to 

spend on foreign affairs. 

The first year, when the budget was sent, it was rejected, and 

we came up with our budget, in a bipartisan way I should say. And 

then, the second year, the Administration came to lowball us once 

again. And now, the third year, at the same time when the budget 

has been rejected twice before, why would the Administration send 

a similar budget, only to be rejected a third time? 
2 

So, Mr. Secretary, let me be clear, this budget request was dead 

the moment it arrived on Capitol Hill. I do not know whether the 

Administration really believes that we can mount an effective foreign policy, one that advances American interests, values, and security, on a shoestring budget, or if the people calling the shots just 

do not care. But Congress will not stand by and see American leadership on the global stage undermined, and that is not just our 

opinion; that is the power of the purse. That is what we are supposed to do. So, that is the good news. 

The bad news comes when the Administration shows the world 

just how little stock it puts in diplomacy and development, in building bridges of friendship and forging alliances, in resolving conflict 

and crises. This budget, in my opinion, signals to the world that 

the Trump foreign policy is one of disengagement, of pulling back 

from places where American leadership is needed the most. And we 

know other countries that do not share our values, countries like 

China and Russia and Iran, those countries are more than happy 

to fill the void. 

So, it also tells our diplomatic and development work force that 

their efforts are not valued. That has had an impact that we can 

already see. We see it in the plummeting morale at the State Department and the number of diplomats chased to the exits. We see 

it in report after report after report of politically motivated targeting and harassment of career employees, allegations on which 

the Department has failed to respond to multiple committee requests for information. We see it in the drop of the number of civil 

servants at the Department and the sharp decline in employee satisfaction, according to the Partnership for Public Service. 

And when I look at the Administration’s policies, I am left wondering how often, if State Department experts are being ignored 

completely. From denigrating our alliances; NATO; to cozying up to 

strongmen; to walking away from our international agreements 

and obligations; from an abortive summit with North Korea; to 

saber rattling in Venezuela; to clearing the way for Iran and Russia to run roughshod over Syria, if we leave; from waging a trade 

war with China that is hurting American farmers and consumers; 

to slamming the door on vulnerable people around the world seeking to come to our country, those do not seem like policies to me 

built on the expertise and experience that our diplomats offer. They 

seem like what I call fly by-the-seat-of-your-pants diplomacy. 

And so, as Congress exercises its constitutional responsibility in 

rejecting the inadequate budget request, this committee will also 

conduct oversight to deal with what I consider major problems in 

foreign policy and at the State Department. 

Mr. Secretary, I was hopeful that the Department would work 

collaboratively with us to allow this committee to carry out its constitutionally mandated oversight duties, but I must say, 3 months 

into this Congress, the response from the Department to our requests has ranged from foot-dragging to outright stonewalling. It is 

very frustrating, and that is not acceptable. I believe you would feel 

the same way, since I know you, if you were still a Member of this 

body. 

I hope the trend changes, but if it does not, I will use every tool 

at this committee’s disposal to get the answers we need. And I hope 
3 

we can get some of those answers today. I look forward to a frank 

conversation and to your testimony, Mr. Secretary. 

And before I introduce you, I will call on my friend, the ranking 

member, Mr. Mike McCaul of Texas, for any opening statement he 

may have. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, Mr. Secretary. I applaud the work that you are doing 

for our country. Let me say, in my recent visit to the State Department, I found that the morale is very good. 

Over the last 2 years, the Administration has embarked on a forward-leaning agenda which is putting America back where it needs 

to be. And I want to thank you for ending the era of leading from 

behind and strategic patience. The importance of our diplomatic 

mission cannot be overstated. With the growing crisis in Venezuela, 

an unpredictable North Korea, China and Russia creating mischief 

around the globe, terrorism on the rise in Africa, and Iran threatening Israel, we must show our strength through hands of diplomacy. 

The President’s budget request identifies our most challenging threats. For example, it includes $662 million to counter Russia’s 

malign influence in Europe and Eurasia. This vital assistance will 

support our allies like Ukraine to help enhance their cybersecurity 

infrastructure, to counter Russian attacks and their propaganda 

and disinformation campaigns. 

In regard to the Ukraine’s upcoming elections, I will closely 

watch, and I know you will as well, how the Russians interfere. It 

may be a precursor to what we will see here in 2020. 

The President’s budget proposal also contains some much-needed 

reforms. However, I do agree with the chairman; I believe that certain cuts have unintended consequences that cost us more in the 

long term. This is especially true of cuts to critical humanitarian 

and developmental assistance programs that promote democracy, 

support economic growth, and provide lifesaving resources to bolster stability in areas at risk of terrorism and extremist ideologies. 

As the former Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis once said, ‘‘If you 

do not fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more 

ammunition.’’ 

On terrorism, a few years ago, you and I had the opportunity to 

travel to Northern Africa and the Middle East, and I remember 

watching the F–18s taking off in the Persian Gulf from the deck 

of the Harry Truman to hit ISIS targets in Syria. Today, it almost 

feels a little surreal to be able to finally say that their so-called caliphate is gone. And I applaud your efforts in that mission. But we 

also still note the threat from ISIS, al-Qaeda, and others still remains. 

On fragile States, a key lesson from violent conflicts and fragile 

States is that they provide a fertile recruiting ground for terrorists 

and transnational criminal organizations. This broken model can 

be fixed, and we need to do more in terms of prevention. That is 

why Chairman Engel and I reintroduced our fragile States bill this 

Congress. It will require that the Administration launch a new initiative to coordinate our assistance to these broken States. 

On the Middle East, any strategy there must always include 

strengthening our ties with Israel. And for starters, I was very 
4 

proud of your efforts and the President’s to see our embassy move 

from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. 

Mr. Secretary, I want to applaud your efforts, also, in countering 

Iran. Some do not see their true menace. They are still the No. 1 

State sponsor of terror. They support Hezbollah, Hamas, and the 

Houthis, hold Americans hostage. They have an assassination campaign in Europe, a reckless missile program, suppress their people’s freedom, and let’s not forget want to wipe out Israel, and 

chant death to America. 

I applaud last week’s sanctions that target Iranian weapons of 

mass destruction proliferators. We cannot let Iran get nuclear 

weapons ever. 

On China, their government aggressively steals our intellectual 

property, threatens Taiwan, partakes in growing military adventurism, and targets both developed and underdeveloped nations 

through their One Belt One Road Initiative. 

I am very supportive of the action items laid out in your IndoPacific speech last year. As you know, many countries tell us America is just not there the way the Chinese and other countries are. 

And that is why I introduced the Championing American Business 

Through Diplomacy Act with Chairman Engel. In sum, it bolsters 

U.S. economic and commercial diplomacy by mandating that our 

diplomats have better training and do more to ensure countries do 

business with American companies rather than with the Chinese. 

On Venezuela, we can all agree that the socialist policies of Nicolas Maduro have turned the once rich country into a failed mafia 

State. With little food and medicine, millions of people are suffering 

more every day and forced to flee to other countries in the region. 

Maduro’s armed thugs are blocking the delivery of humanitarian 

aid. They have shot innocent civilians, kidnapped the chief of staff 

of Interim President Guaido, and just yesterday attacked Guaido’s 

motorcade. I would also like to note that Maduro has taken four 

Texans who work for Citgo and put them in a Venezuelan prison. 

I commend the President for supporting the people of Venezuela 

in their quest to take back their country through free and fair elections, and applaud neighbors like Colombia, Brazil, and the Lima 

Group for their effort. 

Secretary Pompeo, it is a great honor to welcome you today as 

a Secretary, as a former colleague, and a friend. And I have always 

said that partisanship, as the chairman says, must end at the 

water’s edge. This hearing gives us a chance to put partisan politics aside and offer solutions to complex issues. 

I look forward to your testimony. 

And I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. McCaul. 

And now, let me introduce our witness. Michael Pompeo is the 

70th United States Secretary of State, taking office April 26th of 

last year. From January 2017 until he became our top diplomat, 

Mr. Pompeo served as the sixth Director of the Central Intelligence 

Agency. From 2011 until 2017, he represented Kansas’ 4th congressional District right here in the U.S. House of Representatives. He 

is a lawyer, an entrepreneur, and from 1986 until 1991, served in 

the United States Army. 
5 

Mr. Secretary, welcome back to the House. We are pleased to 

have you with us today. And I now recognize you for 5 minutes to 

summarize your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL POMPEO, SECRETARY, UNITED 

STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Secretary POMPEO. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman 

Engel. Thank you, Ranking Member McCaul. I will be brief this 

morning. 

Thanks for the opportunity to discuss the Administration’s Fiscal 

Year budget. It is designed around the national security strategy 

to achieve our foreign policy goals. The request for $40 billion for 

State Department and USAID puts us in position to do just that. 

These moneys will protect our citizens at home and abroad, advance American prosperity and values, and support our allies and 

partners overseas. We make this request mindful of the burden on 

American taxpayers and take seriously our obligation to deliver exceptional results on their behalf. This budget will achieve our key 

diplomatic goals. Let me walk through many of them. 

First, we will make sure that China and Russia cannot gain a 

strategic advantage in an age of renewed great power competition. 

We will continue our progress toward final, fully verified 

denuclearization of North Korea, and we will support the people of 

Venezuela as they work toward a peaceful restoration of their democracy, so they can achieve prosperity in their once rich nation. 

And we will continue to confront the threat posed by the Islamic 

Republic of Iran and its maligned behavior. We will work to help 

our allies and partners around the world to become more secure 

and economically self-reliant as well. 

I take it as a personal mission to make sure that our world-class 

diplomatic personnel have the resources they need to execute 

America’s diplomacy in the 21st century. Mr. Chairman, I know 

that you, too, care deeply about the welfare of our dedicated professionals. I have seen it. They get up every day and carry out the 

Department’s vital national security and foreign policy missions. 

And like you, my foremost priority is to ensure we have the resources to recruit, hire, develop, retain, and empower them to remain the world’s finest diplomatic team. We especially need the extremely qualified individuals we nominated to serve in important 

management positions across the Department, many of whom have 

been awaiting Senate confirmation since last year. I also appreciate 

this committee’s focus on ensuring that the 75,000 men and women 

of the Department’s work force are treated respectfully and justly. 

I have great respect for the committee’s oversight role, and I 

work to ensure that those commitments are carried out. When I 

served in this chamber, I pressed Administration officials hard 

about the importance of executive branch responsiveness to requests from Congress, and my team will continue to work with 

yours to fulfill your requests for briefings, meetings, information 

from the Department, to work constructively to identify how we 

can appropriately respond to the committee’s oversight and investigative requests. 
6 

I look forward to continuing to work with you on all of these key 

foreign policy priorities and many more. And I will now end my remarks, so that we will have fulsome time for a good conversation. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Secretary Pompeo follows:] 
7 

SECRETARY OF STATE MIKE POMPEO 

WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE 

ON THE FY 2020 BUDGET 

MARCH 27,2019 

Chairman Engel, Ranking Member McCaul, and distinguished members of the Committee: 

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Administration's FY 2020 budget request for the State 

Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). 

To support our National Security Strategy and achieve our foreign policy goals, the President has 

submitted an FY 2020 budget request of$40 billion for the State Department and USAID. 

The proposed request will allow us to protect our citizens at home and abroad, advance 

American prosperity and values, and support our allies and partners overseas. 

It will promote partner countries' economic and security self-reliance as they begin to transition 

away from U.S. assistance programs, which the American people have generously underwritten 

for decades. 

We make this request mindful of the burden on American taxpayers, and our obligation to 

deliver exceptional results on their behalf. 

*** 

In an era of great power competition, the State Department and USAJD's work is key to our 

1 
8 

security, the protection of our freedoms, and the promotion of American values. 

China is proactively applying its power and exerting its inOuence in the Indo-Pacific region and 

beyond. Under President Trump's leadership, the United States is responding decisively to 

China's aggressive actions. The United States' future security, prosperity, and leadership 

depends on maintaining a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific. To advance the Indo-Pacific 

strategy, the budget request nearly doubles U.S. foreign assistance resources targeting this 

crucial area compared to the FY 2019 request. 

Russia poses threats that have evolved beyond external or military aggression, and now include 

influence operations targeting America and the Western world. This budget prioritizes 

countering Russian malign influence in Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia, and further 

strengthens the Department's own systems against malign actors. 

Our diplomatic efforts toward the final, fully-verified denuclearization of North Korea are the 

most successful that have ever been undertaken. We remain committed to that goal. This budget 

provides for our diplomatic outreach to continue, and to continue implementation and 

enforcement of sanctions until we achieve our objective. 

We know that the Islamic Republic of Iran's authoritarian regime will continue to use their 

nation's resources to proliferate conflict in Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and beyond. It will continue to 

bankroll terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. 

2 
9 

The United States will therefore work together with our allies and partners to counter Tehran's 

aggressive actions to undermine peace and security in the Middle East and beyond. 

As the people of Venezuela continue to fight for their freedom, the budget request includes 

funding to support democracy and prosperity in V cnezuela. The budget also requests new 

authority to support a democratic transition in Venezuela, including transferring up to $500 

million to foreign assistance accounts. 

The budget also delivers on the President's commitment to optimize the effectiveness of our 

outdated and fragmented overseas humanitarian assistance. It ensures the United States will 

remain the world's largest single donor of humanitarian assistance. The proposal maximizes the 

impact of taxpayer dollars, helps more beneficiaries, and delivers the greatest outcomes by 

consolidating our humanitarian programming in a new bureau at USAID. This budget request 

also preserves the State Department's lead role on protection issues, as well as the U.S. refugee 

admissions program. Further, through available funding in 2019 and 2020, the United States will 

have on average approximately $9 billion available per year to supp01t overseas humanitarian 

programs, maintaining the highest level of U.S. overseas humanitarian funding ever. 

President Trump has made the protection of religious freedom a key priority at home and abroad. 

The Fiscal Year 2020 budget supports our efforts to continue U.S.leadership in the promotion of 

global religious freedom and the protection of persecuted religious and ethnic minorities all 

around the world. This July, the State Department will host the second annual Ministerial to 

Advance Religious Freedom. 

3 
10 

American assistance is helping to reverse the devastation and suffering caused by ISIS and 

associated terrorist groups. But much work remains to be done. Working by, with, and through 

local partners and community leaders, our assistance programs clear explosive remnants of war 

to help keep families safe, restore access to critical health and education services, improve 

economic oppmiunities, and more. 

As we work to promote economic growth, the Fiscal Year 2020 budget includes a request for 

$100 million for a new Fund at USAlD for the White House-led Women's Global Development 

and Prosperity Initiative. Through the Fund, we will work to find and scale proposals that 

advance women's economic empowerment across the developing world, in support of the 

Initiative's goal of reaching 50 million women by 2025. 

There are few efforts as important to this Administration and to the safety and security of the 

American people as border security. The State Dcpatimcnt and US AID budget request will 

strengthen visa vetting, and improve our targeting of illicit pathways that transnational criminal 

organizations use to traffic people, drugs, money, and weapons into our nation. 

President Trump has made it clear that U.S. foreign assistance should serve America's interests, 

and should support countries that help us to advance our foreign policy goals. This budget 

therefore maintains critical support for key U.S. allies, including Israel, Jordan, Egypt, and 

Colombia, among others. 

4 
11 

The FY 2020 request also includes $175 million for a Diplomatic Progress Fund. These funds 

will be used to respond to new oppottunities arising from potential progress in diplomatic and 

peace efforts around the world. 

Finally, the diplomatic challenges we face today are compounded by rapid advancements in 

technology and an ever-changing media environment. We need our colleagues to be safe, 

prepared, and ready to take on any challenge at a moment's notice. The FY 2020 budget will 

fully fund State and USA I D's current workforce levels, enabling us to take on emerging policy 

challenges. We are also modernizing our human resources, IT infrastructure, and organizational 

structures to stay on the cutting edge of 21st century innovation. 

We must continue to put American interests first and remain a beacon of freedom to the world. 

With the support of Congress, and through the strategic, efficient use of resources, this budget 

will do just that. 

Thank you. 

5 
12 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. 

I will now begin with my questions, and after my time has expired, I will recognize members for 5 minutes for the purpose of 

questioning the witness. 

So, I have three questions. I am going to try to get them in. And 

so, if you could give us a short answer, perhaps it would work, and 

then, we will follow it up. 

Mr. Secretary, from your experience in Congress investigating 

Benghazi, you know, of course, that we cannot conduct our constitutional oversight duties effectively if the executive branch 

stonewalls or drags its feet on committee requests for information. 

I want you to know, for over a year, the State Department has not 

responded to my concerns about allegations that senior officials targeted career employees for improper reasons, including their work 

for previous Administrations, their sexual orientation, and even 

their national origin. As you know, the Inspector General will finish his investigation of this matter shortly. You testified last May 

that people engaged in such targeting should not be working at the 

State Department. 

I am holding two emails from 2017 right here from a senior official, Brian Hook. In one, he pledges to gather intel on an employee 

who was, quote, ‘‘born in Iran’’. On the other, he makes a list of 

employees. I was shocked to see how he characterized these employees, not by anything related to their job performance, but by 

national origin, ethnicity, perceived political affiliation, and even 

gossip that some might be troublemakers. 

So, I want to ask you an easy question. Is targeting employees 

for these reasons appropriate? 

Secretary POMPEO. I came onboard and immediately made sure 

that both the Office of Special Counsel and the OIG had all the information they needed to complete their investigation. And I am 

disappointed that they have not completed their work yet and hope 

that they will do so soon. Other than that, I am not going to respond to anything about any particular person, but I can assure 

you I want every employee at the Department of State treated with 

the dignity that they deserve because of their humanness. 

Chairman ENGEL. Can you tell us, then, Mr. Secretary, why have 

not you shared with us any of the information? 

Secretary POMPEO. I think we have shared a great deal. We have 

come over and we have talked with you. We have talked with folks 

on the Senate as well. We are working diligently to comply with 

the requests that you have. 

It is complicated when you have IG investigations and Special 

Counsel investigations. You would be the first to remind me that, 

if we started asking hard questions of the IG, it would suggest that 

I might be trying to improperly interfere with their work. And I 

have tried to do everything I can to make sure that accusations 

like that could not possibly be leveled. 

Chairman ENGEL. I just want you to know that I have here the 

OIG’s email confirming that they have no problems with the Department providing these documents to Congress. It has just been 

very frustrating, and I am sure you can understand, the 

stonewalling we have been getting for over a year now. And it is 

very frustrating. All we want to know is what we are entitled to 
13 

know. A call from your staff just days before this hearing in which 

they did not agree to produce any documents is really not a goodfaith effort. So, I would hope, based on what you have said, that 

you will provide us the documents the committee requested, and I 

hope you can do that within 1 week. There is nothing outlandish 

or outrageous. We are just trying to do our jobs. 

I want to ask you a question about Syria. I am very worried 

about President Trump’s statement that we are going to pull out 

of Syria. I do not want the United States to be in a foreign country 

any more than we have to, but pulling out of Syria would be a betrayal to the Kurds, our faithful allies for many, many years; saved 

American lives. It would create problems for our ally Israel because 

it would put the Iranian regime right on Israel’s border. And if and 

when we ever had to come back, it would probably result in more 

American casualties. Right now, we seem to have the situation 

pretty much in hand. 

So, I hope that the President’s precipitous statement that we 

were going to, after he allegedly spoke with Mr. Erdogan of Turkey, 

that we were going to pull out of Syria soon, immediately, or whatever, is not the truth, is not so, and that we have rethought it. And 

can you give us some assurances on that? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not want to speak about particular troop 

levels. I will leave that to the Department of Defense. But I can 

talk about the policy. The President has made clear he wants to 

put as few American soldiers’ lives at risk as he possibly can and 

do so while achieving America’s important policy interests. I think 

we can do that. 

By the way, I have a senior State Department official who is 

working diligently to implement U.N. Security Council Resolution 

2254 and to work with the Turks and with the Kurds to create conditions on the ground, in the real estate that separates Syria and 

Turkey, so that we can continue to maintain the vigilance that led 

to the destruction of the caliphate. 

It is a longer answer, but this fits inside our policy throughout 

the Middle East, whether it is Iraq or in Syria, the work that we 

are doing to help Lebanon, the work we are doing with our Gulf 

partners to achieve precisely what it is I think you describe, a secure situation for the American people and an increase in the stability throughout the Middle East. 

Chairman ENGEL. And, of course, we do not need Iran in Syria 

or Russia in Syria, right up to Israel’s northern border. 

Secretary POMPEO. That is correct. 

Chairman ENGEL. Let me finally ask you this question: the Balkans, how is the U.S. pushing back on Russian encroachment in 

the Balkans? I am very supportive of the independence of Kosovo, 

very supportive of the U.S. alliance with Kosovo. I would like to see 

Kosovo in the United Nations, in all the international organizations. I know they are having negotiations with Serbia, but Serbia 

is actually trying to undermine them the minute they walk away 

by trying to get other nations to withdraw their recognition of 

Kosovo, by making noise in terms of preventing them from getting 

into INTERPOL, and some of the other international organizations. 
14 

I just want to say that I hope the Administration stands by our 

ally. I know of no country that is more pro-American than Kosovo. 

And I just would like to hear you respond to that. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We are watching the situation closely. We understand all the 

rest. Under Secretary Hale was in the region not too terribly long 

ago. He reported back to me on the challenges. We understand 

Russia’s efforts to influence and use various forms of power to control that region. 

And I would be happy—I know you want short answers—I would 

be happy to talk to you in detail about how it is we are trying to 

achieve those through all the diplomatic tools we have, not only the 

soft power of diplomacy, but through our economic tools as well. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Mr. McCaul? 

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me first say, Mr. Secretary, that the chairman and I will be 

working in a bipartisan fashion to plus-up your budget. I think we 

need stability throughout the globe, and we look forward to working with you on that issue. 

Tomorrow, the chairman and I will be traveling to the Venezuelan border in Colombia. And I have kind of a two-part question. First is I do not think failure is an option here, but what 

would be the consequences for the United States and the region if 

Maduro succeeds in Venezuela? And the second part is, if Maduro 

does not succeed, what would a post-Maduro reconstruction strategy look like? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, I am of the nature that I try not to contemplate failure too often, but we have certainly considered what 

the risks are associated with the efforts that we have provided to 

date and the efforts. Frankly, you mentioned the Lima Group, all 

the countries in the region now, some 50-some that have recognized 

the proper leader, as designated by the Venezuelan people through 

their constitution. 

Look, we have seen Russia continue trying to exert influence. We 

know that the Cubans are providing substantial support to the 

Maduro regime. Allowing Maduro to continue will have as its primary negative outcome continued destruction of the Venezuelan 

economy and real hardship for the Venezuelan people. It will certainly have an importance in terms of the risk of terror, the risk 

of chaos, the economic, and refugees flowing from those regions, 

from Venezuela to the region as well. So, there is lots of downside 

if the Venezuelan people’s objective is not achieved. 

Second, the day and week after is going to be a long process. The 

Maduro regime’s destruction of the economy in Venezuela is not as 

a result of the sanctions that the United States has put in place 

over the last months. This is years of socialist leadership that has 

completely put their primary revenue source, their fossil fuel resources, in a place that is going to cost, I have seen estimates between $6 and $12 billion, and years to repair. So, the day after 

means making sure the Cuban and Russian influence are out; 

Maduro and his cronies are all gone, and we begin to rebuild the 

democracy. And the world will have to provide the economic assistance to get them through this transition period. 
15 

The United States will certainly be part of it, but I am confident 

we will find the coalition that we have built, some 50 countries 

strong, that our State Department has built, will be part of that 

as well. 

Mr. MCCAUL. And thank you. I think it is an historic opportunity 

for the region, the hemisphere. I think it will transform Venezuela, 

which is now a failed State. It was a prosperous nation. Now, 20 

years later, it is in utter chaos. And I think it would also impact 

Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia. It could really transform the Western 

Hemisphere and be a major foreign policy victory. 

On China, as I get my threat briefings, Islamist terror has always been the focus, but it seems to me that China now is becoming more the No. 1 threat in nation States. Can you tell me about 

the threat from China? In particular, what I am concerned about 

is the One Belt One Road Initiative. You know, their theft of intellectual property—they are in our medical institutions, our universities. But the One Belt One Road, they are literally overleveraging 

countries, and particularly in Africa, too, where they can take over 

these countries without a shot fired. And they are in Sri Lanka 

now—they have that port—and in Djibouti. 

What is the Administration doing to counter the Chinese threat? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, the first thing we did is we identified it, 

something previous Administrations were loath to do. I get it. We 

have important economic interests with China. Many American 

jobs depend on that. President Trump is doing his level best to set 

the trade relationship so that it is fair and reciprocal. So, I would 

describe that as the first thing the Administration did. 

The second thing is we recognize this is a great power battle and 

we are engaged in it across the world. It is our support of ASEAN. 

It is identifying the threat from Chinese State-owned enterprise 

technology companies, sharing that with countries in the Middle 

East and in Europe, identifying these risks, so that Western democracies around the world will wake up to the risks and will push 

back. 

And you mentioned One Belt One Road, in particular. We are 

doing our best to make sure that there are Western competitors 

every place there is a project that China is putting forth. We are 

happy to compete. If it is fair, transparent, open transaction, you 

know, the Chinese may win a few, but I am very confident that 

American businesses will do incredibly well there. 

What we have seen is just the opposite. We have seen transactions that were not straight-up, that were not fair, that were designed with a national security interest, and not an economic interest for the people of their country. The State Department has 

shared with these countries and their people and their leadership 

the risks from entering into these. And frankly, I think countries 

throughout Asia/Southeast Asia are waking up to this concern as 

well. 

Mr. MCCAUL. And let me just close. I know my time has expired. 

Just commending you for your engagement with Kim Jong-un in 

North Korea. I think that is vitally important, given the threat 

that we face in the region. I also commend you for walking away 

from the table. I think the best thing Ronald Reagan did was walk-
16 

ing away from the table from the Soviets, and then we, ultimately, 

saw the end of the cold war. 

And I think just to get a deal, like the Iran deal, for instance, 

it is not adequate. We need a good deal. And so, thank you, sir. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. McCaul. 

We will now go to Mr. Sires. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary of State, thank you and welcome. 

I want to talk a little bit about the Western Hemisphere and 

what is going on. I see a bigger plan in what is going on in Venezuela I think than most people. I see a lot of similarities of what 

happened with Cuba and what is happening in Venezuela. In 

Cuba, they allowed the people to leave that were disenchanted with 

the government. In Venezuela, there are 5,000 people leaving every 

day. They expect, by the end of this year, to be about 5 million people that have left Venezuela, those who are disenchanted with this 

government. 

I really believe that there is a bigger plan here to destabilize the 

Western Hemisphere with what is going on in Venezuela. You have 

a million people putting a great deal of pressure on Colombia, and 

they have opened their doors and they have done a great job in 

helping these people. You have 700,000 people going into Peru. You 

have people all the way down to Argentina. Some of these countries 

cannot absorb the quantity of people that are leaving Venezuela 

daily. So, to me, I think this is part of a bigger plan to destabilize 

this whole region. 

It continues to keep us busy. It continues to make America the 

bad apple in all this. And I would hope that we will continue to 

put pressure on Maduro. I do not believe in military action, but I 

do believe that sanctions will be effective and working with the 

Lima Group will be very effective. 

This afternoon, I am meeting with Fabiana Rosales, the wife of 

Guaido. She is very concerned about her husband. She feels that 

any day now they are going to pick him up, and God knows where 

they are going to put him. 

Are we prepared to increase our sanctions and make it even 

harder for Maduro to continue being in power if anything like this 

happens? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. SIRES. Do you know, can you share with us kind of sanctions 

would you be considering? 

Secretary POMPEO. What we have done so far is historic. 

Mr. SIRES. I agree with what they are doing so far. 

Secretary POMPEO. And your analysis, I actually share most all 

of the analysis that you just laid out as well of the risks to the region. I would prefer not to get out ahead of what we are prepared 

to sanction and what we are not, but suffice it to say, you have this 

Administration’s commitment to continue to work to deliver for the 

Venezuelan people. Whether that is economic sanctions, sanctions 

on family members, military leaders, our outreach through diplomats to try and convince the Venezuelan army of the fool’s errand it is to stand with this thug, we are hard at it. 
17 

Mr. SIRES. I am concerned that it is going to go from Venezuela 

to Nicaragua. I mean, Nicaragua last year bought $80 million 

worth of tanks from Russia. They are one of the poorest countries, 

if not the poorest, in the region. So, to me, they are going on the 

same path. 

This idea that somehow they are having this dialogue now, they 

keep walking away from this dialogue with the opposition. And it 

is only a matter of time until they pull one of these Maduro issues 

where they become absolute power. 

Are we willing to put sanctions on Nicaragua if they go the same 

way as Venezuela? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am confident that we will respond. If the 

threat is similar and the risks are similar, we will respond in a 

similar fashion. 

Mr. SIRES. And the last thing I have is, Uruguay, Mexico, they 

were talking about somehow some sort of dialogue to see if they 

could move Maduro out. Has the Administration talked to these 

two countries in terms—I think Brazil was probably involved in 

that also—to see if they could help in moving this guy out of there 

before more people die? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, we have been in conversations with, I 

personally have been in conversations with each of those two governments. And I must say, there is no evidence that there is any 

value in speaking with Maduro at this time. His time has come; his 

time has gone. It is time for him to leave. 

Mr. SIRES. I have so many questions, but my time is running out. 

But I know the Turks—— 

Secretary POMPEO. I tried to be brief. 

Mr. SIRES. You are; you have been. 

The Turks, the Iranians are in Venezuela. Very concerned. 

And thank you for being here. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Chairman. 

Secretary POMPEO. May I just add to that? And they have provided financial assistance and support to the Maduro regime at a 

time when it was incredibly unconstructive. 

Mr. SIRES. And I see that the Russians landed 100 soldiers, or 

something, the other day? 

Secretary POMPEO. That is correct. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Smith? 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, welcome and thank you for your great leadership 

and for being here today. 

A few months ago, I chaired a hearing on the Chinese government’s complicity in the production and trafficking of fentanyl. As 

we all know, 29,000 people in the United States have been killed, 

the most recent numbers in 2017. I have a bill, H.R. 1542—Mr. 

Suozzi is my principal Democrat cosponsor—called the Combating 

Illicit Fentanyl Act of 2019. And what we are looking for is a listing of people who are complicit. At the hearing, I walked away 

thinking we are not doing perhaps all that we can do. I know you 
18 

are doing much. But it seems to me the Magnitsky Act sanctions 

and other things ought to be brought to bear against those people. 

Second, thank you, on Ambassador John Richmond and Special 

Envoy Elan Carr, for two very superb choices, the Special Envoy 

on Antisemitism and Ambassador Richmond heading up the trafficking office. So, thank you for that leadership because they are 

two wonderful people that are doing a good job already. 

Let me just jump back to a second ago. Last night I was at a premiere of a brand-new film called ‘‘Unplanned,’’ which opens this 

weekend at over 1,000 theaters, based on the life of Abby Johnson 

and her book Unplanned, which I have read. The film chronicles 

Ms. Johnson’s life as a Planned Parenthood student activist, followed by almost 8 years as director of a large Planned Parenthood 

clinic in Texas where over 20,000 abortions were performed. 

In Unplanned, Ms. Johnson points out that she assisted in the 

first ultrasound-guided abortion at that clinic and she says, and I 

quote her, ‘‘The details startled me. At 13 weeks, you can clearly 

see the profile of the head, arms, and legs, even tiny fingers and 

toes. With my eyes glued on the image of this perfectly formed 

baby, I watched as a new image emerged on the video screen. The 

cannula, a straw-shaped instrument attached to the end of the suction tube, had been inserted into the uterus and was nearing the 

baby’s side. It looked like an invader, out of place.’’ She then says 

that, ‘‘at first, the baby did not seem aware the of canaula. ‘‘The 

next moment there was a sudden jerk of the tiny foot of the baby 

as it pressed in.′′And then the doctor’s voice broke in and said, 

‘‘Beam me up, Scottie,’’ telling the assistant to turn on the suction, 

and the child crumpled right before her eyes. 

I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary. In this country, we have lost 

61 million unborn babies to abortion, a number that equates with 

the entire country, the population of Italy. And yet, there are many 

of those who would like to export abortion through our foreign policy. 

So, I want to thank you for your faithful implementation of the 

Protecting Life and Global Health Assistance Policy, which continues to be a significant reiteration and expansion of President 

Reagan’s Mexico City policy. Members might recall that, announced by Ronald Reagan at the U.N. conference in 1984 in Mexico City—hence, its name—the policy was and is designed to ensure 

that U.S. taxpayer funding is not funneled to foreign NGO’s that 

perform or promote abortion as a method of family planning. 

Thirty-four years ago, in July 1985, I authored the first of several successful amendments that became annual amendments to 

preserve this policy. People said then that NGO’s would not accept 

those conditions. We found out very quickly that they did, and they 

divested themselves, if they were complicit in the taking of life, to 

what their mission happens to be, malaria and some other important program. So, I want to thank you for that. 

Let me also remind my colleagues—and you know this so well, 

and special thanks—that President Trump has said he will veto 

any bill that weakens or nullifies any pro-life policy, any of them, 

and that includes Mexico City. And we will sustain that veto. 

More than 169 Members have signed the letter to the President 

in the House, 49 in the Senate, saying clearly, if it is on any bill, 
19 

that bill, we will sustain your veto, Mr. President. And I want to 

assure you, because life is so precious and we need to protect it, 

we will do that and those Members will be true to their words. 

If you could speak on those issues briefly and on fentanyl. 

Secretary POMPEO. Let me take two of them briefly. 

President Trump has made this a priority. He got a commitment 

from President Xi that President Xi would do all he could in his 

space to stop fentanyl from moving out of China. We have not yet 

seen as much action as we had anticipated we would see. The day 

I was there I heard President Xi make that commitment. 

This Administration is determined. This crisis, this opioid crisis 

is real. It is tragic. We do not have our hands around it yet, but 

know that the State Department and my colleagues across the Cabinet understand the risk that this presents to the United States 

and its people. 

Second, your statements on the Mexico City policy I appreciate. 

We made an extension of it yesterday. I am very confident that the 

things that we did yesterday will be absorbed by the NGO community. They will continue to deliver on the health needs that you and 

I both are so committed to delivering. Not a single dollar will be 

reduced in terms of spending, and we will make sure that those 

dollars go to the right place and that not one dollar of taxpayer 

funding goes to the tragedy of abortion around the world. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

As you can see, we have a vote on the floor right now, and it is 

4 minutes 40 seconds. There are only two votes, though, luckily. So, 

I am going to recess for now. 

Secretary POMPEO. Great. 

Chairman ENGEL. Mr. Secretary, there is a room we were in before if you would like to go in. 

And we will be back and start as quickly as we can. It should 

only be about another 15 minutes or so. 

So, we stand in recess until then. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman ENGEL. Mr. Secretary, we are about to get some of our 

members. I know you remember the days fondly. 

Secretary POMPEO. I do. 

Chairman ENGEL. So, what we will do is we will start. OK, as 

our members are coming back, we will start immediately, and then, 

we will continue to the end. I am told we are not expecting any 

more votes. So, that should be a good thing. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for your patience. 

It is now my pleasure to call on Mr. Meeks. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Hi, Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary POMPEO. Hello. 

Mr. MEEKS. I missed your testimony, but I read it, and I thought 

it was an important point that you made when you mentioned Colombia and this whole scenario that is dealing with Venezuela. I 

guess you would say that the people of Venezuela—I think we 

would agree on this—are in crises, correct? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am sorry, the people in Venezuela? Yes. 

Yes. 
20 

Mr. MEEKS. And so, they are fleeing and, fortunately, they are 

going to Colombia. And we have got a great ally in Colombia, and 

Colombia is doing the right thing by taking care of these folks who 

are in crises. 

It just seems to me that it is in contrast to the position that we 

are taking on our southern border, because I do not hear any 

talks—I am now speaking to the members of the Colombian government—they are not saying they are being invaded. They have 

got millions of people crossing their border every day. They are not 

saying they are being invaded. There is no talk about building a 

wall. But, rather, they are calling for a coordination of humanitarian assistance and working within their group. 

The fact of the matter is, in talking to some of the Colombian 

members of their government, I was talking to them not too long 

ago, yesterday to be a fact, they expect the possibility of a bigger 

crisis. They say 2–3 million people may be coming across. But they 

were going to try to make sure they take care of them, not prevent 

them from coming across. 

A stark contrast to the policies that we have on our southern border. Do you see a difference from people trying to flee for their life 

and safety on the southern border of the United States and the border between Venezuela and Colombia? 

Secretary POMPEO. In what respect? 

Mr. MEEKS. Well, in the respect of being humanitarian and trying to take care of people that is in crises, people that are fleeing 

their homeland because of their safety. And what we have seen on 

our southern border, families who are fleeing their homeland for 

fear in losing their life. And we have had the policy of either building a wall, so they will not come over here, separate them from 

their families, locking them up. That has been our policy, as opposed to what I see happening on Colombia and Peru and the other 

bordering countries around Venezuela. And there is nowhere near 

the amount of people on our southern border that are now crossing 

the border in Colombia, but the response is substantially different 

from our Administration and President Duque’s Administration in 

Colombia. 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, every nation gets to make its own sovereign decisions about how to handle crises of this nature. I think 

that is to be sure. Our President—— 

Mr. MEEKS. Well, you praise them. So, then, maybe you should 

say something different about us because we are having a situation 

completely different than they are. 

Secretary POMPEO. We—— 

Mr. MEEKS. Let me just go from there. Let me ask, because you 

are here about budget also, and I understand that there was a cut, 

somewhere between 17 and 20 percent reduction, for embassy security, construction, and maintenance, is that not correct? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not have the numbers in front of me. I 

know that we have increased our budget for the overall scope of security inside the Department of State. It is something I have as a 

real priority. 

Mr. MEEKS. But I just want to be sure because, look, last time 

we had a conversation, we talked about security and you said at 

that time that you take a backseat to no one with respect to caring 
21 

about protecting the people that work for us. Cutting their security, 

given what is going on, I know it is concerning to me because I 

want to make sure that we protect our diplomats. 

In fact, do you recall the incident in Dhaka, Bangladesh? I think 

that took place on August 4th of 2018. 

Secretary POMPEO. I am sorry, where was this? 

Mr. MEEKS. Dhaka, Bangladesh. 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not know what incident you are referring 

to. We have security incidents with great frequency, and we do our 

level best to address them. Our teams are fantastic and have kept 

our people safe during—— 

Mr. MEEKS. Well, let me tell you about it. Fortunately, no one 

was injured. But, on August 4th, 2018, armed men on motorcycles 

targeted our then-Ambassador to Bangladesh while her—attacked 

the vehicles. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I now recall the incident, yes. 

Mr. MEEKS. OK. And so, luckily, nobody is hurt. But when I 

hear, as a matter of policy, that we are cutting back on security, 

that gives me some real concern, particularly from you, Mr. Secretary, because when you were on this side of the bench, you questioned Democrats, when we had a Democrat Administration, on 

their sincerity with reference to protection of our embassies. But, 

yet, you are silent when we are cutting the budgets for security 

and the State Department, but nothing said. And clearly, our Ambassadors are at a state of risk. 

I think I am out of time. So, I yield back, Mr. Chair. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Chabot? 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, as you know, last Congress I introduced the Taiwan Travel Act, and President Trump signed it into law last 

March. The intention of this legislation was to allow our high-level 

officials to go to Taipei and to allow their high-level officials to 

come here to the United States, including Washington. In fact, as 

I had mentioned when you were here last time, I would absolutely 

advocate President Tsai addressing a Joint Session of Congress 

here in Washington, DC, sometime in the not-too-distant future. 

As you know, you and I were elected together back in 2010, the 

historic 2010 class, majority-makers. And you have moved on. It 

was your first time, my second time, but you moved on to, I guess, 

to some would argue bigger and better things. But you are now 

Secretary of State. As you may know, I was first elected back in 

1994, and a member of my class back then, Sam Brownback, was 

here for a while, and then, he moved up and on to the Senate, although we do not necessarily think that is ‘‘up’’ on this side of the 

building. 

[Laughter.] 

Of course, then he became Governor of Kansas. And the reason 

I bring Sam up is not only were we classmates, but he is no Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom. And he did 

visit Taipei recently. And I would certainly encourage more visits 

like that. 

So, I guess my question, Mr. Secretary, would be, do you think 

that the full implementation of the Taiwan Travel Act would im-
22 

prove U.S.-Taiwan relations? And can the people of Taiwan count 

on you to advocate for further implementation of that I think very 

important legislation, the Taiwan Travel Act? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, I think it is important to consider all of 

these things in the context of the challenges from China. You have 

seen what we have done with respect to Taiwan. It was just in the 

past few days that we sailed through the Straits, that the United 

States Department of Defense—— 

[Interruption from audience.] 

Chairman ENGEL. If everybody will hold—excuse me. You are out 

of order. We will hold for a minute. 

[Interruption from audience continues.] 

Chairman ENGEL. The chair reminds all members of the audience that any manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings is in violation of the rules of the House and its committees. And if there are any further disruptions, the police will be 

called back to remove the person or persons from the hearing room. 

Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, the Secretary was in the process of 

answering a question. I would ask that our time be restored. 

Chairman ENGEL. Yes, absolutely. 

Mr. CHABOT. I appreciate that. 

I would also note that the—I guess I will use the term—‘‘gentleman’’ who just interrupted this meeting was neither from Taiwan nor the PRC and had nothing to do with my question or the 

Secretary’s answer. 

So, Mr. Secretary, if you could continue? 

Secretary POMPEO. I appreciate you stopping people from disapproval, Mr. Chairman. If there is approval, you can let them go 

on. 

[Laughter.] 

So, this is a very serious matter. The Taiwan Travel Relations 

Act is an important piece of legislation. You have seen our Administration do a great deal to implement that. I am sure there is more 

to follow. I do not want to get too far out ahead of what we are 

doing. 

But, make no mistake about it, we understand the importance of 

that relationship and, more importantly, we have taken a much 

fuller view than previous Administrations. This is not partisan. It 

goes back to Republicans and Democrats alike, the concerns about 

the risks that China presents to American wealth creation and our 

continued democracy. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I appreciate that. 

I would like to move on at this point to Burma. A year and a half 

ago, the Burmese military drove the Rohingya out of the Rakhine 

State through a campaign of killings and rapes and burning of villages, and some of the most horrific and unspeakable crimes that 

we had seen on this globe in a long, long time. We all appreciated 

when then-Secretary Tillerson, your predecessor, dubbed these 

atrocities as ethnic cleansing. Now, as you know, ethnic cleansing 

is a powerful message, but it does not have legal weight. 

And since 2017, overwhelming evidence has come out that clearly 

shows that the Burmese military committed crimes against humanity. Even the Department’s own investigation into these atrocities 

came to similar conclusions. Several entities, including the House, 
23 

have concluded that these crimes constitute genocide. The State 

Department has not made any legal pronouncement at this point 

beyond ethnic cleansing. 

Given all the evidence available to you, could you comment today 

if you are ready to conclude or where you are in determining 

whether the crimes committed against the Rohingya by the Burmese military did constitute at least crimes against humanity? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, let me try to address that. You referenced the report that the State Department did. It was amazing 

work by some really talented State Department officers to go out 

and collect that data. I think the data speaks for itself in terms of 

the horrific nature of what took place there. 

With respect to making this legal determination, I am not prepared to provide you an answer today. Know that we are still looking at it, frankly, that I am still looking at that more specifically. 

My objective here is to get a really good outcome, to change this 

behavior, then to hold those responsible accountable. I want to 

make sure that we do this in a thoughtful way. I get the messaging 

that takes place when a Secretary of State makes these designations. I value that and it is important. But I think we would all 

agree the most important thing we can do is get both accountability 

and behavioral change, and that is what the State Department is 

working to do. We are still actively considering how to approach 

those conclusions. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you very much. 

Georgia and Ukraine both face intense continued pressure from 

Putin. Both have territory illegally under Russian control. Despite 

the risks, Georgia and Ukraine, and really many Eastern European 

countries, actively pursue pro-Western policies. Could you describe 

how the President’s budget enhances our support for these two critical partners? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, you have seen real tangible ways we have 

done in Ukraine, providing defensive items to the Ukrainian people. We have provided intelligence assistance. I saw that in my previous role and before I was the Secretary of State. You have seen 

our efforts all across the world, Ukraine and Georgia included, to 

push back against Russian efforts to interfere when elections are 

approaching, as we are in Ukraine today. 

There are many elements. And I was speaking about things 

mostly that the State Department and the Department of Defense 

were involved in. There are elements all across the U.S. Government determined to help the Georgian people, who are very proAmerican and share our understanding of the way that region 

ought to operate. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. 

I have only got 30 seconds. So, I want to conclude on North 

Korea. I want to applaud both you and the President and his team 

for being willing to walk away from a bad deal in Hanoi. It reminded me a lot of a President who up to this point was my most 

respected President, Ronald Reagan, walking away from Gorbachev 

in Reykjavik. So, thank you for doing that. It is easy to enter into 

a bad deal and you get some press that is positive. But you were 

willing to walk away. God bless you for doing it. Keep the sanctions 
24 

up, and let’s denuclearize that peninsula. Thank you for your efforts. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Connolly? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome back, Mr. Secretary, and thank you for being here. 

Mr. Secretary, I do not want to talk at a political level today with 

you. I want to talk from the heart. And I want to talk about a matter of justice on behalf of one of my constituents well known to you. 

I want to show you a picture. 

This picture took place on November 19th, 2017 in my district. 

I am holding a cane because I had had a bad accident at a NATO 

meeting in Bucharest, Romania, a few months before and I still 

needed a cane to hobble around, not the most flattering picture of 

me. 

Next to me is a man named Jamal Khashoggi. He is a mild-mannered man. He and I are discussing Middle East issues. He was a 

Saudi citizen, family, children, had on occasion worked for the 

Saudi government or for members of the royal family. He was mildmannered, soft-spoken, and a moderate critic of the Kingdom. He 

wanted to see modernization. He wanted to see reforms. He was a 

columnist sometimes for The Washington Post, our local newspaper 

here in Washington. 

On October 2d, 2018, 11 months later, my constituent, a legal 

resident of the United States who lived in Tysons Corner in Fairfax 

County, the Commonwealth of Virginia, was lured into the sovereign territory, the consulate of the Saudi government in Istanbul 

because he was seeking papers to get remarried. He had his fiancee 

outside waiting for him. He had been to the consulate before, and 

they had lulled him into believing he would be safe. But, of course, 

he was not. 

