U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

55–126PDF 2010

PROMOTING SECURITY THROUGH DIPLOMACY

AND DEVELOPMENT: THE FISCAL YEAR 2011

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS BUDGET

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

FEBRUARY 25, 2010

Serial No. 111–88

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California, Chairman 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BILL DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

MICHAEL E. MCMAHON, New York 

JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

LYNN WOOLSEY, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

BARBARA LEE, California 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

BRAD MILLER, North Carolina 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

JIM COSTA, California 

KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota 

GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona 

RON KLEIN, Florida 

VACANT 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

RON PAUL, Texas 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

BOB INGLIS, South Carolina 

GUS BILIRAKIS, Florida 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Staff Director 

YLEEM POBLETE, Republican Staff Director 

DIANA OHLBAUM, Senior Professional Staff Member 

GENELL BROWN, Senior Staff Associate/Hearing Coordinator 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, U.S. Department 

of State .................................................................................................................. 4

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton: Prepared statement ............................ 8

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 52

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 53

The Honorable Howard L. Berman, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California, and Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs: Prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 55

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of New Jersey: Prepared statement ................................................... 57

The Honorable Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, a Representative in Congress from 

American Samoa: Prepared statement ............................................................... 61

The Honorable Diane E. Watson, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California: Prepared statement ............................................................ 69

The Honorable Russ Carnahan, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Missouri: Prepared statement ......................................................................... 70

The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Virginia: Prepared statement ............................................................... 71

The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Texas: Prepared statement ................................................................... 73

Questions for the record submitted to the Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton 

by: 

The Honorable Eni F.H. Faleomavaega ............................................................. 78

The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of Florida .......................................................................................... 80

The Honorable Eliot L. Engel, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New York ...................................................................................................... 90

The Honorable Dan Burton, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Indiana .......................................................................................................... 91

The Honorable Barbara Lee, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California ...................................................................................................... 101

The Honorable Joe Wilson, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of South Carolina .............................................................................................. 113

The Honorable Shelley Berkley, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Nevada ................................................................................................ 115

The Honorable Michael T. McCaul, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of Texas ............................................................................................. 117

(1)

PROMOTING SECURITY THROUGH DIPLOMACY AND DEVELOPMENT: THE FISCAL 

YEAR 2011 INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS BUDGET 

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2010

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Howard L. Berman 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Chairman BERMAN. The committee will come to order. Welcome, 

Madam Secretary. 

In order to maximize the time for member questions, I will limit 

openings statements to myself and the ranking member. I intend 

to keep my statements short, well shorter than usual. And all other 

members are welcome to submit written statements for the record. 

Madam Secretary, we appreciate this opportunity to explore with 

you the President’s international affairs budget request for Fiscal 

Year 2011, the supplemental appropriations request for the current 

fiscal year, and the various policy initiatives you have championed 

as Secretary of State. 

This is the second budget request submitted by this administration, but the first one prepared from start to finish under President 

Obama’s and your leadership. So this is the first opportunity for 

Congress and the Nation to see a clear and comprehensive picture 

of your vision and the priorities you have set. 

We applaud the President’s decision to define ‘‘national security’’ 

to include not only the Defense budget, but also the international 

affairs budget. As you have said on many occasions, America’s national security depends not only on our men and women in uniform, but also on the civil servants who risk their lives on a daily 

basis to support America’s interests abroad. 

Regrettably, this point was brought home by the recent deaths 

of a dedicated Foreign Service officer in the Haitian earthquake 

and seven CIA officers at the hands of a suicide bomber in Afghanistan. These courageous civilians gave their lives in service to our 

country. 

Our diplomats and development specialists work day and night 

to head off international crises before they erupt, and to prevent 

the onset of failed states where terrorists who threaten our security 

find safe haven. Over the long run, these civilian efforts are much 

more cost effective than putting our brave soldiers in harm’s ways. 

2

Investing in the international affairs budget is the proverbial ounce 

of prevention. For example, if we are to resolve the Iranian nuclear 

crisis, whether by diplomacy or sanctions, it will be thanks mainly 

to the creativity and hard work of our diplomats and civil servants. 