What we know was that, on that day, two planes under the control of the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia flew in with two teams 

whose objective was to either kidnap or kill Mr. Khashoggi. One 

presumes the objective involved killing because, not a diplomatic 

tool normally, they brought with them a bone saw. We know all of 

that because of revelations from Turkey. But those revelations, as 

I understand it, have been confirmed by our intelligence community; you would know better than I. 

Nonetheless, what we do know is the Saudi government lied consistently. They lied about whether he safely left the consulate that 

day, knowing full well he did not. They lied about his murder. They 

lied about the conspiracy to murder him. They lied about who did 

it and how it was done. 

And I guess I want to show you another picture, Mr. Secretary. 

This is a picture that took place 14 days after the murder. And 

that shows you and the Crown Prince, who many believe orchestrated and ordered the murder of Mr. Khashoggi, my constituent. 

And I guess what this picture raises is a question. At what point, 

as Americans, do we insist that the inalienable rights enumerated 

in our Declaration of Independence, life, liberty, and the pursuit of 

happiness, all three of which were denied my constituent, Mr. 

Khashoggi, when do they trump diplomatic nicety? Is there ever a 
25 

time when we are going to, as a country, insist, you know what, 

we are not going to do business as normal and we are going to hold 

you to account? 

Now, at that meeting, you said, I believe, that they would be held 

to account, but you were meeting with a man who was assuring 

you they would be held to account, when he is himself suspected 

strongly of having orchestrated the murder. And so, I guess I want 

to ask you, Mr. Secretary, were you aware of the fact at that point 

of the gruesome details of the murder of my constituent, Mr. 

Khashoggi? Did you discuss that murder with the Crown Prince? 

And how are we going, moving forward, to hold the Crown Prince 

and the Saudi government responsible for one of the most grisly 

episodes ever to occur in a consulate or an embassy in our diplomatic experience? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, you asked three questions there, I believe. 

The first one was what was my knowledge base. I think at that 

time I knew most of what had taken place, although I do not recall 

the exact sequence. I certainly have learned more about that since 

then. I have learned additional facts since that moment in time. 

The second question was did I discuss the murder. The answer 

is yes. I think I said it that day, that I had discussed the murder 

with him. 

And then, the third question is how will we hold them accountable. You have seen the Trump Administration do just that with 

respect to 17 individuals. We are continuing all across the government, certainly with overt means and all the tools that we have in 

our capacity, to learn more facts about this. President Trump has 

made very clear that we will continue to work to identify those who 

are responsible for Jamal Khashoggi’s murder and hold them accountable. We will. I stand by that today. I am sure President 

Trump will as well. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. And just a real quick one. And does that mean, 

Mr. Secretary, no matter how high up it might go? 

Secretary POMPEO. I said ‘‘anyone’’. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. And I pray we get justice for Mr. Khashoggi and 

his family and friends. 

Thank you. 

Mr. SHERMAN [presiding]. Now I recognize the gentleman from 

Pennsylvania. 

Mr. PERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Mr. Secretary, it is great to see you. We are proud of your 

service in this body and your current efforts. 

I want to begin by applauding the President and your Department for taking steps to recognize the Israeli sovereignty over the 

Golan Heights. As you might recall, I wrote you a letter last year 

in that regard, encouraging that recognition. And I just think at 

this time, with Iran and their proxies, terrorist organizations, the 

IRGC, Hezbollah, all on the border, there is no more an important 

time than now to take this action. And I speak for all the people 

in the district that I am privileged to represent that are proud of 

this action, support it, and just say thank you very much. And we 

offer our support and assistance. 
26 

Moving on, regarding Tibet, I am just wondering, what is preventing the Administration from formally placing a diplomatic post 

in Lhasa? 

Secretary POMPEO. It is something that previous Administrations 

and this Administration continue to review. We have to place it in 

the context of our larger policy, Indo-Pacific policy, even more 

broadly. We are trying to make sure that we get each of these steps 

right. 

What President Trump has directed each of us to do is recognize 

facts on the ground, try to apply good common sense, and then, 

generate policies that actually get outcomes. I think for an awful 

long time, we have done things that made us feel good, but did not 

deliver. And so, with respect to this particular issue, and all the 

issues that surround it in Asia, we want to make sure that we actually deliver for the American people. And so, as we consider the 

appropriateness of a lot of decisions on designations, on sanctions, 

on how the Department of Defense is going to posture, how we 

work with Southeastern countries, we want to make sure that we 

actually deliver for the American people. 

Mr. PERRY. We hope you do. It has been a long time, and I think 

it would be helpful for our broader relationship, so to speak. 

Moving on, but somewhat within the realm of China, will the 

State Department consider revoking pouch status for construction 

materials regarding the housing complex on Connecticut Avenue 

that China is building in association with their diplomatic mission 

here until they respond to a reciprocal-type arrangement with our 

embassy in Beijing? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am familiar with the challenges we are having with delivering diplomatic materials consistent with international treaty obligations there in Beijing. We are considering lots 

of different ways to convince the Chinese to permit us to do this 

basic diplomatic function. 

Mr. PERRY. Is it not part of their agreement that they cannot be 

shipping their construction materials in via diplomatic pouch? I 

mean, did not they sign that agreement or agree to that provision? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am not certain if that is the case or not. 

Mr. PERRY. It is my understanding, but if there is something 

other than that, maybe we will followup afterwards. But it seems 

to me that this is a circumstance that should be easy. When our 

construction, our building over there, needs assistance and needs 

attention, that we should be able to do that, and certainly under 

the exact same provisions that they are. And the fact that they 

would not allow that, while we allow them to build on Connecticut 

Avenue, on the high ground, mind you, as a military officer, that 

concerns not only me, but many Americans greatly. 

Moving on, with the advent of the Mueller report, I am wondering if your Department is starting to investigate people at the 

State Department that used their official position to distribute elements or discuss elements of the Steele dossier, with the intent of 

sparking an investigation into the President of the United States, 

that work in the State Department, those folks. Are there ongoing 

investigations or are you considering investigations at this time? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am going to honor the commitment I made 

when I signed up for this gig. I am not going to talk about ongoing 
27 

investigations that we have. But you can rest assured that, if we 

see malfeasance, misbehavior, those doing things that are inappropriate, the team understands their mission set, which is to hold 

every officer accountable against the mission set that the Constitution and President Trump have laid out for us. 

Mr. PERRY. And I appreciate not discussing ongoing investigations, but now that the Mueller investigation is complete and the 

report, at least the summary is issued, and we expect the full report or at least a portion of that when able, do you envision any 

new investigations or opening any investigations subsequent to 

that, based on what you know now about some of the people at the 

State Department who have engaged in circulating or being a part 

of the Steele dossier? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I am not going to speculate on investigations that we might or might not open. 

Mr. PERRY. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

I yield. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you. 

The chair now recognizes himself. 

I have four questions for the record that I just want to have my 

colleagues be aware of. 

The first of these is whether we can count on you to support continued assistance to Nagorno-Karabakh Artsakh, especially for 

demining efforts, and expanding support to health care and rehabilitation services, especially those injured in mines. 

The second is whether we can count on you to support aid to Armenia for the 25,000 Syrian refugees that they have taken in. 

The third is I am chair of the Sindh Caucus. Southern Pakistan’s 

Sindh has faced extrajudicial killings, forced conversions of Hindu 

girls after they have been kidnapped, and then, forcibly marriages. 

And Dr. Anwar Leghari, the brother of a dear friend of mine, was 

subject to extrajudicial killing 4 years ago. So, I hope that you can 

pledge to raise a gross human rights in Sindh with the Pakistani 

diplomats that you interact with. And I hope that you will also be 

able to support more outreach in the Sindhi language from our Karachi consulate, and to support $1.5 million a year, so that the 

Voice of America can broadcast in the Sindhi language. 

Now I want to pick up on Mr. Connolly’s comments. Khashoggi 

was brutally murdered. So far, our sole response has been to tell 

17 thugs that they cannot visit Disneyland, these 17 button men 

who will not get U.S. embassies. That is an inadequate response. 

I am going to suggest a better response. 

There are a lot of things we could do to Saudi Arabia that may 

not be our traditional policy, may not be in our interest, but one 

thing that is in our interest is to prevent Saudi Arabia from getting 

a nuclear weapon for three reasons. If you cannot trust a regime 

with a bone saw, you should not trust them with nuclear weapons. 

Second, even if you think MBS is a tremendous leader for the future, he is a not a democratically elected leader. He could be overthrown by the Wahhabi clerics at anytime. And, of course, the Middle East does not need a new nuclear weapon. 

What I have seen in this Administration recently—and it has 

just come out—is an effort to evade Congress, and to some extent 

evade your Department, and provide substantial nuclear tech-
28 

nology and aid to Saudi Arabia while Saudi Arabia refuses to abide 

by any of the controls we would like to see regarding reprocessing, 

enrichment, et cetera. And we see strong advocacy of this coming 

from a group called IP3 and others show seem very close to the 

Saudi regime. 

In particular, we have seen your Assistant Secretary of State 

Chris Ford say the Department will conduct some nuclear cooperation through memorandums of understanding, which do not require 

congressional oversight or approval, rather than through a one-twothree agreement. 

And we see that there were some six licenses granted by the Department of Energy which in normal course are made available to 

the public, but are, instead, being kept secret, all of which provide 

for the transfer of nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. 

So, can I count on you and the Administration to release these 

six—they are called Part 810 authorizations—by the middle of this 

month? 

Secretary POMPEO. I will have to look into it. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Can your staff prepare for us or you prepare for 

us a list of all the types of nuclear commerce the Administration 

believe it is entitled to engage in without a one-two-three agreement that has gone through congressional review? 

Secretary POMPEO. We can certainly take a look at that. I can 

assure you that we will do our level best to comply with the law 

every day. And if you believe that we are not doing that on our obligations, please let me know. 

Mr. SHERMAN. It appears to be in one case, it appears that this 

is an end run around the law in an effort to achieve a policy. Do 

we want to provide nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia before they 

enter into agreements for no reprocessing and no enrichment? 

Secretary POMPEO. We have been working—‘‘we’’ collectively, the 

U.S. Government, the Department of Energy, the State Department, and others—have been working to get—the Saudis have indicated they want civil nuclear power. We have been working to 

make sure that they do—— 

Mr. SHERMAN. But why would not they want controls, except for 

the reason that they want nuclear weapons? How do you generate 

an extra kilowatt by keeping the IAEA inspectors out? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, you know, I can only tell you that the 

Islamic Republic of Iran very much wanted to do the same, right? 

They did not want any of these things in, either, and we got—— 

Mr. SHERMAN. We treated Iran like an enemy. If Saudi Arabia 

is hell-bent on developing a nuclear program that is uncontrolled 

and designed to make them a nuclear State, or a possible nuclear 

State, we will treat them as an enemy? 

Secretary POMPEO. We are working to ensure that the nuclear 

power that they get is something we understand and does not 

present that risk. That is the mission statement—— 

Mr. SHERMAN. These six secret Part 810 authorizations are inconsistent with that, and I look forward to you making them available to the public, or at least to this committee. 

And with that, I recognize my fellow head of the Asia Subcommittee, the ranking member thereof, Ted Yoho. 

Mr. YOHO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
29 

Mr. Secretary, good to see you again, and thank you for the great 

job you and the Administration are doing. And it is good to see Ms. 

Mary Elizabeth with you. 

When you came into office, what were the biggest threats to the 

U.S. and the world that you guys saw or inherited from the previous Administration? 

Secretary POMPEO. Goodness. You know, I get asked to rank all 

the time. It is always a challenge. There are some that are immediate, right? The threat from terrorism is on top of us. It is real. 

It is a threat every day. We have done our best to make progress. 

We have made progress in certain parts; in other places we still 

have a tremendous amount of work to do. 

But the threats, our renewed efforts to build that coalition is to 

push back against what I will call the traditional power rivalries 

have been very real, the threat from China, the threat from Russia, 

the threat from Iran. And then, of course, we have spent a lot of 

time on proliferation issues, Iran there, too, North Korea. 

Mr. YOHO. Well, and that is what I wanted to bring up. Terrorism, ISIS, obviously, DPRK, China, Afghanistan, the situation. 

Has that threat of ISIS been lessened in the 2-years this Administration has been there? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I believe that it has. I think the numbers 

are different. It is still there. 

Mr. YOHO. It is, and it will never go away, but I think the immediate threat has been the dynamics have changed drastically. 

Has the DPRK threat been lessened? And that is an obvious because, if we look at the last ballistic missiles or nuclear bombs 

launched or detonated, it has been over 15 months. So, I think the 

results that you guys are doing and pursuing are doing a great job. 

Has the Administration backed or signed into law legislation to 

counter China’s BRI? I almost feel guilty asking that. 

[Laughter.] 

Secretary POMPEO. We have. President Trump did sign. 

Mr. YOHO. He did sign the BUILD Act? And that is a way that 

we can stand up to what they are doing with the BRI. 

Do you have sufficient resources, i.e., people or budget, to accomplish your mission to advance America’s diplomacy? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. YOHO. In the staffing shortfalls, my understanding is many 

people have been nominated and positions have been nominated. 

Where is the holdup? 

Secretary POMPEO. On staffing, I brought the data with me. Our 

staffing levels were actually in pretty good shape. The overall size 

of the work force, the Foreign Service Officer work force, by the end 

of this year, will have at or near more Foreign Service Officers 

than ever in the history of the United States of America. 

We are challenged. I have in front of me a list of 40-plus senior 

leaders. I have not had a Chief Operating Officer in 2 years. I do 

not have a head of Near East Affairs. These are highly qualified 

people that have been held up. 

Mr. YOHO. By the Senate? 

Secretary POMPEO. They are sitting in the U.S. Senate today. 

I made a commitment to get the team on the field. I have got 

an ambassador waiting to go the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a topic 
30 

we just talked about. I want to get these folks out there, so that 

we can deliver American diplomacy in every corner of the world. 

Mr. YOHO. And I am going to give a shoutout to you because I 

had the opportunity to travel with you for a better part of a day. 

What I saw you and your team doing I thought was pretty phenomenal, because I have never seen this done before where you 

were traveling within the States to promote what the State Department does. You were talking to young students to get them involved in thinking about going into a career in the State Department. And I commend you and your team for doing that, because 

I look back when I grew up as a pretty sheltered life. I did not even 

think that was a realm of possibility. Again, I cannot tell you how 

much I appreciate that. 

I share the same beliefs as Mr. Sires, of my colleague, in regards 

to Russia, Cuba, China, and Iran, that there is maybe a destabilizing, coordinated effort underway to destabilize the Western 

Hemisphere. And I think you and I have talked about this, that 

Venezuela could be but the rubicon, because if Venezuela fails, it 

will show that Cuba, you know, they cannot survive because they 

are the ones that have been propping that up. 

How do you assess that? And along with that, how should we respond to Russia’s interference under the guise of support to the 

Maduro regime in Venezuela? And do we need to reemphasize the 

Monroe Doctrine? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, I have spoken to my Russian counterpart 

no less than three times on the issue of Venezuela and their interference, the fact that they are undermining Venezuelan democracy. 

It was met with precisely what you would expect from them. 

We are doing our level best to push back against the capacity of 

Cuba, who has had intelligence officers and security officers on the 

ground there today protecting Maduro. It shocks me that the Venezuelan military will tolerate these foreigners, right, coming to run 

their security service. As a former U.S. Army officer, it would have 

been embarrassing if a third country had to come in and provide 

security for the leadership of our country. But that is where we are 

today. 

We are doing our level best to put sanctions in place, to put restrictions in place, and to, more importantly, build our coalition, 

not just in South America and Central America with the OAS and 

the Lima Group, but European countries from all the around the 

world who understand that democratic Venezuela is the only path 

forward and Maduro has to go before we can get there. 

Mr. YOHO. I look forward to working with you. 

I am out of time, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL [presiding]. Thank you. 

Mr. Deutch? 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being with us. Thank you for your 

service. 

March 9th marked the 12th anniversary of the disappearance of 

Bob Levinson from Iran’s Kish Island. Bob is my constituent. He 

is part of our community back home in Coral Springs. He is a patriot, as you know, who devoted 30 years to serving his country, 

first, with the DEA, and then, a quarter century with the FBI. He 
31 

is a husband of 40 years. He is a father of seven. He is a grandfather of six, five of whom he has never met. 

Iran’s despicable practice of holding Americans and other foreign 

nationals hostage should not be tolerated by any responsible nation. Mr. Secretary, I know you are well familiar with Bob’s case 

and the Levinson family. Bob’s son, Doug, is here today. I appreciate that you have always been willing to engage with the 

Levinsons and with me on this matter. And I would ask that you 

look for every opportunity to raise Bob’s case; also, to make bringing Bob home a priority. I would ask that you implore the President himself to sit down with the Levinsons and the other families 

of others detained in Iran. And I am willing to work with you, Mr. 

Secretary, others in the Administration, anyone—anyone—who can 

help bring Bob home. 

I would like to turn to Syria. Mr. Secretary, I am troubled by 

your Syria policy because I, frankly, do not understand it. I do not 

understand how freezing assistance, pulling back U.S. troops, and 

ceding American leadership to Russia and Iran will help protect 

our national security interests. I have a series of related questions. 

The first has to do with the role of Russia in Syria. There have 

been now several requests for information, so that we can do the 

job that we are supposed to do in providing oversight, requesting 

information about the meetings that the President has had with 

Vladimir Putin, particularly the summit that took place in Helsinki, that took place without anyone there. We have an obligation 

on behalf of the American people to know what was said. And as 

the chairman of the Middle East Subcommittee, it is of great interest to me and our subcommittee to understand what may or may 

not have been said on the topic of Syria. 

And my first question is, why has the Administration refrained 

from providing information of those Trump-Putin meetings to Congress? 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, let me begin by saying, it is not remotely unusual for senior leaders to have private conversations 

with their counterparts around the world. So, to suggest otherwise 

I find surprising. I might use a different descriptor, but I will use 

‘‘surprising’’ in a second. 

As for what is going to be shared and released on conversations 

between the President and his foreign partners, the White House 

ultimately makes those decisions. And so, the inquiries would properly be lodged there. 

Mr. DEUTCH. And we have. And you are the Secretary of State 

before us. And as a former Member of this body, you also understand the constitutional obligation we have to provide oversight of 

the Administration. 

The Fiscal Year foreign affairs budget eliminates all economic assistance to the Syrian people and all security assistance, known as 

foreign military financing. That is to Iraq. Since the re-emergence 

of ISIS, Iraq used FMF to fund urgent counterterrorism requirements, and the State Department claimed those funds were critical 

to Iraq’s efforts to defeat ISIS and improve the security environment in Iraq. 

Given these statements by the State Department, why the decision to cut FMF when it seems, based on those statements, that 
32 

it would undermine efforts in Iraq, our efforts in Iraq, and create 

the conditions that would allow ISIS to revive? 

Secretary POMPEO. Look, I am proud of what this Administration 

has done in Iraq. I think we have been prepared to do things, take 

risks, act against Iran, the true malign actor inside of Iraq today, 

in ways the previous Administration just had no interest in whatsoever. So, I am very proud of the work we have done there. 

I have traveled now to Baghdad as the Secretary. I had been 

there before in my previous role. I have senior officials on the 

ground. I would love it if I could get my Ambassadors from the region confirmed. If you could talk to your colleagues on the Senate 

side, that would be most helpful to us in executing American policy. 

But I am convinced that we will have the resources we need to 

deliver all of the assistance to build out the Iraqi security forces 

in a way to give the Iraqi leaders—the speaker of the house will 

be here this week; I will get a chance to meet with him again— 

to deliver all the support needed, so that Iraq can become independent, free, and sovereign. I think that is your goal. It is certainly mine. 

Mr. DEUTCH. It is. We will have an opportunity to talk more 

about those budget decisions. 

Moving to a different part of the world, but continuing a discussion that we started on human rights, Mr. Secretary, there are 

more than a million Uyghurs who have been detained without due 

process in Xijiang, kept in internment camps, reeducation camps, 

under the guise of antiterrorism efforts. There are reports that 

China is now considering implementing this same approach in 

Tibet. Can you tell us what the State Department has done to raise 

these human rights abuses with the Chinese government and to 

elevate these issues which are so critical to us as we try to advance 

our values around the world? 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Kinzinger? 

Mr. DEUTCH. Could the Secretary answer? 

Chairman ENGEL. Yes, certainly. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary POMPEO. Let me just try to do it briefly. The human 

rights violations that you identified, we have spoken about strongly. If you watch our Human Rights Report, what I said and what 

the head of DRL said that morning when the Human Rights Report 

came out, we have elevated this. We have raised this. We have 

done that publicly. You have seen that. 

I met with a group of Uyghurs just yesterday in my office. Ambassador Brownback has been relentless, if nothing else, with respect to this issue. And you should know that we have done that 

not only publicly in the way that you can see, but each time we 

interact with our Chinese counterparts this issue is raised as well. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ENGEL. Mr. Kinzinger? 

Mr. KINZINGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. 

We talk a lot about politics ending at the water’s edge. I believe 

it does and should. Even under the prior Administration, I very 
33 

much religiously held that. But what kind of an effect does it do 

for our politics when we do not have Ambassadors in place? Just 

briefly, I mean, how does that hurt you? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, I do not want to criticize any of the 

charges who are running, doing their level best to manage the 

chief-of-mission responsibilities in theater in the countries that 

they are in. But other countries know that it is different when you 

have a Senate-approved nominee who has gone through it and is 

now the dedicated Ambassador. It reduces your capacity to speak 

on behalf of America. 

Mr. KINZINGER. Thank you. 

And would you trust Iran with a bone saw? In other words, earlier the question was, would you trust Saudi Arabia with a bone 

saw; therefore, we cannot give them nuclear weapons or engage 

with them at all. I think an important point to note is I would not 

trust Iran with a bone saw. They have quite a few bodies, frankly, 

on their conscience from Syria, from a lot of places. 

And so, I just want to commend you and the Administration for 

your decision to get out of the Iran nuclear deal. I think that was 

a smart move. I think it sent a very strong message that it is not 

just about the development of nuclear weapons over a period of 10 

years; it is also about behavior in the region and development of 

ballistic missiles. So, I just want to commend you on that. 

Closer to home—actually, I want to hit Yemen real quick. The 

very first thing this committee did—and I hate to obsess about it 

and channelize on it, but it has really stuck with me—the very first 

thing this committee did, Mr. Secretary, in the new Congress was, 

basically, to take away the authority of the Administration to be 

involved in any way with Yemen. And I think most of the members 

of this committee have never had a classified briefing on what is 

occurring in Yemen. They have never had a briefing on the SCIF. 

And I think there is a perception out there that it is the United 

States and Saudi Arabia that are creating a humanitarian crisis in 

Yemen. 

Mr. Secretary, can you briefly talk about maybe the Houthis’ role 

in a humanitarian crisis in Yemen, many actions of Iran, and 

maybe some of the role that we do not hear about in terms of who 

is really driving that crisis? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am not sure I can do it briefly, but let me 

try. It is complicated space. 

Mr. KINZINGER. Take whatever time you need. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. So, let me start with something that 

often gets neglected in this debate, too. There is still active alQaeda, al-Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula there. The United 

States is engaged in trying to crush it there, in Yemen as well. Remember that Yemen sits on the southern border of Saudi Arabia 

and has launched hundreds of missiles into the Kingdom of Saudi 

Arabia out of Yemen. They were launched by the Houthis and they 

were Iranian missiles in nearly every case, missiles that had been 

brought across the borders, in through ports, in pieces and parts. 

And now, the Iranians are attempting to establish the capacity to 

actually build out missiles inside of Yemen. 

The United States has a responsibility to do all that it can to 

prevent the humanitarian crisis, which is ravaging that nation. We 
34 

have done that. I think the number is now close to a billion dollars 

that the United States has provided. The Saudis and Emirates 

each have provided billions of dollars as well. The one country that 

has not provided a single dollar to aid the humanitarian crisis is 

the Islamic Republic of Iran. Instead, they have chosen to use their 

money to get Houthis and Yemenis killed and spur the continuation of the civil war, and frankly, put Americans at risk. 

We all fly. Members of Congress fly into King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh. They are launching missiles that can 

range to Riyadh. This is a very real risk, and the Saudis have a 

right to defend their nation, just in the same we would if we had 

missiles at airports in Denver or LA or New York. And at its root, 

Iran is driving this behavior. 

Mr. KINZINGER. You obviously represent one instrument of 

power, which is diplomacy. Actually, you have a few others in your 

toolkit. But when you think about diplomacy and you think about 

the message that this Congress sent on the Yemen issue, and considering there are hundreds of defense cooperation agreements 

that, frankly, for the first time ever now could be brought up and 

brought under privileged resolution, including our agreement with 

Israel, what does that do to your ability, for instance, to try to solve 

diplomatically the crisis in the Middle East when Congress is sending kind of contrary messages? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, look, the good news is I am hopeful that 

Martin Griffiths, the U.N. Special Envoy in Yemen, in the next 

handful of days will make progress. He may not. We have a great 

agreement in Stockholm. We have not been able to enforce it. The 

Houthis have refused to withdraw from the Port of Hodeidah. I 

hope that they will in the coming days. Frankly, if I were betting, 

I would probably bet against, but one lives in hope. 

Congress obviously has its own independent right to act as it so 

chooses. It has its constitutional authorities. I can say this: I hope 

everyone who cares about the people of Yemen understand that the 

legislation that passed did not remotely benefit them. Indeed, it 

will work to their detriment. 

Mr. KINZINGER. Thank you for your service, sir. I appreciate it. 

And I will yield back to the chairman. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Keating? 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. 

I do want to go back to the instance where a bone saw was used 

and just had a couple of questions. I know that you would agree 

that every single person who is responsible for the murder of Jamal 

Khashoggi needs to be held accountable. You said that in January 

in Saudi Arabia. And thank you for saying that. 

I do want to ask, however, along those lines: 17 people were 

sanctioned out on that. So, there seems to be—is there a discrepancy between the people that were arrested and the ones that were 

sanctioned under that? Is there a difference in that number? 

Secretary POMPEO. Congressman, can I get back to you? There 

is a large overlap. I could not tell you that they are completely coincident, that those were—— 
35 

Mr. KEATING. OK, but did you or anyone from our country have 

discussions with the Saudis about who was going to be sanctioned 

or how that list was determined? 

Secretary POMPEO. No, we did not. Indeed, the sanctions decisions were based on information that we had in our possession. It 

was information that the American Department of Treasury was 

able to validate. 

Mr. KEATING. Well, I know that, it is my understanding that the 

intel chairs had a briefing. 

Now you mentioned that you had some information when you 

met with the Crown Prince. Did you hear the tapes? And what was 

the nature of that? Did you hear the tapes at that point that Turkey sent us or tapes that we had ourselves, either one? 

Secretary POMPEO. I have not to date heard the tapes. 

Mr. KEATING. Did you think it would have been a good idea, before you sat down with the Crown Prince, to get as much intelligence as you can to deal with that? 

Secretary POMPEO. I did. 

Mr. KEATING. But you did not do that? Or you did not have access to the tapes at that point? Is that it? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not recall the precise timing. I do not recall the precise timing of when the information transited. I am very 

confident I have a deep understanding of all the intelligence the 

U.S. Government has in its possession, and I would have had every 

bit of it that was in its possession at that time. 

Mr. KEATING. Oh, OK, because you had just said a few minutes 

ago that you got some more later on. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. No, we continue to learn things. I am 

confident we will learn something this afternoon and tomorrow as 

well. 

Mr. KEATING. Well, thank you for that. 

Another question. I believe that the Senate has requested that 

their Members have a classified briefing on the intelligence surrounding the Khashoggi murder. Is that correct? 

Secretary POMPEO. It would not have come to the State Department. I assume it would have gone to the intelligence—— 

Mr. KEATING. Well, I thought you might know since you knew everything about what was going on. So, let me ask you this: would 

you join us if we requested, as a committee, that classified briefing, 

so we could be informed? Indeed, we are the committee that will 

be involved in arms sales to Saudi Arabia. It would be important 

for us to have that access. Can you see, in your current capacity 

or your former capacity as CIA Director, why this committee 

should not have that information? 

Secretary POMPEO. I will say this: I know this often gets caught 

up on your side, in the legislative branch. There are jurisdictional 

debates about which Member sees certain pieces of classified information. I am not about to wade into that briar patch. 

Mr. KEATING. I see. Well, I think we should, and I think, Mr. 

Chairman, we should make that request formal in terms of our 

committee, if not for the whole membership of the House. 

Yesterday, I had a hearing here in our Subcommittee on Europe 

and Eurasia. And as part of that hearing, we dealt with the historic 70-year alliance that we had with Europe, one of the most 
36 

successful alliances in modern history, if not the history of Europe 

itself. 

And one of the things that came across to me in a recent trip 

there about three and a half weeks ago was the concern with the 

officials there. Let me give you one example that really was difficult for me to address when I was asked. The EU officials that 

we met with, they used words like ‘‘painful’’ and ‘‘hurtful,’’ and they 

meant it sincerely, when they were talking about how they felt 

from actions of the United States. 

And one thing they said, in particular, was that the emergency 

security powers that we used to assess the tariffs that were there 

struck them, because they asked the question, ‘‘You are using 

emergency security powers to create tariffs on our closest allies.’’ 

And they were asking us—and maybe you could help us with this— 

when did they become a security risk to the United States? 

Secretary POMPEO. I will tell you, I do not know with whom you 

were speaking. If you want to share with me who you spoke to and 

exactly what they said, I would be happy to—— 

Mr. KEATING. It was repeated through all. I will tell you, you 

could go right to the leadership of the EU—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Because my conversations have been very different. 

Mr. KEATING. I was in the room. So, trust me, it was a highranking EU leader. 

Secretary POMPEO. I believe you. 

Mr. KEATING. As a matter of fact, I would like to know the answer to that. It does not matter who asks. I am asking. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, so I am happy, if it is from you, I am 

happy to answer. 

Mr. KEATING. Well, it is for me, but, you know what, it is important that our allies know this, too. 

Secretary POMPEO. This Administration has worked with European countries in ways the previous Administrations simply refused. I get it. Sometimes when we ask them to do more, when we 

ask hard things, when we ask the American taxpayers for money 

in America for our Department of Defense, I know many Americans 

would prefer we spend those resources someplace else. 

When I encounter European officials and they say, ‘‘Boy, it is 

hard for us to get to our own promise for 2 percent. It is just really 

hard to convince our people,’’ I—— 

Mr. KEATING. Well, can I, because my time is out, I just want 

to say this: that the President said—again, the NATO officials we 

met with, they are great allies, they remain great allies, but there 

were some comments that were made, Article 5 concerns. And that 

came up at yesterday’s hearing, too. And the President said ‘‘Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people. . . . They are 

very aggressive people. They may get aggressive, and congratulations, you are in World War III.’’ Is that the way we should approach our Article 5 agreement with our NATO countries? 

Secretary POMPEO. Next week, I will host here in Washington, 

DC, the 70th anniversary of the NATO alliance. I will be with Secretary General Stoltenberg. America will once again, this Administration will once again reaffirm our commitment to our NATO allies, and we will again ask them, because it is important, to do 
37 

their share to make sure that NATO is around for the next 70 

years. 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, and I look forward to the information, 

the personnel information, that the chair requested. And hopefully, 

you can provide that to the committee in 7 days. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

And I want to remind everyone that Mr. Stoltenberg is going to 

speak before a Joint Session of Congress, I believe it is next week. 

Mr. Zeldin? 

Mr. ZELDIN. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. I have great respect for 

your service to our country, first in your class at West Point, a 

great colleague of ours, did an exceptional job as our CIA Director, 

and I am really a big admirer of your work so far as Secretary of 

State. 

I do have some concerns I want to bring up. I have been working 

with Chairman Engel and other colleagues with regards to the 

Bytyqi brothers, who were constituents of the First congressional 

District of New York. They were murdered 20 years ago in Serbia. 

And the chairman and I recently met in Munich with President 

Vucic and asked him about this. There really needs to be justice 

delivered. And anything that you and your team can do, and any 

opportunities that present itself, we would really like to see justice 

in that case. 

I am concerned about Turkey’s acquisition of the S–400’s and 

what that means, especially with our upcoming transfer, potential 

transfer, of F–35s. 

I am greatly concerned with the human rights violations that we 

see around the world, but I also want to touch on a number of 

other topics that I think are just going really well. 

And one of the words that has been mentioned at this hearing 

was the term ‘‘disengagement’’. Over the course of these last few 

years, ISIS has been nearly wiped off the map in Iraq and Syria. 

The caliphate is gone. 

Thank you for the recognition of Golan Heights and Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan; the embassy move in Israel to Jerusalem, 

and encouraging other countries to follow suit, as we are seeing 

now; helping the Taylor Force Act get passed and signed into law, 

so that the Palestinian Authority does not financially reward, as 

they continue to do, terrorists who murder innocent Americans and 

Israelis. We should be cutting off our U.S. tax dollars when that 

happens. It is a better policy for us to go forward with the Taylor 

Force Act and the principles behind it. 

The use of the MOA when President Trump first came into office. 

I was in Afghanistan shortly thereafter, and a direct, positive response with morale and effects, but our troops know that their 

President and this Administration has their backs. 

Standing with Guaido and recognizing him as the constitutional 

Interim President of Venezuela; and all your efforts to combat antisemitism, recently appointing a Special Envoy, I thank you for 

doing that. That was a position that was long vacant, and it is 

great to see it filled with Elan Carr. 
38 

In Syria, it should be noted that we followed through with air 

strikes after Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his own people. In the past, there have been threats that use of chemical weapons would result in consequences from the U.S., and the United 

States now follows through. And I believe that the Assad regime 

and their allies know what the consequence is of use of chemical 

weapons. 

In Russia, the imposition of sanctions in response to the use of 

biological or chemical weapons in the U.K. 

As far as engagement with regards to North Korea, when President Trump first came into office, putting the military option back 

on the table, but understanding that the military option should always be the last possible option of anyone on the entire globe between any nations. 

The USMCA, which Congress should pass. I met with President 

Trump yesterday on it. I believe this should be a bipartisan effort, 

Republicans and Democrats in the House and the Senate, to get 

speedy passage. 

In China, confronting the currency manipulation and the IP infringement and trade deficits; the imposition of tariffs if China does 

not positively change their behavior. 

I know Congressman Cicilline is following me, something that he 

is deeply passionate about. I am working with him with concern 

about the LGBT community in other parts of the world where they 

have been criminalized. They are being murdered simply because 

they are LGBT. Over the course of recent weeks, I have seen that 

the State Department has taken an important leadership role in 

confronting that. 

But, in our brief time, I just hope you could talk about your upcoming efforts as it relates to religious freedom. I know it is a personal topic. There is a lot of religious minorities who are being persecuted across the world. And with our remaining time, I am hoping you could touch on that. Thank you. 

Secretary POMPEO. On religious freedom, protecting religious minorities, not simply—we have talked about the Uyghurs, Muslim 

minorities in China, but Christian minorities in Iraq that we spoke 

about earlier this morning of every religion. We will host the second ever ministerial for religious freedom at the State Department 

this summer. We had—I have forgotten the number—dozens and 

dozens of foreign ministers to talk about religious freedom, not all 

of whom were in the place we want them to be, but each of those 

who was present that day was making real progress in places one 

might not expect. It is important. It is America’s first freedom. All 

our other freedoms build from that, and I hope that we can expand 

that around the world. 

Mr. ZELDIN. Our Secretary contacted me at 1:58 a.m. on your 

time to talk business on Monday morning. The last person that 

Secretary Pompeo and his team—the last thing they should be accused of is disengagement. I appreciate your continued service. 

[Laughter.] 

And I yield back. 

Secretary POMPEO. It was a different time in my time zone. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Zeldin. 
39 

We are going to just go out of order quickly because one of our 

members has to be on the floor. I am going to call on Ms. Wild. 

Ms. WILD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Pompeo, I am deeply concerned about the unprecedented lack of transparency and potential conflicts of interest in 

this Administration. Members of Congress and the American people do not always know what foreign policy decisions are being 

made or whose interest they are intended to serve. 

Earlier this month, on March 18th, you held a telephone press 

briefing focused on, quote, ‘‘international religious freedom,’’ end 

quote, that was only open to faith-based media outlets. This briefing was closed to the State Department’s press corps and closed to 

major independent news organizations. The State Department has 

said it will not release a transcript of the briefing to the public, 

which is highly unusual for this type of high-level briefing. 

To me, this instance raises concerns about First Amendment violations. The Administration should not be granting some media 

outlets access to briefings while selectively excluding others based 

on the Administration’s preferences. As a public official, what you 

say, especially during a press briefing, is inherently of interest to 

the public and the media. And I am concerned, also, that the Department during your tenure has greatly reduced the frequency 

with which it holds regular open press briefings on foreign policy 

matters of the day. 

So, my question to you is, why did you want to limit the type of 

participants who could join this press briefing call on March 18th, 

and why are you not releasing the transcript of that briefing and 

the call participants who participated? 

Secretary POMPEO. Congresswoman, I talk to the press all the 

time. I talk to different groups of the press all the time. Indeed, 

sometimes I talk to single members of the press. I do that with 

great frequency. And when I do, I do not release transcripts of 

those conversations. Those are interviews that I grant individual 

reporters. They write certain pieces and certain other pieces they 

do not. This was no different from that in any material respect. I 

am confident I will do so again. 

Ms. WILD. Excuse me. Secretary, my question was very specific 

about the March 18th press briefing—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Ms. WILD [continuing]. Which was specifically focused on international religious freedom and was made open only to faith-based 

media outlets. So, my question to you is not about individual press 

discussions that you may have on a daily basis, but about a very 

specific briefing. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I was answering that question. 

Ms. WILD. And so, will you release a transcript of that briefing? 

Secretary POMPEO. No. 

Ms. WILD. Will you identify who the participants were in that 

briefing? 

Secretary POMPEO. No. 

Ms. WILD. And your rationale for that is simply that it is something that you like to do? 

Secretary POMPEO. It is something that every Secretary of State 

that I am aware of has done consistently on a consistent basis. 
40 

Ms. WILD. So, that will continue to be your practice? 

Secretary POMPEO. It will continue. It was Secretary Powell’s 

practice. It was Secretary Rice’s practice. It was Secretary Kerry’s 

practice. And Secretary Pompeo intends to continue that practice, 

yes, ma’am. 

Ms. WILD. OK. So, that was a decision made on your own, not 

with influence by anybody else from the Administration? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. Yes, it was my decision. 

Ms. WILD. All right. Secretary, my colleague, Mr. Yoho, commended you on your travels through the United States sharing the 

message of the State Department. I noticed that you visited Iowa, 

an interesting choice, along with Texas and Kansas this month on 

1-to–2-day visits. Can you reassure this committee that you are not 

using your travels and engagement as Secretary of State to advance your own personal brand or political ambitions? 

Secretary POMPEO. Of course I can. 

Ms. WILD. And the purpose, again, for these travels throughout 

the United States? 

Secretary POMPEO. Look, it is true, I did not go to Martha’s Vineyard. 

Ms. WILD. That is not my question. 

Secretary POMPEO. No, but may I—— 

Ms. WILD. Secretary—— 

Secretary POMPEO. It’s that Secretaries travel—— 

Ms. WILD. May I—— 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. Domestically all the time, 

ma’am. And the fact that I went to places outside the Acela corridor somehow seems to have alarmed people here in the Beltway. 

I went there, I will tell you what—— 

Ms. WILD. I am not alarmed by travel throughout the United 

States. 

Secretary POMPEO. I went there—let me tell you what, let me tell 

you what my mission set was, what I said when I was on the trip. 

There were multiple missions. When I went to Houston, I was talking about American energy and its importance to diplomacy. When 

I went to Kansas, it was a long-planned Global Entrepreneur Summit that we will repeat in the Netherlands in June. When I went 

to Iowa, I was talking to Iowa farmers about President Trump’s 

trade policy and how it fits into American diplomacy. 

And then, second, I had a very selfish mission. I want the most 

talented people from all across the country to apply and become 

Foreign Service Officers working as America’s finest diplomats. 

Those were my mission sets. I spoke publicly at each of these 

events, in some cases numerous times. I think it would track with 

what I just told you. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Sensenbrenner? 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, welcome back to this sea of tranquility compared 

to what your current job is now. 

I have a couple of questions. We have seen a rising level of antisemitism across our country and even in our own government institutions. Several high-profile individuals have spouted off anti-Israel 

rhetoric that has had to be countered with condemnation resolu-
41 

tions by the House. The Administration is currently attempting to 

craft a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. The 

two questions, Mr. Secretary, are: will these statements damage 

our standing with Israel and make is a weaker ally? And second, 

do these types of antisemitic acts and rhetoric damage the United 

States’ credibility in the Middle East nations that will be involved 

in the final agreement? 

Secretary POMPEO. I think the answer to both questions is yes, 

and antisemitic language is abhorrent regardless of the U.S. diplomatic outcome. But, yes, it makes more difficult, undoubtedly. 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. So, what we say here, particularly when it 

is way off base, does make the job of our diplomats more difficult 

when they are attempting to reach a peace agreement in a part of 

the world where real peace has not come for centuries? 

Secretary POMPEO. Language used by Members of Congress matters. These countries all around the world are listening to you all. 

They are watching. They are watching to see if this is a whole-ofgovernment United States process, and they are watching voices, 

even if sometimes those voices are outliers. They do not always 

know what to make of it. 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. My second issue is, as you know, the opioid 

and fentanyl epidemic has been plaguing our Nation for almost a 

decade now. Congress has taken aggressive steps to better fund 

treatment programs and curb the implementation of these deadly 

substances. Recently, my good friend, Mr. Connolly, and I introduced the Blocking Deadly Fentanyl Imports Act. This would add 

illicit fentanyl to the list of substances under Section 481 of the 

Foreign Assistance Act, which makes any exporting nation ineligible for U.S. taxpayers’ subsidized foreign aid or Export-Import 

Bank loans if it fails to cooperate with American narcotics control 

efforts. 

Now, Mr. Secretary, do you believe that this section of the Foreign Assistance Act is an effective tool of combating illegal drug imports into the United States? And do you believe that Mr. 

Connolly’s legislation and mine, bipartisan, would be an effective 

additional tool in combating illicit fentanyl in our country? 

Secretary POMPEO. With respect to your first question, is that 

section important and effective, the answer is yes. With respect to 

the particular language you are proposing, my gut tells me it is 

right. I would love the chance to actually review it and make sure 

that I understand it in its full context. 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. OK. We will talk to you later about that. 

And I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Cicilline? 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. 

You and other Administration officials have repeatedly claimed 

that military action is an option in Venezuela or all options are on 

the table. As a former Member of Congress, I assume you are familiar with the War Powers Act? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am. 

Mr. CICILLINE. And as your Special Representative for Venezuela, Elliott Abrams, confirmed for me before this committee 
42 

there is no current statutory authorization for a military intervention in Venezuela. So, is the Administration currently planning any 

military action against Venezuela? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am certainly not going to speak to that 

today. I will leave the Department of Defense to speak about their 

planning. I can say this: any action that we take with respect to 

Venezuela, whether it is military action or action otherwise, will be 

in full compliance with U.S. law. 

Mr. CICILLINE. And so, I take that that is an agreement that you 

will honor the Constitution and, as a member of this Administration, seek congressional authorization before any military engagement in Venezuela? 

Secretary POMPEO. We will fully comply with the Constitution. 

Mr. CICILLINE. I will take that as a yes. 

In August, the Administration announced it would cutoff funding 

to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine, UNRWA, claiming that the U.N. body provides a lifeline and truly vital assistance, 

but needs reform. Your spokeswoman pledged, then, that the 

United States will intensify dialogue with the United Nations, host 

governments, and international stakeholders about new models 

and new approaches, which may include direct bilateral assistance 

from the U.S. and other partners that can provide today’s Palestinian children with a more durable and dependable path toward 

a brighter future. 

Can you please tell me about this intensified dialogue? 

Secretary POMPEO. Sure. 

Mr. CICILLINE. What concrete steps has the United States taken 

and what specific reforms are you working on? And how many suggested reforms has the Administration submitted to the U.N. or to 

UNRWA as of today? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I could not tell you numbers. I can tell 

you that we have absolutely lived up to the commitment that you 

just described there. Indeed, I spoke about it with the Egyptian 

Foreign Minister just yesterday. I spoke to the Jordan—— 

Mr. CICILLINE. No, my question, Mr. Secretary, is—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, well, I understand—— 

Mr. CICILLINE [continuing]. What steps have you taken, concrete 

steps has the United States taken with respect to these reforms? 

Secretary POMPEO. This is how you do reforms, right? This is 

how you work on them. You go build out coalitions that are designed to resolve the very problems that we identified with 

UNRWA. And so, we are working—may I answer? 

Mr. CICILLINE. Yes, of course. I am anxious for you. I am waiting. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, well—— 

Mr. CICILLINE. Are there concrete actions that the U.S. has taken 

or reforms that you have proposed? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, we are trying—— 

Mr. CICILLINE. What are those? 

Secretary POMPEO. We are trying to make sure that the resources that the American taxpayers provide go to the right places 

and achieve American outcomes. We have made a number of suggestions. We do not have any—we have not had any takers yet. 

Mr. CICILLINE. OK. 
43 

Secretary POMPEO. But I am confident that we will continue to 

work on this—— 

Mr. CICILLINE. Will you be willing to provide a summary of those 

reforms and suggestions that you have made to the committee? 

Secretary POMPEO. I would have to take a look at it. If they were 

private conversations, I likely will not be able to do that. 

Mr. CICILLINE. OK. Next, Mr. Secretary, around the globe, as you 

know, LGBTI people have been targeted, rounded up, tortured, and 

even killed just for being who they are. We have seen this in 

Chechnya, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and other 

places. The United States recently refused to join a statement delivered to the United Nations Human Rights Council calling for the 

perpetrators of violence in Chechnya to be held accountable. Why 

did the U.S. not join over 30 other nations in signing the recent 

joint statement to the U.N. Human Rights Council calling for a 

thorough investigation into the anti-LGBTI crimes being perpetuated in Chechnya? 

Secretary POMPEO. I will have to get back to you on the reasons 

for that particular decision. But I will defend staunchly the work 

that we have done. I hope you have seen that. I hope when you 

talk to our diplomats as you travel around the world you see our 

commitment. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Secretary, it makes the refusal to sign this 

very important document particularly concerning. So, I would like 

an answer back on that. Thank you. 

Mr. Secretary, you had made reference to NATO just a moment 

ago. Are you familiar with the report ‘‘NATO at 70,’’ prepare by 

Ambassador Burns and Ambassador Lute? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am not. I know who—— 

Mr. CICILLINE. Well, I urge you, encourage you to read this report. They identify the single greatest challenge to NATO today is 

the President of the United States. And they detail conversations 

with NATO officials who explained, for the very first time in the 

history of NATO, there is an American President who does not 

seem to support or understand its significance, who has said that 

he has considered withdrawing from NATO, that NATO is obsolete. 

And so, it is a really alarming report. And I wonder what steps 

you, as the Secretary of State, are taking to reassure our allies that 

the U.S. remains committed to NATO and that we understand its 

critical role in our shared values of advancing democracy, human 

rights, and the very important alliance that has provided such 

peace and stability around the world. 

Secretary POMPEO. No, I have not read the report. I have known 

Doug Lute since I was a young lieutenant when he was the S3 of 

my squadron in Bindlach, West Germany—he was a major—a long 

time ago. I have great respect for him. He is just simply wrong. If 

the conclusion he drew is that President Trump is the biggest impediment to NATO, he is just simply wrong. We have worked diligently to make NATO stronger. I am convinced that we have done 

so. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you. 

And my final question, Mr. Secretary, is, just to go back to the 

question about your March 18th briefing, it has been the practice 

of every other Secretary of State, not on individual meetings, but 
44 

when there are press briefings or press roundtables, that transcripts are prepared and the State Department press corps are 

present. You have changed that practice. So, when you say it has 

been the practice of every Secretary, with respect to one-on-ones 

you may be right. With respect to press briefings, the State Department press corps is there, and there is a transcript provided. 

I am asking you today whether you will reconsider your position 

and go back to that past practice and bring greater transparency, 

because we are all concerned about a significant reduction in press 

access and a significant reduction in access to transcripts of these 

proceedings, which goes against a very basic principle of freedom 

of the press and is very dangerous for our democracy. 

Secretary POMPEO. I am happy to take a long at it again. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you. 

Chairman ENGEL. All right. Thank you. 

Mr. Mast? 

Mr. CICILLINE. I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I have a unanimous 

consent request. 

Mr. MAST. Thank you for recognizing me, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ENGEL. Yes, Mr. Mast, if you will just hold for a second, please? 

Go ahead. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, I request unanimous consent to 

put into the record remarks delivered by Senator Menendez on the 

floor today directly refuting both the President and the Secretary’s 

claim that Senate appointees are being held up by the U.S. Senate. 

And I would ask that be placed in the record. 

Chairman ENGEL. Without objection, so moved. 

[The information referred to follows:] 
45 

4/2/2019 Press Release 1 Press Releases j News & Events I U.S. Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey 

Menendez Corrects the Record on 

Trump Administration's Failure to Fill 

Key State Department Vacancies 

Wednesday, March 27, 2019 

WASHINGTON- U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign 

Relations Committee, spoke on the Senate Floor today to outline the Trump Administration's 

failure to nominate qualified individuals for a number of ambassador posts and senior State 

Department positions. The Senator's speech comes in response to the latest statements the 

President reportedly made yesterday afternoon when he met with Senate Republicans, where he 

tried to shift the blame away from himself for his Administration's failure to adequately staff our 

foreign policy agencies. 

https:II'WV'NJ.menendez.senate.gov/news-and-evenls/press/menendez-corrects-the-record-on-trump-administrations-fai!ure-to-fill-key-state-departrnent 1/6 
46 

4/2/2019 Press Release 1 Press Releases! News & Events [U-S. Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey 

"When the Trump Administration repeatedly fails to appropriately vet political nominees, Congress must 

exercise appropriate oversigllt," said Menendez. "The President has nominated and re-nominated 

individuals with restraining orders for threats of violence; people who made material omissions, 

sometimes on a repeated basis, in their nomination materials; people who tweeted and retweeted vile 

things about Senators and their families; and who have engaged in incidents that should, frankly, mean 

they never should have been nominated. One nominee attacked my late colleague and good friend, 

Senator John McCain, claiming that John McCain, an Americiln hero, was rolling 'out the welcome mat 

for ISIS on America's Southern Border.' But unfortunately, we know that attacking McCain does not 

cross any red lines for this President. Another nominee has claimed, with no evidence, that tl1e wife of 

Senator Cruz is part of a sinister cabal seeking to combine the governments of Canada, Mexico and tile 

United States. This nominee called Hillary Clinton a 'terrorist with amnesia,' and retweeted someone 

calling Senator Romney a 'dumbass.' You can't make this stuff up." 

"When the White House, either through negligence or incompetence, sends us un-vetted, unqualified 

nominees, incapable and often times offensive, my staff and I must exercise due diligence on behalf of 

the American people. So. to make this crystal clear, the President can speed up this process. All he has 

to do is start nominating Amel'icans with appropriate credentials and honorable conduct in their 

careers," concluded the Senator. 

In Floor Speech, Menendez Corrects Trump's Statements o ... 

a 

Below are Senator Menendez's remarks as delivered. 

"/come to the floor to correct the record concerning statements the President reportedly made 

yesterday afternoon w!Jen he met with Senate Republicans. 

https:/!WoNW.menendez.senate.gov/news-and-events/press/menendez~corrects-1he-record-on-trump-admlnistrations-fai!ure-to-fi!l-key-slate-department. .. 216 
47 

41212019 Press Release j Press Releases 1 News & Events 1 U.S. Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey 

Apparently, in-between his efforts to stiff hurricane victims in Puerto Rico and tear affordable 

health care away from millions of Americans, President Trump claimed that Democrats were 

holding up ambassadorial nominations in the Senate. 

Just weeks ago we heard similar comments from the Senate Majority Leader, who claimed that 

General John Abizaid's nomination to be Ambassador to Saudi Arabia was "being held up." 

So let me be clear: no one wants to see the State Department vested with all the resources it 

needs to be effectively conduct American foreign policy, including qualified and capable staff, 

more than I do. 

We cannot promote our foreign policy, protect American citizens, advocate for American 

businesses or advance American values without a robust diplomatic co1ps. 

So I want all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to know that each time the Senate 

Foreign Relations Committee has received nominations, I have dedicated my time and staff 

resources to efficiently and diligently vet and advance those nominations. 

In the last Congress, the Committee reported 169 nominations. I reject any assertion that we 

IJave not done our part to ensure that the State Department is appropriately staffed. 

Now let me speak to General Abizaid, because no one can honestly claim that the Foreign 

Relations Committee has been anyt!Jing but extremely diligent and expeditious with his 

nomination. 

With my full support, General A biz aid appeared on the very first Committee nominations hearing 

of this Congress. 

And I very much look forward to voting in favor of his nomination --as soon as our Chairman -

our Republican Chairman - exercises his prerogative and puts him before the Committee for a 

vote. 

As with all nominees, t!Je timing of his consideration by the full Senate is under the control of the 

Majority Leader. 

It's clear that President Trump has an inaccurate or dishonest- view of tiJe nominations 

situation in the Senate, and particularly on tl1e Foreign Relations Committee. 

We cannot confirm diplomats that we do not IJave. All too often, the Committee has received 

nominations late or not at all. 

https:lfwv-.m.menendez.senate.govlnews-and-eventslpresslmenendez-corrects-the-record-on-trump-adminlstrations-fallure-to-fill-key-state-department . 316 
48 

4/2/2019 Press Release 1 Press Releases 1 News & Events 1 U.S. Senator Bob Menendez of N-ew Jersey 

The Trump Administration took nearly two years before it even bothered to nominate General 

Abizaid, leaving a gaping hole in our diplomatic posture to Saudi Arabia and tiJe region. 

To go nearly two years without putting forward a nominee is a failure of leaders!Jip pure and 

simple. 

Saudi Arabia's actions over these past two years hig!Jiight the fact that we need an adult on the 

ground, which is why I wholeheartedly support General Abizaid and look forward to wiJat I hope 

is his speedy confirmation. 

Sadly, Saudi Arabia is not an isolated example. 

It took even longer, more than two yea1s, for tiJe Trump Administration to nominate a candidate 

to be U.S. Ambassador to Turkey. 

Astonishingly enough. it was only this week that the President sent up an ambassadorial 

nominee for Mexico. 

We are now 26 months into the Trump Administration, and we still lack ambassadorial nominees 

to critical countries like Egypt, Pakistan, and our close ally, Jordan. 

So let's be clear- t/Jis is tile President's reckless abdication of a constitutional responsibility 

essential to projecting American power abroad. When you don't nominate someone, President 

Trump has only himself to blame. 

Furt!Jermore, Mr. President, there is unfortunately another severe problem that we cannot ignore 

with regard to this Administration's nominees. 

WIJen the Trump Administration repeatedly fails to appropriately vet political nominees, Congress 

must exercise appropriate oversigllt 

The President has nominated and re-nominated individuals with restraining orders for threats of 

violence; people who made material omissions. sometimes on a repeated basis, in their 

nomination materials; people who tweeted and retweeted vile things about Senators and their 

families; and who have engaged in incidents that should, frankly, mean ti1ey never should have 

been nominated. 

One nominee attacked my late colleague and good friend, Senator John McCain, claiming that 

John McCain, an American hero, was rolling 'out the welcome mat for ISIS on America's Southern 

Border.' But unfortunately we know that attacking McCain does not cross any redlines for this 

President. 

https:/fv.NN.J.menendez.senate.gov/news-and-events/press/menendez-corrects-the-record-on-trump-admin!strations-fai!ure-to-fill-key-state-department 416 
49 

41212019 Press Release 1 Press Releases 1 News & Events I U.S. Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey 

AnotiJer nominee has claimed, with no evidence, that the wife of Senator Cruz is part of a sinister 

cabal seeking to combine tiJe governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States. This 

nominee called Hillary Clinton a 'terrorist with amnesia,' and retweeted someone calling Senator 

Romney a 'dum bass.' 

You can't make this stuff up. 

Senator Sasse's office said that nominee should 'put on his tinfoil hat and visit our office with 

evidence for his salacious conspiracy theories and cuckoo allegations,' and went on to observe 

tl73t, 'people who want to serve Americans as our diplomats and spokespeople abroad should 

know that words and truth matter, even during campaigns. Cynics and nuts are probably going to 

have a hard time securing Senate confirmation.' 

I couldn't agree more. Yet tiJe President thought highly enough of this individual, and lowly 

enough of the U.S. Senate, tiJat he nominated him for an ambassadorship in two successive 

congresses. 

Another ambassadorial nominee was the subject of a temporary restraining order after she left a 

bullet-riddled target practice sheet on her doctor's ciJair. Again, you cannot make this up. 

As for being unresponsive to Committee requirements for all nominees, I can understand that 

nominees may accidentally leave off a few businesses that they were involved in. But we had 

one nominee who failed to inform tiJe Committee of dozens of businesses, and another nominee 

who, even more egregiously, failed to mention multiple lawsuits that he was involved in, 

including one in which he was alleged to have fired a female employee who complained of 

sexual harassment. Given tiJe nature and frequency of these omissions, it's hard to believe they 

are unintentional. 

So when tiJe White House, eitiJer through negligence or incompetence, sends us un-vetted, 

unqualified nominees, incapable and often times offensive, my staff and I must exercise due 

diligence on beiJalf of the American people. 

So, to make this crystal clear; the President can speed up this process. All he has to do is start 

nominating Americans with appropriate credentials and honorable conduct in their careers. This 

is not rocket science! 

Mr. President, the United States and our allies continue to face tremendous challenges around 

the world 

https:/f~JN.NJ.menendez.senate.gov/news-and-events/press/menendez-corrects-the-record-on-trump-admlnlstrations-fallure-to-fi!!-key-state-department .. 516 
50 

4/2/2019 Press Release 1 Press Releases! News & Events l U.S. Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey 

We must continue to lead on the international stage and work in collaboration with international 

partners to ac/lieve our shared security goals. 

But to have our diplomats in place, they must be nominated in a timely fashion and veiled 

properly. 

That is the real hold-up here, not Senate Democrats. And I refuse to let this President point the 

finger at us when l7c should be pointing at himself" 

Press Contact 

Juan Pachon (202) 224-4651 

Related Content 

03/29/19-

Menendez Reacts to Trump Administration's Attempt to Cut Foreign Aid to Central America 

03128/19-

Bipartisan Group of Senators Introduce Senate Resolution Condemning Terrorist Attacks in 

New Zealand 

03/27/19-

Menendez Introduces Resolution Observing the 25th Anniversary of the Genocide in 

Rwanda 

03126119-

As Russian Troops Land in Camcas, Menendez Pushes Review of Potential Russia Sanctions 

Violations in Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua 

https:f/w.J.NJ.menendez.senate.gov/news-and-eventstpress/menendez-corrects-the-record-on-trump-administrations-failure-to-fill-key-state-department... 6/6 
51 

Chairman ENGEL. Mr. Mast? 

Mr. MAST. Thank you again for recognizing me, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, I want to say thank you to you and to the State 

Department for the truths that you have gone out there and made 

it a point to address that have been ignored year over year. And 

there is an extensive list that many of my colleagues have brought 

up. 

You have addressed the truth that Jerusalem is the capital of 

Israel. If folks have a problem with that, they should probably take 

it up with God. 

You have addressed the truth that, if your enemy wants to shoot 

you, you do not go take them out to buy a gun. And we do not allow 

nations like Iran, who threaten to kill us, who would be more than 

happy to slit the throat of every person in this room, we do not give 

them access to weapons of mass destruction. That is a truth that 

your State Department went out there and addressed. 

You addressed the truth that we should seek peace with nations 

like North Korea. We should attempt to reach denuclearization 

agreements, but that we should also walk away from bad deals 

that do not benefit the citizens of the United States of America. 

You addressed the truth that China has been ripping us off year 

after year, penalizing our goods, stealing our ideas, stealing our intellectual property, and said that that is not going to happen any 

further. 

You addressed the truth that many in Europe want us to go out 

there and defend them from Russia while at the same time they 

are doing business with Russia and not picking up their piece of 

the check in terms of defense. 

You have addressed the truth that we have exhausted tremendous treasure and lost far too many sons and daughters of the 

United States of America in our 18 years of war. 

You have addressed the truth about the people crossing our border illegally on our southern border. Whether it be for the purpose 

of bringing drugs, for trafficking humans, or for seeking a better 

life, they are crossing our border illegally, and you have addressed 

those truths. 

And my question for you today, as we are supposed to be having 

a hearing on strategy of the State Department going forward, is, 

what truths do you want to see us go out there and confront moving forward for the United States and for the State Department for 

the betterment of our citizens? 

Secretary POMPEO. One of the things I have focused on is ensuring that our team had what it needed to go out and make sure that 

America was leading, and it was leading in a way that was not, 

frankly, from behind, but was, rather, building coalitions. And we 

have been pretty successful at that. I think the world needs to see 

that. 

When we supported Venezuelan democracy, we built out an enormous coalition. I sent folks to every corner of the earth explaining 

what was taking place in Venezuela and why the recognition of 

Juan Guaido made sense and was the right thing to do. 

When we wanted to take on North Korea, we got the largest coalitions and the biggest sanctions, voted on by every member of the 

United Nations Security Council uniformly to achieve the objective 
52 

there, the denuclearization, the risk that we take of proliferation 

takedown from the world. 

The counter ISIS campaign that has now taken down the last 

piece of real estate in Syria and in Iraq from ISIS. We know work 

continues, but we built out an enormous coalition to do that. That 

was the great work, largely, of the team that I have the privilege 

to lead. 

And I want everyone in the world to know that we are prepared 

to do that. Where problems and challenges confront us, the United 

States Department of State will lead and build out organizations, 

so that we can confront these challenges that present risks to 

America and to the world. 

Mr. MAST. I thank you for that leadership, Mr. Secretary. 

And I yield my time back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Mast. 

Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for appearing here. 

I was pleased to hear in your opening comments that you recognize the important role that Congress has and the important role 

that Congress has with regards to oversight and investigations. 

As the new chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, I want to thank the chairman of the full committee for 

giving us broad jurisdiction really to take a look and a deep dive 

into the State of America’s diplomacy and development. It is a big 

task, and I am sure I share your commitment that we want to have 

the best State Department; we want to have the best development 

agencies; we want to have the best people out there serving the interests of the United States of America in our soft power. 

I cannot do this by myself, and I am going to need your help and 

your commitment to allow your staff to work with us as we take 

this deep dive. Do I have your commitment that you will make 

your staff available to us? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, sir, you do. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you. 

Also, in your opening I was glad to hear you talk about the important work that the men and women around our country who 

serve and represent us abroad every day, the work that they do is 

incredibly valuable. They are patriotic Americans often working in 

difficult environments and difficult situations. 

I do have one concern. A March 2019 GAO report found that 13 

percent of the overseas Foreign Service’s positions were vacant as 

of March 2018. Now that is not your doing because these are similar vacancy levels as such positions in 2008 and 2012. 

But, also, in interviews GAO found that the staff at overseas 

posts told us that the vacancies really are increasing their workloads, contributing to low morale, and high stress levels. And this 

seems to be borne out in other reporting. 

In the latest annual rankings of Best Places to Work in the Federal Government, produced by the Partnership for Public Services 

and the Boston Consulting Group, the State Department dropped 

from eighth place to 14th place amongst the 17 large Federal agencies. 
53 

Meanwhile, I think as you have already mentioned, the registration for Foreign Service Officer tests saw a 22 percent decline from 

October 2017 and October 2018, according to an NBC News report. 

I am glad you are out there recruiting. I am glad you are out 

there trying to get the next generation of America’s diplomats to 

think about service to country through the Foreign Service. But we 

realize that morale is taking a beating. 

What I would like to do is, again, obviously, it is important for 

us to fill those positions. In our oversight role, I would be curious, 

who is the person responsible for implementing your plan to help 

fill these positions, help with recruitment, and so forth? You cannot 

do it by yourself. So, who should we be working with? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, the person you would work with would be 

my Under Secretary for Management, but I do not have one. 

Mr. BERA. OK. 

Secretary POMPEO. So, it would be great if I did. We have now 

gone 2 years without a confirmed Under Secretary for Management, essentially, the chief operating officer. We did get, although 

it took too long, we did get Carol Perez, who is a talented career 

Foreign Service Officer, whose title is Director General for Human 

Resources. 

Mr. BERA. Do you have a nominee that—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, we do, yes, absolutely. 

Mr. BERA. OK. 

Secretary POMPEO. That is the second one we have put forward. 

Mr. BERA. Well, let’s try to get that position filled. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. Highly qualified, I believe every Member 

of the U.S. Senate so believes. And yet, we have not been able to 

get him across the floor. But we have someone you can work with. 

Mr. BERA. Great. 

Secretary POMPEO. Her name is Carol Perez. She is a career Foreign Service Officer. She runs what is called the Director General 

of Human Resources. 

Mr. BERA. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO. She is a great lady and is driving—— 

Mr. BERA. And I got your commitment that we could work with 

that to get these positions filled. 

And last, I have a concern. And I want to thank you for being 

here. Over the years in both Democratic and Republican Administrations we had had an interagency process that has served us 

well, where the various agencies are working together to make sure 

the President has the best advice before the President makes a decision. I have got a couple of yes-no questions, because I do have 

some concerns about the decisionmaking process currently. 

On the decision to withdraw troops from Syria, General Votel, 

the Central Command commander, said, quote, ‘‘I was not consulted before this decision was made.’’ 

Our Special Envoy to defeat ISIS, Brett McGurk, said he spoke 

with you after the President has made up his mind, and he wrote 

in a public op-ed, ‘‘During the December call, Pompeo informed us 

that there had been a sudden change in plans. President Trump, 

after a phone conversation with his Turkish counterpart, planned 

to declare victory over the Islamic State and direct our forces to 

withdraw from Syria.’’ 
54 

A yes-no question. Did the President consult you before deciding 

to withdraw troops? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. BERA. Five days ago, the President tweeted that, ‘‘It was announced today by the U.S. Treasury that additional large-scale 

sanctions would be added to those already-existing sanctions on 

North Korea. I have today ordered the withdrawal of those additional sanctions.’’ 

Bloomberg News reported yesterday that the President was referring to sanctions that the Treasury Department had announced 

the day prior against two Chinese shipping companies that were 

helping North Korea avoid U.S. sanctions. A yes-no question. Did 

the President discuss removing those sanctions with you prior to 

the tweet? 

Secretary POMPEO. They were Treasury sanctions, as I recall. 

Mr. BERA. But, again, in an interagency manner, was the State 

Department consulted for that? 

Secretary POMPEO. We have had lots of discussions. The reason 

I cannot answer that yes or no is because we have had discussions 

on sanctions issues with respect to Iran, with respect to Venezuela, 

with respect to China. 

Mr. BERA. Right. I know—— 

Secretary POMPEO. We have these discussions consistently and 

over time, and then, there does come a point where Presidents 

make decisions. And at that point in time, we inform our team, and 

we go execute and implement with all of the energy and vigor that 

we have. 

I must say, too, if I may, you made a statement about some of 

the things that Mr. McGurk said. I cannot answer them because 

what Mr. McGurk said in that was classified, and it should not 

have been uttered publicly. And I regret that very much. 

Mr. BERA. OK. 

Chairman ENGEL. Mr. Bera, I am going to let you get one more 

quick question. We have to move on. 

Mr. BERA. Just very quickly, a final—I think it is very concerning that there may be a lack of an interagency dialogue where 

our leaders at State, Defense, et cetera, are being consulted prior 

to these decisions being made. Does that sound like sound foreign 

policy? And you do not have to answer that question because we 

are out of time. 

Chairman ENGEL. All right. Thank you. 

Ms. Wagner? 

Mrs. WAGNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, over here. 

Secretary POMPEO. I have got you. 

Mrs. WAGNER. Thank you for your time today and for your service. 

I have to say that it is appalling the number of nominees that 

this Administration still has in State and other agencies that have 

not been confirmed by the Senate. We hope that they can move 

much more swiftly and waive the 30-hour rule. 

Sir, the Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act, a bill 

that I introduced, that was signed into law by President Trump in 

January, affirms the critical importance of interagency coordination 
55 

to prevent genocide and mass atrocities. Secretary Pompeo, how is 

State supporting atrocity prevention and response activities? 

Secretary POMPEO. There are multiple mechanisms inside the 

Department of State. We have teams that have responsibility for 

the implementation. The State Department’s element of implementing that particular statute and law, we have a broader group 

of folks who work on human rights issues. And then, yet, we have 

another group that have regional responsibility. Each of them has 

tasks to ensure that we do all that we can to reduce the risk that 

there would be genocide, atrocities, crimes against humanity all of 

these horrific activities that we find too many governments taking. 

Mrs. WAGNER. And are they reaching posts actually? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mrs. WAGNER. Are they trained up—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I think so. I am sure we could do better. 

Just I am sure we could get this information out more broadly and 

execute this, and I am happy to look at how effective we are at getting this out into the missions. 

Mrs. WAGNER. I have some ideas about that, as a former U.S. 

Ambassador and on this piece of legislation. So, I would love to 

share them with your team, Mr. Secretary. 

China has been working to isolate Taiwan through diplomatic 

channels. We have heard a little bit about this earlier with Mr. 

Chabot. In the past year, China convinced three countries to cut 

diplomatic ties with Taiwan and, instead, recognize Beijing. How is 

State working to prevent China from further eroding Taiwan’s 

international support? 

Secretary POMPEO. We are using every tool that we have in the 

toolkit. You have seen that we have used our economic toolkit to 

try to convince countries that this was not the right thing to do. 

We have used our, I will call it our diplomacy/political toolkit to 

convince them that this was something that mattered to America. 

As a former Ambassador, we have issued demarches to countries. 

Mrs. WAGNER. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO. We have a commitment with respect to Taiwan and how we will deal with that, a longstanding set of policies 

that goes back now decades. 

Mrs. WAGNER. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO. The United States is firmly committed to enforcing that set of understandings, and inside of that, doing our 

level best to make sure that we honor the commitments to Taiwan 

as well. 

Mrs. WAGNER. I was glad to see us in the Taiwan Strait recently. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yesterday. 

Mrs. WAGNER. Yesterday, yes. 

Speaking of recently, on Sunday, Mr. Secretary, Thailand held its 

first elections since the military junta seized power in 2014. Although voting was expected to be free and fair, worrisome reports 

have emerged that cast doubt on the election’s legitimacy. How will 

State work with civil society and government officials in Thailand 

to facilitate a return to genuine democracy? Thailand has the chair 

of the ASEAN Caucus, of which I am a co-chair and care deeply 

about this region, especially vis-a-vis a counterbalance to China. 
56 

Secretary POMPEO. So, I have been to Bangkok. We have reengaged in ways that the American leadership has not engaged 

since 2014. I have also seen the reports from the election yesterday, albeit only what I would call first reports. So, I want to see 

more about what actually transpired. Our team on the ground 

there worked diligently to ensure that we would be able to make 

determinations about the election and, in fact, to ensure that we 

provided whatever support we could to make sure that there was 

a free and fair election. 

Thailand is an important place, a place where I believe America 

can find an important counterbalance to the risk that China presents to the United States. 

Mrs. WAGNER. I could not agree more. I care deeply about the entire ASEAN region from a security standpoint, from a trade standpoint, from a humanitarian standpoint, and, most of all, as a counterbalance to China. 

Given the Burmese government has cutoff Rakhine State to humanitarian and AID workers and international observers, how is 

State working with local actors to direct aid to those who need it 

most, Mr. Secretary? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, State Department proper is doing it. 

USAID is on the ground as well. 

Mrs. WAGNER. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO. There are other commercial partners, nongovernmental partners as well. It is tough. It is heavy slogging. 

Our capacity to deliver that is, unfortunately, limited, but we are 

working. We are working to reopen some of the ways we were able 

to do that previously as well, but we have not had much success. 

Mrs. WAGNER. These atrocities, whether it is in Burma with 

Rohingya, the Kachin, Shan, and the Rakhine, are just horrific. 

We thank you for all of your service and your support in this 

area. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Castro? 

Mr. CASTRO. Thank you, Chairman. 

Thank you, Secretary, for your testimony today. 

I have a question about what seems in some parts of the world 

to be the growing cooperation between Russia and China to pursue 

mutual interests. In Venezuela, for example, it seems as though 

both have been involved to some extent. And I came across, not too 

long ago, a quote by an African leader that said that, ‘‘China is the 

money and Russia is the muscle.’’ Do you find that to be true, and 

what do you see in terms of their cooperation? 

Secretary POMPEO. That is a very important question. We have 

seen Russia and China begin to work together in ways that they 

had not done 15–20 years ago. That is a trend that has probably 

gone on for a handful of years now. They have just found themselves in places where they have overlapping interests. They have 

strategic challenges between the two countries, long-term strategic 

challenges in places that I do not believe will ever truly overlap. 

But certainly, tactically and operationally, we see that today. 

Venezuela is a very, very good example, but we have seen it in 

other places as well. We see it at the United Nations, where, as 
57 

members of the U.N. Security Council, they work together as well, 

almost always against freedom, democracy, liberty, the things that 

the United States and democracies hold dear. 

Mr. CASTRO. Also, let me ask you about recent news that Italy 

is joining the effort on China’s One Belt One Road Initiative. And 

obviously, a major European country, friendly to the West, historically, what that means for the United States and for China and its 

effort at expanding its might, economic might and military might, 

around the world. 

Secretary POMPEO. It is disappointing anytime any country begins to engage in behavior and commercial interactions with China 

that are not straight-up. China has every right to move around the 

world and compete transparently, private companies engaging. 

They will win a handful of times. I am convinced that we will do 

great if there are rule-of-law transactions that are open and transparent. 

That is not the case with many of the initiatives under One Belt 

One Road. And so, your point, whether it is Italy or other countries 

that have gone down this path, we are saddened because we think 

those countries, we think the people of those countries will ultimately lose. We have seen that in some smaller, less wealthy countries. That is, the debt trap diplomacy, this predatory lending that 

takes place comes home to roost more quickly than it does in nations that can survive that, that are wealthier. 

But when you engage in these non-economic transactions with 

essentially State-owned or State-directed enterprises, nothing good 

happens for your people. It may feel good in the moment. You 

think you got a cheap product or a low-cost bridge or road built. 

In the end, there will be a political cost attached to that which will 

greatly exceed the economic value of what you were provided. 

Mr. CASTRO. We certainly support your efforts to obviously allow 

China to compete, but not to cheat around the world. 

And let me ask you one last question with respect to North 

Korea. I want to get your perspective on whether you think, think 

or know whether North Korea’s nuclear capacity and capabilities 

have increased or decreased since the first Trump summit. 

Secretary POMPEO. So, the fact that they have not conducted missile tests or nuclear testing is a good thing. It reduces their capability. Their systems become less reliant. But we have not yet seen 

them make the big move that we were hoping, frankly, that they 

would do in Hanoi. We have not yet seen them take the big step 

that I spoke about the very first time I met Chairman Kim, goodness, almost exactly a year ago, where we talked about the fact 

that there would be a brighter future for the North Korean people, 

but it had to be this complete denuclearization. We have not seen 

them take a step in that direction yet. 

I am still hopeful that we can engage and negotiate with them 

and get to the right outcome. Chairman Kim, even in this last visit 

between the Presidents, the conversations between my team and 

his team, they still tell us they are committed to it. It is time that 

we begin to see real actions in that regard. 

Mr. CASTRO. And where does it all go from here with North 

Korea? 
58 

Secretary POMPEO. My team is engaging at every level, not only 

with the North Koreans. Steve Biegun, the Special Representative, 

has been in China these past couple of days. I think he may be on 

his way back here now. He has been working with our allies in the 

region, South Korea and Japan, to ensure that we keep the pressure campaign, that we continue to enforce the U.N. Security 

Council resolutions, and then, continue our diplomatic efforts to 

achieve this outcome. 

Mr. CASTRO. Thank you, Secretary. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Curtis? 

Mr. CURTIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Mr. Secretary, greetings from Utah. It is a delight to be 

here with you today. 

I am not sure all of us can appreciate that one of your skill sets 

is sitting there hour after hour and answering our questions, but 

thank you. 

We have paid homage, rightly so, to C-SPAN for their 40-year 

anniversary over the last day or two, but, interestingly, I think we 

have missed one of the most significant 40-year anniversaries. 

Forty years ago yesterday, President Carter, Sadat, and Begin 

signed the historic peace treaty. I happened to be 19 years old and 

living in Jerusalem at the signing of that treaty, and I grabbed a 

newspaper and, for years and years, I kept it in a file in my office. 

And when I came to Congress, I took that newspaper and I had 

it framed. And this now hangs in my office as a reminder of the 

many lessons that came out of that, among other things, that we 

can do what seems near impossible; that we can bring these groups 

together that seem so far apart; that we can be bipartisan in the 

way that we approach these. And I worry that our relationship 

with Israel is becoming a partisan issue, and I hope that it is not. 

I think our success depends on this being a bipartisan issue. 

Could you touch just a minute on what the Administration is 

doing that might take us back to a point like this in our relationships with Israel and their Arab neighbors? 

Secretary POMPEO. Sure. So, your point is well-taken. I am also 

reminded, if I have the history right of that day, that if you looked 

at the outsiders the day before, at least a week before, months before, it seemed almost imaginable—— 

Mr. CURTIS. It would not happen, yes. 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. That that would have happened. 

So, I am mindful. 

We were talking about North Korea a little bit ago. As difficult 

as these problems look, if you continue to work at them, if you continue to engage in good-faith negotiations, and try and grind away 

and resolve these resolutions, that sometimes things happen quickly and big. And I am hopeful that the Trump Administration will 

be able to achieve some of those. 

With respect to the efforts in the Middle East, there has been a 

lot of groundwork laid, working with each of the countries in the 

region, the Jordanians, the Egyptians, the Saudis, the Emirates. I 

am going to miss a few along the way. We have worked with the 
59 

Iraqis. I was just in Lebanon. I was in Israel. In my previous role, 

I met a number of times with the Palestinian leadership. 

Working to try and understand the conflict as it sits today, not 

as we might have imagined it 5 years ago or 10 years ago or 30 

years ago, and to try to identify those places where we can find 

congruence, overlap, places where we can acknowledge the history, 

but move past it. And we will lay out our vision for that in the nottoo-distant future, and I hope that every one of those countries will 

take a good look at it. There will be something in there, I am sure, 

that they do not find too wimpy, but I hope they will at least take 

a serious look at it and take it as a good-faith effort to resolve this. 

Mr. CURTIS. And to your point about the naysayers, I actually 

was in Galilee the night that it was signed, and Syria had said 

they would invade over the Golan Heights. And I remember, as a 

19-year-old, looking up and seeing the Golan Heights, wondering if 

they were coming. But I think it is a great testament that we can 

do these hard things. 

Unfortunately, this week we have also seen rockets launched at 

Israel from Hamas, from Gaza. There is some belief that Iran had 

a hand in this. Can you address that and, also, does that show us 

one of the flaws in the Iran nuclear deal with the long-range ballistic missiles not being addressed? And is this an example of why 

that is a problem? 

Secretary POMPEO. With respect to the recent rocket attacks, 

when I came this morning, I think both sides had agreed that they 

had gotten to a pretty good place. Whether that will hold, I do not 

know. It was pretty fragile when I had the last conversation, but 

I am hopeful that it will. 

Second, I could not tell you if the Iranians were directly involved 

in this particular attack. I can tell you that they underwrite 

Hamas, the entity, the terrorist entity, that is responsible for those 

missile launches. 

And then, finally, your third question was about the JCPOA. 

Look, most of the behavior that has led to Iran being the world’s 

largest State sponsor of terrorism increased during the JCPOA. It 

was because the JCPOA prevented the Administration from taking 

any action against Iran. They said that it did not, but, in fact, you 

just need to look at the activities that they engaged in. They permitted Iran to expand. They gave Iran resources. They opened up 

economic wealth for Hezbollah and for Shia militias all across Iraq. 

Those were the kind of things that our policies are trying to 

cabin, to reduce the capacity for the Islamic Republic of Iran to engage in terror behavior, whether that is in the Gaza Strip or the 

assassination campaigns that are taking place in Europe, or the 

missile launches that are coming out of Yemen. 

Mr. CURTIS. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

I yield my time. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Ms. Titus? 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. 

It has been reported that Jared Kushner offered Prince Mohammad of Saudi Arabia, and I quote, ‘‘advice about how to weather 
60 

the storm’’ in the aftermath of the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Do 

you know if that is true or not? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not. 

Ms. TITUS. Well do not you think it would be important for the 

Secretary of State to know what the senior White House officials 

are telling world leaders, including the leader of Saudi Arabia? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I believe I know everything that he told 

him, but you suggested some report that I have not seen. And so, 

I am happy to—— 

Ms. TITUS. Well, do you know if he gave him PR advice? 

Secretary POMPEO. To the best of knowledge, he did not. 

Ms. TITUS. Do you think it would be—— 

Secretary POMPEO. I talk with Mr. Kushner all the time. I think 

we are fully in sync with respect to how we are handling each of 

the issues around the world. We know what his files are. We know 

the ones that I am engaged in. We know where we have overlap, 

and we are working toward the same end State. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, I want to ask another question about some of 

our relations, whether it is through you or through Mr. Kushner. 

And that is the setting up of an Air Marshals-type program with 

Saudi Arabia. I know this was begun under a previous Administration, but I wonder if you have any reservations about continuing 

the program now, since it comes in the wake of the murder of The 

Washington Post journalist, in the wake of arrests and detentions 

and abuses of women’s rights activists, in the wake of air strikes 

that have hit schools and hospitals, even a bus carrying 40 children. Thousands of people in Yemen have died as a result of it. 

Both Houses have voted in opposition to it. Do you think that we 

might want to reassess a program that we have set up with Saudi 

Arabia to create this special Air Marshals-type program? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am not familiar with the program. I am 

happy to take a look at it. 

Ms. TITUS. You are not familiar with the program? Because it is 

supposed to go into place fairly soon, and we have sent TSA officials—— 

Secretary POMPEO. I am happy to look—— 

Ms. TITUS [continuing]. Over to set it up. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I vaguely recall. I do not have responsibility for TSA. 

Ms. TITUS. Yes, I know you do not, but it is through the State 

Department. 

Secretary POMPEO. That might be why I am not as familiar with 

it as I might otherwise be. But I am happy to take a look at it. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, great. Maybe you will take a look at the other 

countries in the Middle East where we already have these programs. Are you familiar with those at all? 

Secretary POMPEO. I know of the existence of the program, yes. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, can I ask you what you might think, if we set 

up a program with Saudi Arabia, what we can do to put some safeguards in place to be sure that it will not be used against our interests or fall into the wrong hands that, then, might be used against 

us? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I think, most appropriately, DHS would 

be the best place to lodge those questions. But I am happy to take 
61 

a look at them and see if they have important State Department 

equities or foreign policy elements to them. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, thank you. I would appreciate it if you would 

get back to us on that. And I am a little disappointed that you are 

unaware of a major program that is taking place with collaboration 

of the State Department. 

Let me ask you about another program that maybe you do have 

more information about. It has been reported that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services—I know that is not directly under 

you—but they are closing 23 international field offices. These are 

offices that work on refugee applications, family reunification, 

visas, and foreign adoptions. And they plan to transfer those over 

to the workload of the State Department. That would be what you 

are in charge of. 

Secretary POMPEO. It would, yes, ma’am. 

Ms. TITUS. I wonder, did you sign off on that decision? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, ma’am, I am very familiar with this. I 

am very familiar with how our Consular Affairs team interacts 

with the USCIS, and I am very comfortable with the path that we 

are taking. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, there is nothing that is reflected in your budget 

to show how you are going to take up this work. Can you explain 

how you are going to be able to cover these new assignments? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am very comfortable that we can deliver on 

that mission set, and my team has told me the same. 

Ms. TITUS. And are you going to continue to make this a priority 

or will this be put on the back burner? And what is going to be 

the impact on refugee applications as a result of your just kind of 

absorbing this process? 

Secretary POMPEO. When you say ‘‘this,’’ I am not certain what 

you are—— 

Ms. TITUS. This was family reunification, visas, the refugee applications, those activities that used to be done by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that are being transferred to you, 

that you are so comfortable about taking up. 

Secretary POMPEO. I am very confident that we can deliver these 

services. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, we will be watching that to be sure that that 

is the case. But it seems to me it would be a little more responsible 

if you had made some mention of it in your budget, that this will 

be a new task that you are undertaking, as opposed to DHS. You 

do not have any problem with that? 

Secretary POMPEO. Do you have a question, ma’am? 

Ms. TITUS. My question was, why did not you put it in your 

budget? 

Secretary POMPEO. Ma’am, I would have to go take a look at that 

line item and see what we did and where it is that line item fits. 

But I have talked with the team on the budget. The Consular Affairs team was very involved in delivering the budget and they are 

comfortable that they can deliver on all of the missions that we 

have provided to them. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, I am glad you are comfortable because I am not 

very comfortable. I am not very comfortable with the answers, that 

you do not seem to know what is going on. But I would be more 
62 

comfortable if you would get back to us and tell us about this TSA 

Air Marshal program that you are setting up with Saudi Arabia. 

Secretary POMPEO. I will ensure that DHS gets back to you, 

ma’am. 

Ms. TITUS. And I appreciate that. Thank you, sir. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Buck? 

Mr. BUCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome back, Secretary Pompeo. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you. 

Mr. BUCK. During your time at the CIA and at the State Department, did you receive training on how classified information should 

be handled? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, sir, I did. 

Mr. BUCK. Does everyone handling classified information at the 

State Department receive a briefing or training course on how to 

handle classified information? 

Secretary POMPEO. I believe that is correct. 

Mr. BUCK. Did this training cover the different designations indicating a document’s level of classification? 

Secretary POMPEO. Anyone who receives a clearance and has access to classified information would receive training on the various 

levels and how those various levels are required to be handled. 

Mr. BUCK. And does a classification marker of ‘‘TS’’ indicate that 

it is top secret information contained in that document? 

Secretary POMPEO. That is what those two letters would normally indicate, yes. 

Mr. BUCK. And if it is an ‘‘S,’’ would it indicate that it is a secret 

classification? 

Secretary POMPEO. Also correct. 

Mr. BUCK. And if it is a ‘‘C,’’ would it indicate that it is a classified document? 

Secretary POMPEO. ‘‘C’’ typically means confidential. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. 

Secretary POMPEO. That is the level of classification, but I suppose it could—yes, I think—— 

Mr. BUCK. OK. So, confidential? 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. Typically, it means confidential, 

yes, sir. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. And you were taught these designations at the 

training that you received as Secretary of State? 

Secretary POMPEO. You know, I know I went through that training as Director of CIA. I do not know that I went through the 

course again when I became Secretary of State. I may have. 

Mr. BUCK. I do not want to suggest something about your age, 

but were you grandfathered into that as a result? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not know. Here is what I am confident 

of: if I was required to go through the process, I did. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. Have you ever gone home for the night and left 

classified documents on your kitchen table? 

Secretary POMPEO. Not to the best of my knowledge. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. Have you ever left them in your car? 

Secretary POMPEO. Not to the best of my knowledge. 
63 

Mr. BUCK. Have you ever taken classified documents home with 

you and had them outside of your possession? 

Secretary POMPEO. I have, only because I have a location that I 

can store classified information in my home. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. So, it has—— 

Secretary POMPEO. So, they would have been stored in an appropriate location inside the secure facility that is inside of the house 

in which I live. 

Mr. BUCK. And a security official has approved that as a secure 

location? 

Secretary POMPEO. That is correct, yes, sir. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. Do you have a private server in your home? 

Secretary POMPEO. No, I do not. 

Mr. BUCK. And if you had left classified information in your car 

or if you had left it in your home outside of the private area, would 

that be a violation of the training that you had received about how 

to handle classified information? 

Secretary POMPEO. Anytime that classified information is not 

stored in an appropriately approved facility or is outside of the control of to whom that information has been provided, whether that 

is written or even if one speaks about it, lets it out orally, yes, that 

is inconsistent with the requirements. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. Could you be prosecuted for receiving information 

outside of a secure or sending information outside of a secure location or email serving—a non-classified email server? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. Mr. Secretary, you are also a lawyer, is that correct? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am not certified to practice anywhere today, 

but, yes, at one point I went to law school and I used to have a 

bar registration. 

Mr. BUCK. And as a lawyer, you have heard of the term ‘‘circumstantial evidence’’? 

Secretary POMPEO. I have. 

Mr. BUCK. And would it be considered circumstantial evidence of 

guilt for someone to take evidence of a crime and destroy that evidence? 

Secretary POMPEO. It might well be. 

Mr. BUCK. OK. I have no further questions, and I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Espaillat? 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary, I believe the last time I spoke, I was the Mariano Rivera of this. Now I am sort of like a middle reliever, or still find 

myself asking questions that may have been addressed already. 

But I want to start by expressing my serious concerns with plans 

to close USCIS. The international field offices was previously mentioned. This may seem a little bit out of scope with this hearing, 

but I guarantee that it is not. 

Two weeks ago, the USCIS Director Cissna put forward a plan 

to close its 12 dozen overseas offices and said that many other responsibilities would be shifted onto the State’s Consular’s Office. It 

is my understanding that the very reason that these offices exist 

is to take some of the workload off the Consular officials. 
64 

Let me make myself clear. I oppose this plan. I know that a 

number of my colleagues also oppose it. I will be leading a letter 

in opposition to it. 

I just want to find out how are you going to address the overload 

of work for these Consular Offices. Are you going to increase staff? 

There is currently a backlog to begin with. And now, you are shifting these services to another unit that may, in fact, be overburdened to begin with. Do you have a plan to increase staffing and 

do you project—what kind of workload do you project these Consular Offices are going to have? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not have that in front of me, but I know 

our team is very well apprised of this transition that is taking 

place, and our Consular team is confident that they can achieve 

their mission set. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. One of the issues that often comes forward is the 

lengthy times that folks have to wait for these services. With regards to family reunification, some families, some mothers have to 

wait as long as 7 years. By the time they are done, those kids that 

they want to reunite with are now adults. And this brings about 

a great degree of issues to the families. So, I urge you to please 

come back to us and give us what your plan is for this change. 

Secretary POMPEO. I will make sure that we collectively do that, 

that we help you. This is a longstanding issue, as I understand the 

history of it—it is not the last couple of years; it predates that— 

and one that we need to seriously make sure that we understand 

fully. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. I want to shift now to the Caribbean. I find that 

the Caribbean is often overlooked for its strategic importance to the 

U.S. The Caribbean is, in fact, our third border, and we ought to 

direct necessary focus to the region. We must work to curb the flow 

of illicit drugs, combat corruption, promote good governance, and 

buildupon trade partnerships for our relationship with these nations to prosper. 

One important aspect of our relationship with the Caribbean is 

the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, to which the U.S. contributes roughly $58 million annually to combat drug trade, promote 

social justice, and increase public security. I believe that the CBSI 

is critical to the U.S. national interest and that we ought to continue to grow the program. I will be asking for a substantial increase to the CBSI. 

I just want to know from you, Mr. Secretary, how do you plan 

to ensure that we continue to work with the Caribbean, the CBSI 

program to fight drugs in that region? 

Secretary POMPEO. The CBSI is, in fact, an important program. 

I concede that. We have to make hard choices from time to time. 

You will have to make hard decisions about how many dollars to 

allocate to particular programs. You will have to make tradeoffs, 

ones that you are not always happy with as well. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Will you be supportive of a substantial increase 

to that program? 

Secretary POMPEO. I will have to take a look at it in the context 

of all the other demands on resources for the State Department. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Finally, Mr. Secretary, I consistently hear of our 

allies in the region that they feel, in that region and Latin Amer-
65 

ica, that they feel ignored by the U.S. because we have stepped 

away from the region. We do not invest in our allies. And instead, 

they turn to China because we have left sort of like a vacuum. 

I know that you, the Administration has sort of like given a 

green light or winked at some of those nations saying, you can 

trade, but there are certain projects that we would oppose. For example, ports, access to data, other important—could you enumerate 

which are the kinds of projects that the Administration will oppose 

some of the countries in Latin America engaging with China? 

Secretary POMPEO. Sure. I am agree with the predicate of your 

question with respect to a couple of decades where America did not 

engage and invest in that region in the way that it should have. 

We are trying to correct that. 