Madam Secretary, you have set out very clear priorities in this 

budget: Working with the local partners to defeat al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan; ensuring that children around the world 

have enough food to eat and don’t die of easily preventable diseases; helping nations reduce emissions and adapt to climate 

change; putting women front and center in our humanitarian and 

development efforts; and rebuilding our civilian workforce by hiring 

a new generation of Foreign Service Officers and giving them the 

training and resources they need to make a real difference. 

There may be differences of opinion about the relative priority of 

these initiatives and the optimal amount of funding for specific 

countries and programs, but I, and I hope my colleagues on this 

committee, will do everything we can to maintain the overall funding level because we recognize—as you do—that diplomacy and development are integral to our national security. 

In fact, a full 18 percent of the international affairs budget re- quest—$10.8 billion—is for the frontline states of Afghanistan, 

Pakistan and Iraq. That includes $1.6 billion for programs that 

were previously carried out by the Pentagon, including Iraqi police 

training, the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capabilities Fund, and 

Section 1207 reconstruction and stabilization assistance. By having 

the State Department assume responsibility for these programs, we 

place them in civilian hands where they belong and now allow the 

military to focus on its core mission. 

There are many ways to look at the budget figures. I would 

argue that in order to compare apples to apples, the Fiscal Year 

2010 total should include supplemental funding—both the new request and ‘‘forward funding’’ provided in the 2009 supplemental. 

Looking at it that way, the Fiscal Year 2011 request represents a 

very modest increase, about 2.8 percent. 

In these difficult economic times, it is particularly important to 

remind ourselves and the American people that the international 

affairs budget is little more than 1 percent of the entire Federal 

budget, and only a small fraction of the amount we spend on defense. 

Madam Secretary, we look forward to hearing your testimony on 

the budget request and the administration’s foreign policy priorities. And now I am very pleased to turn to my ranking member, 

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for any opening remarks that she might want 

to make. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Madam 

Secretary, welcome back to our Foreign Affairs Committee. For the 

sake of time I am going to incorporate my questions into the opening statement to allow time for more members to raise their concerns during the question period. Our existing public debt is already more than $12 trillion. Under 

the President’s overall budget for Fiscal Year 2011 our national 

debt would grow at an estimated rate of almost $4 billion per day. 

Our foreign aid funding is not a major part of the overall budget 

we know, and we want to accomplish many things overseas, but in 

3

light of our fiscal situation the international affairs budget should 

also be subject to selective freezes or slower rates of spending in 

order to assist in the battle for our Nation’s economic future. 

The $9.5 billion requested for the State Department’s basic salaries and operations when combined with last year’s increases 

amounts to a 33 percent jump from Fiscal Year 2009 levels. These 

increases do not include, of course, funds sought in the anticipated 

supplemental for Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. There are reports that we are spending $1 billion, $1 billion for a new U.S. Embassy in London described as a crystal form that is light-filled and 

light-emitting. We all want to provide for the security of our overseas personnel, but we should be able to meet those needs without 

seeking to build a crystal palace. 

There is a 22 percent increase for the International Atomic Energy Agency, which according to GAO has provided millions in assistance to the nuclear program of Iran and Syria. The international affairs account has grown significantly over the past decade. It was $23.4 billion in Fiscal Year 2000. By 2010 it was at 

$50.6 billion. That is a 116 percent increase. 

I would like our foreign aid budget to move to a greater reliance 

on development credit assistance, which should help us achieve 

considerable savings. As the State Department’s own documents 

note, the development credit account has historically leveraged significant amounts of private funds for development projects. 

Turning to policy questions, Madam Secretary, on Iran the recent 

IAEA report stated concerns ‘‘about the possible existence in Iran 

of undisclosed activities related to development of a nuclear payload for a missile.’’

Then today’s news report have Russian officials refuting claims 

that Iran could be pursuing nuclear weapons while emphasizing 

Russia’s commitment to delivering advanced air defense missiles to 

Iran. Some European officials are also quoted suggesting that sanctions should come later and investments in Iran continue. 

Madam Secretary, successive U.S. administrations, under the 

guise of seeking multilateral concessions, have taken no action 

under the Iran Sanctions Act, and the Iranian threat keeps growing. When are companies like Royal Dutch Shell, France’s Total, 

Russia’s Gazprom, and Spain’s Repsol going to be held accountable 

for their actions? When will we take action to address the almost 

$3 billion in investments by China’s Sinopec? When will we be 

leveraging the Iran Sanctions Act for concrete cooperation from our 

allies and cutting off the regime in Iran? 