And China has shown up and made proffers that we think are 

not in the best interest of those nations. I do not know that I can 

segregate them out as categories other than to say free, open, private companies competing transparently, Chinese companies, all 

good. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. But do you think—— 

Secretary POMPEO. When it presents a security risk to the 

United States, no good. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Do you think, for example—real quickly, Mr. 

Chairman—do you think that allowing Chinese to run ports, given 

the crisis of fentanyl in the region and in the hemisphere, is a good 

idea? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Wright? 

Mr. WRIGHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. I want to compliment 

you on what I believe is outstanding leadership of your Department. 

I recently introduced the Digital Global Access Policy Act, which 

would expand internet access to developing countries and promote 

U.S. export of technology. We have heard a lot about China. 

So, my question relates specifically to internet access. And, yes, 

we work with private companies and all of that, but is there anything the State Department is doing with regard to that? We 

talked about this yesterday in the African Subcommittee hearing. 

And could you tell us what the State Department is doing just in 

that regard? 

Secretary POMPEO. With respect to internet access? 

Mr. WRIGHT. Yes. 

Secretary POMPEO. And globally? Speaking around the world? 

Mr. WRIGHT. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. So, there are places that is our responsibility. We try to make sure that there is freedom of speech, freedom of expression. The internet is, obviously, part of that, the capacity for citizens to communicate. We talk about that in every 

place we go where there is substantial risk of that. We also do our 

best, when malign actors are attempting to close down, create 

closed systems which prevent citizens from speaking, from getting 
66 

this information that comes through the internet, the State Department has a role in trying to prevent that as well. 

Mr. WRIGHT. Great. 

Now I want to shift to the border. You know what the national 

numbers are. I can tell you that in Texas 11,000 per week are coming across into Texas, 9,000 into three Texas counties, the three 

most southern counties. I toured that area last week by plane, by 

helicopter, by gunboat on the Rio Grande. I saw firsthand where 

the drug cartels are operating, where human traffickers are bringing people across on rafts. 

And I have a lot of questions for one of your counterparts. Nobody is going to mistake you for the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

But, as it relates to Mexico and our policy toward Mexico, what 

can we do to get Mexico to do more on their side of the border? 

Secretary POMPEO. I have personally been very involved in this. 

Frankly, I think I have been to Mexico more than any previous 

Secretary of State in our first—what now?—10 or 11 months as 

Secretary of State, and met with my Mexican counterpart and spoken with him more. I have a great relationship with Foreign Minister. 

We have asked them to do a number of things. We have asked 

them to strengthen border security at their southern border, a very 

important component—— 

Mr. WRIGHT. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. Of what is taking place today at 

America’s southern border. 

We have asked them not to create incentives for people to travel 

this dangerous path through Mexico. And then, we have come to 

an understanding with respect to how those coming to the United 

States to seek asylum can remain in Mexico during the time of the 

pendency of their claim. 

We are working with the Mexican government on each of these. 

We need them to do more. We need them to set up more checkpoints. We need them to do the things that prevent what you describe is happening in your State. 

Mr. WRIGHT. With regard, though, to the drug cartels and the 

human trafficking—and the human trafficking aspect of this is 

something that we do not hear a lot about, but it is absolutely horrible, what is happening to young women that are being brought 

across the border. I do not see Mexico stepping up to the plate 

when it comes to that. 

Secretary POMPEO. I have talked with them a great deal. I know 

my counterparts at DHS, at DEA, all the elements that work on 

these transnational criminal organizations, the narcotics and 

human trafficking that flow through those networks, we are there 

to help. The United States taxpayers actually provide significant 

resources to assist them. We are prepared to continue to do that, 

but we certainly need the Mexican government to do more. 

Mr. WRIGHT. Well, I can tell you that what U.S. Border Control, 

the Texas Department of Public Safety working in tandem with 

them, and the county sheriffs, they are doing outstanding work. I 

can also tell you they are overwhelmed. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 
67 

Mr. WRIGHT. And they need help down there. 

My last question, it is a little more personal. I have some constituents in my district, a family who has a family member, Majd 

Kamalmaz, who is being held in Syria, has been for almost 2 years. 

You have been very responsive. Your office has been very responsive to my office as well as to the family. I would just ask that you 

continue to work with the Czech Republic—they are the ones that 

are actually helping us with this—and not let this man fall through 

the cracks. 

Secretary POMPEO. You have my commitment. Next week, we 

will hold an event at the State Department talking about this specific set of issues, about Americans that are detained wrongly 

abroad. I will have some of the families in. 

The Trump Administration has had some success we are very 

proud of in getting people back. I personally got to bring back three 

Americans who were being held in North Korea. We focus on this 

every single day. 

Mr. WRIGHT. Great. Thank you. Thank you again. Thank you for 

your service. 

And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Phillips? 

Mr. PHILLIPS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Mr. Secretary, as a Gold Star son, I am particularly grateful for your service to our country. 

My question is about Afghanistan. It goes without saying that a 

secure and peaceful Afghanistan is not in our country’s best interest, but, of course, the world’s. I know that will be difficult to 

achieve. But it also goes without saying that Members of Congress 

are concerned about the lack of communication between the State 

Department and Congress relative to both our strategy and an update relative to the negotiations with the Taliban. 

I think since November 2018, this committee staff has been asking for a briefing. I believe Chairman Engel and Ranking Member 

McCaul have sent a letter as recently as February asking for that 

briefing. And all have been ignored. 

So, my question is, can you confirm that within 2 weeks that 

Ambassador Khalilzad would appear for a briefing in front of this 

committee? 

Secretary POMPEO. No, I am not prepared to do that, to confirm 

that he will do that. I am happy to share with you our strategy, 

what it is the State Department has been tasked to do, and frankly, all the U.S. Government has been asked to do in Afghanistan 

by President Trump. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. Before you continue—— 

Secretary POMPEO. I am happy to share with you—you describe, 

by the way, our negotiations. Our negotiations are with every element inside of Afghanistan aimed at there to be Afghan-led conversations. That is the mission set that Ambassador Khalilzad is 

engaged in. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. OK. Specifically—— 

Secretary POMPEO. So, it is just important to characterize it correctly. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. I respect that. 
68 

But, going back to the Ambassador, what is a reasonable timeframe for him to appear in front of this—— 

Secretary POMPEO. You know, when you are engaged in complex 

negotiations, one needs to be really careful to make sure that the 

contents of those negotiations remain in a very small circle. And 

I am happy to share with you. I know precisely what he is doing. 

I do not speak with him every day, but almost every day. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. OK. 

Secretary POMPEO. It is either I are Under Secretary Hale that 

is working closely with Ambassador Khalilzad. 

I am happy to come share with you what we can, but you have 

to know the success of these negotiations depends on every one of 

those partners having confidence that what they say in those negotiations will not end up in The Washington Post. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. I respect that. But, in his absence, and with about 

3 minutes here, if you could brief us on both strategy—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. PHILLIPS [continuing]. And any update that you can share, 

it is most important. 

Secretary POMPEO. You bet. Let me walk you through President 

Trump’s strategy. He has talked very publicly about ending endless 

wars and about taking down America’s substantial commitment in 

Afghanistan as quickly as we can, consistent with American national security interest. That is the aim that he has set out for us. 

So, I, working closely with, first, Secretary Mattis, now Acting 

Secretary Shanahan, have laid out our effort for reconciliation to 

see if we can take down the violence levels, and then, begin to have 

real negotiations about what a political resolution would look like 

in Afghanistan, always being mindful of the risk. There is continued ISIS-Khorasan inside of Afghanistan. Although America has 

done enormously good work under multiple Presidents to take 

down the threat from al-Qaeda, it remains there as well. So, all the 

while being mindful that we have important counterterrorism equities that we need to make sure that we address appropriately. 

And that is what Ambassador Khalilzad and the Department of 

Defense who is working alongside him on these reconciliation discussions are trying to convince all the parties, the government of 

national unity, including President Ghani, other Afghan actors, 

and the Taliban to come together to see if we cannot find a way 

to reduce the violence. When we do that, we will be able to reduce 

not only American forces there, but, importantly, the NATO forces 

that are located inside and working together alongside us inside of 

Afghanistan. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. And in your estimation, can the Taliban and other 

extremist groups be trusted? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am a believer that whoever it is we are negotiating with, we have to have deliverable, measurable outcomes 

that can be verified. That goes for everyone I negotiate with. When 

I was in the private sector negotiating with customers and suppliers, I did not want to have to resort to enforcement mechanisms, 

but, rather, I wanted to be able to have the capacity to understand 

that we could measure, work together, and see deliverable outcomes on the ground. That is what we will expect from all of the 

parties in the region. 
69 

Mr. PHILLIPS. OK. All right. My understanding is the Ambassador is now going back to the region, will be there through April 

10th. 

And I will just ask one more time. Your encouragement would be 

appreciated on behalf of this entire committee to extend that invitation for a briefing. I think it is important, and you having been 

a former Member of this body, I think you probably recognize that. 

Secretary POMPEO. I understand. And I remember when negotiations were taking place with the previous Administration, they 

were very careful about information ending up in places that 

harmed the very effort that we would agree we are engaged in trying to achieve. 

But I am happy to consider if there is a way we can execute what 

it is I know you want. You do have an obligation on oversight. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. Yes, we do. 

Secretary POMPEO. I understand that deeply. And I will do my 

best to make sure that we keep you apprised, as we move along, 

of the success and absence thereof with respect to our reconciliation 

efforts. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. OK. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Fitzpatrick? 

Mr. FITZPATRICK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. Thank you for 

your service. 

I wanted to touch on Ukraine. I am the co-chair of the Ukraine 

Caucus. Also, before being in Congress, as an FBI agent, my last 

international assignment was in Ukraine, and spent a lot of time 

and put a lot of effort into working with their anti-corruption efforts to start the NABU, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, and 

also working a lot of counterintelligence. 

And my question, sir, is, the Administration, their broader policy 

with regards to Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea, the ongoing 

battle occurring in the Donbas region. Do you feel that we are supplying them with enough of what they need? What has the followup 

been with regards to the commitments we have made? Do you 

think it is sufficient? That pertains to eastern Ukraine. And with 

respect to Crimea, are we satisfied just accepting the status quo 

there with the annexation? I know we have made statements of not 

recognizing it. But recognizing that what Mr. Putin did was a violation of international law, what is next in that regard? 

Secretary POMPEO. Let me, if I may, take the second question 

first. We have issued statements. We have issued a Crimea declaration. We have worked with our partners along the Black Sea 

in the region. When the Russians captured soldiers in the Sea of 

Azov, sailors in the Sea of Azov, we have done a great deal of work 

to try to push back against that. We need to do more. 

Next week, I am hopeful when our NATO colleagues are in town 

for the 70th anniversary of NATO we will be able to announce another series of actions that we will jointly take together to push 

back against what Russia is doing there in Crimea and in the Sea 

of Azov and in the region. 
70 

So, the answer is, I do not know that we have done all that we 

can yet. We are continuing to work to make sure that we are building out the right policies, so that we can ultimately restore what 

we have said with respect to Crimea. It belongs to Ukraine, and 

we want to see that fixed. 

Second, we are constantly evaluating whether we are not only 

providing enough resources to Ukraine in the southeast, in the 

Donbas, along the line of contact, not only whether it is enough, 

but whether if it is the right tools, not only the tools that you see, 

munitions and arms, but intelligence sharing, situational awareness, all the things that we have the capacity that you were engaged in, building out infrastructures and institutions inside of 

Ukraine. We are constantly reviewing whether or not we are doing 

enough there. 

We are hopeful that there will be a successful election and a successful government formation that follows that. And then, we hope, 

too, that we can continue the very efforts you described, the anticorruption efforts. They are incredibly important. Those reforms 

will be central to restoring the full democracy that the Ukraine and 

people so richly deserve. 

Mr. FITZPATRICK. Thank you, sir. I can tell you, the younger generation, particularly in Ukraine, provides a very, very bright future 

for that country. They want, more than anything, closer ties with 

the West. 

I think the greatest thing we can do in that region is to keep our 

word to the Ukrainians, provide them with as much military assistance as they need, because that is a big, big constraint for them 

right now. And I just wanted to share that thought with you, sir. 

If you could keep that in mind when you are enacting policies pertaining to that region, that we maintain close contact and ongoing 

communications with Ukrainian leaders, particularly in the area of 

the military. The more military folks we can have joint exercises 

and training with—I know predominantly now it is the National 

Guard in California that does most of the work in Ukraine—but it 

would certainly help to have some of their military leaders in 

Ukraine train here at some of our academies. I think that would 

really go a long way. 

Thank you, sir. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Levin? 

Mr. LEVIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, Mr. Secretary. 

I have several questions for you on the Administration’s implementation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. Let me be 

clear. There is bipartisan support for ending human trafficking, but 

we must follow the letter of the law and ensure vulnerable populations are not punished for their government’s conduct. 

In November, a Presidential memorandum restricted aid to countries that are not meeting or trying to meet standards set out by 

the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, meaning governments that 

are not doing things like seriously investigating and prosecuting 

trafficking cases. This memorandum said the United States ‘‘will 

not provide nonhumanitarian, nontrade-related assistance’’ to the 
71 

governments until they make progress, but it is not totally clear, 

at least to me, what that means. Does assistance to governments 

include aid administered through NGO’s directly to populations 

where the government does not provide any financial or in-kind 

support? 

Secretary POMPEO. We look at each of those on a case-by-case 

basis to determine whether it is appropriate. I think you noted that 

in the memorandum there was an exclusion for humanitarian assistance. Many of the NGO’s, indeed, are providing just exactly 

that. 

Look, there is a good reason for that memorandum. I think it 

makes enormous sense. I am fully supportive of the decision the 

President made there. It is the right thing to do to encourage these 

governments, ultimately, for it to be successful at taking down this 

threat from trafficking. It is going to be those governments that do 

that. So, our work, the State Department’s work—— 

Mr. LEVIN. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. Is to make sure that those governments do it and build that infrastructure. 

Mr. LEVIN. We are all for that, sir, but what I am trying to get 

at is the boundary, and, in particular, we do not want to restrict 

direct NGO aid to victims and vulnerable populations. 

Several Senators and Representatives sent you a letter on this 

very matter on December 17th, and the Department did not respond at all until March 5th. And even then, in the response, it did 

not answer the question at all. We are talking about things like nutrition assistance and health care without which people suffer. So, 

it has been more than 3 months since we first asked the Department this question. Why isn’t there an answer? 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, you just said we sent you a letter. I 

think we have provided an answer. If you think the letter is insufficient, we are happy to review it and see if we cannot provide you 

additional context, additional color, some more detail. But it sounds 

like that—— 

Mr. LEVIN. So, when can we expect a followup? 

Secretary POMPEO. If you would, please, send us a letter indicating what it is you think—— 

Mr. LEVIN. So, another letter? We will just go back and forth—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, I mean, we clearly think we responded. 

We believe we responded to you. 

Mr. LEVIN. OK. 

Secretary POMPEO. If there are particular places where you have 

concerns or you think we did not adequately respond, it does not 

have to be a letter, but if you would share with us what it is you 

are—— 

Mr. LEVIN. Yes, time is short. Let me ask you another question 

about waivers to aid restrictions and how they are being applied. 

I understand that PEPFAR funds are being granted waivers, so 

that assistance can continue, even though PEPFAR programs require coordination and some integration with governments. Yet, I 

have also heard that education and other programs that are not 

working through governments are being impacted. I do not think 

there is any question that cutting off education assistance will hurt 

local populations. So, I would like to understand the decision-
72 

making process. What criteria is the Department using to determine which forms of assistance can continue and which cannot? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I cannot give you a blanket answer. Do 

you have a particular country? I mean, I can talk to you about our 

understanding about how it is we deliver that. We are trying to get 

the very outcomes that are described in the program. So, we are 

trying to make sure that U.S. American taxpayer dollars are used 

for programs that actually have positive outcomes, that actually deliver the results. Where we—— 

Mr. LEVIN. Well, for sure. I do not mean to interrupt you, but, 

you know—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, you did. 

Mr. LEVIN. This is also—yes, I did—this is also a matter we 

asked in the December 17th letter. And the reason I am asking you 

these questions is because the assistance we are talking about is 

absolutely critical to some of the world’s most vulnerable people, 

and because this is hardly the first time requests for key information from this committee have been ignored. I am extremely concerned that, despite the Secretary’s own experience with congressional oversight, that this State Department has no qualms 

stonewalling Congress and keeping us from carrying out our constitutionally mandated oversight responsibilities. 

Let me just ask you one other quick question about Paul Whelan, 

a Michigander. He is an American citizen. He was arrested, as you 

know, on December 28th in Russia by the FSB, purportedly for espionage. He remains in prison, and a Russian court recently extended his pretrial detention until May. Given that we have little 

time left here, can you just give me some sense? We are very concerned about him, that he remains in prison. And we would like 

to know what you are doing to secure his rights under international law and, ultimately, his release. 

Secretary POMPEO. I cannot say much about what we have taken, 

only to reassure you that our Ambassador Huntsman there, our 

team on the ground, our team that travels and has communications 

with the Russian government raises this issue consistently and is 

doing all that it can to make sure that we treat this issue with the 

highest priority. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. LEVIN. Thank you, and I would yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ENGEL. Mr. Burchett? 

Mr. BURCHETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here, brother. You have incredible control. I have had to leave three times for restroom 

breaks; you stay right there. So, I am not sure what was in your 

criteria for hiring, but a large bladder must have been. So, I am 

appreciative of that, brother. 

I am going to ask you some questions about Israel and the Golan 

Heights. And I was wondering if you could elaborate some further 

on the strategic implications that will have for the region, and will 

it be helpful for the peace process? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, first of all, the decision the President 

made was one that we had been working on for some time. And ultimately, it was done because it was the right thing to do, in the 

sense that it recognized the reality on the ground. So, in the first 
73 

instance, the decision was made because it was simply the right 

thing to do to recognize Israel’s claim for the sovereignty of the 

Golan Heights. 

Second, we also believe—and we took a look at this—we believe 

this increases the likelihood that we get resolution of the conflict 

between Israel and the Palestinians. We think it speaks with the 

clarity that takes this away from any uncertainty about how we 

will proceed. And so, we think that, when one is involved in a complex negotiation, that more certainty is better. And so, we do think 

this will benefit both Israel and the Palestinians, so that we can 

get resolution. 

Secretary POMPEO. Cool. Thank you. 

And also, I noticed the United Nations, to me, it is pretty apparent they have a clear anti-Israel voting pattern, I would call it. Will 

the U.S. be leveraging American foreign aid to encourage countries 

to stand with us at the United Nations, as has been suggested. You 

know, we talk about the carrot or the stick. It seems like we are 

always giving the carrot, and maybe the stick might be in order at 

some point. 

Secretary POMPEO. So, we have certainly done that in terms of 

using all the tools at our disposal to make the case that we needed 

partners certainly on the U.N. Security Council, not only the permanent members, but those that are there for a shorter time, as 

well as folks in the broader U.N. General Assembly, that they 

would support us and vote with us. 

One of the reasons we have ended the U.N. Human Rights Council was because it had clearly lost its mission; it had lost its focus. 

It was behaving in ways that were deeply inconsistent with the 

very charter of that commission. 

Mr. BURCHETT. Clearly, I guess some of the countries that were 

on it were some of the worst actors that we have seen. 

What steps is the State Department currently taking to stop the 

flow of resources to the Hezbollah, and are we doing to stop Iranian 

resources from going to them? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, the major global campaign is the sanctions regime that we have put in place. We have taken them from 

2.7 barrels of oil per day down to something around a million barrels of oil per day. We will make another set of decisions in May 

about that. That has denied them hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. 

We have active campaigns with countries around the world to 

deny Iran the capacity to move weapons and money around the 

world. So, Treasury is obviously in the lead, but the State Department is doing work for financial sanctions to deny those countries 

the capacity to trade with Iran. 

There are other tools the U.S. Government uses as well. It is a 

full-on campaign. 

With respect to Hezbollah, I was in Beirut just this past week 

to talk with them about how we can work to ensure that Lebanon 

gets the democracy they want without a third-party armed force inside of their country. It presents real risks to them. It is not to the 

people of Lebanon’s best interest. And we are around the world 

working to make sure that wherever the Islamic Republic of Iran 
74 

is fomenting terrorism or trying to undermine democracy or behaving in a malign way, we are pushing back. 

Mr. BURCHETT. All right. It seemed like I asked something about 

the Chinese and the Huawei—I am not sure; I think that is how 

you pronounce it—with the Chinese using them. And Secretary 

Albright was here, I believe last week or the week before, and she 

concurred; she agreed that they were a national security threat, especially if they were allowed to be a part of the 5G internet infrastructure. 

And with the recent news that Germany will most likely allow 

them to bid on the 5G networks, will that threaten our NATO intelligence-sharing and transatlantic security? 

Secretary POMPEO. I do not want to talk specifics about what the 

Germans are telling us, but I can say this: we have made clear 

publicly to every country the risks of putting technology from a 

Chinese State on the enterprise, or one that is closely affiliated 

with Chinese State-owned enterprises inside your network, and 

then, the subsequent risk about decisions that we will have to take, 

that America will have to take with respect to where we can put 

our information. Not only our government information, but the private information of our citizens is at risk as well. 

And we are out talking about this, making sure that everybody 

understands America’s view of the risk. Then, countries will make 

their own sovereign choices, and we will be forced to then make 

ours as well. 

Mr. BURCHETT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield no time back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Burchett. 

Mr. BURCHETT. So, do with it what you will. 

Chairman ENGEL. I appreciate it. I appreciate it anyway. Thank 

you. 

Mr. BURCHETT. Yes, sir. 

Chairman ENGEL. Ms. Spanberger? 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Thank you, Secretary, for being here today. 

Secretary Pompeo, as a former intelligence professional, I am extremely troubled by the apparent lack of respect for the intelligence 

community’s objective, nonpartisan intelligence assessments and 

their critical importance in the formulation of sound, well-reasoned, 

and balanced foreign policy which is your responsibility as Secretary of State. I would like to ask you a few questions regarding 

some of the most pressing foreign policy issues facing our Nation 

today. As time is short, please answer with a simple yes or no, sir. 

Do you believe the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un will covertly retain his nuclear weapons program despite negotiations? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, I cannot answer that yes or no, and I 

would challenge, by the way, the predicate of your question. I think 

it is important to let—— 

Ms. SPANBERGER. So, sir, I am a former intelligence officer. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. So, I understand that nuance is deep, but 

these are actually—— 

Secretary POMPEO. I worked there for a little while, too. 

Ms. SPANBERGER [continuing]. In-public, open source. They are 

answered in a very straightforward yes or no. 
75 

So, shall I take your response as a no or a yes, sir? 

Secretary POMPEO. You may take my response however you 

please. But I am happy to answer your questions substantively—— 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Do you believe Russia interfered with the 2016 

U.S. general election, sir? 

Secretary POMPEO. If you will permit me to answer your question, I would be happy to do so. But—— 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Please go ahead, sir. 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. It is not fair to ask a question 

that cannot be answered yes or no and demand that I do so. As 

you said, you know nuance. There is nuance in responding—— 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Well, sir, I would argue that point because in 

the 2019 Threat Assessment where we had leaders from the intelligence community here before us, they did answer with a, yes, that 

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un will covertly retain, their assessment is will covertly retain—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, but I am happy to give you my answer 

to that. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Well, moving on to the next one—— 

Secretary POMPEO. You never get a deal until you get a deal. And 

I understand how intelligence works. They look at history. They 

stare at the past. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Sir, let’s move on to the next one. 

Secretary POMPEO. But I am looking at forward and I am very 

hopeful that we—— 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Do you believe Russia interfered with the 2016 

U.S. general election? This is looking toward the past. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. So, that one should be one that you can answer. 

Secretary POMPEO. Oh, yes, they did, and the 2012 and the 2008 

and the 2004—— 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Thank you. 

Do you believe Iran is following the provisions of the 2015 Joint 

Comprehensive Plan of Action to reduce or eliminate its enriched 

uranium stockpile and enrichment facilities? 

Secretary POMPEO. That is a very complicated answer, not all of 

which I can give in public. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Also answered in the January 2019 threat testimony. The answer that the intelligence leaders of our intelligence 

community gave was yes. 

Do you believe that global climate change is real and represents 

a threat to U.S. national security? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, the climate is changing. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Thank you. 

And is it a threat to our national security, sir? 

Secretary POMPEO. It is not at the top of my list. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. I am not asking about your list. I am asking 

about the intelligence community’s list and their assessments, 

which should be driving the policy you are pushing. 

Secretary POMPEO. But policymakers have an obligation to form 

their own independent judgment on priorities, and that is what 

this Administration is doing. It is what I, frankly, wish the past 

Administration—— 
76 

Ms. SPANBERGER. And for the record, I would like to put into the 

record that the 2019 Annual Worldwide Threat Assessment did say 

that global climate change does present a threat to U.S. national 

security. 

So, thank you. I am glad that, ultimately, overall it seems like 

we are in agreement that, when we are looking at threat assessments, you are listening to the career intelligence professionals, 

and differing, and learning from, and listening to their years of 

training and expertise. However, unfortunately, sir, this has not 

matched some of the previous comments that you have made over 

the past years, certainly not those of the White House. 

So, my question is, why is there such a disconnect between your 

positions and that of the President, the assessment of the intelligence community and those of the President? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, there is not. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Is there not, sir? 

Secretary POMPEO. No. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. So, OK. Well, thank you very much for your 

answers on this. 

I do want to close because, as a former intelligence officer and 

as someone who has been deeply disturbed by the lack of the credence given to some of the work or most of the work of the intelligence community, I would like to close with a note to my sisters 

and brothers in the intelligence community. And as one former 

DNI has said, ‘‘The IC will continue to speak truth to power, even 

when the power ignores that truth.’’ 

I want to commend the men and women of the intelligence community for risking their lives across the world, and too often their 

livelihoods as well, every day to collect the information that should 

be directing and informing the policy that the U.S. Government is 

pursuing throughout the world. 

Thank you to you, sir, for being here today. And thank you to 

the intelligence community serving around the world. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you, and—— 

Ms. SPANBERGER. I yield back. 

Secretary POMPEO. And I would just add that you should know 

that it is; the very work that they are doing is important and used 

by this Administration to inform its policy decisions all across the 

spectrum. 

Ms. SPANBERGER. Thank you, sir. Then, I would urge you, in 

your conversations with the President, for him to potentially speak 

more respectfully of the life-risking work that so many of our intelligence community members pursue, so that you may have well-informed, well-sourced information in your day-to-day work. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Watkins? 

Mr. WATKINS. Thank you, sir. 

Secretary Pompeo, thank you for your selfless service. It brings 

honor upon our great State of Kansas, our country, and the United 

States Military Academy at West Point. 

Last time you were home, we were at the GES Heartland Institute, and we talked about the role of the State Department when 

linking up our growers, our farmers, and producers in Kansas to 
77 

the global market. Can you talk me through the State Department’s role in that? 

Secretary POMPEO. Certainly. So, both the State Department 

team that works here in the United States and the team that 

works across missions across the world, we have a responsibility to 

ensure that we have open access to markets. So, that is a policy 

decision inside of those countries that we work diligently to make 

sure they understand that America is going to demand reciprocal 

trade. You see the President raised this to new levels of importance. We want to make sure that, if they are selling their goods 

here, we can sell our goods inside of their country as well. It is only 

fair and right. 

And with respect to agriculture, in particular, we have got a 

whole big team. We have 1500 economic officers stationed around 

the world whose singular mission is to make sure American companies understand rules, understand customs, understand tax laws, 

have the capacity to build out their businesses and create wealth 

and jobs here in the United States by selling all across the world. 

Mr. WATKINS. Thank you, Secretary Pompeo. 

Chairman, I yield my time. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Ms. Houlahan? 

Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Secretary, thank you so much for your time 

today. 

My name is Chrissy Houlahan, and I am here representing the 

people of Pennsylvania’s Sixth congressional District. And so, I 

take great responsibility of making sure that my people in my community understand the importance of the State Department, frankly. 

I am a third-generation military service member myself. I have 

active-duty cousins, many of them in harm’s way right now. But I 

firmly believe that the work that you do prevents the work that my 

family needs to do. 

Secretary POMPEO. Amen. 

Ms. HOULAHAN. And so, my questions are along a couple of lines, 

the first one regarding women and peace and security. I am member of this committee, but I am also a member of the Armed Services Committee. And I am actually quite concerned about the Administration’s delay in submitting to Congress its strategy on bolstering women’s inclusion, peace, and security efforts globally. It 

was required by the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017. 

And so, my first question is to you, which is, when will you plan 

to deliver this strategy, which was due October 2018? 

Secretary POMPEO. I cannot answer that question, but I will get 

you an answer in the next day or two, of when we will have delivered it. 

Ms. HOULAHAN. I would very much like to have a very specific 

answer to that question because I am also a former teacher, and 

deadlines matter. And I would love to have an actual, concrete 

deadline. 

Secretary POMPEO. As a former businessperson, I understand 

how important deadlines are. And I now run a 75,000-person organization. I am with you. 

Ms. HOULAHAN. Yes, sir. 
78 

And the question is, if you have not yet submitted that, how can 

you possibly, therefore, have an implementation strategy for that, 

and how does that possibly, or can it even possibly be folded into 

this proposed budget that you have put forward with regard to 

women’s issues and women’s issues of safety? 

Secretary POMPEO. I am proud of the work we have done on 

women’s issues in this Administration, both in my time as CIA Director—you might not think of that as a place where this rises to 

the forefront, but it certainly did for me. Indeed, my deputy was 

a very talented CIA officer who is now the Director of the CIA. But, 

even more broadly than that, it is certainly part of what I do at 

the State Department, what I demand of my team on the ground 

all over the world. 

Ms. HOULAHAN. Well, and I appreciate that, sir, and I definitely 

would love to get with you in the next day or two to get a very firm 

date on when that particular report will be due. 

And my next question also has to do with women’s issues and the 

Women’s Global Development and Prosperity Initiative. I also an 

a former businessperson, and I was really pleased to see that you 

included $100 million in the women’s economic empowerment 

through the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity Initiative. But I understand in your testimony this morning, in the appropriations hearings, that you spent a lot of time discussing the 

long-term viability of this program, given the proposed cuts to 

other programs that assist and empower women worldwide, like 

the Global Health Program and basic education. 

And I really appreciated in your testimony that you expressed 

flexibility and a willingness to evaluate the effectiveness of that 

program. But my question to you is, how do you reconcile the decreased commitments in some programs and this increased commitment in this particular initiative? How do you reconcile the critical 

programs that have been decreased with this program that you 

have increased? 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, as a former businessperson, you know 

you have to make tough decisions all the time and you have to 

make priorities and allocate resources. We certainly did that in the 

budget that we presented to Congress. We are confident that we 

can deliver on the objectives that I think you have outlined in the 

predicate to your question, and we believe we can—— 

Ms. HOULAHAN. Can you give me a couple of specifics of why, 

what—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Tell me what you are most interested in? I 

would be happy to—— 

Ms. HOULAHAN. Well, just in general, when you are talking about 

making specific decisions and weighing kind of pros and cons of different decisions, what was it that made you decide to do a new program versus some old programs? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, it is our observation that we were not as 

effective with those resources as we believe we can be in the new 

programs in delivering the real outcomes that matter, matter to 

these nations, matter to women in those nations. That was the 

analysis that was undertaken. 

Ms. HOULAHAN. If it is all right, I would love to ask for you to 

put to the record what were those analyses, what were those deci-
79 

sionmaking processes, that it made you evaluate those particular 

things. Because I am a businessperson, a metrics-driven human 

being, just like you are, and I know, in particular, with things like 

this that are ‘‘social sciencey’’ and that are very squishy—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Ms. HOULAHAN [continuing]. You know, that it is really important to have those quantifiable ideas behind them of what it is that 

you were weighing pros and cons on. 

Secretary POMPEO. I appreciate that, and you are right, sometimes things that you cannot put a number to, you can still measure qualitatively. I will concede it is softer. And that is what we 

undertook in this allocation decision as well. 

Ms. HOULAHAN. And thank you. I do actually have a couple of 

other questions, but I only have half a minute remaining. So, if it 

is all right, what I will do is I will submit the remainder—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. HOULAHAN [continuing]. Of my questions to the record. 

And I appreciate your time, sir. 

Secretary POMPEO. I am happy to get back to you on them. 

[The information referred to appears in the Appendix] 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Guest? 

Mr. GUEST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, in your written statement that was provided to us 

prior to your testimony, on page 2 of that testimony, you say, 

‘‘President Trump has made it clear that U.S. foreign assistance 

should serve America’s interest and should support countries that 

have helped us advance our foreign policy goals. This budget, 

therefore, maintains critical support for key allies.’’ And the first 

ally you list there is the Nation of Israel. 

First of all, I want to thank you, in a time of rising opposition 

and the increase of antisemitism, both domestically and internationally, I want to thank you and I want to thank the Administration for supporting our longstanding alliance between the 

United States and Israel. Recently, the Administration has shown 

support by relocating our embassy to Jerusalem and has recognized 

Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights. 

Mr. Secretary, even with our recent support, we continue to see 

attacks on Israel, including just this week where we saw rocket attacks that injured seven, including two young children. And so, my 

question is, can you please address the Administration’s approach 

to working with the international community to support Israel’s 

right to, one, defend itself and, two, to prevent future attacks on 

the Nation of Israel? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, I am not sure exactly where to begin in 

responding to that question. I have addressed some of this. Look, 

we have tried to find places where these countries had overlapping 

interest with Israel. There is a long history in the Middle East 

where these countries could not find any place to overlap. 

We managed to put together a meeting in Warsaw where you 

had senior-level leaders from Gulf States, from Arab States, sitting 

in the same room having discussions about Middle East stability 

and security with Prime Minister Netanyahu. Those kinds of 
80 

things are incredibly important. They reduce risk to Israel. They 

reduce risk to the United States of America. 

And then, I could go through a series of other places we have 

done, perhaps no place more important with respect to the Islamic 

Republic of Iran, right, a country that has sworn to wipe Israel off 

the map. We have taken an approach that is 180 degrees from the 

previous Administration, recognizing the threat that Iran is not 

only to Israel, but to Europe, where they are conducting assassination campaigns, to the capacity for Iraq to stand up an independent, sovereign government. We are working on each of these 

things, and each of those—our effort to build that MESA, the Middle East Strategic Alliance—each of these projects, each of these coalition-building exercises, it is aimed at reducing risk to Israel. 

Mr. GUEST. What additional support can Congress provide the 

Administration, again, to show our support? I know we have talked 

a little bit about the international community. What can we, as a 

legislative body, do to show our support for Israel and work toward 

peace in the Middle East? 

Secretary POMPEO. I think Congress over the past decade has 

done a lot. It is important that every Member of Congress speak 

out about this issue. And the more Members of Congress, the more 

that the world sees that this is bipartisan, this commitment, that 

this commitment to Israel will not change from Administration to 

Administration, the more successful we can be. 

Mr. GUEST. And if the Congress and the Administration were to 

speak in a bipartisan voice, do you believe that that would help advance the peace process in the Middle East? 

Secretary POMPEO. Undoubtedly. 

Mr. GUEST. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield my time back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Guest. 

Mr. Malinowski? 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Mr. Secretary, you have been eloquent in denouncing the harm that socialism has done to Venezuela, and I 

agree with you. I applaud you for it. But I am confused about one 

thing. If we are going to be so forceful in denouncing socialism, 

why is the Administration so high on communism? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I mean, the very statement there is pretty outrageous. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Well, I am talking about North Korea, sir, the 

most perfectly realized communist State in history, a country 

where the State owns everything and everyone. And yet, the Administration is repeatedly referring to how it has, quote, ‘‘awesome 

economic potential,’’ how it can become an ‘‘economic powerhouse,’’ 

quote/unquote, without changing a system, simply by giving up nuclear weapons. 

And so, my question is, why are you so confident in the capacity 

of a communist State to provide for its people? 

Secretary POMPEO. Let me just back up for just a moment. We 

have both the toughest sanctions on North Korea in the history— 

this Administration built out this coalition against this Nation. The 

previous Administration did not do it, did not take it seriously. 

This Administration has done that. I am very proud of what President Trump has been able to do there. We have the toughest sanc-
81 

tions while still engaged in some of the most serious negotiations 

and diplomatic efforts. 

And our mission set is, in fact, to get the proliferation risk reduced, to get North Korea denuclearized, and then, our commitment is to say, at that point, we want a brighter future for the 

North Korean people. The form of government that will take place 

there will evolve over time. We have seen countries in the region 

who have not fully transformed in the way we like, countries like 

Vietnam, be able to grow their economy, provide better for their 

people. We think that opportunity exists in North Korea as well. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. I am asking because there is a whole lot of 

rhetoric about liking Kim Jong-un, falling in love with Kim Jongun, Kim Jong-un being our friend. And so, let me ask you, why is 

liking Kim Jong-un a sufficient reason to cancel or not to pursue 

sanctions against companies helping his nuclear program, as the 

White house said last week? I am quoting the White House there. 

Secretary POMPEO. There have been more sanctions put in place 

by this Administration with a global coalition than at any time in 

the world’s history, sir. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. And yet, liking him is cited as a reason not to 

do more. And, sir—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Let me answer. We will continue, we will continue—— 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. It is a simple yes-or-no question. 

Secretary POMPEO. Well, if I may, we will continue to enforce the 

U.N. Security Council resolutions and do our best to encourage 

every nation in the world to do so. I only wish the previous Administration had undertaken this same effort. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Well, actually, it did. Now let me ask a yes-orno question. 

Secretary POMPEO. These sanctions were not in place, sir. That 

is factually inaccurate. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Is Kim Jong-un responsible for maintaining 

North Korea’s system of labor camps? 

Secretary POMPEO. He is the leader of the country. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Is he responsible for ordering the execution of 

his uncle, the assassination by chemical agent of his half-brother? 

Secretary POMPEO. He is the leader of the country. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Was he responsible for the decision not to 

allow Otto Warmbier to come home until he was on death’s door? 

Secretary POMPEO. I will leave the President’s statement to 

stand. He made that statement. We all know that the North Korean regime was responsible for the tragedy that occurred to Otto 

Warmbier. I have met that family. I know those people. I love them 

dearly. They suffered mightily, sir. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. So, what is to like? 

Secretary POMPEO. They suffered mightily, sir. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. So, what is to like about Kim Jong-un? 

Secretary POMPEO. So, do not make this a political football. It is 

inappropriate. It is inappropriate to do. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Well, when the White House says that sanctions decisions are based on liking Kim Jong-un—has the President 

ever used that kind of language with respect to Angela Merkel? 

Has he ever publicly called her a friend? 
82 

Secretary POMPEO. I have heard him talk about her that way, 

yes. I do not recall if it was in a public setting or not. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. OK. Let me go back to the questions—there 

have been a number of questions about Saudi Arabia and the 

Khashoggi killing. Do you believe that the Saudi authorities, the 

most senior Saudi authorities are capable of investigating themselves for a murder that has been attributed to them? 

Secretary POMPEO. I think the most important commitment that 

the United States made is the one that I spoke about earlier—it 

would have been earlier this afternoon—which is the commitment 

for the United States to conduct its work and hold every person responsible. That is what the United States—— 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. We will base our judgment on our own assessment? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, sir, that is what we have done to date, 

and it is what we will continue to do. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Thank you very much. 

And if Saudi Arabia’s cover story here, if their story is that this 

was a rogue operation, do we not risk reinforcing that cover story 

if all we do is sanction the rogues, the henchmen, the people who 

have been accused by the—— 

Secretary POMPEO. I have made very clear, as has President 

Trump, we are continuing to develop the fact set using all the tools 

that we have at our disposal. And as we identify individuals who 

we can hold accountable for the heinous murder of Jamal 

Khashoggi, we will do so. 

Mr. MALINOWSKI. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Pence? 

Mr. PENCE. Chairman Engel, Ranking Member McCaul, thank 

you for convening this hearing. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here and thank you for your 

fantastic service to this country. 

I noted with great interest that you were recently in Houston at 

CERAWeek. During your address, you stated, and I quote, ‘‘Our 

plentiful oil supplies allow us to help our friends secure diversity 

in their energy resources. We do not want our European allies 

hooked on Russian gas through the Nord Stream 2 project any 

more than we, ourselves, want to depend on Venezuela for our oil 

supplies.’’ 

You went on to note that there is a desperate need for diversification, while pointing out the fact that last year the United 

States exported more crude oil to places like India, Japan, and the 

Republic of Korea. These are great achievements, but you also outlined challenges. You specifically singled out China, Russia, Syria, 

and described how these countries are attempting to leverage their 

energy resources for political purposes. You stated that we are ‘‘not 

just exporting energy; we are exporting our commercial value.’’ I 

could not agree more. 

Mr. Secretary, can you elaborate on what you and Assistant Secretary Fannon’s priorities are in the energy security space, and 

how can we best address these challenges? 
83 

Secretary POMPEO. As America’s senior diplomat, I am an enormous beneficiary of the capacity for American innovation and creativity, whether that is through fracking, the capacity to deliver 

energy around the world. When America shows up, when I talked 

about exporting our commercial values, when we show up, we do 

straight-up deals. We demonstrate value. We have contracts. We 

honor contracts. We engage in deals that are commercial and honor 

the rule of law, independent from government directions, with no 

political gain to the United States. 

Having American companies do business in those ways provides 

an enormous opportunity for us because these countries no longer 

have to be dependent on those countries that are trying to undermine Western democracy and Western values. They have the capacity to create electricity for their countries, to have natural gas, 

to fuel all of the energy needs of their nation without having to 

turn to bad actors around the world. When I was talking about 

those exports having value, that is what I was referring to. 

Mr. PENCE. Again, thank you for your service. Thanks for being 

here today and keeping us all informed. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Trone? 

Mr. TRONE. Mr. Secretary, the Trump Administration Muslim 

ban, that is an appalling policy. It has affected my friends. It has 

affected my neighbors. They have been unable to see their families. 

They feel discriminated in their own country. 

In 2017, a thousand visas were denied. In 2018, that number was 

37,000. There is a waiver there to Proclamation 9645 for undue 

hardship, when it is not a national security threat, but the waiver 

is rarely used. As a matter of fact, it is used less than 2 percent 

of the time. Your own consular officers have described the waiver 

process as a fraud, window dressing. 

Would you talk about what discretion the consular officers have 

in utilizing this waiver? 

Secretary POMPEO. I would be happy if you tell me which consular officer thinks it is a fraud because I would be happy to speak 

with him or her about the fact that it is not, in fact, a fraud. 

Mr. TRONE. His name is in the press. 

Secretary POMPEO. Great. I will—— 

Mr. TRONE. We can have that sent to you. 

Secretary POMPEO. I am happy to take a look at it. I am happy 

to make sure he understands the Trump Administration’s policy 

there. 

We are determined to make sure that we understand who is coming in and out of our country and that we are vetting people properly. I am proud of the work that we are doing there. I am confident that we have reduced risks to the United States of a terror 

attack here. 

Mr. TRONE. The same officers allege that the discretion issue 

waivers is consistently countermanded by Washington. Your answer is the same? 

Secretary POMPEO. What is the question, sir? 

Mr. TRONE. It is they do not have that discretion that they 

should have, and that is why we have 2 percent. 
84 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I actually think we have the authority, 

sir, precisely right. 

Mr. TRONE. OK. Is it the policy of the State Department to implement a ban on visas for predominantly Muslim countries? Do 

you believe it is due to nationality or religious affiliation that 

makes them a unique threat? 

Secretary POMPEO. We evaluate each individual based on the 

characteristics of the threat that they pose. 

Mr. TRONE. These are great people, great Americans, and their 

lives are being disrupted. 

Let’s talk about the Kingdom for a second. Thousands of people 

in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have disappeared or been murdered. The Crown Price has stolen over $100 billion from his own 

countrymen. He has moved against Qatar, our ally. He has kidnapped the Prime Minister of Lebanon, and Yemen is a nightmare 

with tens of thousands dead, millions threatened by starvation. He 

is 33. He will probably be the king, if he moves up, for 50 years. 

I always like to think about my kids and your kids and their kids 

and future generations. Is this the type of individual that would 

use a bone saw as part of his foreign policy that you would invite 

home for Thanksgiving dinner? 

Secretary POMPEO. Are you suggesting a regime change in Saudi 

Arabia? 

Mr. TRONE. Would you invite him home to cut the turkey? 

Secretary POMPEO. I have met with the Crown Prince. I have 

worked with him. The challenges that you have cited there, the 

death that you just cite in Yemen is not because of the Kingdom 

of Saudi Arabia. You have the wrong end of the stick on that—— 

Mr. TRONE. I am not talking about the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 

I am talking about the Crown Prince—— 

Secretary POMPEO. You are talking about—— 

Mr. TRONE [continuing]. With a bone saw and the whole litany 

of items we just discussed that all emanate from one individual. 

Secretary POMPEO. That predatory question is unfounded. I am 

happy to talk about our strategy with respect to the Kingdom of 

Saudi Arabia. I am happy to talk to you about the conversations 

I have had with the Crown Prince, to the extent that I can. 

We have acknowledged the incident with respect to Mr. 

Khashoggi was a murder and it is outrageous. And we are working 

to do everything we can to hold everyone who is responsible accountable, and we will continue to do that. 

Mr. TRONE. Well, I am disappointed in my own country, and I 

know many, many others are, too. It was not that long ago that, 

short-term convenience, an individual that was in a position of 

power was not tolerated, but, instead, now we just tolerate that individual because it is convenient to the Trump Administration’s national policy. But at some point in time we have to draw a line. 

Where do you draw that line? How many more Khashoggis do we 

have to have? 

Secretary POMPEO. Sir, we are effectuating policies that will keep 

America safe. We are determined to do that. The Trump Administration has put human rights at the top of its list in every single 

conversation we have had. It is a tough, nasty world out there, if 

you had not noticed, and we are a force for good everywhere we go. 
85 

Mr. TRONE. But long term are we really safer in a tough, nasty 

world when we tolerate that type of behavior? That is my concern? 

Secretary POMPEO. We simply disagree. I believe the policy we 

have makes America infinitely safer today, next week, and for our 

children and grandchildren. 

Chairman ENGEL. The time has expired. I am going to go on. 

Votes have just been called. We have only about three or four 

more people. I am going to see if we can do this. The Secretary of 

State has been very generous with his time, and I would like to try 

to see if we can get this in before the votes are finished. So, if people would understand that and maybe give back a minute or so, 

that would be appreciated. If not, we will do the best we can. 

Mr. Costa? 

Secretary POMPEO. Congressman Costa, I will do my best to answer briefly, too. 

Mr. COSTA. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sure the Secretary will appreciate brevity. I will do my best. 

First of all, on behalf of the chairman, I wanted to followup on 

his line of questioning regarding the committee’s request for documents. On March 14th, 2019, this committee sent you a letter reiterating two specific set of document requests, and we wanted to 

know, the chair wanted to know, yes or no, can you commit to providing the committee with the requested documents within the 

next seven business days? 

Secretary POMPEO. Making sure I have got the right set of documents, these are documents that had to do with—which request 

was this? 

Mr. COSTA. Mr. Chairman? 

Secretary POMPEO. There are dozens and dozens. 

Mr. COSTA. I am trying to be helpful here. 

Secretary POMPEO. No, no problem. I am happy to take a look at 

it. I just do not want to answer a question when I am not thinking 

about the right set of documents. 

Chairman ENGEL. The bottom line—and I will say this fast—the 

bottom line is it is very frustrating when we send something and 

we do not get a response or get stonewalled, or maybe it got caught 

in the bureaucracy. I do not know what it is, but we will get those 

things back to you again and we will highlight them as second requests. And hopefully, we can get through it then. 

And I thank my colleague for mentioning it—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, sir. 

Chairman ENGEL [continuing]. For reiterating it. 

Mr. COSTA. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That has been about 

a minute of my time. 

Mr. Secretary, since we have last chatted, I have become the 

chairman of the Transatlantic Legislators’ Dialog. And for the purpose of the focus of the State Department’s strategy for this Congress and your budget, I want to focus most of my questions, if I 

can, with regards to Europe and NATO. 

In the most recent meeting, we Members of Congress and the 

members of the European Parliament, we asserted our joint statement on the bond between the United States and the European 

Union. It is the most fundamental economic and security strategic 

partnership. Do you agree with that? 
86 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, our European partners are—— 

Mr. COSTA. OK. Let me just continue to go on. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. COSTA. The bond is also based upon the strong foundation 

of our common history and values, including the principles of democracy, rule of law, human rights, free and open societies, and 

markets. Do you agree with that concept? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COSTA. And obviously, this partnership has had a long history. We have talked a lot about this this afternoon. And certainly, 

there have been concerns, I can tell you, and I know you know it 

because you hear them, too, by our European friends about where 

this relationship is today. And words do matter. 

And whether it is the issues where we disagree or the Administration disagrees with Iran, tariffs, climate change, or defense, 

many of our European colleagues are scratching their head and 

they say, ‘‘Jim, what has happened? Where is our relationship?’’ 

What have you tried to do to reinforce it, because I know you 

have been asked the same questions? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. COSTA. Words matter. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, they do, and the words that I have 

shared with them is that they have a continued deep, important relationship. You identified three and a half places where we have 

disagreements. On Iran, frankly, we are working together on large 

pieces of pushing back against the Islamic Republic of Iran. And 

there are hundreds of other issues on which we work closely with 

the Europeans. 

You are talking about Europe, France and the U.K. Please know 

this is much broader than that. We have deep relationships all 

across with the Balkans—— 

Mr. COSTA. I know that. 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. And Eastern Europe. These are 

all important places. 

Mr. COSTA. And there were previous Administrations that talked 

about ‘‘Old Europe’’. And so, I mean, this is not new ground. 

Secretary POMPEO. I try not to use that language. I talk about 

our friends. 

Mr. COSTA. No, and our most important allies, I believe. 

Let me move on. What kind of message does it send to our European allies when the State Department downgraded last fall the 

status of the European Union’s Ambassador, and then, recently reinstated it to the rightful status a few months later, because that 

is where it should have been? I do not know what happened. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, we messed up and we fixed it. 

Mr. COSTA. OK. Well, that is good. 

Let me move over to NATO quickly. You know, this partnership 

post-World War II that we helped create has resulted—and I suspect most Americans, probably most Europeans do not realize—in 

the longest peacetime dividend post-World War II, 70 years that we 

will celebrate next month, as you noted, in over a thousand years 

in Europe. I mean, that is significant by any way you examine it. 

Acting Secretary of Defense Shanahan said in his testimony before the Senate that the cost of 50 percent-plus present for our 
87 

military commitments, that we are not an outfit of U.S. mercenaries, that we are not going to run a business, our common defense. And, yes, you are right, Europe is a wealthy continent. Germany should pay more, all these countries. And by the way, I applaud you for that effort, but that has been continuing now for 

three Administrations, to do their part, in fairness. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COSTA. So, I would like to hear your thoughts on whether or 

not we should have a cost-benefit basis analysis in terms of how 

our European partners do their part, as they should. 

Secretary POMPEO. So, it is certainly more complicated than that. 

But it is the case that we are constantly—we have shared values 

with these European partners. 

Mr. COSTA. Of course. Let me put it this way to make it simple. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. COSTA. Do you think that the kind of cost-plus–50-percent 

proposal would be a bad idea? 

Secretary POMPEO. I saw precisely what Assistant Secretary 

Shanahan says. He got it exactly right. 

Mr. COSTA. Good, good. 

Let me move over quickly. I have a little bit of time left. 

Secretary POMPEO. I said ‘‘Assistant Secretary’’. I meant Acting 

Secretary. He would be offended if I did not correct that. 

Mr. COSTA. Acting Secretary. You are duly corrected, Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you. 

Mr. COSTA. Anyway, finally, I do agree—I will commend you 

when I think we agree—that your efforts to bring a coalition together in Venezuela is the proper thing to do. I am wondering 

why—and maybe it is under the radar screen—you have not convened the Organization of American States together to formalize 

this strategy and this commitment to do the right thing with Venezuela, to make the changes that are necessary. 

Secretary POMPEO. I have attended, on this issue, I have attended two OAS meetings on this very issue. You should know we 

are actively working alongside them. They have been great partners. There is not total unanimity inside the OAS—— 

Mr. COSTA. No, there never is with the OAS. 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. But they are an important force 

that we have worked through with this great—— 

Mr. COSTA. I think we need to continue to utilize that. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, I completely agree. 

Mr. COSTA. Along with our partners in Mexico. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. COSTA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Allred? 

Mr. ALLRED. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your patience. I know it has 

been a long afternoon. 

I want to talk about Afghanistan. My colleague earlier was questioning you and asking about Special Envoy Khalilzad coming to 

speak to our committee. And you said that, during ongoing negotiations, that this would be something that would be very hard to do 
88 

that has not been done in the past. We have had two Special Envoys come speak to our committee without leaks to The Washington Post. 

Secretary POMPEO. That is actually not true. 

Mr. ALLRED. Well, I have been in classified briefings from some 

of your Special Envoys. We have a constitutional duty to make sure 

that we are overseeing what you are doing in the State Department. And so, I do not accept the excuse that ongoing negotiations 

mean that we cannot have the information this committee deserves. 

Secretary POMPEO. I am trying to make sure you get the best information that you can that is consistent with your oversight duties. I am determined to do that. I am also determined to make 

sure we protect this information in a way that prevents us from 

undermining U.S.—— 

Mr. ALLRED. I hope you understand that, with a 17-year war 

heading into the 18th year, that the Congress deserves to have a 

role in how we are going to proceed here. 

Secretary POMPEO. A hundred percent. 

Mr. ALLRED. OK. Well, thank you. I think this committee deserves to have—we can have a classified briefing. We can do it in 

a way that I think is secure. I think if you were in our seat during 

the Obama Administration era and we were having the discussions 

around the JCPOA, and they refused to give you any information 

until the very end—— 

Secretary POMPEO. I actually was, and they did. 

Mr. ALLRED. Oh, they did not. They gave you briefings. I know 

that that is—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Meaningless and unimportant. 

Mr. ALLRED. Meaningless briefings? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. ALLRED. OK. Well, I would like to have some kind of a briefing because we have not had that at all. 

Secretary POMPEO. You want more than a meaningless briefing, 

and I would not be doing it right if we gave you a meaningless 

briefing. 

Mr. ALLRED. Well, this is an important issue, and I think this 

committee, in particular, deserves to have some information on it. 

And I want to also talk about the conditions for our withdrawal, 

because previous U.S. policy has required the Taliban to accept the 

current Afghan constitution, including its provisions and protections for women and minorities. Why have we dropped that condition? 

Secretary POMPEO. You should not be certain that we have 

dropped any conditions based on what you may have read in some 

newspaper. 

Mr. ALLRED. Well, I have not had a briefing. So, I do not know 

what our conditions are. 

Secretary POMPEO. You should know we are very, very focused 

on making sure that the gains that have been achieved are not lost 

as part of this. The security gains that have been achieved, the 

gains, albeit intermittent, with respect to corruption, we hope we 

can actually do better. But, as you well know, this is still a very 

difficult place. It is the reason we still have thousands of soldiers 
89 

on the ground. And we are focused on taking down the level of violence, so that we can do precisely what it is I think you just—— 

Mr. ALLRED. Well, I share the recognition that we are not going 

to have a military solution to Afghanistan. My concern is, if we 

have a precipitous withdrawal, and then, we pull out without the 

correct conditions in place, that the progress that has been made, 

particularly for Afghan women, will be lost. And I think that this 

is something that is in the interest of our country. It is in our national interest. We need to make sure that does not happen. So, I 

am hopeful that, as part of those negotiations, as you said, that is 

going to be part of it. 

Secretary POMPEO. To describe a departure after 18 years as precipitous is—— 

Mr. ALLRED. No, the withdrawal would be precipitous if we just 

take whatever conditions the Taliban will offer us so that we can 

get out. 

Secretary POMPEO. I promise you we are going to maintain 

American security. 

Mr. ALLRED. Well, my concern is that it seems that there might 

be just trying to fulfill a political promise going on here, instead 

of a rational and reasoned withdrawal, and doing it in the right 

way. And that is what I think this committee’s jurisdiction directly 

falls upon, and that is why we need to have a briefing and talk to 

the folks who are involved in that negotiation. 

Secretary POMPEO. Just so you know, I am running the negotiation. So, you are talking to the guy who is in charge of it. 

Mr. ALLRED. Well, yes, but I would like to know, have some more 

information. And maybe we should have you back to talk about 

that specifically then. I think we should consider that. 

Secretary POMPEO. I am happy to do it in the right setting, yes, 

sir. 

Mr. ALLRED. So, are we also caving to the Taliban’s stance that 

the Afghan government is an illegitimate puppet of the U.S.? Because that is what they have said previously. Our conditions previously have been that they should be part of the Afghan government. Is this funny, sir? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, the fact that you are relying on thirdhand reporting for something that the Taliban might or might not 

have actually said in some print report, yes, I think we should all 

have better information. 

Mr. ALLRED. Is the Afghan government actively part of this negotiation that we are having? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, we speak, Ambassador Bass talks to 

President Ghani multiple times every week, multiple times every 

day on some days. 

Mr. ALLRED. So, your testimony is that, right now, the Afghan 

government is part of our negotiations with the Taliban? 

Secretary POMPEO. Right now, the Afghan government is fully 

apprised—— 

Mr. ALLRED. Apprised? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, exactly, and we are diligently trying to 

get these parties to work together. 

Mr. ALLRED. And is that—— 
90 

Secretary POMPEO. The previous Administration went at that for 

8 years. We have had, I have had 10 months. We are diligently trying to—— 

Mr. ALLRED. Well, my concern is that you are undercutting—— 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. Enter Afghan conversations, so 

that we can resolve this—— 

Mr. ALLRED. Undercutting the Afghani government by not having them as part of the negotiations is a direct—— 

Secretary POMPEO. But that is just untrue. 

Mr. ALLRED [continuing]. A direct role, not to be apprised of it, 

sir—— 

Secretary POMPEO. They are just untrue. 

Mr. ALLRED [continuing]. But a direct role, risks, when we do 

pull out—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. ALLRED [continuing]. Undercutting the legitimacy of that 

government. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Mr. ALLRED. Leading to the Taliban retaking power. 

Secretary POMPEO. It is just I disagree with the facts as you have 

stated them. 

Mr. ALLRED. Do you agree that al-Qaeda and ISIS are still in Afghanistan right now? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. 

Chairman ENGEL. OK. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. Bass? 

Ms. BASS. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here, I know, all day. 

Secretary POMPEO. It is good to see you. 

Ms. BASS. Good to see you as well. We came in together. 

So, I want to ask you about two countries and one general question. The one general question is about U.S. aid to Africa and the 

Administration’s pledge to review all U.S. aid to Africa in order to 

target assistance toward key countries and particular strategic objectives. And I am wondering if that review has happened. 

The second question is about Zimbabwe. They have had elections, 

and they are attempting to address the economic issues of the 

country. I wanted to know if we are reviewing or have plans to review U.S. policy toward Zimbabwe. 

And then, the third question is about Sudan and the current 

crackdown and our efforts toward normalizing relations. And I 

wanted to know how the Administration was weighing these actions as it addresses Sudan’s progress on phase 2. 

Secretary POMPEO. Let me take each of them as best I can recall 

them in sequence. 

Ms. BASS. Sure. 

Secretary POMPEO. First, with respect to the assistance in Africa, 

we are reviewing it. There will be all the factors that you could 

imagine. I think we will give it every thought across every element 

of the U.S. Government to make sure that we get the levels right. 

I am sure there are places our assistance will increase; there may 

well be those where our assistance decreases. And I am very confident there will be assistance that moots. That is, we put it in in 
91 

different ways and try to make sure we get better outcomes, that 

have better outcomes from those resources that we are expending. 

That review is not complete. It is an interagency process, and 

probably—— 

Ms. BASS. Do you have a timeframe possibly? 

Secretary POMPEO. It is going to be a while still. 

Ms. BASS. Well, months? 

Secretary POMPEO. I have watched these interagency processes 

move. It will be too slow. 

Ms. BASS. OK. 

Secretary POMPEO. And it will take time. 

Ms. BASS. While it is under review, then you maintain the same 

levels? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, that is largely the case, although it is 

also the case that from time to time we will see things that we just 

say they are disconnected from what has happened and transpired, 

that we feel compelled to make a decision on the spot. That is usually—— 

Ms. BASS. Like the cyclone? 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, exactly. That is usually a State Department-USAID decision where we do that, a cyclone, a tragedy, a 

particular terrorist incident where we are trying to react in a very, 

very timely fashion, but not laying down a longer-term, thoughtful 

strategy about the region, and a country in particular. 

Does that answer that first part of the question. 

Ms. BASS. Yes, it does. 

And in Zimbabwe and Sudan? 

Secretary POMPEO. You know, the same thing. I am happy to 

give you a readout on what we are doing in each of those places. 

Ms. BASS. OK. 

Secretary POMPEO. There have been great changes in Sudan. 

And this Administration has tried to find places where we can find 

a more comfortable place to work alongside them and continue to 

develop them. We saw what happened in Zimbabwe. I am hopeful 

we can deliver that too. 

But I am happy to have my team come give you particular briefings on the details of what we are doing real time in each of those 

two spaces with respect to our assistance, the State Department’s 

role there. 

Ms. BASS. I would appreciate that, especially with Zimbabwe. I 

mean both countries, but Zimbabwe also, trying to move forward. 

I just recently met with the Ambassador from Zimbabwe, and they 

are very concerned about basically their economy, where they want 

to move to privatize certain sectors, but their hands are tied because of our previous policies. And as they move forward and try 

to comply and try to bring their constitution in line with some past 

policies—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. BASS [continuing]. How do we make sure we do not hold 

them back? 

Secretary POMPEO. These are very real concerns. Sudan is also 

the case. 

Ms. BASS. Right. 
92 

Secretary POMPEO. I was with yesterday, or perhaps it was the 

day before, with the Prime Minister from Mali, a similar set of concerns and an incredibly difficult environment in Mali—— 

Ms. BASS. Right. 

Secretary POMPEO [continuing]. Terror and trying to figure out 

how to get not only U.S. assistance there, but U.S. economic private sector industry to grow and help them, so they can build out 

and take care of the terror threats that are there in Mali. 

There is a country-by-country effort and a regional effort that we 

are undertaking. 

Ms. BASS. OK. Thank you very much. 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you, ma’am. 

Ms. BASS. I yield back my time, Mr. Chair. 

Chairman ENGEL. Thank you, Ms. Bass. 

We have two members, I am told, that want to come back after 

the vote to ask you questions. I do not know what the timing is 

on this. But, right now, we—let me put it this way. Let me call on 

the ranking member for—— 

Mr. MCCAUL. Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

I would like to submit for the record a statement, an op-ed by 

Chairman Risch of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the 

importance of getting the President’s nominees confirmed. 

Chairman ENGEL. OK. 

[The information referred to follows:] 
93 

Contacts: 

SFRC: Wrasse. L\JL-J.:L4-I 'U'J HELEASE 

March 27,2019 Risch: Kaylin Minton. 

Wc1shinglon, D.C.- U.S. Sen. Jim Risch 

comrmttee, today made the following 

"I look forward to 

that are waiting to be filled at the State Department 

thE' OJJP<)rtlmi:ty to hear from three very nominees who will 

positions for which they are and we badly need 

conversations this 

backlog of 6'1 nominations 

time to move these nominees forward to 
94 

USA Today- OPINION 

Global tensions rise while too many U.S. diplomats are MIA. Trump and Congress, get on 

it. 

Liz Schrayer, Opinion contributor 

March 20, 2019 

We need more State Department nominations from the Trump administration and more 

confirmations from Congress. National security is at stake. 

In the past month alone, Brazil has called for a regime change in Venezuela. Iraq is inching 

forward in discussions with the Kurds. Mexico has threatened to not ratify the new NAFT A. 

Turkey threatened to nullify local election results. Thailand has passed a troubling cybersecurity 

law that alarms human rights activists. 

Guess what? At a time of growing global tensions, the United States does not have a single 

appointed ambassador on the ground in one of these countries. In fact, close to 80 senior 

leadership posts at the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development and 

other U.S. international affairs agencies are vacant. More than 40 of those posts have nominees 

pending before the Senate, while at least 35 critical leadership positions await a nominee from 

the White House. 

Two years into this administration and at the start of a new Congress, this crisis is both an 

unforced error and a unilateral disarmament of our civilian forces, with significant risks to our 

national security. It is time to stop blaming either end of Pennsylvania Avenue and swiftly move 

forward on diplomatic nominations and confirmations, especially given the backdrop of China 

trade talks and nuclear tensions with North Korea. 

Unfortunately, a quick tour of the world underscores the gaps in America leadership: 

As we seek to challenge China's rising global influence, America is missing essential leadership 

in Asia and the Pacific, with no one confirmed for the State Department's top Asia post along 

with ambassadors to Singapore, Thailand, Cambodia, and the ASEAN. Yet, countering China is 

certainly not limited to Asia. In Africa, for example, experts tell me that Chinese diplomats 

working on economic and commercial issues outnumber American diplomats by as much as five 

to one- and yet we're still missing ambassadors to nine African countries. 

With gaps on nearly every continent, more than 40 ambassador posts remain unfilledincluding in critical hot spots. The State Department leadership posts for the Middle East and 

South Asia remain unconfirmed, and we currently lack ambassadors to some of our most critical 

allies in the region including Turkey and Jordan- both on the front lines of the refugee 

emergency from Syria. 

In our own hemisphere, no ambassador has been nominated to Brazil to help confront the 

growing crisis in Venezuela. Even closer to home, we are missing ambassadors in El Salvador, 

Honduras, and Mexico, where violence and poverty are driving vulnerable populations to flee 

their homes. 
95 

Here in Washington at the State Department we're missing four out of six under secretaries and 

one-third of the assistant secretary positions- responsible for everything from management and 

finance to refugees and human rights. At USAID, three senior level nominees still await Senate 

confirmation and four high level positions lack a nominee altogether. Other agencies, such as the 

Millennium Challenge Corporation and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, haven't had 

confirmed political leadership at the top since the start of the administration. 

There is no question that vetting nominees and the confirmation process takes time, and both 

need to be done right. I am thankful for the seasoned career Foreign and Civil Service 

professionals who have stepped up to fill these gaps temporarily. Yet trying to exercise 

leadership with the title "Acting" can handcuff authority and hinder decision-making. 

In recent days, an impressive array of regional U.S. combatant commanders- from 

SOUTH COM to AFRICOM to CENTCOM- have testified before Congress, arguing their 

work is harder without civilian counterparts alongside them on the field. Last week, more than a 

dozen elite former combatant commanders echoed the same call, stating, '·diplomacy and 

development are essential to combating threats before they reach our shores." 

We will and we must continue to tackle the crises of the day. But sadly, there are no shortages of 

brewing threats- many of which could become the crisis of tomorrow. The world is not waiting 

for us to nominate and confirm America's team around the globe. It's long overdue for some 

peacemaking between Congress and the administration, at least on this issue, so that Team USA 

can get fully back in the game. 

Liz Schraver is president and CEO of the US. Global Leadership Coalition Follow her on 

Twitter: @LizSchraver 
96 

Chairman ENGEL. We have been here a long time, Mr. Secretary. 

I think what we will do is we will call the hearing. 

I want to thank you for your patience. I hope you will come back 

and visit us—— 

Secretary POMPEO. Thank you. I promise I will. 

Chairman ENGEL [continuing]. Many, many times. 

Secretary POMPEO. Yes. And thank you for running a very professional hearing today. I appreciate that. 

Chairman ENGEL. Well, thank you. Thank you for coming. 

The hearing is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:52 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 
97 

APPENDIX 

FULL COMMITTEE HEARING NOTICE 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6128 

Eliot L. Engel (D-NY), Chairman 

March27,2019 

TO: MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

You are respectfully requested to attend an OPEN hearing of the Committee on Foreign 

Affairs to be held in Room 2172 of the Rayburn House Office Building (and available live on the 

Committee website at https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/): 

DATE: 

TIME: 

SUB.JECT: 

WITNESS: 

please call 

Wednesday, March 27,2019 

12:30 p.m. 

The State Department's Foreign Policy Strategy and FY20 Budget Request 

The Honorable Michael R. Pompeo 

Secretary 

United States Department of State 

By Direction of the Chairman 
98 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

MINUTES OF FULL COMMITTEE HEARING 

Day Wednesday Date. __ _;;_0""3/2.=:711-=-9 __ ~Room, _ _::21:.:7.:.:2:.:RR=O:::'ll=--

Starting Time 12:35 p.m. Ending Time 4:52p.m. 

Recesses _1_ <1:16 to 11m L_to __) L_to __) L_to __) L_to __) L_to __) 

Presiding Member(s) 

Clfllirman Eliot L. Bnget Rep. Brad ~herm1111 

Check llll of the following thllt apply: 

Open Session 0 

Executive ~sed) Session 0 

Televised 0 

TITLE OF HEARJNG: 

Electronically Record~taped)0 

Stenographic Record W 

The State Department's Foreign Policy Strategy and FY20 Budget Request 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: 

See attached. 

NON-COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: 

N/A 

HEARJNG WITNESSES: Same as meeting notice attacbed? YesEJ NoD 

(If "no'', please list beluw and include tide. agency, department, or organization.) 

STATEMENTS FOR THE RECORD: (List any statements submitted for the record.) 

SFR- Engel (1), Engel (11), McCaul, Cicilline 

IFR-McCaul 

QFR- Engel, McCaul, Sherman, Perry, Sires, Burchett, Keating, CiciUine, Bera, Lieu, Allred, Houlahan 

TIME SCHEDULED TO RECONVENE----

~ADJOURNED 4'

52 p.m. 
99 

PRESEt'v7 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

• X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

_,_, X 

X 

_.x 

X 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

FULL COMMITTEE HEARING 

Mr:MBER PRESf.N/ MloMBER 

Eliot L. Engel, NY X Michael T. McCaul, TX 

Brad Sherman, CA X Christopher H. Smith, NJ 

Gregory W. Meeks, NY X Steve Chabot, OH 

Albio Sires, NJ Joe Wilson, SC 

Gerald E. Connolly, VA X Scott Peny, PA 

Theodore E. Deutch, FL X I Ted Yoho, FL ···-

i Karen Bass, CA X Adam Kinzinger, IL 

William K ""''"" M" X Lee Zeldin, NY 

David Cicilline, Rl X James Sensenbrcnner, Jr., WI 

Ami Bera, CA X Ann Wagner, MO 

Joaquin Castro, TX I X Brian J. Mast, FL 

Dina Titus, NV X Francis Rooney, FL 

Adriano EspaiiJat, NY X Brian K. Fitzpa~ick, PA ,,_ 

Ted Lieu, CA X John Curtis, UT .. ,.,_ 

Susan Wild, PA X Ken Buck, CO .. - Dean Phillips, MN X Ron Wright, TX 

llhan Omar, MN X Guy Rcschenthaler, PA 

Colin Allred, TX X Tim Burchett. TN 

Andy Levin, Ml X Greg Pence, IN 

Abigail Spanberger, VA X Steve Watkins, KS 

.PA ~ ~ichael G_~!-:~---. 

Tom 

• Davi' I Trone, MD 

J;, 

Juan Vargas, CA 

Vicente Gonzalez, TX ,_ 

----·- .. 

_, __ , 
100 

P.~cc PROFESSIONAL 

.._}1 SERVICES 

-----•dfl COUNCIL 

the President's Fiscal 

professional 

dangerous. 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

Hearing on the 

The State Department's Foreign Policy Strategy and 

FY20 Budget Req ucst 

Statement Submitted by David .J. Berteau 

President & CEO, Professional Services Council 

PSC and our CIDC members were grateful for the recent Congressional appropriations to the 150 

Account as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 20193

, enacted in February 2019. 

1 CIDC companies arc reflective of the overall American economy, ranging from large firms employing thousands in the 

U.S. and overseas to one and two-person small businesses. Their effOrts have been well-documented by PSC. See our 

From the Field accounts_Qftheir foreign assi\U.ll.l:!9.£..!l:[Q.£.@!!l.im.lill:m~ntation. 

2 https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/ 

3 https:l/www.congress.gov/bil!/116th~congress/house-ioint-resolution/31/text 
101 

Congressional support was also manifest in 2018- not once, but twice- by preventing attempts to 

rescind upwards of nearly $3 billion in prior-year appropriations from that account.4 

PSC is concerned that the absence of available information regarding obligations of prior-year 

appropriations may reflect an intention by the administration to under-spend funds appropriated by 

Congress. lfvalid, this concern raises issues of adherence to the Congressional Budget and 

Impoundment Control Act of 1974. PSC urges this Committee and the Congress to monitor vigilantly 

those agencies covered by the 150 Account to ensure that funds are obligated in accordance with the 

I 974 Act and current appropriations laws. 

Federal budget deficits need to be addressed. However, trying to solve current budget deficit problems by 

making draconian cuts to the !50 Account simply will not work. Committee members know that the entire !50 

Account (funding all of the State Department and USAJD) is just over l% of the annual federal budget. Cuts 

there will do far more harm to America's interests than they will contribute to deficit reduction. 

Additionally, it is useful to remember that U.S. foreign assistance programs provide many direct and indirect 

benefits for America. For example, programs that help eradicate dangerous diseases before they reach our 

shores, create stable governments that fight terrorism, and help countries become ready and able to buy 

American goods and services. Results like these protect Americans and our homeland and strengthen our 

economy. 

Contractors form an integral part of the U.S. foreign policy arena, working alongside their government 

counterpmts. Their employees risk their lives every day. PSC members who work with the Department of State 

and USAJD are private-sector international development companies who optimize efficiency and effectiveness 

in order to realize a modest return on their work, which in turn permits them to fund the ongoing internal 

business investments that sustain them as reliable, capable, and innovative partners. Competition among 

contractors on the basis of best value is a hallmark of U.S. programs throughout the federal government and 

should remain so, including in the t1eld of international development. 

Adequately funded contracts, incorporating clear achievement benchmarks and federal government guidance, 

enables contractors to provide the kind of significant value for money that American taxpayers demand. The 

proposed FY20 !50 Account budget cuts do not support those characteristics of success. Therefore, PSC urges 

Congress to appropriate full funding of the !50 Account. and by doing so, optimize the usc of private sector 

contractors to deliver real results and the best value for development spending. On behalf of our member 

companies, thank you tor the opportunity to present these important points, and we are happy to provide 

additional information or respond to any questions at any time. 

## 
102 

<i)cws CWS Statement to the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs, pertaining to its hearing, "The State 

Department's Foreign Policy Strategy and FY20 Budget Request," on Wednesday, March 27, 2019 

As a 73-year old humanitarian organization representing 37 Protestant, Anglican, and Orthodox communions and 23 

refugee resettlement offices across 17 states in the United States, Church World Service urges the Committee to hold 

the administration accountable to administering the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) in good faith and 

returning refugee resettlement numbers to historic norms, at least meeting this year's record-low refugee admissions 

goal of 30,000, and committing to resettling at least 75,000 in Fiscal Year (FY) 2020. 

Refugee resettlement is an important tool in advancing U.S. foreign policy interests, leveraging durable 

solutions, and encouraging other countries to support displaced persons. Since 1975, the USRAP. the world's 

most thorough resettlement vetting program, has safely and successfully resettled over three million refugees. As one 

of 37 resettlement countries, the United States utilizes the resettlement program to play a critical role in promoting 

stability around the world and elevating our moral leadership on the global stage. Over the past two years, the 

administration has made drastic changes designed to grind the refugee program to a halt, resulting in human tragedy 

and long-term damage to our nation's capacity to respond to humanitarian crises. 

CWS urges Congress to hold the administration accountable to meeting this year's refugee admissions goal 

of 30,000, and to setting a goal of resettling at least 75,000 refugees in FY 2020. Last year, the administration 

resettled only 22,491 refugees, not even meeting half of its own, then-record-low goal of45,000. The FY 2019 refugee 

admissions goal of 30,000 is a new historic low, and yet, the administration is only on track to resettle around 22,000 

refugees. These figures are a drastic departure from our nation's annual historic average resettlement goal of 95,000. 

The United States implements a public-private partnership model of refugee resettlement, with congregations, 

schools, employers, and local communities intrinsically involved in welcoming refugees and helping them integrate 

and thrive. The U.S. refugee resettlement program emphasizes early self-sufficiency, and most refugees are 

employed within their first six months of arriving to the United States. Numerous studies have found that refugees 

contribute positively to the U.S. economy. 

CWS calls on Congress to ensure that overseas assistance and protection programs for refugees and 

displaced persons are funded robustly. Forcibly displaced people often lack access to the basic necessities of life, 

including food and nutrition, clean water, safe shelter, healthcare, education, livelihood, and protection from 

persecution, conflict, war, and violence. Beyond these grave humanitarian concerns, the presence of large 

populations of forcibly displaced persons is an urgent concern for the countries and regions in which they live. By 

helping to meet the basic needs of displaced persons and assisting the countries hosting them, U.S. funding 

strengthens regional stability, thus preventing further destabilization in fragile regions and relieving pressure on host 

countries. 

CWS urges the Committee to safeguard the State Department's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and 

Migration (PRM)'s leadership role in refugee protection and resettlement. CWS is deeply opposed to the 

proposal in the President's Budget request that would reduce PRM's budget by 90% and remove from PRM the 

important tool of overseas assistance, combining that funding with the International Disaster Assistance account and 

Food for Peace into a new International Humanitarian Assistance account and drastically cutting funding overall. This 

would eliminate PRM's ability to leverage resettlement and overseas assistance for the benefit of regional stability and 

other U.S. foreign policy interests. The proposal also contravenes Congressional intent to maintain PRM within the 

Department of State, which has been stated in report language in the past two State Department and Foreign 

Operations appropriations bills in response to similar proposals. 

CWS is also opposed to the Trump administration's plan to close all U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 

(USCIS) international field offices, which would place additional burdens on the diplomatic infrastructure, drastically 

reduce services for US military personnel stationed abroad and other American citizens, place additional barriers to 

family reunification, and further dismantle the refugee admissions program. 

CWS calls on Congress to robustly fund refugee protection and affirm the importance of refugee resettlement as a 

life-saving program during this global refugee crisis, with over 68.5 million people displaced worldwide, 25.8 million of 

whom are refugees. 
103 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The Administration's FY 2020 budget request would provide $4.9 billion in State Departmentand USAID-administered bilateral assistance specifically for Africa, an II% reduction from the 

FY 2019 request and 31% decrease compared to actual allocations in FY 2018 (excluding Food 

for Peace aid, which the Administration proposes to end entirely). How do these proposals 

reflect the Administration's stated priorities for the region, such as countering strategic 

competition from China and Russia, advancing U.S. trade and economic ties, and 

countering Islamist terrorism and other armed conflicts? 

The request advances commercial ties with nations across the region to benefit both the 

United States and Africa. It invests in the new Prosper Africa initiative, which aims to double 

two-way U.S.-Africa trade and investment by facilitating transactions and fostering fair and 

accessible business climates. The request counters terrorism in the Sahel and East Africa and 

reduces violent conflict, particularly in Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan, and 

Somalia. Our focus is on enabling African countries to move from relying on grant-based 

foreign assistance or predatory lending to developing sustainable financial independence. Our 

engagement ensures better-targeted assistance with the most impact in the era of great power 

competition. 
104 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

The Administration's FY 2020 budget request would provide $4.9 billion in State Departmentand USAID-administered bilateral assistance specifically for Afl·ica, an II% reduction from the 

FY 2019 request and 31% decrease compared to actual allocations in FY 2018 (excluding Food 

for Peace aid, which the Administration proposes to end entirely). The Administration has 

pledged to review all U.S. aid to Africa in order to target assistance toward "key countries and 

particular strategic objectives" and states with democratic, accountable governments. What is 

the current status ofthis aid review? 

Answer: 

As a part of the new Africa Strategy, the Administration is focused on enabling African 

countries to move from relying on grant-based foreign assistance or predatory lending to 

developing sustainable financial independence. The State Department and USAID are constantly 

reviewing our assistance to ensure it is effective and aligned with U.S. foreign policy objectives. 

This budget addresses foreign policy Administration priorities and reflects a continued effort to 

ensure U.S. foreign assistance is an efficient, effective, and fiscally responsible investment on 

behalf of the American people. 
105 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The Administration's FY 2020 budget request would provide $4.9 billion in State Departmentand USAID-administered bilateral assistance specifically for Africa, an 11% reduction from the 

FY 2019 request and 31% decrease compared to actual allocations in FY 2018 (excluding Food 

for Peace aid, which the Administration proposes to end entirely). How is the Administration's 

commitment to focus aid resources on African countries that "encourage accountable and 

transparent governance" reflected in the proposal to significantly cut aid to Ethiopia, 

Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, and South Africa'? 

Answer: 

Africa remains a priority for the Administration. The FY 2020 request includes funding 

to promote peace and security on the continent, create an enabling environment for U.S. 

businesses, advance food security and economic growth, bolster governance programs, and 

address HIV/AIDS and other communicable illnesses. Active partnerships with the countries 

and people of Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, and South Africa continue, and focus 

on supporting their aspirations for inclusive democracy, peace, and prosperity. The request seeks 

to foster stability throughout sub-Saharan Arrica and translate it into enhanced national security 

and prosperity for Africans and for the American people. 
106 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#4) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What are the implications of this recent crackdown for efforts to normalize relations? How 

is the Administmtion weighing these actions as it assesses Sudan's pmgress on "Phase II" 

of the bilateral reengagement framework? 

Answer: 

The Government of Sudan's heavy-handed response to the ongoing protests has disrupted 

progress on this track. The deteriorating human rights situation, which includes a state of 

emergency declared in late February, threatens to undermine our entire Phase II engagement. 

We have urged the Government of Sudan to exercise restraint and respect the protesters' 

fundamental freedoms. We remain seriously concerned about, and will continue to monitor, 

Sudan's progress in a range of areas, including improving its human rights record and respecting 

freedoms of expression such as freedom of the press, religion or belief, peaceful assembly, and 

association. 
107 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#5) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Are there any actions that the Administration would consider to be "red lines" for Sudan 

re-engagement, removal from the State Sponsor of Terrorism list, and/or debt relief! 

The United States made clear that any progress in the U.S.-Sudan bilateral relationship is 

dependent on Sudan first making progress in a range of areas, including improving its human 

rights record and respecting freedoms of expression such as freedom of the press, religion or 

belief, peaceful assembly, and association. 
108 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#6) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

And how far does the Administration expect normalization to proceed when Bashir, who 

has been indicted by the ICC for genocide and crimes against humanity, appears set to 

remain in office beyond the constitutional limit of his time in office? 

In our pub] ic and private messages, we underscored that all constitutional amendments or 

other actions that would enable President Bashir to extend his time in office in contravention of 

the Sudanese constitution would be problematic. We made clear to the Sudanese that progress in 

the U .S.-Sudan bilateral relationship is dependent on Sudan making progress in a range of areas, 

including improving its human rights record and respecting freedoms of expression such as 

freedom of the press, religion or belief, peaceful assembly, and association. The United States is 

concerned about the political crisis in Sudan and has condemned the Bashir government's 

repressive actions against peaceful protestors. 
109 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#7) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

With Ethiopia scheduled to hold critical elections in 2020 and significant opportunities to 

support the country's new democratic opening to ensure credible polls, why does the 

Administration's FY 2020 budget request pmpose a sizable cut to the accounts that would 

support democracy and governance programs? 

Answer: 

We strongly support the important reforms underway in Ethiopia and that has not 

changed. Our broader budget request considers factors beyond individual country support, 

including the burden on U.S. taxpayers and whether partner countries are stepping up to use their 

own resources to their best effect. Our obligation is to produce exceptional results on behalf of 

the American people, and as we take a fresh look at matching resources to outcomes, I remain 

confident the State Department will have the resources to pursue our policy objectives in 

Ethiopia. 
110 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Senetary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#8) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

While the security situation in Somalia remains concerning, the political and economic spheres 

look relatively more promising, despite continued tensions between the Federal Government of 

Somalia and the Federal Member States. What is the United States doing to promote greater 

political stability and improve relations between federal and state authorities ahead of 

planned elections next year? 

Answer: 

Somalia's long-term stability depends heavily on the Federal Government of Somalia and 

the Federal Member States reaching agreement on an appropriate delineation of authorities at the 

national and regional levels. The United States engages regularly with all political leadership to 

encourage Somali-led political, security, and economic reform eff01ts to support the country's 

stability, to include: a one-person-one-vote national electoral process in 2020; completion of the 

constitutional review process; implementation of the agreed national security architecture and the 

African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) transition plan; and fiscal reforms that will 

enable debt relief and resumption of international financial institution lending. 
111 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#9) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What more can the United States do to stabilize the Sahel region and promote development 

and economic opportunity for its people? 

Answer: 

We support the countries in the Sahel through broad-based programs that run the gamut 

from security and economic growth to human rights and countering violent extremism. Our 

embassies engage in a whole-of-government approach to ensure that U.S. assistance programs, 

diplomatic outreach, and security sector activities reinforce one another. Gains across these 

areas, and greater efficiencies in our programming, will help communities be less vulnerable, 

promote development and economic opportunity, and help strengthen stability and security in the 

Sahel. 
112 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#10) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Six years after France's military intervention and the deployment of a UN peacekeeping 

operation in Mali, the security situation in Mali continues to deteriorate, while Burkina Faso has 

been subsumed by a growing lslamist insurgency. The Administration has pledged to help build 

the military capacity of the GS Sahel countries (Mali, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Niger, and 

Chad) to counter cross-border threats, but a promised GS Sahel "joint force" remains notional (at 

best) and these countries are not likely to be able to make significant headway in the near future. 

Meanwhile we have seen repeated credible allegations of serious human rights abuses on the part 

of military forces in Mali and Burkina faso and by the ethnic militias they have backed as proxy 

forces. The Administration's budget proposal would eut bilateral development and health aid for 

Mali, and although it would add a small amount of bilateral development aid for Burkina Faso, 

health assistance for that country would decrease. What is the Administration doing to 

impress upon our partners in the Sahel that progress against insurgent and terrorist 

groups is unlikely in the absence of governance improvements and respect for human 

rights? 

I am committed to supporting African-led efforts to defeat terrorism and improve 

security. Senior Department officials have emphasized to African counterparts that military, 

intelligence, and law enforcement tools must reinforce- not replace- efforts to strengthen 

democratic institutions, promote human rights and accountability, and stimulate broad-based 

economic opportunity. The United States emphasizes security force professionalism and 

accountability from the beginning of assistance programs and continues to urge the Government 

of Mali to conduct transparent investigations into accusations of human rights violations against 

Malian armed forces and to prosecute those found responsible for any such violations. 
113 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#11) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What can be done to support Burkina Faso's fragile democratic transition, which will cease 

to be a beacon of hope for the continent if it continues to be associated with a massive surge 

in insecurity? 

Answer: 

Our key objectives are to assist Burkinabes in strengthening their stability and 

governance, working with Burkinabes to counter regional threats, assisting Burkinabcs with 

identifying and broadening economic development opportunities, and encouraging community 

participation in civic life. The U.S. is already encouraging Burkina Faso to pave the way for a 

credible, transparent, and democratic process to take place in the 2020 elections, even in the face 

of significant security challenges. Respect for human rights, the rule of law, the law of armed 

conflict, a strong criminal justice sector, and civilian authority are cornerstones of U.S. military 

and law enforcement training programs in Burkina Faso. 
114 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#12) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Six years after France's military intervention and the deployment of a UN peacekeeping 

operation in Mali, the security situation in Mali continues to deteriorate, while Burkina Faso has 

been subsumed by a growing lslamist insurgency. The Administration has pledged to help build 

the military capacity of the 05 Sahel countries (Mali, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Niger, and 

Chad) to counter cross-border threats, but a promised 05 Sahel 'joint force" remains notional (at 

best) and these countries are not likely to be able to make significant headway in the near future. 

Meanwhile we have seen repeated credible allegations of serious human rights abuses on the part 

of military forces in Mali and Burkina Faso, and by the ethnic militias they have backed as proxy 

forces. The Administration's budget proposal would cut bilateral development and health aid for 

Mali, and although it would add a small amount of bilateral development aid for Burkina Faso, 

health assistance for that country would decrease. What safeguards are in place to ensure that 

U.S.-origin equipment provided to the GS Sahel countries does not end up in the hands of 

abusive militia groups? 

~: 

Defense articles and services provided by the Department on a grant basis are subject to 

statutorily required end-use monitoring and restrictions on rctransfer, end-use, and security. 

These requirements are set out in binding international agreements with all 05 Sahel countries, 

consistent with section 505 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA). We also proactively 

monitor our assistance, emphasize the importance of our agreements, and address any concerns 

regarding reports of misuse of U.S.-origin equipment. Moreover, recipient units are vetted to 

ensure that assistance is provided only to units where there is no credible information that the 

unit committed a gross violation of human rights (pursuant to section 620M of the FAA). 
115 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#13) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Several U.S. counterterrorism patiner states in Africa, such as Uganda, Mauritania, and Chad, 

have questionable democratic credentials, and the security forces of these countries have 

periodically been implicated in human rights violations. Beyond security assistance, what is 

the United States doing to promote political stability in Chad, which ranks among the 

wo1·Id's most fragile states and has one of Africa's longest ruling leaders? 

Answer: 

Through the Africa Regional Democracy Fund (ARDF), the Bureau of African Affairs 

provides foreign assistance resources to support programming that strengthens democratic 

institutions. ARDF programming in Chad includes the promotion of good governance, 

anti-corruption, and improvement of gender equality within the National Assembly. These 

programs will contribute to systems that promote and protect women's rights in Chad. Other 

ARDF program activities focus on promoting participation and accountability for elections by 

increasing civic awareness. 
116 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#14) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

How would the FY2020 budget request support greater stability and security in CAR? In 

what ways would it respond to or counter growing Russian influence in the country? 

Answer: 

The UN peacekeeping mission in CAR (MINUSCA), supported by the United States, 

remains indispensable in advancing peace. U.S. assistance will continue to focus on improving 

the security environment and helping the government of CAR project state presence by 

providing training, equipment, and capacity building support to the CAR military. The 

Department's Bureau oflnternational Narcotics and Law Enforcement continues efforts to 

rebuild and professionalize CAR's judiciary and internal security forces as an important step to 

bring stability and end impunity. U.S. assistance to CAR security services helps serve as a 

counterweight to the transactional, less transparent security assistance from Russia. 
117 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#15) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

How is the Administration working to address impunity for past abuses, which has 

impeded the return of conflict-displaced populations and has been a driving factor in 

ongoing violence? 

Answer: 

The U.S. continues to use every opp01iunity to press the government of CAR to hold human 

rights violators accountable. President Touadera plans to travel to Washington on April 7-12, 

and I intend to stress that the United States will remain a partner to the CAR government as it 

advocates against impunity. We will continue to impose domestic and international sanctions 

against war criminals and those responsible for human rights violations in CAR. Fmiher, the 

United States continues to provide assistance to professionalize and expand the capabilities of 

the CAR Special Criminal Court as it works to ensure that victims of this conflict receive the 

justice they deserve. 
118 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#16) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What support ean or should the United States provide to the next election process in CAR, 

due in 2020? 

Answer: 

In 2016, the Central African Republic saw an unprecedented peaceful transition of power 

with the election of President Faustin Touadera. Although the Touadera administration has faced 

significant challenges, the United States has remained a stalwart supporter and partner ofthe 

democratically-elected CAR government. During the 2016 election, MINUSCA played a key 

role in facilitating the elections. This directive was added to the MINUSCA mandate in advance 

of the elections, and we expect it will again be discussed during the next mandate renewal in 

November 2019. The United States will work with our partners in the UN Security Council to 

ensure that MINUSCA can again play a positive role in the 2020 elections. 
119 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#17) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Ahead of elections in 2020, Burundi has yet to resolve the political crisis that has prompted 

hundreds of thousands of people to flee their homes since 2015 due to ongoing politically 

targeted violence and humanitarian hardship. Regionally mediated political talks have stalled 

amid growing tensions within the East African Community (including between Burundi and 

Rwanda, and between Rwanda and Uganda). The Administration's budget proposal would 

decrease bilateral health and development aid for Burundi, which is also designated as Tier Ill 

under the TVP A. In what ways is the Administration working with regional actors to 

restart the EAC-convened political talks for Burundi, and to encourage greater political 

space ahead of elections? 