Turning to Cuba, I am also deeply concerned about reports that 

the administration might bend to the Cuban regime’s blackmail 

and agree to end anti-censorship and pro-democracy programs in 

exchange for the release of U.S. citizen Alan Gross. As you know, 

Orlando Zapata Tamayo, a Cuban dissident in jail, died this very 

week from a hunger strike and we must do all that we can to help 

with the dissident movement and help with the opposition in Cuba. 

I would like to hand to you a copy of a February 3rd letter addressed to you from former U.S. Ambassadors to the Western 

Hemisphere countries urging you ‘‘to not make any concessions to 

any dictatorial regime and particularly not to Cuba.’’

4

And lastly, turning to PA funding and UNRWA, a former Palestinian anti-corruption official has reportedly revealed that Palestinian officials have stolen hundreds of millions in foreign aid, yet 

the administration is requesting another $0.5 billion, including 

$150 million in direct cash transfers for the Palestinian Authority. 

Similarly with respect to the United Nations’ Relief and Works 

Agency, the homicide bomber who killed 7 Americans at a base in 

Afghanistan previously worked at UNRWA, in an UNRWA camp 

and had significant radical Islamic ties. UNRWA also continues to 

agitate against Israel while refusing to vet radical Islamic extremists in its very ranks. Yet the administration just announced another $40 million to UNRWA. 

What is it going to take for the U.S. to stop the no strings attached pipeline of funds to the PA and to UNRWA? 

And Madam Secretary, Mr. Chairman, 11⁄2 minutes to go. I yield 

back the balance of my time. Thank you and welcome. Glad to hear 

that the President is doing much better. 

Chairman BERMAN. Well, thank you very much. 

Madam Secretary, I yield myself 5 minutes to begin the questioning—oh, yes. Do you want to testify? We can really save a lot 

of time. 

Secretary CLINTON. Mr. Chairman, I will do it in a New York 

minute. 

Chairman BERMAN. No, no, no, you take all the time that you 

want. This is important. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HILLARY RODHAM 

CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, first let me say to you and to the ranking member and to all of the members of the committee that it is 

a pleasure to be back with you today. 

When I was last here discussing our budget, I emphasized my 

commitment to elevate diplomacy and development as core pillars 

of American power, and since then I have been heartened by the 

bipartisan support of this committee and the rest of Congress, and 

I want to take this opportunity to thank you on behalf of the men 

and women who work every day for the State Department, for 

USAID here at home and around the world putting our foreign policy into action, advancing America’s interests and values. And that 

is what this budget we are presenting today intends to do. 

Our Fiscal Year 2011 requests for the State Department and 

USAID totals $52.8 billion. That is a $4.9 billion increase over 

2010. Of that increase, $3.6 billion will go to supporting efforts in 

the front line states, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. Other funding will grow by $1.3 billion, which is a 2.7 percent increase that 

will help us address global challenges, strengthen partnerships, 

and ensure that the State Department and USAID are equipped 

with the right people and resources. 

Over the past 6 weeks in Haiti we have been reminded yet again 

of the importance of American leadership. I am very proud of what 

our country has done. Our military and civilian personnel have performed extraordinarily, and we are continuing our work with our 

Haitian and international partners to address the ongoing suffering 

and transition from relief to recovery. 

5

Now, Mr. Chairman, I know that this is a time of great economic 

strain for our fellow Americans, and as a former Member of Congress I know what this means for the people you each represent. 

For every dollar we spend we have to show results. That is why 

this budget must support programs vital to our national security, 

our national interests, and our leadership in the world while 

guarding against waste, duplication and irrelevancy, and I believe 

it achieves those objectives. 

The figures in the budget are more than numbers on a page. 

They tell the story of the challenges we face and the resources we 

need to overcome them. We are fighting two wars that call for the 

skill and sacrifice of our civilians as well as our troops. 

We have pursued a dual track approach to Iran that has exposed 

for the world to see its refusal to live up to its responsibility, and 

it has helped us achieve a new unity with our international partners. Iran has left the international community little choice, but to 

impose greater costs for its provocative steps, and we are now 

working actively with other countries to prepare and implement 

new measures to pressure Iran to change course. 