Answer: 

The Department has urged the Government of Burundi at senior levels to expand political 

space, including ending restrictions on media outlets, and to respect the rights of freedom of 

assembly and association of opposition political actors. The United States has also urged the 

Government of Burundi and the EAC to renew their commitments to the EAC-Icd inter-Burundi 

Dialogue, including in February 19 remarks at the UN Security Council. We will continue to 

encourage the EAC and its member states to restart the Dialogue. 
120 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#18) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Ahead of elections in 2020, Burundi has yet to resolve the political crisis that has prompted 

hundreds of thousands of people to flee their homes since 2015 due to ongoing politically 

targeted violence and humanitarian hardship. Regionally mediated political talks have stalled 

amid growing tensions within the East African Community (including between Burundi and 

Rwanda, and between Rwanda and Uganda). The Administration's budget proposal would 

decrease bilateral health and development aid for Burundi, which is also designated as Tier Ill 

under the TVPA. What is the likely impact of the withdrawal in early 2019 of 1,000 

Burundian soldiers from AMISOM (at the African Union's behest) on conditions within 

Burundi, if any? What has been the impact of Burundi's Tier III TVP A designation on 

U.S. support for Burundi's remaining -4,000 soldiers serving in AMISOM? 

Answer: 

The withdrawal of the 1,000 Burundian AMISOM soldiers is ongoing as of March 27. It 

is too early for the Department to assess what the impact will be on conditions within Burundi, 

though we continue to monitor the situation. The foreign assistance restriction under the 

Trafficking Victims Protection Act has affected U.S. support for Burundi's remaining soldiers in 

AMISOM, such as support for logistical flights from Burundi to Somalia and a mentoring 

program in Somalia. The Depa1iment has urged the Government of Burundi to take greater 

efforts to combat trafficking in persons so that we may better support Burundi's participation in 

AMISOI\1. 
121 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#19) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

For Djibouti, tbc FY 2020 request includes more funding for security assistance including 

$5 million, the only country-specific request for sub-Saharan Africa, in Foreign Military 

Financing- than for health, economic, and development assistance combined. Tbat security 

assistance would be in addition to much larger security cooperation investments made by DOD. 

Docs Djibouti have the ability to absorb such sizable investments in its forces, and do both 

the State Department and USAID view investing more in security than in pco1lle and 

development to be the most effective way to promote US interests and foreign policy 

priorities in the country? 

Answer: 

Djibouti is an important security partner for the United States, hosting our only enduring 

military presence in Africa since 2004. Cooperation with the Djiboutian armed forces is an 

important component of our partnership, and l believe Djibouti has the capacity to absorb the 

Foreign Military Financing in a way that will further our shared security interests in the region. 

We remain committed to a holistic approach to our partnership with the people and 

Government of Djibouti. The United States has significant investments in the people of Djibouti 

beyond security matters, including ongoing workforce development programming preparing 

Djibouti an youth for key occupations in a skills-based service economy. 
122 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#20) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

You said at the hearing that you are not prepared to provide an answer on whether the crimes 

committed against the Rohin1,rya community constitute at least crimes against humanity, but you 

are looking at it more specifically. You also said that your objective is to change behavior as 

well as hold those responsible accountable. On November 15,2017, then-Secretary ofStatc 

Tillcrson said in a joint press availability with Aung San Suu Kyi that these crimes had many of 

the "characteristics of crimes against humanity." Does the Department still stand by this 

statement today? 

Answer: 

The United States has been the largest single donor to address the humanitarian crisis 

stemming from northern Rakhine State; our humanitarian assistance has exceeded $494 million. 

The State Department suppmted a large-scale documentation project in Cox's Bazar, 

Bangladesh, to establish a comprehensive understanding of the human rights abuses committed 

in Rakhine State, Burma. The report made clear the extent and severity of the abuses that were 

committed, and the underlying information and findings assist in informing the decisions that my 

team and I make as the U.S. government continues to seek to advance accountability in Burma. 
123 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#21) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

You said at the hearing that you are not prepared to provide an answer on whether the crimes 

committed against the Rohingya community constitute at least crimes against humanity, but you 

are looking at it more specifically. You also said that your objective is to change behavior as 

well as hold those responsible accountable. Given the abundant evidence documented by the 

United Nations and State Department staff, and the Holocaust Museum's remarks that the 

Burmese military had committed genocide against the Rohingya, why are you uot yet 

prepared to make those same designations? When can Congress expect the Department to 

make the designation? 

Answer: 

I am deeply concerned about the Burmese military's extensive, horrific human rights 

violations and abuses against the Rohingya. To establish a comprehensive understanding of the 

human rights abuses committed in Rakhine State, the Department supported a large-scale 

documentation project in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. The report clarified the extent and severity 

of the abuses, and the underlying information and findings will help inform our decisions as we 

seek accountability in Burma. Determinations that certain acts may amount to genocide, crimes 

against humanity, or ethnic cleansing are not made in all cases in which such acts may have been 

committed; they depend on our assessment of the facts and consequences of such determinations 

in each context. 
124 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secreta1-y of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#22) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

You said at the hearing that you are not prepared to provide an answer on whether the crimes 

committed against the Rohingya community constitute at least crimes against humanity, but you 

are looking at it more specifically. You also said that your objective is to change behavior as 

well as hold those responsible accountable. Beyond sanctioning a few individuals and 

military units, what steps has the administration taken to change Burmese behavior? Why 

has the United States sanctioned fewer individuals than other partners, such as the 

European Union? Why has the administration failed to sanction the commander-in-chief 

of the Burmese military, and other top military leaders? 

Answer: 

The United States was the first country to sanction a Burmese officer after the ethnic 

cleansing of Rohingya, and has since sanctioned a total of five Burmese commanders and two 

military units for human rights abuses in Rakhinc, Kachin, and Shan States. The United States is 

the largest donor to the Rakhine State crisis, providing $449 million in humanitarian assistance 

since August 2017. The U.S. helped create the UN Fact-Finding Mission and its successor, the 

Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar; supported the mandates of the UN Special 

Envoy and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation; and co-sponsored the UN 

General Assembly resolution on human rights in Burma in 2018. 
125 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#23) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

You said at the hearing that you are not prepared to provide an answer on whether the crimes 

committed against the Rohingya community constitute at least crimes against humanity, but you 

are looking at it more specifically. You also said that your objective is to change behavior as 

well as hold those responsible accountable. The Burmese military, acting with impunity, are 

now committing similar abuses against the largely Christian Chin and Kachin ethnic groups. 

How will the Department hold them accountable? 

Answer: 

In August 2018, the United States sanctioned Burmese Major General Khin Hlaing and 

the 99th Light Infantry Division for their roles in human rights abuses against minorities in 

Kachin and Shan States. We have supported the UN Fact-Finding Mission and its successor, the 

Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, which have mandates to investigate human 

rights violations throughout Burma. The United States also again designated Burma as a 

Country of Particular Concern for religious discrimination. We will continue to consider 

additional actions and will continue to call for accountability for Burmese security forces and 

others responsible for human rights violations and abuses and for the establishment of civilian 

control of the military. 
126 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#24) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

You said at the hearing that you are not prepared to provide an answer on whether the crimes 

committed against the Rohingya community constitute at least crimes against humanity, but you 

arc looking at it more specifically. You also said that your objective is to change behavior as 

well as hold those responsible accountable. Would you support re-establishing U.S. sanctions 

against Burmese military-owned business conglomerates such as MEC and MEHL? If not, 

why? 

Answer: 

Accountability for human rights violations and abuses is a key priority for the United 

States in our policy towards Burma. We will continue to consider options for pursuing 

accountability and will implement those most likely to have an impact in changing the military's 

behavior, including targeted sanctions where appropriate. 
127 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#25) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Over one million Uighurs and Muslim ethnic minorities have been detained without due process 

under the guise of "anti-terrorism" efforts and Congress has repeatedly demonstrated bicameral, 

bipmiisan support for condemning these abuses. What has the Department done to ensure 

that U.S. technology transfers to Chinese entities have not contributed to China's 

repression? 

Answer: 

We arc outraged by the Chinese Communist Pmiy's campaign of repression and mass 

detention of Uighurs, Kazakhs, and other members of Muslim minority groups in the Xinjiang 

Uighur Autonomous Region and elsewhere in China. 

In the wake of China's human rights abuses in Xinjiang, the Depmtment of State is 

actively working with other agencies on effective actions to address the challenge. The 

Department has conducted outreach to U.S. and Chinese companies with business in Xinjiang to 

urge them to implement human rights safeguards in an effort to ensure their commercial 

activities do not contribute to these abuses. 
128 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#26) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Over one million Uighurs and Muslim ethnic minorities have been detained without due process 

under the guise of "anti-terrorism" efforts and Congress has repeatedly demonstrated bicameral, 

bipartisan support for condemning these abuses. You said in your testimony that you and other 

Department officials raise this issue with your Chinese counterparts each time you interact. 

What has been their response'! What is the administration's strategy for holding Beijing 

accountable for these abuses? 

Answer: 

In meetings with Chinese counterparts, senior Department of State officials repeatedly 

speak out against Beijing's highly repressive campaign against Uighurs, ethnic Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, 

and other members of Muslim minority groups in Xinjiang and elsewhere in China. On 

March 13, we eo-hosted an event with pminers on the sidelines of the UN Human Rights Council 

in Geneva to highlight the magnitude of the crisis. On March 26 in Washington, I met with 

affected Uighurs and pledged U.S. support. 
129 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#27) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Given that the State Department's March 25, 2019, report on the implementation of the RATA 

concludes the Chinese government violated the principle of reciprocity by systematically 

impeding travel to Tibet by U.S. diplomats, officials, journalists, and tourists in 2018, have you 

begun identifying and denying visas to the Chinese officials responsible for implementing 

these restrictive policies, pursuant to the RATA of 2018? 

Answer: 

We are committed to implementing RATA in the timeframc prescribed by Congress, 

including identifying those officials who are substantially involved in the formulation or 

execution of policies related to restricting access to Tibet for visa denials or revocations. We are 

currently determining the framework that will most effectively press Chinese authorities for 

reciprocity. We are committed to working closely with Congress in pursuit of our shared goal of 

seeing Americans have full access to China, including the Tibetan Autonomous Region and other 

Tibetan areas. 
130 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#28) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

March 10, 2019, marked the sixtieth anniversary of the Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule and 

the Dalai Lama's exile. The Chinese government has barred foreigners from traveling to Tibet 

until April 1 given the politically sensitive anniversary and remains assertive on the Chinese 

Communist Patiy's role in suppressing "separatists" plots in Tibet and deciding who will 

succeed the Dalai Lama. In December 2018, President Trump signed the Reciprocal Access to 

Tibet Act (RATA, PL 115-330) into law. When will the Department appoint the Special 

Coordinator for Tibetan Issues role- a legislatively-mandated position? 

Answer: 

In accordance with the Tibetan Policy Act, the Office of the Special Coordinator for 

Tibetan Issues continues to coordinate U.S. government programs to preserve Tibet's distinct 

religious, linguistic, and cultural identity as well as efforts to promote dialogue between the 

Chinese government and the Dalai Lama. We are in the process of selecting a Special 

Coordinator and hope to make the announcement soon. 
131 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#29) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March27,2019 

March I 0, 2019, marked the sixtieth anniversary of the Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule and 

the Dalai Lama's exile. The Chinese government has barred foreigners from traveling to Tibet 

until April I given the politically sensitive anniversary and remains assertive on the Chinese 

Communist Party's role in suppressing "separatists" plots in Tibet and deciding who will 

succeed the Dalai Lama. In December 2018, President Trump signed the Reciprocal Access to 

Tibet Act (RATA, PL 115-330) into law. Without the Special Coordinator for Tibetan 

Issues, in what way and at what level is the Department engaging with Chinese authorities 

on the issue of Tibet? Have you engaged with your counterparts on these issues, as you had 

pledged to do in your written response to a question during your Apri12018 confirmation 

hearing? If so, what has been the response from Chinese authorities? 

U.S. government officials, including myself, the Vice President, our Ambassador at 

Large for International Religious Freedom, and officials from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and 

the U.S. Consulate General in Chengdu continue to call upon the Government of China to 

respect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of Tibetans and to provide U.S. officials, 

journalists, and tourists access to the Tibet Autonomous Region and other Tibetan areas. The 

Government of China continues to characterize the Dalai Lama as a separatist and accuses the 

United States and other governments of interfering in China's domestic affairs. 
132 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#30) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

March I 0, 2019, marked the sixtieth anniversary of the Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule and 

the Dalai Lama's exile. The Chinese government has barred foreigners from traveling to Tibet 

until April I given the politically sensitive anniversary and remains assertive on the Chinese 

Communist Patty's role in suppressing "separatists" plots in Tibet and deciding who will 

succeed the Dalai Lama. In December 2018, President Trump signed the Reciprocal Access to 

Tibet Act (RATA, PL 115-330) into law. What has the Department been doing to engage 

with China on the issue of succession, since the Chinese government continues to publicly 

assert its right to select the next Dalai Lama (as they did most recently on March 20, 

2019)? 

Answer: 

The United States remains concerned about Chinese government leaders' interfering in 

the selection, education, and veneration of Tibetan Buddhist religious leaders. U.S. officials at 

multiple levels have underscored with their Chinese counterparts that decisions regarding the 

selection of Tibetan Buddhist leaders rests with the Dalai Lama, Tibetan Buddhist leaders, and 

the Tibetan people. 
133 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#31) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

March 10,2019, marked the sixtieth anniversary of the Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule and 

the Dalai Lama's exile. The Chinese government has barred foreigners from traveling to Tibet 

until April I given the politically sensitive anniversary and remains assertive on the Chinese 

Communist Party's role in suppressing "separatists" plots in Tibet and deciding who will 

succeed the Dalai Lama. In December 2018, President Trump signed the Reciprocal Access to 

Tibet Act (RATA, PL 115-330) into law. Are you reaching out to like-minded governments 

to challenge China's blatant violation of the principle of religions freedom of Tibetan 

Buddhists, and if so, what have you done specifically? 

Answer: 

Promoting religious freedom is a core objective of U.S. foreign policy. We coordinate 

closely with like-minded governments and other partners on a variety of issues, including 

religious freedom and other human rights challenges. We monitor religious persecution and 

discrimination worldwide, including in China. We are concerned that, over the past decade, 

more than 150 Tibetan Buddhist monks have self-immolated in protest of China's repression of 

their beliefs and culture. We continue to raise the issue of religious ti·eedom for Tibetan 

Buddhists, including the right of choosing their own leaders without interference, in our bilateral 

engagements with the Chinese. 
134 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Ji:ngel (#32) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

March 10, 2019, marked the sixtieth anniversary of the Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule and 

the Dalai Lama's exile. The Chinese government has barred foreigners from traveling to Tibet 

until April 1 given the politically sensitive anniversary and remains assertive on the Chinese 

Communist Party's role in suppressing "separatists" plots in Tibet and deciding who will 

succeed the Dalai Lama. In December 2018, President Trump signed the Reciprocal Access to 

Tibet Act (RATA, PL 115-330) into law. Why has President Trump not yet publicly called 

upon President Xi to negotiate with the Dalai Lama or his representative to find a lasting 

solution, as all U.S. presidents have done since 1997? 

Answer: 

U.S. government officials, including myself, the Vice President, the Ambassador at Large 

for International Religious Freedom, and officials from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and the U.S. 

Consulate General in Chengdu continue efforts to establish conditions for a direct and 

meaningful dialogue between Chinese authorities and the Dalai Lama or his representatives, 

without preconditions, that will lead to a sustainable settlement. 
135 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#33) 

House Committee ou Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

March 10, 2019, marked the sixtieth anniversary of the Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule and 

the Dalai Lama's exile. The Chinese government has barred foreigners from traveling to Tibet 

until April I given the politically sensitive anniversary and remains assertive on the Chinese 

Communist Party's role in suppressing "separatists" plots in Tibet and deciding who will 

succeed the Dalai Lama. In December 2018, President Trump signed the Reciprocal Access to 

Tibet Act (RATA, PI, 1 1 5-330) into law. Will you commit to pressing the Chinese 

authorities to allow for the opening of a U.S. consulate in Lhasa and not to allow the 

opeuiug of any more Chinese Consulates in the U.S. until such U.S. Consulate is opened? 

Answer: 

I will press the Chinese government to allow the opening of a U.S. Consulate in Lhasa, 

consistent with the Tibetan Policy Act. I will also fully implement the Reciprocal Access to 

Tibet Act, and I will press Chinese authorities to reciprocate the access that China enjoys in the 

United States. I am committed to working closely with Congress in pursuit of our shared goal of 

seeing Americans have full access to China, including the Tibetan Autonomous Region and other 

Tibetan areas. 
136 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#34) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

How is the Department engaging with third countries regarding Chinese investments, 

particularly when there are strategic risks or predatory Chinese lending terms at issue? 

What has been the general response? Do the countries share U.S. concerns about how 

Chinese investments may undermine their economic or national security interest? 

Answer: 

The Department is working with borrower countries to highlight the strategic risks 

associated with the predatory lending practices of countries such as China. U.S. engagement is 

showing results as we have started to sec a number of would-be borrower nations scrutinize or 

reevaluate Chinese lending. 
137 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#35) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

How have you ensured that we can identify these problematic investments and provide 

alternatives? 

Answer: 

As part of a broad, interagency effort, our embassies and officers in the field are speaking 

to third countries to assess the most problematic Chinese projects. The U.S. private sector is key 

to providing quality alternatives to Chinese engagement. We are working with U.S. companies 

to assist them to compete for projects in third countries where it makes sense to do so. 

Through the new U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, we will mobilize 

newly expanded resources including a more-than-doubled exposure limit and the capacity to 

engage earlier in the project lifccycle. This new tool will help catalyze private-sector investment 

in developing economies. 
138 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#36) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What specific steps bas the Department taken to ensure that there are Western competitors 

everywhere where China is putting forth projects? How does the administration plan to 

resource these initiatives, given the decreased budget request for the region from the FY18 

enacted amount? 

Answer: 

We arc not seeking to match every Chinese-affiliated project. Some projects the Chinese 

pursue are poorly targeted to the country's needs or simply not viable. Instead, we are providing 

capacity-building support to enable countries to make fully informed decisions. We are working 

on transparent, effective procurement processes that help countries assess life-cycle costs of 

infrastructure and allow our firms and those of likeminded countries to compete in all markets 

where China is active. These initiatives have been funded through targeted re-allocations from 

other clements of the budget. Our programs seek to leverage private-sector resources rather than 

match, dollar-for-dollar, public expenditures by other governments. 
139 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#37) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

How is the Department engaging with partners and allies regarding adoption of Chinese 

SG technology? More broadly, how do U.S. partners- from Europe to Asia- view the 

geopolitical competition between the United States and China? Is there a concern that by 

making nations "choose," we may end up having some of them make choices that are not in 

the U.S. interest? 

Answer: 

Information technology networks and services are a critical element of our national 

security and economic prosperity. These networks are an attractive target for foreign 

adversaries, and we arc actively working with our partners and allies to reduce the risk of 

unauthorized access and malicious cyber activity as we implement 5G networks. 

Ultimately, countries have the sovereign right to decide how to build their critical 

infrastructure. As we are sharing our concerns about the risks of vendors subject to extrajudicial 

control by foreign powers, we are seeing numerous countries strengthen their 5G security 

requirements and regulations in response. 
140 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#38) 

House Committee on l<'oreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

When you recently met with President Duterte in Manila, did you raise concerns over 

extra- judicial killings and the politically motivated charges against his political opponents, 

including Senator de Lima and Maria Ressa of the online media publication, Rappler? 

What is the State Department doing to mitigate the risk that constitutional changes being 

debated in the Philippines do not result in further entrenchment of political dynasties, 

including that of President Dutcrte himself? 

Answer: 

The United States has consistently engaged the Philippine government on human rights 

issues at the highest levels over the past three years, as we did during my March visit to Manila. 

On March 29, we publicly voiced our concern with Maria Ressa's arrest. U.S. Embassy Manila 

officials are in regular contact with Senator de Lima's staff. The United States has suppOiied the 

capacity building of Philippine institutions, including through U.S. judicial sector training aimed 

to strengthen the rule of law, due process, and respect for human rights. We will continue to 

emphasize these values in our future engagements. 
141 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#39) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

It appears to many that the administration has failed to meaningfully respond to democratic 

backsliding in the Indo-Pacific region out of fear that these countries will turn toward China. Do 

yon believe that promoting U.S. values of democracy, human rights, and good governance 

is an obstacle to advancing onr other interests that risks countries "choosing" China over 

the United States? 

Answer: 

I believe promoting values of democracy, human rights, and good governance advances 

U.S. interests. These values make for more responsive and just governments; more dynamic and 

open economies; and more willing and capable partners. Promoting these values is a key U.S. 

objective, a~ Vice President Pence laid out when he announced the Indo-Pacific Transparency 

Initiative. I will continue to work to build stronger, more vibrant, and more resilient partners 

who work with the United States to combat democratic and human rights backsliding. 
142 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#40) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Can you confirm that you will instruct your subordinates to reflect this position at any 

interagency meetings on the subject of military basing overseas? Will you commit to 

opposing any similar proposals to radically alter our current basing arrangements in 

Europe? 

Answer: 

I can assure you the United States is not asking our Allies to pay tor our military presence 

at "cost-plus 50 percent." However, we are asking our Allies to meet their commitment to invest 

in our collective defense and ensure fairer burden-sharing, which is a long-standing U.S. goal. 

The Department works closely with the Depattment of Defense on forward military presence 

issues, ensuring any changes are based on United States national security requirements. 
143 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#41) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Jam concerned about democratic backsliding in central Europe, particularly in Hungary and 

Poland, with growing corruption; shrinking press, academic, and religious freedom; and 

weakened judiciary independence. Did you raise these concerns during your visit to the 

region in February'? What steps are you taking to address this democratic backsliding? 

Answer: 

I regularly speak with my Hungarian and Polish counterparts privately- and publicly 

when warranted to promote shared Transatlantic principles, including the separation of powers, 

universal human rights, and fundamental freedoms. In the current era of heightened strategic 

competition, it is important to compete for positive influence in Central Europe. To that end, the 

State Department is working to bolster the democratic values that underpin the Western Alliance 

and remind people why the choices they made in 1989 are important today. We are working 

with civil society in the region to counter disinformation, strengthen the rule of law, fight 

corruption, counter Russian malign influence, and expand the space for independent voices. 
144 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#42) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What steps are you taking to combat Russian malign influence in the Balkans? 

Answer: 

The United States is actively working to counter Russian malign influence, in particular 

by pushing back on Russian efforts to exploit vulnerabilities and weaken democratic 

institutions. In the Western Balkans, we are partnering with the countries in the region as they 

work to develop strong, democratic, transparent institutions, combat corruption, increase media 

independence and reject disinformation, build engaged citizenries, and improve their energy 

security. Montenegro's NATO accession and the historic Prespa Agreement between North 

Macedonia and Greece demonstrate that sustained U.S. engagement and foreign assistance 

programs are helping the region move forward towards greater Western integration. 
145 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#43) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Is the Administration confronting Serbian leaders about their statements and actions 

cozying up to Moscow? 

Answer: 

We strongly support Serbia's Western integration and its stated, strategic goal of 

European Union membership. Serbia has said it seeks to balance this goal with its relationship 

with Russia but has also said it sees its future in Europe and the West. We also see Serbia's 

future in Europe and the West. Toward this end, we have urged Serbian leaders to undertake 

democratic reforms, especially strengthening rule of law and media freedom. These and other 

reforms are part of the EU accession process and ultimately will build Serbia's resilience against 

the malign influence campaigns carried out by actors like Russia. 
146 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#44) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Have we communicated to the EU and EU member states our belief that Serbia should not 

join the EU until it recognizes Kosovo? 

Answer: 

Normalization of relations between Serbia and Kosovo, with mutual recognition at its 

core, is a top priority for the United States in the Western Balkans. We have communicated this 

clearly to our European partners. The EU has linked both countries under Chapter 35 of Serbia's 

accession negotiation process, calling for a legally binding agreement on comprehensive 

normalization of relations. The United States supports both Kosovo's and Serbia's advancement 

on their respective EU paths by meeting criteria laid down by the EU. We trust the EU will 

continue to support and assess each country's progress in implementing the necessary steps to 

achieve its integration aspirations. 
147 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#45) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Since your announcement in February giving Russia a six-month ultimatum to return to 

compliance with the INF Treaty, what steps have you taken to engage the Russians? What 

else are you doing to pressure the Russians in this six-month window? 

Answer: 

Since 2013, Russia has not taken any demonstrable steps to return to compliance and has 

fielded multiple battalions of its INF non-compliant missile. On February 2, the U.S. suspended 

its obligations under the Treaty, in response to Russia's material breach and provided Parties 

with formal notice that the United States would withdraw from the Treaty in six months. 

Additionally, the United States is now moving forward with developing conventional 

ground-launched, INF-range missile capabilities. This work is designed to be reversible should 

Russia return to full and verified compliance. However, given Russia's February 2 

announcement of its purported suspension of the Treaty and its stated interest in pursuing an 

additional ground-launched, JNF-range system, Russia appears unlikely to do so. 
148 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot :Engel (#46) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Is Russia currently in compliance with the New START Treaty? Is the New START 

Treaty in U.S. national security interests? 

Answer: 

Both Russia and the United States are currently in compliance with the New START 

Treaty. The New START Treaty's numerical limits on Russia's strategic nuclear force; 

establishment of data exchanges including the locations, numbers, and technical characteristics 

of weapons systems and facilities; and its verification provisions contribute currently to U.S. 

national security. The Administration is currently reviewing whether to seek an extension of the 

Treaty, and central to that review is evaluating how the Treaty's expiration would impact U.S. 

national security, including Russia's ongoing development of new strategic offensive arms and 

serial noncompliance with its arms control obligations, as well as China's continuing nuclear 

modernization. 
149 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#47) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The last round ofU.S.-Russia Strategic Stability Talks occurred in September 2017 and was 

chaired by then-Under Secretary of State for Political A flairs Tom Shannon. This is a forum that 

we should be using to ensure we avoid a nuclear conflict with Russia. Why haven't you held 

another round of talks since then? Have you proposed to Russia that another round be 

held? Do you support holding additional rounds of these talks? 

Answer: 

At their .July 2018 meeting in Helsinki, President Trump and Russian President Putin 

directed their respective national security advisors to continue discussions on issues relevant to 

easing tensions in the U.S.-Russia relationship and to explore cooperation in areas of mutual 

interest. In August and October 2018, Ambassador Bolton and his Russian counterpart, Security 

Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev, discussed a number of issues, including some related to 

strategic stability. State Department officials regularly meet with Russian officials bilaterally 

and multilaterally to discuss matters relating to strategic stability. We will continue these 

discussions as appropriate in the interest of U.S. national security. 
150 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#48) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

When will you impose the second round of sanctions on Russia for its chemical weapons 

attack on the Skripals as required by the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and 

Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 ("the CBW Act")? The CBW Act envisioned this second 

round of sanctions within three months of the initial determination that chemical weapons 

had been used. Why is it taking so long? 

We do not preview sanctions actions. However, we are working diligently with the 

interagency to prepare for imposing the second round of sanctions. 
151 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#49) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Can you confirm whether President Trump has personally told President Erdogan that 

Turkey should not purchase the S-400 system? 

Answer: 

The Administration has been unequivocal in its opposition to Turkey's purchasing the 

S-400 system, and we have made clear that acquiring the S-400 will put at risk Turkey's 

continued role in the F-35 program- both aircraft acquisition and industrial participation- and 

expose it to sanctions under Section 231 of the Countering America's Adversaries Through 

Sanctions Act (CAATSA). In February, Vice President Pence stated publicly that, "the U.S. 

would not stand idly by while NATO Allies purchase weapons from our adversaries;· 

specifically pointing to Turkey. Turkey's purchase of a $2.5 billion S-400 air defense missile 

system from Russia poses great danger to NATO and to the strength of the Alliance and could 

lead to consequences for Turkey. 
152 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#SO) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

How does the U.S. military withdrawal from parts of Syria affect out· assistance and the 

very limited diplomatic presence we had in Syria? 

Answer: 

We are keeping a residual force in Syria while the deliberate and coordinated withdrawal 

of our troops continues. We remain engaged in Syria and our policy objectives remain the same: 

(1) the enduring defeat of ISIS; (2) an irreversible Syrian-led and -owned political settlement; 

and (3) removing all Iranian-commanded forces from the entirety of Syria. Likewise, we will 

continue to support international cffotts to establish local security, local governance, and a 

restored economy and justice and accountability in liberated areas. We will also continue to 

provide life-saving humanitarian assistance to people inside Syria and the region. Our staff 

continue to perform their assistance oversight responsibilities from their permanent posts. 
153 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#51) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The 2020 budget calls for zeroing out all economic assistance to Syria. Last year, Saudi Arabia 

and other countries backfilled funding on those U.S.-designed projects after the United States 

decided to withdraw its assistance to communities seeking to hold territory after the battle with 

ISIS. Is there a similar plan to fund projects that help Syrians in post-ISIS communities 

recover'! Which U.S.-designed projects are set to receive fonds from foreign governments 

and which governments have pledged to fund these projects? What specific role does the 

U.S. have in shaping and monitoring these projects that are not paid for by U.S. foreign 

assistance? 

The Department is continually re-evaluating stabilization assistance levels and 

programming. regardless of fiscal year. Our objective in these reviews is to ensure our 

assistance is targeted, effective, and set at the appropriate level. We continue to seek 

contributions from Coalition partners, per the President's request. Coalition donors fund a 

number of programs managed by the United States, including essential services, explosive 

remnants of war removal, education, civil society, first responders, livelihoods, and local 

governance. We monitor these programs according to our own procedures and per the specific 

agreements set with these countries. 
154 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#52) 

House Committee ou Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

The Committee has been informed that the Department has decided to make significant staffing 

cuts to Embassy Baghdad. Please detail how many positions will be cut, from which agency 

functions, and what plans (if any) exist to fulfill the duties those positions fulfilled? Please 

also provide a comprehensive accounting of staffing at all other U.S. diplomatic posts in 

Iraq, including in Basrah and Erbil. 

Answer: 

The State Department regularly assesses staffing abroad to ensure our resources are 

properly aligned with our objectives. Embassy Baghdad recently undertook a staffing review of 

232 positions with the goal of pursuing U.S. objectives with as few people as possible given a 

high-threat environment. It was determined that 70 positions could be eliminated: 26 from 

State; 35 from Defense; three from Justice; and six from USAID. Duties will be integrated into 

existing positions, fulfilled through Temporary Duty, or managed from an alternative 

location. As of March 27, total Chief of Mission staffing in Iraq totals 1 ,035, including 42 at the 

Baghdad Diplomatic Support Center and 315 in Erbil. Operations in Basrah are suspended, and 

local staff are transferring to Baghdad. 
155 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#53) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

How does the United States plan to adjust its diplomatic and development priorities given 

the ongoing political transition in Algeria, following over 20 years of rule by President 

Bouteflika? What opportunities and challenges does this transition present? 

Answer: 

Algeria remains an important partner on regional security, counter terrorism, economic 

development, and trade and energy. The United States has a strong partnership with Algeria that 

will endure as we continue working together to tackle shared challenges and promote the security 

and prosperity of our citizens in the months and years ahead. Although I will continue to 

monitor political developments, only Algerians can determine how they navigate this 

transition. 
156 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#54) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What is the State Department doing to advance a peaceful solution to the conflict in Yemen 

between the Saudi-led coalition and the Houthis? 

Answer: 

The Administration supports UN Special Envoy (UNSE) for Y emcn Martin Griffiths in 

his efforts to facilitate a political resolution. Since fY 2016, we have awarded grants to Yemeni 

organizations involved in local peacebuilding and post-conflict planning and provided the UNSE 

office $6.2 million to support personnel and operations. We endorsed UNSCR 2452 creating the 

UN Mission to support the Hudaydah Agreement, and we communicate often with Special 

Envoy Griffiths to discuss how we can support his efforts. U.S. diplomatic engagement in the 

Quad (United States, UK, UAE, and Saudi Arabia) has influenced Coalition maintenance of the 

Hudaydah ccasefire, providing space for building momentum toward broader reconciliation. 
157 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#55) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What leverage does the United States have over the various parties to the conflict to get 

them to commit to a peaceful solution to the conflict? How arc we using that leverage? 

Answer: 

Our positive relationships with the Republic of Yemen government (ROYG) and the 

Coalition have been instrumental in the Administration's ability to push for resolution at critical 

junctures. Common interests in countering malign Iranian activity are a cornerstone of our 

leverage with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and the sale of U.S. defense articles to these regional 

partners protects their borders from Iranian and Houthi threats. For example, this past year, we 

were able to prevent a UAE-Ied offensive on the city ofHudaydah and worked with the Saudis to 

pressure the ROYG to attend peace talks in Sweden. 
158 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#56) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

The State Department recently transmitted to Congress the Congressionally mandated Yemen 

strategy, in which the Department stated that "there is no military solution to this conflict." 

Have you communicated this view to the Saudi-led coalition? If the UN-Ied peace process 

falls apart, would you support the Saudi-led coalition and local Yemeni forces taking the 

Port ofHudaydah by force? 

Answer: 

We have been clear that only a comprehensive political solution will bring the Yemen 

conflict to an end and resolve Yemen's economic and humanitarian crisis. We communicate this 

regularly to the Coalition at the highest levels and will continue to do so. 
159 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#57) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

At a time when Yemeni people are trapped in conflict, why won't you consider lifting the 

travel ban on Yemenis? 

Answer: 

The Administration's primary responsibility is to ensure the safety and security of U.S. 

citizens and of the United States itself. The ROYG does not have full control over its territorywhich is home to the Houthis and AI Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula- its passport issuance, or 

its airports. The Administration reviews its determinations under Presidential Proclamation 9645 

every 180 days and takes into account progress made by the ROYG with regard to 

information-sharing and identity-management practices as part of this process. 
160 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#58) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

CNN recently reported that the UAE transferred U.S.-origin defense equipment to third parties in 

Yemen, including Y emenis who have ties to AI Qaeda. Please provide the Committee with an 

update on the State Department-led investigation. What arc the consequences for our 

defense relationship with the UAE ifthese transfers did take place'? 

Answer: 

We are investigating this matter and are coordinating with our partners to determine 

whether U .S.-origin weapons or other defense articles were transferred to unauthorized end-users 

in Yemen. We have not reached final determinations and continue to investigate. We will 

continue to update the Committee as additional information is available. If the articles were 

intentionally transferred without the Department's written consent, we will coordinate within the 

interagency to determine the appropriate next steps and inform the Committee of any 

repercussions. 
161 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#59) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Last year, Congress required the Pentagon to certify that the Saudi and Em irati governments 

were working sincerely to support diplomatic efforts to end the civil war in Yemen and reduce 

the risk ofharn1 to civilians and civilian infrastructure. Absent that certification, the United 

States would not be able to refuel Saudi and UAE jets operating over Yemen. Many of us 

believe the initial September certification was disingenuous, considering the coalition bombed a 

school bus just a month before. Since then, the Administration has stopped sending 

certifications, despite the fact that there is no legal authority to terminate these reports to 

Congress. Are there plans to send a certification or a waiver to Congress? Are Saudi 

A1·abia and the UAE making a good faith effort toward a diplomatic solution? Are they 

taking appropriate measures to alleviate the humanitarian crisis by increasing access at the 

aiJ·port in Sana'a? Are they taking demonstrable actions to reduce the risk of harm to 

civilians and civilian infrastructure resulting from their military operations? 

Answer: 

As of November II, 2018, the United States ceased refueling support to the Coalition's 

counter-Houthi operations in Yemen. Because the United States has discontinued in-flight 

refueling that would be su~ject to the restriction in Section 1290, a subsequent certification under 

Section 1290(d) is not necessary. The Coalition has demonstrated active diplomatic support for 

the Special Envoy's efforts before, during. and since the Stockholm talks in December 2018. 

Sana'a Airport has remained open to humanitarian flights throughout the conflict. Additionally, 

the Coalition's civilian casualty mitigation efforts have resulted in demonstrated improvements 

in its targeting practices. 
162 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#60) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

There have been numerous media repotis about armed UAVs operated by 1-louthis in Yemen 

penetrating the air space of our partners in the Gulf. What specific steps have you takeu to 

protect U.S. diplomatic facilities and American citizens in the Gulf from this UA V threat? 

Answer: 

Iran takes advantage ofthe instability resulting from the Yemen conflict to increase its 

presence in the Arabian Peninsula and the region. The provision oflranian weapons to the 

1-louthis threatens U.S. citizens residing in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, international shipping in 

the Bab al-Mandab strait, and our allies and partners in the region. The Administration supports 

UN-led efforts to bring an end to the conflict, which will reduce the instability in Yemen that 

allows groups like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as well as al-Qa'ida in the 

Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and ISIS, to thrive. The provision oflimited support, including 

advice and intelligence, to the Coalition helps us to counter these common threats. 
163 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#61) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Just a few weeks after the heinous murder of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi, you 

wrote that the Crown Prince has moved the country in a reformist direction. What specific 

reforms is the Department working on with Saudi Arabia now? 

The Department engages the Saudi leadership on a range of political, economic, and 

security issues that underpin the U.S.-Saudi relationship. Vision 2030, for example, provides an 

opportunity for the U.S. government to engage both leadership and the country's people in 

advancing an economically and culturally vibrant society. The current reform efforts underway 

seek to diversify the country's economy, advance a more progressive vision of the Kingdom's 

cultural space, and bring millions of young Saudis- both men and women- into the workforce. 

In engaging on these issues, Department officials routinely stress to the Saudis that political 

repression endangers the many positive reforms the Saudi government is pursuing. 
164 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#62) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Last year, Senate Foreign Relations Committee leadership requested a determination within 

120 days of any foreign person responsible for human rights violations tied to the murder of 

Jamal Khashoggi- which could result in sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act. Just over a 

month later, these Senators wrote again asking for a specific determination of the responsibility 

of the Crown Prince with respect to the murder. The deadline for these determinations has come 

and gone. Why have you not submitted a report to Congress about whether the Crown 

Prince is responsible for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi? 

Answer: 

The Department shares your conviction that those responsible for this horrific act must be 

held accountable. The United States was the first country to take action to promote 

accountability, when on October 23 the Department placed visa restrictions on those suspected of 

involvement in the murder. On November 15, the Treasury and State Departments imposed 

financial sanctions on implicated Saudi officials under the Executive Order implementing the 

Global Magnitsky Act. The Department will continue to utilize these tools. 
165 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#63) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Why is there a discrepancy between the numbers of Saudis arrested by the Saudi 

government and the numbers of Saudis designated by Magnitsky sanctions? 

The Saudi Arabian Public Prosecutor's Office has indicted II individuals and continues 

to investigate others. The criminal trial of the 1 I individuals is ongoing. The Department 

continues to monitor the trial, press Saudi authorities for full accountability of Mr. Khashoggi's 

killers, and urge transparency in its legal process. The Administration's own actions are based 

on an U.S.-developed fact set. The Administration has thus far utilized three different legal 

authorities to promote accountability- the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), Executive 

Order 13818 implementing and expanding upon the Global Magnitsky Act, and Section 703J(c) 

of the Appropriations Act. The Department will continue to utilize these tools. 
166 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#64) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Media reports indicated that the White House blocked CIA Director Haspel from briefing rank 

and file members of Congress on the Khashoggi matter. Cleared committee staff have also been 

blocked from accessing this information. According to the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, the Committee on Foreign Affairs is responsible for the "review and study on a 

continuing basis laws, programs, and Government activities relating" to "intelligence activities 

relating to foreign policy." Will you commit to adhering to proper Congressional oversight 

and not stand in the way of any intelligence briefing to this committee or to members of 

this committee about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi? 

Answer: 

Yes, the Department is committed to keeping the Committee informed regarding its 

ongoing efforts to hold those responsible for Jamal Khashoggi's murder accountable. 
167 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#65) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

At what level of Saudi government has the Department of State raised the case of the detention 

of dual U.S.-Saudi national Dr. Walid Fitaihi without charge or due process? What has the Saudi 

response been? What efforts have been undertaken to secure Dr. Fitaihi's release? 

Answer: 

We continue to raise Dr. Fitaihi's case at the highest levels of Saudi leadership, and I 

spoke to the Crown Prince on March 19. Embassy Riyadh and the Near Eastern Affairs Bureau 

leadership also continue to raise our concerns with Saudi counterparts in Washington and 

Riyadh. The Saudi Arabian government does not recognize dual citizenship but has granted 

regular consular access following sustained U.S. government engagement. The Department's 

highest priority is the safety and well-being of U.S. citizens abroad. We will continue to engage 

Saudi leadership to ensure Dr. Fitaihi's well-being until the situation is satisfactorily resolved. 
168 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#66) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The 2020 budget request calls for $175 million in a global Diplomatic Progress Fund, which 

Deputy Secretary Sullivan described as a fund to effectively respond to new opportunities arising 

from diplomatic and peace progress and emerging counter-Iran needs." Wbat will these funds 

be used for? How will these funds be used to counter Iran? Will these funds be used to 

advance the President's Middle East Peace plan? If so, how do you intend to use these 

funds, specifically, for the purpose of advancing peace between Israelis and Palestinians 

within the constraints of the administration's interpretation of the Anti-Terrorism 

Clarification Act, which has prevented any U.S. economic assistance from supporting the 

Palestinians? Do you support a revision of the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act? 

Answer: 

The Diplomatic Progress Fund will enable the United States to provide assistance when 

diplomatic breakthroughs present an opportunity to advance U.S. interests, including to counter 

Iranian influence or to support diplomatic efforts such as a plan for Middle East Peace. When the 

Administration presents its vision for a lasting and comprehensive peace between Israel and the 

Palestinians, I welcome the opportunity to discuss with Congress what role U.S. assistance can 

and should play in achieving that goal. 1 also look forward to discussing with Congress the role 

of assistance in light of the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act (ATCA). 
169 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#67) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2109 

Did the State Department tell the Afghan National Security Advisor that it would no longer 

participate in meetings with him? How does sidestepping the Afghan National Security 

Advisor, a close advisor of President Ashraf Ghani, advance U.S. policy in Afghanistan and 

support an inclusive reconciliation process? 

Answer: 

The State Department has communicated to Afghan National Security Advisor Mohib 

that U.S. officials will not meet with him in light of his sustained public campaign directly and 

falsely attacking United States policy in Afghanistan, as well as his unfounded and personalized 

accusations against the senior U.S. official implementing that policy, Special Representative for 

Afghanistan Reconciliation Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. U.S. officials have also 

communicated the same message to President Ghani. The United States-led by Ambassador 

John Bass-continues to work closely with President Ghani and his team on all issues related to 

Afghan security, including on advancing an inclusive reconciliation process. 
170 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#68) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Given the widespread understanding that the 2018 Bangladesh general elections were 

neither free nor fair, what elements of U.S. policy towards Bangladesh will change to 

reflect the deterioration of democracy in the Country? 

Answer: 

Following Bangladesh's December 30 election, the Department expressed concern in a 

January 1 statement about "credible reports of harassment, intimidation, and violence in the 

pre-election period" and "election-day irregularities [that] prevented some people from voting, 

which undermined faith in the electoral process." President Trump sent a letter to Prime 

Minister Hasina further raising our concern about the election. We continue to raise these 

concerns with Bangladesh senior officials, including the prime minister and foreign minister, and 

support calls for an independent investigation into the suppression of political opposition, their 

supporters, and journalists and other electoral-related complaints. 
171 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#69) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Then-U.S. Ambassador to Bangladesh Marcia Bernicat's vehicle was attacked on August4, 

2018, when she was returning from a dinner party. Though she thankfully escaped unharmed, 

the incident prompts questions about the resources for U.S. diplomatic security. Was the 

Regional Security Office in Dhaka fully staffed during the August 4 attack that targeted 

Ambassador Bernicat'! What warnings, if any, did the Department of State have in 

advance of the attack? \Vhat concrete actions has the Department taken to understand 

how the attack occurred, who was responsible, or to bolster diplomatic security presence in 

Bangladesh since the attack? 

~: 

In August 2018, the staffing pattern for the Regional Security Office at U.S. Embassy 

Dhaka included five Diplomatic Security (DS) Special Agents, including one Regional Security 

Officer (RSO), three Assistant RSOs, and one Assistant RSO-lnvestigator. At the time of the 

attack, Ambassador Bernicat's bodyguard program was fully staffed and two DS special agents 

were in-country (one agent was on leave and Post was awaiting two incoming agents). The 

Depatiment was not aware of credible information indicating the attack would occur. After the 

attack, DS deployed a Mobile Security Deployment Training Team to conduct security training 

for Post staff. Post continues to work with the host government to investigate the attack. 
172 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#70) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

We are concerned that China continues to block the UN 1267 committee designation of 

Jaish-e-Mohammcd (JEM). What effort is the U.S. making to ensure that China stops 

enabling terrorism in South Asia? 

Answer: 

Our views on Masood Azhar and JEM, the U.S.- and UN-designated terrorist group he 

leads, are well known. Azhar clearly meets the criteria for designation by the UN Security 

Council 1267 Committee as the founder and leader of JEM, a group the United Nations first 

designated in 200 l. W c are working to ensure the designation list is updated and accurate. We 

have made it clear we will work with our allies and partners to use all available avenues, 

including, if necessary, a standalone UN Security Council Resolution, to ensure that the founder 

and leader of JEM is held accountable by the international community. 
173 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#71) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

I understand that India claims its February 26 strike inside settled Pakistan hit an active JEM 

terrorist training camp, and the State Depatimcnt termed the strike a "counter terrorism" 

operation. Does the Department believe that India engaging in military action inside settled 

Pakistan is an appropriate response to a terrorist attack by a group based in Pakistan 

(albeit conducted by an Indian national)? Was the Department concerned by the potential 

escalatory or legal ramifications of such a strike? 

Answer: 

Following Indian counterterrorism actions on February 26, I spoke with Indian Minister 

of External Affairs Swaraj to emphasize our close security partnership and shared goal of 

maintaining peace and security in the region. I also spoke to Pakistani Foreign Minister Qureshi 

to underscore the priority of de-escalating current tensions by avoiding military action and the 

urgency of Pakistan's taking meaningful action against terrorist groups operating on its soil. I 

expressed to both ministers that we encourage India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and avoid 

escalation. I also encouraged both ministers to prioritize direct communication and avoid further 

conflict. 
174 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#72) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Can you characterize the current tension in Pakistan over scarce water resources? How 

might this stress amplify tensions with India should India seck to restrict the flow of rivers 

whose headwaters it controls, as India threatened during the recent Indo-Pak crisis that 

flared up last month? 

~: 

Although transboundary issues are a significant hindrance for Pakistan's water sector, the 

greatest challenges are internal to Pakistan and are linked to mismanagement of water resources 

and population growth. The Indus River Basin, which is fed from glaciers originating in India, is 

the primary source of water for most of Pakistan~ including 90% of agricultural land~ and is 

supplemented by transboundary water from Afghanistan. Pakistan continues to express concerns 

about India's building clam projects, which predate the Pulwama attack, and argue the projects 

are not in line with the 1960 Indus Water Treaty (IWT). However, Pakistan has stated it is not 

concerned about India's diversion of water as long as it adheres to the IWT. 
175 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#73) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

How has the U.S. adjusted its assistance programming for Sri Lanka to reflect the impact 

that the breaking of democratic norms may have? 

At the time of constitutional crisis, the United States expressed concern publicly and 

privately that the crisis undermined the country's international reputation and economy. With 

likeminded states, we urged that parliament be reconvened and the rule of law be upheld. During 

the crisis, the Millennium Challenge Corporation declined to vote on approval of Sri Lanka's 

$480 million compact, as was previously scheduled. Sri Lanka's democratic institutions, namely 

the judiciary and parliament, ultimately reinstated constitutional order, with senior Sri Lankan 

officials expressing appreciation for U.S. government efforts to ensure the crisis was resolved in 

accordance with the rule oflaw. As such, we arc continuing appropriated assistance. 
176 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#74) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What impact docs the Sri Lankan government's appointment of an individual accused of 

crimes against humanity to the position of Chief of Army staff have on our security 

assistance posture? 

Answer: 

I share your concerns about the appointment of Shavendra Silva. The Department takes 

all allegations of human rights seriously and raises its concems with the Government of Sri 

Lanka when high-level appointments appear to conflict with Sri Lanka's commitments. As we 

have told the President of Sri Lanka, the appointment was not in line with Sri Lanka's 

commitment to accountability, justice, and reconciliation. We will continue to press Sri Lanka to 

fulfill its human rights commitments and obligations. We will also continue to enforce the 

Leahy Law and the restrictions it applies to U.S. security assistance. 
177 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#75) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

How would you rate Sri Lanka's efforts to address longstanding issues of accountability as 

agreed to in the 2015 UN Human Rights council resolution adopted with support ofthe Sri 

Lankan government? 

Answer: 

We welcome Sri Lanka's co-sponsorship of UN Human Rights Council Resolution 

A/HRC/40/L. 1 extending international monitoring of its commitments to reconciliation, justice, 

and accountability. Sri Lanka established an Office of Missing Persons in 2018. An Office of 

Reparations is also being established, with commissioners appointed. Sri Lanka's 2019 budget 

funded both offices. Over 80 percent of occupied lands have been returned. W c support the 

government's efforts to repeal and replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act. We arc encouraging 

the government to make progress on establishing a truth-seeking commission and judicial 

accountability mechanism, expected in 2020. 
178 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#76) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

May 27,2019 

Given the Administration's priority on the Indo-Pacific region, and the National Security 

Strategy's focus on a global competition with China, will the administration be increasing 

the number of positions assigned to the Indo-Pacific region? If so, how many positions will 

be added? Will these be new positions or existing positions? If they are existing positions, 

from where will they be reassigned? 

Answer: 

I support the President's FY 2020 budget request and the position requests contained 

therein. The Department routinely reviews its staffing to ensure it is effectively advancing U.S. 

foreign policy objectives and uses a variety of tools, including diplomatic density, to assess 

staffing levels. The Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs is also planning to reprogram three 

Public Diplomacy positions from Canberra, Seoul, and Beijing to Kolonia, Singapore, and 

Jakarta, respectively. The Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs has reprogrammed six 

positions within the region to directly support the Indo-Pacific Strategy. 
179 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#77) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Please describe the impact of the FBI's Transnational Anti-Gang Units (TAG) in El 

Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, which are funded by the Bureau oflnternational 

Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL). How many gang members have been 

brought to justice as a result of the TAG's efforts? How many gang leaders have been 

extradited to the United States? 

Answer: 

The Department supports specialized and vetted units in the Northern Triangle countries 

of El Salvador. Guatemala, and Honduras- including the Transnational Anti-Gang Units (TAG) 

-to combat transnational criminal organizations. In 2018, vetted and specialized units arrested 

more than 8,600 individuals in the Northern Triangle. Since mid-2017, coordinated regional 

operations led to the filing of nearly 4,000 criminal charges, including a Salvadoran MS-13 

leader responsible for coordinating criminal activities in the United States. TAGs regularly share 

information with the FBI to support U.S. investigations. Since 2017, Northern Triangle 

governments have extradited more than 65 high-level criminals for prosecution in the United 

States. 
180 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#78) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Around the globe, LGBTQI people have been harassed, tortured and even killed, just for being 

who they are. Why did the U.S. not join over 30 other nations in signing the joint statement 

delivered to the UN Human Rights Council on March 18,2019, calling for a thorough 

investigation into the anti-LGBTI crimes being perpetrated in Chechnya? Who made the 

decision to not sign? 

Answer: 

That statement was made during the 40th Session of the UN Human Rights Council, from 

which the United States withdrew in June 2018. Consistent with our withdrawal, the United 

States is not participating in any UN Human Rights Council sessions, including by signing onto 

or aligning with any resolutions or statements pertaining to those sessions. We continue to work 

to advance human rights at the UN and in regional fora, such as the Organization for Security 

and Cooperation in Europe, where we joined 16 countries in invoking the "Moscow Mechanism" 

against Russia for allegations of human rights violations and abuses in Chechnya, including 

against LGBTI persons. We continue to press Russia to bring those responsible to justice. 
181 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#79) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Around the globe, LGBTQI people have been harassed, tortured and even killed, just for being 

who they are. Will you condemn the ongoing anti-LGBTI crimes happening in Chechnya 

and commit to helping LGBTI people in Chechnya, Egypt and other countries to ensure 

they are not targeted for abuse? 

Under my leadership, the Department has been clear and consistent in affirming that 

human rights are universal and that no one should face violence, criminalization, or 

discrimination in areas such as employment, housing, and provision of government services 

because of their LGBTI status. We have and will continue to stand up and speak out in support 

of the human rights and fundamental freedoms ofLGBTI persons in all corners of the globe, 

including in Chechnya and Egypt, and press to hold perpetrators of human rights violations and 

abuses to account. 
182 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#80) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Around the globe, LGI3TQI people have been harassed, tortured and even killed, just for being 

who they are. Do you pledge to continue to support State Department programming aimed 

at meeting emergency needs of human rights defenders? 

Answer: 

Absolutely. The Department continues to provide strong U.S. programmatic and 

emergency support for LGI3TJ human rights defenders and civil society organizations working to 

counter violence, severe discrimination, and criminalization of LGI3TI conduct and/or status. 
183 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#81) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Does the State Department believe that national leaders around the world have a duty to 

condemn hate speech or incitement? Does the Department believe its representatives, 

including at United Nations bodies, should advance this principle? Does the Department 

believe that fighting racism helps build diverse democratic societies, and is it U.S. policy to 

do so around the globe? 

Answer: 

State Department officials regularly speak out to condemn hate speech and encourage 

other governments to do the same. Unfortunately, we see many countries using restrictions on 

freedom of expression to target the political opposition or human rights defenders. We hold up 

our framework of civil rights laws and the infrastructure to ensure their implementation as a 

model for deterring and punishing those who discriminate or engage in violence based on race. 
184 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#82) 

Honse Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Given the many intensifying displacement crises around the world, why hasn't PRM used 

any Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance (ERMA) funds over the past two years? 

This account is fully funded at its $100 million authorized level, which could be used to save 

lives and prevent further displacement. Are there new protocols or barriers to drawdown 

that may be impeding ERMA funds being spent? 

Answer: 

While there are more global humanitarian assistance needs now than there have been in 

decades, the Department has been able to address emergency needs through existing Migration 

and Refugee Assistance (MRA) resources and has not had to seek approval from the President to 

tap into ERMA funds. There are no new protocols or barriers to drawing down funds from 

ERMA. 
185 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#83) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

On January 29,2018, new procedures were announced to process refugees from certain countries 

for resettlement, in addition to new data-collection and processing requirements put in place over 

the last two years. Do these new systems, and the lengthened time it takes to process 

refugees, require additional resources beyond what was necessary under the previous 

procedures? Why did the Department of State request fewer funds in FY 2020 than it did 

in previous years for the U.S. refugee admissions program? 

Answer: 

The screening and vetting protocols associated with the U.S. Refugee Admissions 

Program (USRAP) play a crucial role in preventing the admission of foreign nationals who may 

be involved in acts of terrorism or other threats to national security and public safety. 

The budget request for the US RAP includes funding to support all overseas processing 

steps, data collection, transportation, and initial reception and placement services for 30,000 

refugees and 10,000 Special Immigrant Visas (S!Vs). The request reflects anticipated costs of 

the program based on current operating levels. The FY 2020 Admissions ceiling will be set after 

consultations between the Administration and Congress belbre the start of the fiscal year. 
186 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#84) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

f-low will the administration's reported plan to close USCIS international operations impact 

refugee processing? Is the U.S. continuing to conduct overseas interviews for all priority streams 

of refugee applicants? If so, how many individuals are currently going through this process and 

how long will this process take? Has the State Department established any benchmarks or goals 

for case processing times? 

Answer: 

The Department already performs services on behalf of USC IS at more than 200 posts 

overseas and is committed to working with USCIS to ensure a smooth transition of services over 

the next year. The specific USC IS functions the Department will absorb will be determined in 

the months ahead. The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program continues to conduct overseas 

interviews for all priority streams of refugees. Over 109,000 applicants now await initial 

interviews by Department-funded Resettlement Support Centers, and over 81,000 applicants 

await interviews by USCJS. The average case processing time from date of referral to departure 

to the United States (or closure if denied) is two years and five months. 
187 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#85) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What new security vetting is being implemented in the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program 

by the administration? Given the extensive scrutiny that refugees have previously faced, 

what benefits have such vetting changes added? How is the Administration ensuring that 

security screening of refugees before their entry to the United States is being done in a 

timely manner? How long are current wait times for security advisory opinion (SAO) 

requests and what has been the increase in case processing times under the new SAO 

procedures? Which agencies have typically processed SAO requests and which agencies 

are involved under the new SAO procedures? 

Answer: 

In January 2018, the Secretary of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced 

additional security enhancements to strengthen the integrity of the USRAP. The process for 

screening refugees is managed by DHS and includes the involvement of the Intelligence 

Community, including the National Counterterrorism Center, as well as the Departments of State 

and Defense and the FBI. Only after an applicant has cleared all security screening will DHS 

consider granting admission to the United States. Refugee applicants undergo a number of 

different security checks at different stages in their processing, and the length of these checks can 

vary based on the unique traits of each individual applicant. 
188 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#86) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What is the State Department doing to address the concern that fewer individuals granted 

SIVs will contribute to fewer individuals willing to serve with the U.S. in the future, thus 

damaging our national security? 

Answer: 

We are committed to supporting those who have helped U.S. military and other 

government personnel perform their duties, often at great risk to themselves and their families. 

We are aware of how much we owe our Afghan and Iraqi colleagues and of the risks they face. 

In FY 2017, we issued visas to 4,120 principal applicants- more than any other year. ln 

FY 2018, we issued approximately 1,645 visas to principal applicants. While we encountered 

longer processing times in FY 2018, we have identified the challenges and are working 

proactively to resolve them. The SIV process is a collaborative effort among our interagency 

partners and our focus is to facilitate visa issuance while protecting our national security. 
189 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#87) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Regarding the November 29, 2018, Presidential Memorandum on Trafficking in Persons, 

what was the process used to determine the number and scope of the waivers in the 

Presidential Memorandum? 

The Department and the Administration engaged with relevant agencies to conduct a 

detailed review of the programs that would be affected by any applicable restrictions for Tier 3 

governments and the available justifications for potential waivers. Waivers on restricted 

assistance were granted only where the President determined waivers promoted the purposes of 

the TVP A or were otherwise in the U.S. national interest. 
190 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#88) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Regarding the November 29, 2018, Presidential Memorandum on Trafficking in Persons, 

what guidance was provided, particularly to USAID missions, regarding the 

implementation of the Presidential Memorandum? 

Answer: 

The Administration seeks to implement the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) 

foreign assistance restrictions in a way that holds governments accountable for failing to meet 

the minimum standards to eliminate trafficking in persons in accordance with the November 29, 

2018, Presidential Memorandum. This has included providing guidance, as needed, to State 

Department and USAID bureaus and missions on the application of the TVPA restrictions as 

they relate to existing and planned programs. I have directed my leadership team to explore the 

use of available authorities in certain limited cases where it is in our foreign policy and national 

security interest to continue assistance that would otherwise be subject to the TVPA restrictions. 
191 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#89) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Can you explain bow the Department's interpretations of the Trafficking Victims 

Protection Act (TVPA) provision on "avoidance of significant adverse effects" was included 

in the determinations of the waivers in eluded in Presidential Memorandum and additional 

waivers? 

Answer: 

The authority to grant waivers of the assistance restriction under the TVPA is exercised 

by the President, consistent with applicable requirements. The restrictions will be applied in a 

way that is mindful of the impact on people who rely our life-saving services, particularly 

vulnerable populations in greatest need. The restriction applies only to assistance for the 

governments of countries listed as Tier 3 in the annual Trafficking in Persons report. United 

States assistance for the people ofthcsc countries provided through NGOs and civil society 

organizations is generally not subject to the restriction. 
192 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#90) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) definition of"nonhumanitarian, nontrade-related foreign 

assistance," which is referred to in the TVPA, has been stated as the benchmark for excluding 

certain activities. The definition in TVPA (codified at 22 USC 7102(8)) sets out that the 

following, among other things, should be treated as humanitarian assistance: Economic Support 

Funds (ESF) authorized for use as Development Assistance (DA); disaster relief assistance, 

expressly including International Disaster Assistance (IDA) under FAA Sec. 491; "humanitarian 

and other development assistance in support of programs of nongovernmental organizations 

[under FAA Development Assistance authorities]; and a catch-all for "other programs involving . 

. . humanitarian assistance." What is the administration's definition of"hnmanitarian" in 

the context of the November presidential memorandum? What criteria were used to 

determine which activities were or were not excluded? What approach has the 

administration taken in using its discretion under the catch-all authority? What steps has 

it taken to avoid arbitrary and capricious application of this discretion? 

Answer: 

I have directed my leadership team to take a common-sense and consistent approach to 

implementing the restrictions under the TVP A in accordance with the Presidential Memorandum. 

The restrictions will be applied in a way that is mindful of the impact on people to whom we 

provide these life-saving services, patiicularly vulnerable populations in greatest need. As part 

of implementing the restrictions under the TVPA, certain limited activities, such as life-saving 

health programs and other programs benefitting conflict-displaced and refugee populations will 

continue under available authorities. 
193 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#91) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Additionally, under the definition in Sec. 110 (d) (1) (A) of the TVPA of 2000, is the term 

"provided" interpreted to mean the obligation of funding, and/or disbursement of 

previously obligated funds? If the latter, how much funding docs the Administration 

estimate is no longer eligible to be provided to these countries, and what are the plans for 

its notification and reprogramming? 

Answer: 

The TVPA restrictions under the November 29, 2018, Presidential Memorandum apply to 

the new obligation of certain types of foreign assistance during FY 2019 for the governments of 

countries listed as Tier 3 in the Department's 2018 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report, 

regardless of the fiscal year of the funds. The State Department and USAID are still considering 

plans for potential reprogramming of funds, and I look forward to providing you more 

information as additional decisions are made. 
194 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#92) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Please explain how dual-key authorities such as DOD Section 333 (global train and equip) 

are being handled in the context of the presidential memorandum. For example, DOD 

notified its intent to provide $7.2 million in CT assistance to Mauritania's military in 

FY2018; since this notification was sent up in the previous fiscal year, is the Sec. 333 

package to Mauritania unaffected by the Tier III designation, or will assistance be held up 

at the point of obligation/equipment transfer? 

Answer: 

I have directed my team to exercise the State Department's concurrence under 10 U.S.C. 

333 in accordance with restrictions imposed under the November 29, 2018, Presidential 

Memorandum, which applies to new obligations made in FY 2019. The Department of Defense 

is the agency with further insight on the specific activity referenced in the question. 
195 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#93) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Additionally, we understand that CVE assistance for Mauritania has been allowed to proceed, 

even though it generally involves working with one or more government entities. Under what 

exemption (policy or legal) was this allowed? 

Answer: 

Ongoing CVE assistance for Mauritania as a pmi of the Trans Sahara Counterterrorism 

Partnership (TSCTP) was obligated prior to the beginning of FY 2019 and, therefore, not subject 

to the current TVPA restrictions. TVPA restrictions under the Presidential Memorandum only 

apply to the new obligation of certain types of foreign assistance during FY 2019 for the 

governments of countries listed as Tier 3 in the Department's 2018 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) 

report. 
196 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#94) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The FAA definition also explicitly states that NGO activities are excluded, but there have been 

numerous reports ofNGO programs being impacted by the presidential memorandum. What is 

the Department's legal rationale for what constitutes providing assistance to the 

government of a country? How is this interpretation being implemented in additional 

waiver decisions? What role, if any, does an NGO coordinated/supporting development 

program with local vs. national government play in this interpretation? 

Answer: 

The restriction under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) applies to 

assistance for the benefit of the government, regardless of the type of entity implementing the 

assistance. The State Department and USAID assess whether the restriction applies with respect 

to a particular program on a case-by-case basis. 
197 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#95) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Are NGO implementing partners affected by the presidential memorandum permitted to 

incur closeout costs for the responsible winding down of any relevant activities? 

Answer: 

Where an activity will not receive additional funding as a result of the restrictions under 

the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), implementing partners are generally permitted 

to incur closeout costs to allow for the responsible winding down of the activity. 
198 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#96) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

We have heard reports of organizations having to address questions about whether coffee was 

provided at program workshops where local government pmincrs were present in order to 

determine the nature of government support. How is the Department determining what 

activities constitute government support, particularly in the context ofNGO-run 

programs? 

Answer: 

The restriction under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) applies to 

assistance for the benefit of the government, regardless of the type of entity implementing the 

assistance. The State Department and USAID assess whether the restriction applies with respect 

to a particular program on a case-by-case basis. 
199 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#97) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Does your interpretation of what constitutes assistance to governments include assistance 

programs administered through NGOs directly to general populations, where the 

government does not participate in or receive any kind of financial or in-kind support? If 

so, why? Given the lack of direct support to a government in these instances, what is the 

Department's legal rationale for stopping or slowing these programs? 

Answer: 

The restriction under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) applies to 

assistance for the benefit of the government, regardless of the type of entity implementing the 

assistance. The State Department and USAID assess whether the restriction applies with respect 

to a particular program on a case-by-case basis. 
200 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#98) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

We have heard reports from numerous organizations that additional waivers are being considered 

on a sectoral basis with potentially different criteria across the sectors. For example, some 

PEPF AR funded programs are being granted waivers- and PEPF AR program models require 

coordination and some level of integration with Ministries ofl-lealth, local governments, and 

government hospitals. However, some education and civic engagement programs run through 

local civil society organizations without the involvement of local or national governments or 

schools- are being impacted. What is the explanation for this discrepancy in criteria for 

providing such waivers? 

Answer: 

In connection with the issuance of the November 29,2018, Presidential Memorandum, 

the Administration made clear that Departments and agencies should rely on available authorities 

to provide certain limited types of life-saving assistance in countries that did not receive waivers 

from the restrictions under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). It also made clear 

that Departments and agencies should implement the restrictions in a way that is mindful of the 

impact on people's lives who are served by our life-saving assistance, particularly vulnerable 

populations in greatest need. I have directed my leadership team to work with State Department 

and USAID bureaus to follow this approach. 
201 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#99) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What is the administration's position on addressing the spread of infectious diseases? Does 

it view the prevention of the spread of infectious diseases as in the US national interest? 

Answer: 

Infectious diseases present a risk to U.S. political, economic, and health security. It is in 

the national security interest of the United States to strengthen global health security and manage 

these risks. The U.S. government remains committed to preventing, detecting, and responding to 

infectious disease threats including through initiatives like the PEPFAR program and the 

Global Health Security Agenda. The United States utilizes a whole-of-government approach to 

address infectious disease threats- as outlined in the U.S. National Security Strategy, the U.S. 

National Biodefense Strategy, and the forthcoming U.S. Global Health Security Strategy. 
202 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#100) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

How bas the limited number of waivers in the Presidential Memorandum and the 

processing of additional waivers delayed obligations or disbursements? Please, identify the 

accounts, programs, activities and fiscal year of those funds. When are these funds 

expected to be obligated and disbursed? 

~: 

The Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) restrictions under the November 29, 

2018, Presidential Memorandum apply to the new obligation of certain types of foreign 

assistance during FY 2019 for the governments of countries listed as Tier 3 in the 2018 TIP 

report, regardless of the fiscal year of the funds. There is an ongoing process to consider certain 

limited cases in which it is in our foreign policy and national security interest to continue 

assistance that would be subject to the TVPA restrictions by relying on available authorities. 

look forward to providing you more information as additional decisions are made. 
203 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#101) 

Honse Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Are there additional waivers that have been prepared and arc awaiting review? 

Answer: 

I have directed my leadership team to work with State Department and USAID bureaus to 

explore the use of available authorities in certain limited cases where it is in our foreign policy 

and national security interest to continue assistance that would otherwise be su~ject to the 

Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) restrictions. That process is ongoing, and I look 

forward to providing you more information as additional decisions are made. 
204 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#102) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Some of the Tier 3 identified countries, including South Sudan and DRC, are also under ongoing 

foreign aid reviews. How have the lack of waivers impacted programs on the ground for 

countries under such reviews? 

~: 

Restrictions on U.S. assistance to the governments of Tier 3 countries serve as a 

diplomatic tool to urge action to meet the TVPA's minimum standards. A government's efforts 

to combat human trafficking is just one factor among many that are taken into account when 

reviewing how best to usc our foreign assistance resources to achieve our national security and 

foreign policy goals. We recognize the importance of implementing the TVP A foreign 

assistance restriction in a way that avoids significant adverse effects on vulnerable populations. 
205 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#103) 

House Committee on Foreign Affait·s 

March 27, 2019 

How does the administration plan to manage and improve proactive and timely 

communication around TIP designation/granting waivers in the future? 

Answer: 

The Department will work with relevant agencies to identify considerations relevant to 

the potential waiver of assistance restrictions for Tier 3 governments pursuant to the TVPA. The 

President will determine whether any waivers of the restriction would promote the purposes of 

the TVPA or would otherwise be in the U.S. national interest. The President's determinations 

regarding the imposition and waiver of the TVP A restriction for Tier 3 governments are 

transmitted to Congress and posted on the White House website. 
206 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#104) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What processes will be in place for issuing waivers following the Department's next annual 

TIP report and tier designations'! What are you doing to ensure that waiver process will be 

efficient, timely and transparent? 

Answer: 

The Department will work with relevant agencies to identify considerations relevant to 

the potential waiver of assistance restrictions for the governments of countries listed as Tier 3 in 

the 2019 Trafficking in Persons Report, following the transmission of the report to Congress. 

The President will determine whether any waivers of the restriction would promote the purposes 

of the TVPA or would otherwise be in the U.S. national interest. The Administration will take 

into full consideration the implications of such restrictions and justifications for any waivers. As 

with every year, the Department reviews the process leading to such decisions with a view 

toward improving the process going forward. 
207 

Questions for the Recm·d Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#lOS) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Please provide a list of State Department staff positions and associated responsibilities that 

are funded, in whole or in part, by a foreign government. 

There are five (5) U.S. Direct Hire State Department positions wholly funded by the 

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia pursuant to a Technical Cooperation Agreement (TCA) for critical 

infrastructure protection and public security capacity-building under section 573 (22 U.S.C. 

2349aa-2) and section 607 (22 U.S.C. 2357) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L. 

87-195). The TCA was signed on May 16,2008, and extended on January 16,2013. 

Currently, the Government of Saudi Arabia funds salaries and benefits for the following 

five positions covered by the TCA: 

U.S. Direct Hires Under Technical Cooperation Agreement with the Kingdom of Sandi 

Arabia 

Location T e Title 

Domestic 

Domestic 

Domestic 

Overseas, Saudi Arabia 

Overseas, Saudi Arabia 

Civil Service 

Civil Service 

Civil Service 

Foreign Service 

Foreign Service 

MANAGEMENT ANALYST 

DEPUTY UNIT CHIEF 

ATTORNEY ADVISOR (part time) 

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OFFICER 

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OFFICER 
208 

Question: 

Question for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#106) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

You held a telephone press briefing on March 18, 2019, that was focused on international 

religious freedom but made the briefing available only to faith-based media outlets. Did any 

element of the State Department create a transcript or any other recording or summary of 

the content from this on-the-record phone briefing? Which faiths were represented among 

the "faith-based" media outlets included in the call? How was participation in this call 

determined, and by whom? 

Answer: 

I have conducted numerous interviews in the past year with a variety of outlets and 

reporters, including those that regularly cover the Department as well as other media that 

typically do not have the opportunity to interview a Secretary of State. The Department posts 

transcripts of press briefings. The March 18 event was an interview with a select group of 

invited print journalists, not a press briefing. The Department does not normally publish 

transcripts of interviews with print journalists, as journalists do not always publish in full or at a 

certain time. This facilitates the ability of media outlets to usc material from such interviews at 

their discretion. 
209 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#107) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Please provide the following: The total number of security violations issued to Department 

employees in 2018, including the number of security violations broken down by Bureau 

and by Mission. The number of security violations committed by an employee with a 

history of one or more prior security violations. The number and nature of actions taken 

by the Department in response to security violations, including: disciplinary actions taken 

or criminal referrals; and the administration of remedial training in response to any 

security violation(s). 

Answer: 

In 2018, the Department adjudicated 28 security violations, some for incidents that 

occurred prior to 2018. Seven Depatiment employees who received security violations in 2018 

had received one or more prior violations. Thirteen employees who had committed security 

violations were referred to the Bureau of Human Resources (HR) and/or the Bureau of 

Diplomatic Security (DS) for appropriate action. The Department made no criminal referrals for 

these security violations and six cases remain open with HR to determine disciplinary 

action. We instituted a mandatory annual classification and information security course for all 

employees and contractors and administer remedial security training on a case-by-case basis. 
210 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#108) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What has been the Department's total cost of providing security for the Secretary of State 

by month in 2016,2017, and 2018? 

Answer: 

Total security costs depend on the Secretary of State. Historical costs expended for the 

Secretary's 24/7 Protective Detail arc as follows: $8.6 million (FY 2018); $9.5 million 

(fY 2017); and $14.8 million (FY 2016). Secretary Tillerson's annual at-home security cost was 

$3,116,225, with a one-time security countermeasures cost of$332,000. Secretary Kerry's 

annual at home security cost was $3,208,200, with a one-time security countermeasures cost of 

$225,000. Secretary Clinton had a one-time security countermeasures cost of $800 paid by State 

(USSS paid for her at-home security). Secretary Pompeo's at-home security cost is expected to 

be $1,618,879 annually, with a one-time security countermeasures cost of $274,796. 
211 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#109) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What entities at the Department of State and Department of Defense were responsible fm· 

m·ganizing the Secretary's housing arrangements on the military base? 

Answer: 

A number of entities at the Department of State were involved in reviewing arrangements 

related to the Secretary's housing on the military base, including the Bureau of Administration, 

the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and the Office of the Legal Adviser. We refer you to the 

Department of Defense (DOD) to answer your question concerning which DOD entities were 

responsible for organizing the Secretary's housing on the military base. 
212 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#110) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What month/year did the current Secretary move onto the military base? The State 

Department said the Secretary is paying fair market value. What is his per month cost to 

rent the home? How did the State Department assess fair market value in this case? 

Answer: 

The Secretary moved onto the military base in September 2018. The Secretary has his 

own personal residential lease agreement and the Department docs not pay his personal 

expenses. 
213 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#111) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

By what measures have security requirements related to the Secretary changed as a result 

of this move to housing on a military base? 

Answer: 

No physical or technical security requirements changed as a result of this move. As the 

Secretary moved onto a U.S. military base, DS reduced uniformed guard services by 25 percent. 
214 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#ll2) 

Honse Committee on Foreign Affairs 

Date of hearing, March 27, 2019 

Have you or your staff used WhatsApp or other non-government, third-party platforms to 

communicate with colleagues or foreign counterparts? If so, how do you maintain these 

communications for official records purposes? Arc you concerned about sensitive 

messages in non-U.S. government servers? 

Answer: 

At times Department staff use non-government, third-party platforms to conduct USG 

business. The Department's mandatory records management training and issued guidance makes 

clear that all employees have a responsibility to capture federal records into official USG 

systems. All employees or contractors who create or receive federal records on WhatsApp or 

other non-government, third-party platforms must: (I) copy an official electronic messaging 

account in the original transmission of the record; or (2) export and forward a complete copy of 

the record to his or her official electronic messaging account within 20 days. These messaging 

apps may not be used to transmit classified or sensitive information. 
215 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#113) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What policy guidance does this administration provide to staff about use of non-US Government 

systems- including electronic messaging apps- to conduct foreign relations? Does the State 

Department have a policy and practice of allowing use of these third-party platforms for 

communication? If so, does the State Department retain copies or recordings of the 

communications made by State Depmiment employees in the conduct of foreign relations on 

behalf of the United States? 

The Department's mandatory records management training and Department-wide issued 

guidance makes clear that all employees have a responsibility to capture federal records onto 

official USG systems. The Department currently allows the use of these third party platforms 

only in limited circumstances. Due to an increased demand to use these platforms in the conduct 

of the Department's mission, we are exploring the potential impacts of expanding the official use 

of these platforms. focusing first on our preservation requirements under the Federal Records 

Act. Department personnel who conduct any USG business on third-party platforms must export 

all federal records onto Department systems for preservation. 
216 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#114) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Mr. Secretary, on March 4, 2019, you received a joint letter from the Chairmen ofHFAC, COR, 

and HPSCI seeking records regarding President Trump's communications with President Putin; 

to date, the State Department has not furnished any of the requested records, including any 

created pursuant to its obligations under the Federal Records Act. When you were a member of 

Congress, you received documents from the Obama Administration of a nature almost identical 

to the ones sought in the March 4, 2019, letter. These included documents created before, 

during, and after calls that Secretary Clinton and President Obama had with foreign leadersincluding memoranda of conversations from the calls. What is the legal rationale for the State 

Department producing such records during the Obama Administration but withholding 

them during the Trump Administration? 

Answer: 

In response to your letter of March 4, 2019, we wrote to you on March 26 concerning this 

matter, and I refer you to that response. 
217 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#115) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March27,2019 

How much has the State Department spent on the Congressional Document Production 

Unit (CDP) since it was first established in 2015, on staff, document production, and other 

associated costs respectively? What source of funding was used, and under which 

authorities? How many FTEs are currently allocated to the CDP? How many of those are 

currently filled? How many documents have been produced to Congress by the CDP since 

January 3, 2019? Which committees have received these documents, ami how many 

documents have been provided to each committee? 

Answer: 

The Department has spent $3 million on staff and $5.1 million on document production 

and other associated costs- for a total of$8.1 million- on the Congressional Document 

Production branch (CDP) since it was established in 2015. Funding for the CDP comes from the 

Diplomatic Programs account. The CDP's activities are patt of the Department's routine 

operations. Ten FTEs are allocated to the CDP, of which five are currently filled. The CDP 

searches, collects, reviews, and organizes documents in response to Congressional requests. It 

does not itself provide documents directly to Congress. All document productions from the 

Department are transmitted via the Bureau of Legislative Affairs. 
218 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#116) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Please provide a list of all current Department employees at the rank of Deputy Assistant 

Secretary (DAS) or above who have been advised by the Office of the Legal Adviser's 

Office of Ethics and Financial Disclosures (L/EFD) that they must recuse themselves from 

involvement in particular matters or subjects while employed by the Department of State. 

For each such individual, please also provide: (1) a complete description of the terms of 

said recusal; (2) a description of any incidents in which the Department provided 

subsequent counseling, feedback, or any other advice to that individual regarding 

compliance with said rccusal; and (3) a description of any monitoring or reporting 

requirements associated with ensuring that such recusals are honored and adhered to. 

(Note: To the extent this information includes Personally Jdentiliable Information (Pll), please 

contact the Committee to make appropriate accommodations in order to ensure its protection.) 

Answer: 

Federal ethics rules do not require employees to notify the Ethics Office or to make a 

written record when they recuse from a particular matter. Therefore, the Department does not 

have a list responsive to this request. Ethics agreements document a commitment to avoid 

conflicts of interest, but they do not identify particular matters requiring recusaL Financial 

disclosure review provides an opportunity to discuss potential conflicts with senior employees, 

and the Ethics Oflice routinely advises employees when rccusal might be appropriate, but written 

records of an actual recusal decision are not generally required and are not centrally tracked. 

Compliance with the ethics rules, including recusal when appropriate, is a personal obligation of 

each Department employee. 
219 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#117) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

On January 3, 2018, the State Department reportedly revised the "public charge" provision of the 

Foreign Affairs Manual (9 FAM 302.8) to make it harder for immigrants to obtain visas if they 

or their families have used supplemental, non-cash benefits like SNAP and Medicaid. Since the 

FAM change went into effect, reports indicate that visa denials on public charge grounds have 

skyrocketed. There have also been reports that immigrants are turning down public benefits 

because of fear that they will face immigration penalties. Which officials or staff within the 

State Department were involved in the decision to revise the Foreign Affairs Manual? To 

what extent, and how, did State Department officials or staff consult with other federal 

agencies or offices, including the White House, before making this FAM revision? 

Answer: 

The Bureau of Consular Affairs' Visa Office made the revisions to the Foreign Affairs 

Manual guidance on the public charge visa ineligibility. The changes were pursuant to the 

President's March 6, 2017, Memorandum, "Implementing Immediate Heightened Screening and 

Vetting of Applications for Visas and Other Immigration Benefits, Ensuring Enforcement of All 

Laws for Entry into the United States, and Increasing Transparency among Departments and 

Agencies of the Federal Government and for the American People." Relevant elements of the 

Executive Branch and relevant offices within the Department of State were consulted prior to 

publication. 
220 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#118) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Does the State Department maintain data concerning the number of visa denials under the 

"public charge" ground of inadmissibility broken down by racial or ethnic group, consular 

office, country of origin, or any other categories? If so, please provide those disaggregated 

figures to the Committee. 

Answer: 

The Department maintains data associated with immigrant and nonimmigrant visa 

applicants found ineligible under public charge grounds. Attached are immigrant and 

nonimmigrant refusals under the public charge ground of inadmissibility aggregated by the 

nationality of the applicant and the post that adjudicated the visa. The Department does not have 

data related to the race or ethnicity of applicants refused under the public charge ground of 

inadmissibility as the Department does not solicit race or cthnicity information from visa 

applicants. This data represents refusals for FY 2017, FY 2018, and year-to-date for FY 2019. 
221 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Eliot Engel (#119) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Has the State Department or individual subcomponents or units of the Department, 

including individual consular offices, disseminated additional guidance, instructions, 

memoranda, training, or other information rega1·ding the application of the "public 

charge" ground of inadmissibility since January 20, 2017? If so, please provide those 

documents to the Committee. 

Answer: 

In 2018, the Department of State updated guidance on the public charge inadmissibility in 

the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM). Enclosed is a copy of9 FAM 302.8, Public Charge. 
222 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Michael McCaul (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What is your position on zero-based budgeting? Would you be open to its implementation? 

Answer: 

Zero-based budgeting (ZBB) can provide insights on the efficient delivery of government 

programs and services but relies on assumptions that are not consistently feasible in the current 

fiscal environment. ZBB assumes annual budgetary allocations are set at zero, meaning that no 

costs or activities are automatically recurred, and programs will need to recalculate I 00 percent 

of expenses in advance. While the Department seeks to apply such principles when establishing 

new programs, existing programs must account for considerable uncertainty in the timing of 

appropriations, as well as differing perspectives on priorities. When preparing the budget 

request, we conduct intensive reviews of accounts to ensure resources are well justified. 
223 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Brad Sherman (#l) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Will you support $1.5 million in funding for Voice of America to broadcast in the Sind hi 

language in Pakistan? 

Answer: 

This is an important area of engagement, which is why we have a substantial public 

diplomacy operation in Pakistan and why we have expanded our outreach in vernacular 

languages, including Sindhi. We regularly publicize U.S. initiatives in the Sindhi language. For 

example: Consulate Karachi's website is available in Sindhi, and the Consulate issues press 

releases and engages with the public via social media in Sindhi. We can certainly consider 

Sindhi in the input the Department provides for the U.S. Agency for Global Media's annual 

language review. 
224 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Brad Sherman (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Last month the Treasury Department announced new sanctions against two small Chinese firms 

for doing business with North Korea. A few hours later President Trump tweeted that he was 

rescinding those sanctions because, in the words of Sarah Sanders, "President Trump likes 

Chairman Kim." Then, reports emerged that President Trump's tweet was referring to larger 

sanctions the Treasury Department had prepared but not announced yet. Later, reports said 

President Trump had actually meant to rescind the two sanctions that had been announced but 

was convinced by administration officials not to do so. Can you confirm that there was a 

larger sanctions package on North Korea ready to go and commit to providing the 

Committee with its contents this week? 

Answer: 

We continue to be a leader in the global pressure campaign on the DPRK, backed by 

most of the world, including the UN Security Council, which unanimously passed all the UN 

Security Council Resolutions in 2017. We will continue to work with allies and partners and the 

interagency to implement and enforce our sanctions regime and combat DPRK sanctions 

evasion. It would be inappropriate to comment on internal deliberations on potential actions. 
225 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Brad Sherman (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Are you supportive of continued U.S. assistance to Nagorno-Karabakh, with a special focus 

on completing demining efforts and expanding our support to include health care and 

rehabilitation services? 

As of September 2018, HALO Trust had cleared 97.9 percent of the mined areas with 27 

known active minefields remaining. More than 125,000 people have benefited from the 

demining, which saves lives, prevents injuries, generates local jobs, and promotes economic 

rehabilitation. HALO Trust is currently conducting demining activities to clear known 

minefields as surveyed within Nagorno-Karabakh with $3.5 million in resources USAID 

provided last year. We will continue to assess the humanitarian needs in Nagorno-Karabakh and 

potential engagement. 
226 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Brad Sherman (#4) 

House Committee on Foreign Relations 

March 27, 2019 

Are you willing to work with Congress to help provide Armenia- a landlocked, blockaded 

nation of limited means- with the resources needed to support transitional programs for 

at-risk refugees, including short-term housing/rental assistance and social and economic 

integration initiatives? 

Answer: 

The Department of State, through the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration 

(PRM), supports vulnerable Syrian nationals of Armenian descent in Armenia, and our 

Embassy's Public Affairs Section's Democracy Commission supports local NGOs working with 

refugee communities. In FY 2018, PRM's contributions to international humanitarian 

organizations and funding to local and international NGOs operating in Armenia helped 

vulnerable Syrians integrate into Armenia by facilitating access to housing, jobs, education, legal 

assistance, and vocational training. PRM's regional funding to l.JNHCR also supports the 

strengthening of the government's asylum procedure and improving reception conditions. 
227 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Brad Sherman (#5) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Will you pledge to raise the gross human rights violations Sind his face in Pakistan in all 

your interactions with Pakistani officials? 

Answer: 

The State Department highlighted human rights violations against Sindhis in the 2018 

Human Rights Report, released in February, including reports ofkidnappings, political prisoners, 

and killings. We continue to raise these and other human rights issues in conversations with 

Pakistani officials at the highest levels, and the United States remains committed to working with 

the Government of Pakistan to improve the human rights situation there. 
228 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Scott Perry (#I) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What are the consequences for the United States and its national security interests of Israel 

losing control of the Golan Heights? In addition, what are the strategic implications this 

recognition has for the region and for the peace process? 

Answer: 

President Trump's decision to recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights was 

taken in full awareness that we cannot allow the Golan Heights to be controlled by the likes of 

the Syrian and Iranian regimes. We also cannot turn a blind eye to the threats emanating from a 

Syrian regime that engages in atrocities, or the threats posed by Iran and terrorist actors, 

including Hizballah, who seek to use the Golan Heights as a launching ground for attacks on 

Israel. Our recognition ofisraeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights will enhance Israel's 

security and strengthen our ability to pmtner with Israel in fighting common threats. This 

decision is of critical strategic and security importance to the stability of the Middle East. 
229 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Scott Perry (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

On March 25, the State Department released a report required by the Reciprocal Access to Tibet 

Act on the level of access Chinese authorities grant U.S. diplomats and officials, journalists, and 

tourists to Tibetan areas in China. This report documented outrageous actions taken by the 

Chinese government to keep American diplomats, journalists, and citizens out of Tibetincluding repeatedly denying requests from the US ambassador and other US officials. This 

report is important in showing that the United States is serious about opening access to Tibet for 

American citizens. It is no secret what the Communist Government of China is doing in Tibet. 

There is systematic suppression of Tibetan's rights to freedom of speech, press, association, and 

religion. There is a serious intention by the Communist Party to eliminate Tibet's culture and 

religion- including the destruction of monasteries and the prohibition of the Tibetan language. 

These efforts by the Communist Government only continue to intensify. How is the 

Administration planning to push back against the Communist government's continued 

suppression in Tibet and the restriction on access for Americans? Even broader, how is 

this administration pushing back against the CCP's efforts to subjugate all faiths beneath 

their Party line? 

Answer: 

This Administration is fully committed to implementing the Reciprocal Access to Tibet 

Act (RATA), and we are pressing Chinese authorities for Americans to have the same open 

access to China as the Chinese enjoy when in the United States. We raise concerns regularly 

with Chinese authorities about the lack of regular access to the Tibetan Autonomous Region 

(TAR) and other Tibetan areas for U.S. journalists, diplomats, academics, Tibetan-Americans, 

and others. We have urged China to end its campaign of repression against religious groups and 

its effot1s to "Sinicize" all religions, including Christians, Tibetan Buddhists, and Muslims, and 

to respect the rights of faith groups guaranteed in the Chinese constitution. 
230 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Scott Perry (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

A recent report by the Senate Permanent Committee on Investigations found that the Department 

of State docs not collect information on the Exchange Visa Program (J-1) related to Confucius 

Institutes or Han ban. As such, the Department docs not know the number of Chinese nationals 

in the United States associated with the Confucius Institute program. Since 2017, the State 

Department issued four Letters of Concern to U.S. schools lor inappropriately using J-1 visas 

related to Confucius Institutes. The State Department revoked 32 visas for Confucius Institute 

exchange visitors following reviews at two of the schools that received letters. In 2019, the State 

Department is expected to conduct four field site reviews of Confucius Institutes for proper visa 

use. Does the Department have any additional plans to begin tracking the distribution of J1 visas as a means to understand how many Chinese nationals are in the United States for 

the purpose of a Confucius Institute or classroom? 

Answer: 

The Department takes seriously its responsibility for monitoring the Exchange Visitor 

Program, including the exchange visitors who enter the United States on J-1 visas. The bureau 

of Educational and Cultural Affairs assesses information on exchange visitors associated with 

Confucius Institutes when the U.S sponsoring institution itself is part of a larger monitoring 

review. The Department has increased its monitoring of these sponsors, including thorough 

electronic reviews and intensive field site reviews, to confirm correct use of exchange visitor 

visas. 
231 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Scott Perry (#4) 

House Committee on I<'oreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In accordance with Article 27.3 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR), a 

properly designated diplomatic pouch should not be opened, either physically or electronically, 

or detained. The Government of China has gone against this international norm in preventing the 

United States from sending needed repair parts to our diplomatic mission in Beijing. ln contrast, 

the United States government has allowed China to bring in material unimpeded for construction 

of an embassy residence on Connecticut Avenue. Is there a provision in any agreement that 

the Government of China has signed that prohibits the Chinese government from bringing 

in construction material under diplomatic pouch status for their mission in the United 

States? 

Answer: 

The People's Republic of China (PRC) imposes size and weight limitations on all 

diplomatic pouches entering the PRC. All diplomatic pouches entering the PRC must be no 

larger than one cubic meter with a weight limit of I 00 kilograms per piece and 1000 kilograms 

per shipment. The Department does not believe such restrictions are supported by the VCDR. 

As a matter of reciprocity, per diplomatic note sent to the PRC in 2004, the Department of State 

imposed equivalent restrictions on PRC diplomatic pouches entering the United States. Chinese 

construction materials for the Connecticut Avenue project arc imported under the Conditions of 

Construction Agreement II (which docs not implicate the pouch, but rather diplomatic cargo). 
232 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretat-y of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Albio Sires (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

I ask that you provide the committee with a written summary of the current status of 

FY 2018 foreign assistance funds for Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala- detailing the 

current status and planned schedule for obligating and expending the funds appropriated 

by Congress. 

Answer: 

U.S. law requires the Department to submit spend plans to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations for the U.S. Strategy for Engagement in Central America and the 

Central America Regional Security Initiative, as well as several certifications and reports prior to 

the notification and obligation of funding that benefits the Northern Triangle countries. As of the 

date of this Congressional hearing, the Department had submitted the 25 percent certification for 

all three countries on September 4, 2018, and notified funding for FY 2018 Foreign Military 

Financing International Military Education and Training benefitting these countries. 
233 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Albio Sires (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What is the rationale for requesting just $6 million for Nicaragua, given that a majority of 

U.S. assistance bas supported civil society and independent media? What message does 

this send to those Nicaraguans risking their lives in pursuit of a freer and more democratic 

society? 

Answer: 

The Administration remains committed to supporting the people of Nicaragua in their call 

for freedom, justice, democracy, and change. Since the beginning of the political crisis, and in 

close coordination with the Congress, the United States has mobilized more than $25 million in 

FY 2017 and FY 2018 resources to support civil society and independent media in Nicaragua. 

While there is a reduction from appropriated levels due to an overall constrained budget 

environment, the bilateral request for $6 million for Nicaragua in FY 2020 affirms the 

Administration's priority to suppott civil society engagement and independent media. 
234 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Albio Sires (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What is the rationale for cutting U.S. democracy assistance to Cuba to just $6 million in 

this year's request? 

Answer: 

Foreign assistance was reduced globally, and Cuba was not singled out for reductions. 

The Administration's FY 2020 request provides a sustainable level of democracy support. 