We also achieved this past year unprecedented unity in response 

to North Korea’s provocative action, even as we leave the door open 

for a restart of six party talks. We are moving closer to a fresh nuclear agreement with Russia, one that advances our security while 

furthering President Obama’s long-term vision of a world without 

nuclear weapons. 

With China we are seeking areas of common purpose while 

standing firm where we differ. We are making concrete our new beginning with the Muslim world, and we are strengthening partnerships with allies in Europe and Asia, with friends in our own hemisphere, and with countries around the world from India to Indonesia to South Africa, Brazil and Turkey. And yes, we are working 

every day to end the impasse and the conflict between Israelis and 

Palestinians. 

At the same time we are developing a new architecture of cooperation to meet global challenges that cross national boundaries 

like climate change and the use of our planet’s oceans. In so many 

instances our national interests and the common interests converge, and so from the Western Hemisphere to Africa, Asia and the 

Middle East we are promoting human rights, the rule of law, democracy and Internet freedom. We are fighting poverty, hunger 

and disease, and we are working to ensure that economic growth 

is broadly shared. 

Our agenda is ambitious because the times demand it. America 

is called to lead, and we need the tools and resources to exercise 

that leadership wisely and effectively. We can bury our heads in 

the sand and pay the consequences later or we can make hardnosed, targeted investments now, addressing the security challenges of today while building a stronger foundation for security 

and prosperity in the future. 

Let me quickly highlight the three areas where we are making 

significant new investments, first in the security of the front line 

states. In Afghanistan we have tripled the number of civilians on 

the ground and this presence will grow by hundreds more with the 

$5 billion in this budget. Our diplomats and development experts 

6

are imbedded with our military. They have moved into Marja along 

with our forces, they are now helping to set up institutions, expand 

economic opportunities, and provide meaningful alternatives for insurgents ready to renounce violence in al-Qaeda and join Afghan 

society in a peaceful way. In Pakistan our request includes $3.2 billion to combat extremism, promote economic development, strengthen democratic institutions, and build a long-term relationship with the Pakistani people. This includes funding of the Kerry-Lugar-Berman initiative, 

and I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your visionary leadership on this legislation. 

Our request also includes a 59 percent increase in funding for 

Yemen to help counter the extremist threats and build institutions 

and economic opportunity. 

In Iraq we are winding down our military presence and establishing a more normal civilian mission. Our civilian efforts will not 

and cannot mirror the scale of our military presence, but rather 

provide assistance consistent with the priorities of the Iraqi Government. So our request includes $2.6 billion for Iraq to enable us 

to support the democratic process and ensure a smooth transition 

to civilian led security training and operational support. As these 

funds allow civilians to take responsibility for these programs, the 

Defense Department’s budget for Iraq will decrease by about $16 

billion. That is a powerful illustration of the return on civilian investment. 

We are blessed, as we all know, with the best troops in the world 

as we have seen time and time again, but we have got to give our 

civilian experts the resources that we ask them to exercise as they 

go about doing what they are expected to do, and the budget takes 

a step in that direction. It includes $100 million for a State Department Complex Crisis Fund, replacing the 1207 fund through which 

the Defense Department directed money toward crisis response. It 

includes support for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability 

Fund, which previously also fell under the Defense Department. 

The second major area is investing in development. This budget 

makes targeted investments in fragile societies which in our interconnected world bear heavily on our own security and prosperity. 

These investments are a key part of our efforts to get ahead of crisis rather than just responding to them, positioning us to deal with 

the threats and challenges that lie before us. 

The first of these is in health. Building on or progress, treating 

HIV, Malaria, and tuberculosis, our global health initiative will invest $63 billion over 6 years, starting with $8.5 billion in Fiscal 

Year 2011, to help partners address specific diseases but also to 

build strong sustainable health systems for themselves. 