Advancing democracy and human rights in Cuba remains the Administration's priority through 

U.S. foreign assistance to Cuba, and we are committed to ensuring that U.S. democracy 

assistance in Cuba achieves results. 
235 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Albio Sires (#4) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The Administration has requested authority in its budget to transfer up to $500 million to support 

a democratic transition in Venezuela. What are the specific criteria you will use and what 

conditions must be met to certify that these funds should be disbursed? What type of 

support would this assistance entail and from what accounts would the aid be transferred? 

Answer: 

The Administration's FY 2020 request for assistance to Venezuela reflects the need for 

flexibility and agility given the rapidly changing situation in Venezuela. I look forward to 

consulting with Members of Congress on the situation, our FY 2020 request, and the most 

appropriate use of funds to support a democratic transition in Venezuela. The Department is 

working to ensure we have an effective response when the Maduro usurpation ends, as the road 

to rebuilding Venezuela will be long and difficult. We continue supporting the Venezuelan 

people's efforts to ensure Maduro's departure as well as addressing their humanitarian needs. 

Congress plays a critical role in this process, and I look forward to consulting with you more in 

the future. 
236 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Albio Sires (#5) 

House Committee ou Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Since 2010, the Chinese Government has suspended the official dialogue with the Dalai Lama's 

representatives to resolve the Tibetan issue. In your written response to a question on Tibet 

during your confirmation hearing in April2018, you said you "will express publicly, and at the 

highest levels of government, that Chinese authorities need to engage in meaningful and direct 

dialogue with the Dalai Lama or his representatives, without preconditions, to lower tensions and 

resolve differences." Have you done so since then, and if so, what was the response from the 

Chinese authorities? 

U.S. officials repeatedly raise Tibetan issues with Chinese government counterparts at 

multiple levels. We have pressed Chinese authorities to resume a dialogue with the Dalai Lama 

or his representatives without preconditions to engage in meaningful and direct dialogue to lead 

to a settlement that resolves differences. The Government of China, however, continues to 

characterize the Dalai Lama as a ;;separatist." We believe that Tibetan communities, like all 

faith communities, should be able to select, educate, and venerate their religious leaders without 

government interference. 
237 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Albio Sires (#6) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Since 2010, the Chinese Government has suspended the official dialogue with the Dalai Lama's 

representatives to resolve the Tibetan issue. In your written response to a question on Tibet 

during your confirmation hearing in April 2018, you said you "will express publicly, and at the 

highest levels of government, that Chinese authorities need to engage in meaningful and direct 

dialogue with the Dalai Lama or his representatives, without preconditions, to lower tensions and 

resolve differences." Since 1997, all U.S. Presidents have publicly challenged the sitting 

Chinese President to negotiate with the Dalai Lama or his representative to find a lasting solution 

to the Tibetan issue. Why has President Trump not done so yet during the U.S.-China 

Summits held to date? 

The Administration is fully committed to implementing the Tibetan Policy Act. We urge 

Chinese authorities to resume a dialogue with the Dalai Lama or his representatives without 

preconditions and engage in meaningful and direct dialogue to lead to a settlement that resolves 

differences. U.S. government officials, including myself, the Vice President, the Ambassador-atLarge for International Religious Freedom, and officials from the U.S. Consulate General in 

Chengdu and U.S. Embassy in Beijing continue efforts to establish conditions that lead to that 

end. We continue to urge China to respect the human rights of Tibetans as well as their 

religious, cultural, and linguistic identity. 
238 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Albio Sires (#7) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

Mareh 27,2019 

As required by RAT A, have you already identified, and accordingly started to deny visas to 

the United States, to the Chinese officials responsible for creating and implementing these 

restrictive policies? 

Answer: 

We are fully committed to implementing the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act (RATA) in 

the timeframe prescribed by Congress. We are determining how to effectively press Chinese 

authorities for reciprocity with respect to the open access that China and many other countries 

enjoy in the United States, and how to identify those officials who arc substantially involved in 

the formulation or execution of policies related to restricting access to Tibet. We arc committed 

to working closely with Congress in pursuit of our shared goal ensuring that Americans have full 

access to China, including the Tibetan Autonomous Region and other Tibetan areas. 
239 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Tim Burchett (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Cultural Exchange programs are an important tool to showcase American values with young 

people from other countries. I understand that some of these programs expose program 

participants to American entrepreneurship, including training on how to start businesses in their 

home countries. Can you provide examples to the Committee of how the Department is 

supporting such initiatives and offer some examples of their successes, including in the 

Summer Work Travel program? 

Answer: 

The State Department has a variety of exchange programs that promote entrepreneurship, 

including the Summer Work Travel program, which provides thousands of participants first-hand 

experience with American businesses. Another example is the Young Leaders of the Americas 

Initiative (YLAI), which has brought approximately 250 young entrepreneurs from Latin 

America and the Caribbean to the United States for fellowships with American small businesses, 

strengthening their entrepreneurial and leadership skills. Evaluations indicate 78 percent of 

YLAI fellows expanded their market after the program, while 57 percent increased revenue. 
240 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative William Keating (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What are you doing to ensure the Government of Russia is respecting [Mr. Whelan's) 

rights under international law? How is the U.S. Embassy working with the Russian 

government to ensure Mr. Whelan is able to secure independent legal counsel, sign 

necessary legal documents, and discuss his case with U.S. officials at his discretion? 

Answer: 

Ambassador Huntsman and his team consistently raise Mr. Whelan's case with Russian 

authorities. The U.S. Embassy in Moscow and the U.S. Department of State in 

Washington, D.C., urge Russian officials to guarantee a transparent judicial process without 

undue delay. U.S. consular officials visit Mr. Whelan monthly to monitor and ensure his health 

and welfare. The embassy continues to press Russian officials for unrestricted consular visits to 

include permitting Mr. Whelan to communicate with consular officers to discuss his case freely 

and without obstruction from Russian authorities. The embassy also continues to advocate for 

his ability to sign essential documents. 
241 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative William Keating (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

How has the Department worked toward the release of any previous American detainees, 

hostages, arrests, and prisoners in Russian custody'! What type of U.S. intervention or 

dialogue took place during their detention, and what was the outcome for the detainees? 

Answer: 

U.S. consular officials assist detained U.S. citizens in Russia by conducting regular 

consular visits to monitor their health and welfare, providing information on legal resources, 

facilitating communication between the detained citizen and his or her family, and pressing 

Russian officials to guarantee a fair and transparent judicial process. Due to privacy 

considerations, the Department of State cannot provide details about specific cases, but in 

general, outcomes of detentions in Russia vary widely due to the range of criminal charges and 

differences in individual case circumstances and judicial processes. 
242 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicillinc (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

As Special Representative for Venezuela Elliott Abrams confirmed, there is no current statutory 

authorization for a military intervention in Venezuela. Is the Administration currently 

planning any military action against Venezuela? Will the Administration honor the 

Constitution and seck Congressional authorization for any military engagement? 

Answer: 

The President has been very clear that all options are on the table. Any action with 

respect to Venezuela, whether it's military action or action otherwise, will be in full compliance 

with U.S. law. This Administration will uphold the Constitution. The United States stands with 

interim President Juan Guaid6, the democratically elected national assembly, and the people of 

Venezuela as they peacefully restore constitutional order to their country. We continue to apply 

diplomatic and economic pressure to encourage Nicolas Maduro to accept a peaceful and 

democratic solution to the crisis in Venezuela. 
243 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

As Special Representative for Venezuela Elliott Abrams confirmed, there is no current statutory 

authorization for a military intervention in Venezuela. What's the plan ifMaduro stays in the 

short, medium, and even long term? If Maduro goes, what is the plan for supporting a 

democratic transition in Venezuela and longer-term rebuilding of the country? 

Answer: 

When Maduro leaves, the Guaid6 interim government will find the U.S. and the 

international community ready to assist. We are supporting the people of Venezuela by 

providing emergency humanitarian assistance and full diplomatic support so they can restore 

democracy and stability to their country. We are seeking to curtail corrupt actions of members 

of the Maduro regime who have deprived the Venezuelan people of their liberty, leveraging 

bilateral and multilateral partnerships to raise the cost of repression. The U.S. and international 

community are working with the democratically elected national assembly, civil society, and 

others to re-build democratic institutions and economic capacity, in preparation for a long-term 

peaceful democratic transition. 
244 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

In August, the Administration announced it would cut offfunding to the UN Relief and Works 

Agency for Palestine- UNRWA, claiming that the UN body- which provides a lifeline and 

truly vital assistance- needs reform. Your spokeswoman pledged then: "The United States will 

intensify dialogue with the United Nations, host governments, and international stakeholders 

about new models and new approaches, which may include direct bilateral assistance from the 

United States and other partners, that can provide today's Palestinian children with a more 

durable and dependable path towards a brighter tomorrow." Who has the Administration 

spoken to as part of this intensified dialogue? What concrete steps has the United States 

taken and what specific reforms are you working on? 

The Administration has made it clear to key host country governments that we are ready 

to explore how the United States can assist them in assuming responsibility for UN Relief and 

Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) services, or transitioning 

those services to other international or local non-governmental organizations as appropriate. We 

believe that UNRWA 's business model, which is tied to an endlessly and exponentially 

expanding community of beneficiaries, is unsustainable. Palestinians deserve better than a 

service provision model that operates in permanent crisis mode. 
245 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#4) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In August, the Administration announced it would cut off funding to the UN Relief and Works 

Agency for Palestine- UNRWA, claiming that the UN body- which provides a lifeline and 

truly vital assistance- needs reform. Your spokeswoman pledged then: "The United States will 

intensify dialogue with the United Nations, host governments, and international stakeholders 

about new models and new approaches, which may include direct bilateral assistance from the 

United States and other partners, that can provide today's Palestinian children with a more 

durable and dependable path towards a brighter tomorrow:' Have any other countries signed 

on to any specific proposals the Administration has made? 

Answer: 

We continue to consult with key host country governments on how the United States can 

assist them in assuming responsibility for UNRWA services, or transitioning those services to 

other international or local non-governmental organizations as appropriate. While we have yet to 

see an UNRWA host government take steps to start this transition, we believe that the 

unsustainability ofUNRWA's business model, which is tied to an endlessly and exponentially 

expanding community of beneficiaries, mandates a new approach. 
246 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#5) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

In August, the Administration announced it would cut off funding to the UN Relief and Works 

Agency for Palestine- UNRWA, claiming that the UN body- which provides a lifeline and 

truly vital assistance- needs reform. Your spokeswoman pledged then: "The United States will 

intensify dialogue with the United Nations, host governments, and international stakeholders 

about new models and new approaches, which may include direct bilateral assistance from the 

United States and other partners, that can provide today's Palestinian children with a more 

durable and dependable path towards a brighter tomorrow." What specific reforms arc you 

seeking to UNRWA? Has the Administration submitted any specific reforms to the UN? 

To UNRWA? 

Answer: 

For years, the United States has urged UNRWA to seek out new voluntary funding 

streams, increase financial burden sharing among donors, and find ways to reduce expenditures. 

We reiterated this when we made our final $60 million contribution to UNRWA in January 2018, 

and communicated the need to institute such reforms directly to UNRWA and the UN, as well as 

to the regional and international stakeholders who make up UNRW A's largest contributors. 

While several donors did provide new or increased contributions to UNRWA in 2018, UNRWA 

continues to operate in crisis mode with its unsustainable business model. 
247 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#6) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Around the globe, LGBTI people have been targeted, rounded up, tortured, and even killed, just 

for being who they are. We've seen it in Chechnya, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Bangladesh 

and other places. While I was pleased to see your statement last year that the U.S. "opposes 

criminalization, violence and serious acts of discrimination" against LGBTI persons, the U.S. 

refused to join a recent statement delivered to the United Nations Human Rights Council calling 

for the perpetrators of violence in Chechnya to be held accountable. Why did the U.S. not join 

over 30 other nations in signing the recent joint statement to the U.N. Human Rights 

Council calling for a thorough investigation into the anti-LGBTI crimes being perpetrated 

in Chechnya? 

The referenced statement was made during the 40th Session of the UN Human Rights 

Council, from which the U.S. withdrew in June 2018. Consistent with our withdrawal, the U.S. 

is not participating in any UN Human Rights Council sessions, including by signing on to or 

aligning with any resolutions or statements pertaining to those sessions. We continue to work to 

advance human rights at the UN and in regional fora, such as the Organization for Security and 

Cooperation in Europe, where we joined 16 countries in invoking the "Moscow Mechanism" 

against Russia for allegations of human rights violations and abuses in Chechnya, including 

against LGBTI persons. We continue to press Russia to bring those responsible to justice. 
248 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#7) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Around the globe, LGBT! people have been targeted, rounded up, tortured, and even killed, just 

for being who they are. We've seen it in Chechnya, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Bangladesh 

and other places. While I was pleased to see your statement last year that the U.S. "opposes 

criminalization, violence and serious acts of discrimination" against LGBTl persons, the U.S. 

refused to join a recent statement delivered to the United Nations Human Rights Council calling 

for the perpetrators of violence in Chechnya to be held accountable. Will you condemn the 

ongoing anti-LGBTI crimes happening in Chechnya and commit to helping LGBTI people 

in Chechnya, Egypt and other countries to ensure they are not targeted for abuse? 

Answer: 

Under my leadership, the Department has been clear and consistent in affirming that 

human rights are universal, and that no one should face violence, criminalization, or 

discrimination in areas such as employment, housing, and provision of government services 

because of their LGBTI status. We will continue to stand up and speak out in support of the 

human rights and fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons in all corners of the globe, including 

in Chechnya and Egypt, and press to hold perpetrators of human rights violations and abuses to 

account. 
249 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicillinc (#8) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Around the globe, LGBTI people have been targeted, rounded up;tortured and even killed, just 

for being who they are. We've seen it in Chechnya, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Bangladesh 

and other places. While I was pleased to see your statement last year that the U.S. "opposes 

criminalization, violence and serious acts of discrimination" against LGBTI persons, the U.S. 

refused to join a recent statement delivered to the United Nations Human Rights Council calling 

for the perpetrators of violence in Chechnya to be held accountable. Do you pledge to continue 

to support State Department programming aimed at meeting emergency needs of human 

rights defenders? 

Answer: 

Absolutely. The Department continues to provide strong U.S. programmatic and 

emergency support for LGBTI human rights defenders and civil society organizations working to 

counter violence, severe discrimination, and criminalization of LGBTI conduct or status. 
250 

Question: 

Question for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilliue (#9) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

On March 18, the Secretary briefed members of the press including only faith-based media. 

a. What criteria did the Department use to determine which outlets were allowed to 

participate? b. Was the State Department Press Corps barred from this briefing? c. Did 

your press office release the transcript? d. Why did you depart from the practice of 

releasing transcripts of all press briefings? e. Will you commit to releasing transcripts of 

all on-the-record briefings you conduct? 

Answer: 

The Department posts transcripts of press briefings. However, the March 18 event was 

not a press briefing. It was an interview with a select group of invited print journalists. The 

Department does not typically publish transcripts of interviews with print journalists. The 

Department remains committed to the principles of transparency and press freedom. We do our 

utmost to support the work of the journalists who cover the Department. Since I became 

Secretary of State, I have actively engaged with the media and supported increased access to me 

and other senior officials. 
251 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#10) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In May of last year, you presented what you called a New Iran Strategy, laying out J 2 "very 

basic requirements" that included: "Iran must declare to the IAEA a full account of the prior 

military dimensions of its nuclear program and permanently and verifiably abandon such work". 

Has that happened? What steps arc you taking to achieve that goal? 

Answer: 

The Trump Administration is bringing unprecedented pressure on Iran to end its 

destabilizing conduct while denying Iran all pathways to a nuclear weapon. We will continue to 

impose maximum pressure on the Iranian regime until it changes its malign behavior and returns 

to the negotiating table to conclude a comprehensive deal. As I outlined last May, such a deal 

must include a declaration to the JAEA providing a full account of the prior military dimensions 

of Iran's nuclear program. Iran must cooperate fully with the IAEA, including by providing 

unqualified access to any location requested by the IAEA. 
252 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#11) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

ln May of last year, you presented what you called a New Iran Strategy, laying out 12 "very 

basic requirements" that included: "Iran must stop enrichment and never pursue plutonium 

reprocessing." Has that happened? What steps have been taken? 

Answer: 

The Trump Administration is bringing unprecedented pressure on Iran to end its 

destabilizing conduct while denying Iran all pathways to a nuclear weapon. We will continue to 

impose maximum pressure on the Iranian regime until it changes its malign behavior and returns 

to the negotiating table to conclude a comprehensive deal. As I outlined last May, such a deal 

must include stopping uranium enrichment and preventing plutonium reprocessing. 
253 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#12) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In May of last year, you presented what you called a New Iran Strategy, laying out 12 "very 

basic requirements" that included: "Iran must end its proliferation of ballistic missiles .. . "Has 

it? What steps have been taken? 

~: 

The United States is using a variety of multilateral and unilateral tools to address Iran's 

ballistic missile programs and proliferation activities. We routinely work with other 

governments to interdict missile-related transfers to or from Iran and to target Iranian missile 

proliferation activities in third countries. The United States uses participation in the Missile 

Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and the Hague Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile 

Proliferation (J-JCOC) to raise awareness of Iran's missile development programs and press 

countries to take steps to impede Iran's acquisition or proliferation of missile technology. We 

continue to use our sanctions authorities to penalize entities involved in Iranian missile-related 

procurement and proliferation. 
254 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#13) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In May of last year, you presented what you called a New Iran Strategy, laying out 12 "very 

basic requirements" that included: Iran must release all U.S. citizens." Have they? 

Answer: 

The return of U.S. citizens wrongfully detained abroad remains a top priority for this 

Administration. Sadly, none of the U.S. citizens wrongfully detained or missing in Iran has yet 

been released. Our team, led by Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage AtTairs Robert O'Brien, 

continues to work diligently on these cases to bring our citizens home. We also recently enlisted 

the support of the international community through the creation of a working group on wrongful 

detainees and hostages, wbich held its first meeting in February as part of the Warsaw 

ministerial. 
255 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#14) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

In May of last year, you presented what you called a New Iran Strategy, laying out 12 "very 

basic requirements" that included: "Iran must end support to Middle East terrorist groups." Has 

it? 

Answer: 

Iran remains the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, providing nearly $1 billion to 

designated terrorist organizations annually, including Hizballah, l-lamas, Palestinian Islamic 

Jihad, Kata'ib Hizballah in Iraq, and AI Ashtar Brigades in Bahrain. Iran also continues to 

directly engage in terrorist activity using state institutions including the Islamic Revolutionary 

Guard Corps (lRGC) and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). The regime's 

support of terrorism intensified conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon, and supports 

attacks against Israel. This Administration has enacted the toughest sanctions ever imposed on 

the Iranian regime to deprive it of vital revenue to export terror around the world. 
256 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#15) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

In May of last year, you presented what you called a New Iran Strategy, laying out 12 "very 

basic requirements" that included: "Iran must end its military support for the Houthi militia ... in 

Yemen." Has Iran done that? 

Answer: 

In Yemen, Iran continues to support the Houthis by providing military equipment, 

funding, and training. The Houthis use this equipment and assistance to attack vessels in vital 

Red Sea shipping lanes, launch ground attacks into Saudi territory, and fire ballistic missiles into 

Saudi Arabia. We work in close coordination with the UN and the international community to 

hold countries, Iran included, accountable to arms embargo provisions of UN Security Council 

Resolution (UNSCR) 2216, as well as to UNSCR 2231 to prevent the supply, sale, or transfer of 

arms from Iran. We continue to support comprehensive peace negotiations under the auspices of 

the UN and support the UN Special Envoy to Yemen's efforts to restart talks among parties. 
257 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#16) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

In May of last year, you presented what you called a New Iran Strategy, laying out 12 "very 

basic requirements" that included: "Iran must end its threatening behavior against its neighbors." 

Has that happened? 

~: 

The Iranian regime has taken advantage of regional conflicts and instability to 

aggressively expand its regional influence and threaten its neighbors. The Administration's 

strategy of maximum pressure, including enactment of the most robust sanctions to date, is 

designed to neutralize and counter the threats Iran poses to its neighbors, particularly Iran's 

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Our sanctions are draining Iran's proxies of sufficient 

revenue to spread terror and militancy. In March, for example, Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of 

Hizballah, publicly appealed for donations for the first time ever. 
258 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#l7) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

There is compelling evidence that the Burmese military committed ethnic cleansing, crimes 

against humanity, and genocide against the Rohingya, Muslim minority population in Burma. 

Last year, the United Nations appointed Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on 

Myanmar called for an investigation and prosecution of Myanmar's Commander-in-Chief for 

genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Last year, Congress appropriated $1.5 

million dollars for the State Department to conduct an evidence documentation report to make a 

legal determination on what crimes took place. But the State Department released the report 

without a legal determination, and press reports indicate that you decided not to pursue a 

legal determination even though one was recommended to you by the Department. Why 

did you ignore the recommendations of your own department and not pursue a legal 

determination? 

Answer: 

I am deeply concerned about the Burmese military's extensive, horrific human rights 

violations and abuses against the Rohingya. To establish a comprehensive understanding of the 

human rights abuses committed in Rakhine State, the Department supported a large-scale 

documentation project in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. The report clarified the extent and severity 

of the abuses, and the underlying information and findings will help inform our decisions as we 

seek accountability in Burma. Determinations that certain acts may amount to genocide, crimes 

against humanity, or ethnic cleansing, are not made in all cases in which such acts may have 

been committed; they depend on our assessment of the facts and consequences of such 

determinations in each context. 
259 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#18) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Last year, Congress appropriated $1.5 million dollars for the State Department to conduct an 

evidence documentation report to make a legal determination on what crimes took place. But the 

State Department released the report without a legal determination, and press reports indicate 

that you decided not to pursue a legal determination even though one was recommended to you 

by the Department. We know that the gross human rights violations were committed in 

2017 by members of the Burmese military when the Rohingya were raped, tortured, 

burned, and killed. So I ask you a simple question: yes or no, do you believe that the 

crimes committed were crimes against humanity? Do you think that there is evidence 

pointing to the possibility these crimes meet the legal standard of genocide? 

Answer: 

I am deeply concerned about the Burmese military's extensive, horrific human rights 

violations and abuses against the Rohingya and the need for accountability. To establish a 

comprehensive understanding of the human rights abuses committed in Rakhine State, the 

Department supported a large-scale documentation project in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. The 

report clarified the extent and severity of the abuses, and the underlying information and findings 

will help inform our decisions as we seek accountability in Burma. Determinations that cettain 

acts may amount to genocide, crimes against humanity, or ethnic cleansing, are not made in all 

cases in which such acts may have been committed; they depend on our assessment of the facts 

and consequences of such determinations in each context. 
260 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#19) 

Honse Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March27,2019 

Last year, Congress appropriated $1.5 million dollars for the State Department to conduct an 

evidence documentation report to make a legal determination on what crimes took place. But the 

State Department released the report without a legal determination, and press reports indicate 

that you decided not to pursue a legal determination even though one was recommended to you 

by the Department. Ethnic cleansing is not a term that is found in any U.S. national law or 

international law. Former Secretary Tillerson also called it "crimes against humanity" on 

November 15, 2017 in a press conference with Aung San Suu Kyi in Burma. Does the 

Department stand by Secretary Tillerson's words today? 

~: 

I am deeply concerned about the Burmese military's extensive, horrific human rights 

violations and abuses against the Rohingya. Determinations that certain acts may amount to 

genocide, crimes against humanity, or ethnic cleansing, are not made in all cases in which such 

acts may have been committed; they depend on our assessment of the facts and consequences of 

such determinations in each context. 
261 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative David Cicilline (#20) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Last year, Congress appropriated $1.5 million dollars tor the State Department to conduct an 

evidence documentation report to make a legal determination on what crimes took place. But the 

State Department released the report without a legal determination, and press reports indicate 

that you decided not to pursue a legal determination even though one was recommended to you 

by the Department. A crimes against humanity determination is important under human rights 

law and international law it could support accountability and help convict and seek justice 

against those who committed such crime. The world looks to the United States to be a leader on 

human rights leader- when we act others follow. A crimes against humanity or genocide 

determination could galvanize the international community and build support for holding senior 

military officials accountable- whether it be through sanctions or international justice 

mechanisms. If the U.S. doesn't show leadership on this issue, what signal does this send to 

the rest of the world? 

Answer: 

The United States has been the largest single donor to address the humanitarian crisis 

stemming from northern Rakhine State; our humanitarian assistance has exceeded $494 million. 

The State Department supported a large-scale documentation project in Cox's Bazar, 

Bangladesh, to establish a comprehensive understanding of the human rights abuses committed 

in Rakhine State, Burma. The report made clear the extent and severity of the abuses that were 

committed, and the underlying information and findings assist in informing the decisions that I 

and my team make as the U.S. government continues to seek to advance accountability in 

Burma. 
262 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

I remain concerned over the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and 

the possibility of a broader pandemic reaching our shores. The State Department plays an 

important role in responding both to the current Ebola outbreak and a possible pandemic. In the 

event of a health emergency or high consequence biological event, what are the specific 

criteria and plan to deploy U.S. personnel? How will the State Department work with 

other parts of the U.S. government to facilitate the deployment of these personnel? If you 

cannot share those details in great specificity, do such criteria and plan exist and what 

office at the State Department is responsible for its origination and update? 

Answer: 

Immediately following confirmation of the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of 

Congo (DRC) in August 2018, the U.S. government provided technical assistance and other 

support for DRC-Ied response efforts, in close collaboration with the World Health Organization. 

Every decision regarding the deployment of USG personnel during health emergencies is made 

on a case-by-case basis and in coordination with the interagency and Chiefs of Mission, who 

have authority over the personnel deployed in-country. The security of these personnel is a 

critical component of this decision-making process, along with the scope of the health 

emergency, ability to affect its trajectory, and political and economic conditions. 
263 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

How are Chiefs of Mission engaged in Global Health Security? Do missions and embassies 

have protocols in place to respond and deal with naturally occurring pandemics and 

deliberate events? 

Answer: 

Chiefs of Mission usc a broad array of diplomatic tools to engage on global health 

security, including direct bilateral engagement with host country officials, messaging through the 

media, and outreach to relevant civil society and private sector actors. The Globalllcalth 

Security Agenda is a key mechanism through which Chiefs of Mission promote their 

host- nation's capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease. Each mission or 

embassy has in place an Emergency Action Plan with detailed protocols for response to naturally 

occurring or deliberate events. 
264 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

I remain concerned over the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and 

the possibility of a broader pandemic reaching our shores. The State Department plays an 

important role in responding both to the current Ebola outbreak and a possible pandemic. What 

are the implications for health security of vaccine development for addressing other threats 

from other emerging infectious diseases- be they on the DHS Material Threats list or the 

World Health Organization's Priority Pathogen's list? Should developing vaccines for 

other emerging diseases like Nipah, MERS, or Lassa Fever be a high priority for the 

United States and other countries? Are the right efforts in place and making progress 

toward development of vaccines for these emerging threats be it U.S. Government work 

directly or in partnership with other countries? 

Answer: 

In today's globally connected world, outbreaks of infectious disease have the potential to 

kill millions, cost billions of dollars in GDP, and greatly disrupt travel and trade. The 

U.S. National Biodcfense Strategy (NBS) outlines a comprehensive approach to address natural, 

accidental, and intentional biological threats. A key pillar of the NBS is to accelerate research 

and development of vaccines. Vaccines are one of the most cost-effective public health 

interventions and are a foundation of a well-functioning health system. The U.S. government, 

including the Department of State, supports the development and implementation of international 

processes to facilitate the development, production, and distribution of vaccines and therapeutics. 
265 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#4) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What is the current status of these CDC positions created through the NSDD 38 process? 

Does the State Department have a plan to sustain these positions, even if they may be 

unfilled, to ensure the United States can respond to future high consequence health events? 

How does the State Department coordinate with CDC and HHS to fill these positions? 

Answer: 

The Department of State coordinates closely with the Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS) on issues related to global health security, including the Global Health Security 

Agenda, to ensure the best possible preparedness for any high consequence health event. Thisrequires aligning resources with shifting needs and priorities. The Center for Disease Control 

and Prevention and HHS are best positioned to discuss the details of these staffing decisions. 
266 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#5) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

The State Department stated it would complete a second review of the Mexico City Policy, also 

known as the global gag rule, by the end of2018, yet we are still waiting on that report. Your 

first report admitted you did not have enough data to properly evaluate the impacts of the 

administration's initial expansion of the policy. Last week, you announced a further expansion 

of the policy. Recent research from civil society groups indicates the current global gag rule is 

disrupting health care services, weakening civil society, and halting national policy progress on 

health and human rights. How are you evaluating the impact of the global gag rule on 

service delivery? 

Answer: 

We have worked closely with our interagency partners to implement the Protecting Life 

in Global Health Assistance policy, examine progress in carrying it out, and monitor its effects. 

The six-month review released in February 2018 called for further analysis when more 

experience would enable a more thorough examination. The Department of State is working 

with US AID and interagency partners to complete that review. The United States is a leader in 

assistance for global health, including in its monitoring, evaluation, and use of data for learning. 

I will continue to support robust efforts to review and evaluate U.S. foreign assistance 

programming. 
267 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#6) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The State Department stated they would complete a second review of the Mexico City Policy, 

also known as the global gag rule, by the end of2018, yet we are still waiting on that report. 

Your first report admitted you did not have enough data to properly evaluate the impacts of the 

administration's initial expansion of the policy. Last week, you announced a further expansion 

of the policy. Recent research from civil society groups indicates the current global gag rule is 

disrupting health care services, weakening civil society, and halting national policy progress on 

health and human rights. What process are you putting in place to regularly review service 

disruptions due to the policy and review any requests for exemptions? 

Both the Department of State and USAID have robust systems in place for monitoring 

and evaluating their respective programs. In the six-month review of the Protecting Life in 

Global Health Assistance (PLGIIA) policy, we found that less than one percent of prime partners 

had declined to agree to the PLGHA term in their awards. In those rare instances, State and 

USAID have worked to minimize any potential changes in services. The Mexico City Policy 

does not change overall funding levels, nor does the Secretary's recent announcement. In 

consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, I may authorize case-by-case 

exemptions to the PLGHA policy, and I stand ready to consider requests for exemptions. 
268 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#7) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

The State Department stated they would complete a second review of the Mexico City Policy, 

also known as the global gag rule, by the end of 2018, yet we arc still waiting on that report. 

Your first report admitted you did not have enough data to properly evaluate the impacts of the 

administration's initial expansion of the policy. Last week, you announced a further expansion 

of the policy. Recent research from civil society groups indicates the current global gag rule is 

disrupting health care services, weakening civil society, and halting national policy progress on 

health and human rights. What criteria will you use to determine any potential exemptions? 

Answer: 

ln determining whether an exemption is necessary, factors may include, but are not 

limited to: the existence of a public health emergency that impacts global health assistance; the 

possibility of extreme and irreversible service disruption if the exemption were not granted; 

whether there are other partners qualified to execute the program; or, other extenuating 

circumstances that warrant granting an exemption. 
269 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#8) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Last November, you announced the creation of the Humanitarian Assistance Steering Council. 

You stated, "the purpose of the Council is to coordinate U.S. government effotts in order to 

achieve seamless, efficient, and effective delivery of humanitarian assistance overseas in support 

of U.S. foreign policy objectives, including promoting burden-sharing and UN humanitarian 

reform." What specific authorities have been delegated to the Council? What additional 

reforms, or tasks, is it currently undertaking? 

Answer: 

I established the Humanitarian Assistance Steering Council (HASC) to improve the 

coordination among U.S. humanitarian agencies. There have been no changes to existing 

delegations of authorities; however, the Council has a clear mandate to implement co-budgeting 

and co-planning, oversee U.S. humanitarian policy initiatives to promote burden sharing and UN 

humanitarian reform, and coordinate and oversee U.S. humanitarian assistance in support of U.S. 

foreign policy goals. The creation of the HASC alone cannot optimize humanitarian assistance, 

and that is why the FY 2020 President's Budget proposal goes further and addresses the 

necessary structural changes. 
270 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#9) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Please elaborate on the role and authorities of the "new dual-hat leadership structure to oversee 

humanitarian assistance under the authority of the Secretary of State" that is proposed in the 

2020 CBJ. Would this be a new position or delegated to an existing position? What would 

this oversight role entail, and how would it correspond to the existing designation of the 

USAID Administrator as the President's "Special Coordinator for International Disaster 

Assistance? 

~: 

The current U.S. Government overseas assistance structure is outdated and fragmented. 

To deliver on the President's commitment to optimize the effectiveness of the U.S. 

Government's overseas humanitarian assistance, the FY 2020 Budget proposes to maximize the 

impact of taxpayer dollars, help more beneficiaries, and deliver the greatest outcomes to them by 

creating a new senior-level dual-hat leadership structure and consolidating all overseas 

humanitarian programming in the new Bureau at USAID while retaining State's Bureau of 

Population, Refugees, and Migration's lead role on protection issues as well as the U.S. refugeeadmissions program. The dual-hat would engage and coordinate diplomatic efforts across State 

to resolve conflicts in areas with major humanitarian crises and increase global burden-sharing. 

The senior dual-hat State and USAID leadership structure, under the authority of the 

Secretary of State, would elevate humanitarian assistance within the U.S. government to address 

more effectively the continuum of humanitarian response from relief to conflict resolution and to 

the eventual transition from aid. No changes are anticipated to the existing designation of the 

USAID Administrator as the President's Special Coordinator for International Disaster 

Assistance. 
271 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ami Bera (#10) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

What is the current status of synchronizing the State Department and Commerce 

Department's watch lists? When should Congress expect the complete synchronization of 

this data? 

Answer: 

The Department of State is in the process of modernizing its IT infrastructure to provide 

the Department of Commerce access to the information contained in State's internal watch list, 

which is used to screen parties on all license applications, including firearms, artillery, and 

ammunition exports. The Department docs not have an exact limeline for the debut of this new 

program, due to the high volume of archived data requiring manual review for operational 

sensitivities, as well as the complexity of upgrading a system designed for internal use only. 

However, the Department will keep you apprised of its progress. 
272 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#1) 

Honse Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In your March 28 appearance at the National Review Institute's 2019 Ideas Summit, you were 

asked about U.S. support for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. You said, "Factually, frankly, the 

American role there has reduced civilian casualties there inordinately. I can I think it's 

declassified. I can show you the statistics. Since America's begun to assist the Saudis in their 

campaign, the ratio of civilian casualties to effectiveness has decreased dramatically, and that's 

important. And so it's been a good thing that we've helped them." What specific activities arc 

you referring to as our assistance to the Saudis that decreased the ratio of civilian 

casualties to effectiveness, and when did those activities begin? 

Answer: 

While we believe that only a political solution will resolve the conflict and ease the 

humanitarian crisis in Yemen, we have worked with the Coalition to improve its targeting 

procedures by providing training seminars on best practices, including on the Law of Anned 

Conflict, and advisory efforts in Saudi Arabia's Combined Fusion Cell. The Administration 

continues to support the efforts of UN Special Envoy Martin Griffiths to bring the Houthis and 

Republic of Yemen government to the table for negotiations to end the conflict. 
273 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In reference to your March 28 comments at the 2019 Ideas Summit, will you provide to my 

office the statistics you discussed on U.S. assistance to the Saudis? If so, who can I follow up 

with to obtain that information? 

Answer: 

The Administration works with Saudi Arabia to improve its civilian casualty mitigation 

efforts, and we have seen progress on this front. Data collected by the Armed Conflict Location 

and Event Data project shows a steady decline in Coalition-caused civilian casualties since fall 

2018. During this timeframe, we have worked with the Coalition to improve its targeting 

procedures, including providing training seminars on best practices for mitigating harm to 

civilians and the Law of Armed Conflict. For additional information, I refer you to the 

Department of Defense. 
274 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In March 2019, an airstrike hit a Save the Children-supported hospital in northwest Yemen and 

killed seven people. According to Save the Children, this was a de-conflicted site and should 

never have been attacked. Has the U.S. Government asked the Saudis or Emiratis for 

information regarding the strike, and docs the administration believe an independent 

investigation is necessary for the strike'? 

Answer: 

Following news reports of the strike, Embassy Riyadh and the Yemen Affairs Unit 

contacted Saudi officials to request additional information about the strike on a gas station near 

the hospital, and they continue to investigate this incident. We are urging the Saudis, who have 

been receptive to our inquiries, to release the findings as soon as possible, and will continue to 

work with the Coalition to help them to find ways to minimize risk to civilians. 
275 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#4) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

In November 20 I 8, the administration announced an end to U.S. refueling assistance provided to 

Saudi-led coalition aircraft conducting operations in Yemen. Has refueling assistance resumed 

since the 2018 announcement? 

Answer: 

As of November 11, 2018, the United States ceased refueling support to the Saudi-led 

Coalition counter-Houthi operations in Yemen and refueling has not resumed. 
276 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#5) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March27,2019 

Please describe all forms of assistance the U.S. is still providing to the Saudi-led coalition 

conducting missions in Yemen. 

Answer: 

The United States provides Saudi Arabia defense articles and services; certain 

intelligence support, and military advice, including on compliance with the Law of Armed 

Conflict and best practices to reduce the risk of civilian casualties. Foreign Military Sales, 

Direct Commercial Sales, and provision of limited advice and intelligence to the Coalition help 

us counter common threats and protect Americans living in Saudi Arabia and UAE, international 

shipping in the Bab ai-Mandab strait, and our partners in the region. The Administration works 

with the Coalition through the Quad format to support UN-led efforts to bring the Houthis and 

Republic of Yemen government together for negotiations to end the conflict. 
277 

Question: 

Questions for the Reeord Submitted to 

Secretary of State Miehael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#6) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The Committee has been informed of an ongoing interagency investigation into the 

disappearance of Saudi nationals facing trail in the United States, possibly circumventing the 

U.S. justice system. Is the State Department involved in that investigation? 

Answer: 

The Department of State has engaged with our interagency pminers to ensure we are 

sharing information and working together to respond to Congressional inquiries surrounding the 

absconding of Saudi citizens with pending criminal charges in the United States. 
278 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#7) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Have State Department officials raised the issue of Saudi nationals fleeing the U.S. justice 

system directly with the Saudi government? If so, at what level has it been raised? 

Answer: 

Yes, the Department of State has raised these eases with senior leadership of the Saudi 

cabinet, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as well as with senior leadership of the Saudi 

Embassy in Washington, DC. 
279 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (#8) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Does the State Department have any evidence or reason to believe that Saudi diplomats in 

the United States knowingly helped Saudi nationals flee the United States to avoid legal 

proceedings? 

Answer: 

The Department of State does not currently possess any credible information that Saudi 

diplomats knowingly helped Saudi nationals abscond from legal proceedings in U.S. courts. 
280 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Congressman Ted Lieu (#9) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

Given that the United States does not have an extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia, what 

options is the State J)epartment pursuing to pursue the return of the accused individuals? 

The State Department has raised these cases- including the case of Abdulrahman Sameer 

Noorah- with senior members of the Saudi Government in both Washington and Riyadh. We 

have underscored the importance of justice for the families affected and made clear our 

commitment to the rule of law. 
281 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu(# 10) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

According to State Department documents contained in a soon-to-be-released Senate Foreign 

Relations Committee Democratic staff report, it appears that the Department's public 

justification for cancelling the Secretary of State's International Women of Courage Award to 

Jessikka Aro is not true. The Department claims it made a "regrettable error" and that Aro had 

never been a finalist. But according to State Department documents and communications, Ms. 

Aro was a finalist and the reward was rescinded at the last minute and given to someone else. 

According to public reporting. sources within the Department assert the award was rescinded 

after the Department discovered social media posts Ms. Aro made that were critical of President 

Trump's attacks on the media and the rule of law. Can you confirm that Ms. Aro's social 

media postings, some of which were critical of President Trump's statements, had nothing 

to do with the Department not giving her the award? 

Answer: 

A numher of errors were made in the nomination and approval process of Ms. Jessikka 

Aro. Ms. Aro was chosen as a finalist, but she should not have been considered for approval 

before the Department completed the research needed to vet candidates. Ms. Aro should not 

have been notified that she was an awardee in the absence of a comprehensive review, which is a 

prerequisite for the nomination process. We commit to improving the process moving forward. 
282 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Ted Lieu (# II) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

The decision for who does and does not receive the International Women of Courage Award is 

made by the Secretary of State. I understand that your office initially approved of giving the 

award to Ms. Aro, but then subsequently reversed the decision. Can you please explain to the 

Committee why you rescinded the award to Ms. Aro'! 

Answer: 

A number of errors were made in the nomination and approval process of Ms. Jcssikka 

Aro. Ms. Aro was chosen as a finalist, but she should not have been considered for approval 

before the Department completed the research needed to vet candidates. Ms. Aro should not 

have been notified that she was an awardee in the absence of a comprehensive review, which is a 

prerequisite for the nomination process. We commit to improving the process moving forward. 
283 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Colin Allred (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2109 

Has the Taliban agreed to publicly renounce AI-Qaeda? Why do you and Mr. Khalilzad 

believe the Talihan can be trusted to keep any promises to renounce their relationship with 

AI-Qaeda? If you have evidence that the Taliban will renounce this relationship, will you 

share it with this committee? Do you agree that AJ-Qaeda and ISIS are present and 

training in Taliban-controlled territory? 

Answer: 

The United States is seeking a negotiated settlement to the war in Afghanistan that 

ensures Afghan soil is never again used by international terrorists to launch attacks against the 

United States, its allies, or any other country. Throughout any peace process, we must calibrate 

our own actions and judge the Talibannot on what they say, but on what they do to ensure that 

terrorists cannot threaten the United States from Afghan territory. Because ai-Qaeda remains in 

the region, the Taliban would have to send a strong and clear message that they would not be 

allowed to operate from Afghan soil. The Tali ban and ISJS-Khorasan are currently fighting one 

another. 
284 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Colin Allred (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2109 

Previous U.S. policy required the Taliban to accept the current Afghan constitution, including its 

provisions protecting women's rights. Has this condition been dropped? Has the Taliban 

promised to include this condition in any peace reconciliation? Can you guarantee the U.S. 

will require it as a necessary part of any peace reconciliation? 

Answer: 

The Department continues to emphasize the importance of an inclusive Afghan national 

negotiating team, including the Afghan government, to participate in an intra-Afghan dialogue. 

Women will participate in the intra-Afghan conference in Doha in April, marking an important 

first step in this process that will bring the Taliban face-to-face with Afghan men and women 

who have made it clear that peace and reconciliation will not come at the cost of their 

hard-fought rights. A process that includes women and truly represents Afghan society will add 

legitimacy, increase public confidence, and help Afghans secure the gains their society has made 

since 2001. 
285 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Chrissy Houlahan (#1) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What steps is the Department taking to comply with the Women, Peace, and Security Act 

of 2017 in the Afghanistan reconciliation negotiations? How is the Administration 

ensuring that Afghan women are represented in those talks and follow-on talks between the 

Afghan government and the Tali ban? 

Answer: 

The Department remains committed to advancing the goals of the Women, Peace, and 

Security Act of2017. The meaningful participation of women in peace processes results in 

accords that are less likely to fail, and we will continue to encourage women's participation in 

national and local peace efforts in Afghanistan. To this end, the Department continues to 

emphasize the importance of an inclusive Afghan national negotiating team, including the 

Afghan government, to participate in an intra-Afghan dialogue. Women will participate in the 

intra-Afghan conference in Doha in April, marking an important first step in this process. 
286 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Chrissy Houlahan (#2) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

What is the State Department doing to boost international cyber-enforcement capacity, 

which is needed to keep pace with increasing cyber threats'? 

Answer: 

Building international cyber capacity is a key priority for the Administration, as 

articulated in the Department's 2018 report to the President on Protecting American Cyber 

Interests through International Engagement. To address the growing threats and challenges in 

cyberspace, the Department leverages diplomatic engagements and foreign assistance funds to 

enhance the capabilities of international partners to organize national efforts on cybersecurity 

and related law enforcement efforts to combat cybercrime and counter terrorism. Through U.S. 

eff01ts to assist partner nations to develop policies and practices and modernize laws, we 

promote a common vision of an open, intcropcrahlc, reliable, and secure Internet. 
287 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Chrissy Houlahan (#3) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27,2019 

How is the Department measuring the effectiveness of its (cyber) capacity-building efforts? 

Answer: 

The Department is committed to using design, monitoring, evaluation, and data analysis 

best practices to achieve the most effective U.S. foreign policy outcomes and provide greater 

accountability to our primary stakeholders, the American people. The Department collects 

annual performance information to monitor progress against strategic objectives. We also 

coordinate closely with the U.S. interagency to ensure our capacity building efforts effectively 

achieve the strategic objectives as reflected in the U.S. National Cyber Strategy. 
288 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Chrissy Houlahan (#4) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

How is the U.S. working with other countries to increase international cooperation on 

cybersecurity issues'! 

Answer: 

Given the interconnected nature of cyberspace, international cooperation is fundamental 

to our diplomatic engagements on cyber issues, as articulated in the Department's 2018 report to 

the President on Protecting American Cyber Interests through International Engagement. The 

Depatiment works closely with the U.S. interagency, likeminded foreign government partners as 

well as regional and global multi-stakeholder and multilateral organizations to increase 

international cooperation by sharing information and best practices, leveraging resources, and 

shaping the global agenda in platforms such as the Global Forum for Cyber Expertise on a range 

of cybersecurity issues. 
289 

Æ 

Question: 

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo by 

Representative Chrissy Houlahan (#5) 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 27, 2019 

Over the past few years, we have seen a ransom ware cyberattack, known as WannaCry, cripple 

companies and systems around the world. That attack, like the attack against Sony Pictures and 

the attack on the Bangladesh Bank through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, was carried 

out by state-sponsored hackers in North Korea. This month, a United Nations panel of experts 

issued a report to the Security Council documenting North Korea's continued use of cybercrime 

as a tool to make up for the financial losses the country faces due to sanctions. While the 

Administration is negotiating with the North Koreans over the fate of the country's nuclear 

weapons program, what steps are you taking to hold the North Koreans accountable for 

these cyberattacks? 

Answer: 

North Korean cyber-attacks and other malicious cyber activities pose a risk to critical 

infrastructure in countries around the world and to the global economy and are a source of 

revenue for its illicit WMD programs. The Department of State is working closely with the 

interagency and our allies and partners to counter these DPRK cyber operations with all available 

diplomatic, economic, legal, network defense, and other tools.