The administration has also pledged at least $31⁄3 billion a year 

in food security over 3 years, and this year’s request includes $1.6 

billion, of which $1.2 billion will be funded through the State Department. This funding will focus on countries that have developed 

effective, comprehensive strategies where agriculture is central to 

prosperity and hunger remains widespread. On climate change our request of $646 million seeks to promote 

the United States as a leader in green technology and to leverage 

other countries cooperation, including through the Copenhagen AcVerDate 0ct 09 2002 07:02 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\022510\55126 HFA PsN: SHIRL
7

cord, which for the first time brought developed and developing 

countries together on this challenge. This is part of the administration’s total request of $1.4 billion to support core climate change activities in developing nations. 

Our request also includes $4.2 billion for humanitarian assistance programs. Our efforts in Haiti have made clear that State and 

USAID must be able to respond quickly and effectively to human 

tragedies. 

These initiatives are designed to enhance American security, 

help people in need, and give the American people a strong return 

on their investment. Our aim is not to create dependency, but to 

help people develop solutions that they can sustain for themselves 

over the long term. And essential to this is a focus on advancing 

equality and opportunity for women and girls, who are the key 

drivers of economic and social progress in the developing world. 

And that brings me to the third and final area of investment. 

None of this can happen if with do not recruit, train and empower 

the right people for the job. The State Department and USAID are 

full of talented and committed public servants, but too often we 

have neglected to give them the tools they need to carry out their 

missions on the ground. Rather than building their expertise, we 

have often relied on contractors, sometimes with little oversight 

and often with increased costs. 

This budget will allow us to expand the Foreign Service by over 

600 positions, including an additional 410 for the State Department 

and 200 for USAID. It will also allow us to staff the standby element of the civilian reserve corps, which a crucial tool we are developing to respond to crisis. 

Now while deploying these personnel does generate new expenses 

in some accounts, it will reduce expenses in others by changing the 

way we do business. We are ending an overreliance on contractors 

and finding opportunities to save money by bringing essential functions into government and improving oversight. 

One thing that I hope is clear from this budget is that the State 

Department and USAID are taking a lead in carrying out the 

United States foreign policy and national security agenda. As we 

finish the first ever Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, we have a unique opportunity to define the capabilities we 

need and then match resources with priorities. 

This budget aligns our investments with the strategic imperatives of our time. We are putting a lot of effort into the management of the State Department and USAID. We are asking a lot of 

hard questions, and we come to you with a commitment to be responsive as we have done so this past year. 

At a time of change and challenge at home and abroad we believe these investments will enhance the security of Americans, assure the future of American leadership and help build the foundations of peace, stability, and prosperity for the years ahead. 

I look forward to continuing to work with you and I would be 

pleased to take your questions, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Secretary Clinton follows:]

8


55126b-1.eps
9


55126b-2.eps
10


55126b-3.eps
11


55126b-4.eps
12

Chairman BERMAN. Thank you very much, and now I yield myself 5 minutes to begin the questioning. 

I want to start out by truly commending the administration for 

its sincere and full effort to engage Iran in the goal of stopping the 

Iranian nuclear program. It is regrettable that the Iranians have 

not accepted the President’s outstretched hand. The world has seen 

the President’s efforts at engagement have been met by an Iranian 

clenched fist. If there are any doubts about the nature of the Iranian regime, they have been erased by fraudulent elections and 

brutal repression of dissent. If there was any doubt about Iran’s intention of having a nuclear weapons capability, the revelations of 

the last 3 or 4 months surely have removed those doubts by any 

objective standard. We have tried engagement, and I believe we 

should remain open to a diplomatic solution, but I think it is time 

to shift our focus to implementing effective sanctions, sanctions 

that maximize the chance that Iran will change its decision, change 

its course, and end its effort to seek that nuclear weapons capability. 

The question is what kinds of sanctions work. I think it is a mistake for us to try and draw you out fully as you are engaged in 

an important diplomatic process at the Security Council and with 

other countries bilaterally to develop that strategy. But I do want 

to raise a more general issue. There are people around who say the 

words ‘‘targeted’’ and ‘‘smart sanctions’’ get thrown around all the 

time. The test is whether the sanctions maximize the chances of 

achieving the goal of changed behavior on these issues. And some 

say our targeting of sanctions should be limited to individuals, we 

don’t want to cause any economic deprivation to the Iranian people 

beyond that which the regime’s own policies have foisted on their 

people. I don’t understand how we can have the level of sanctions 

that can change behavior without it unfortunately having consequences on the Iranian people. But we are talking about in the 

context of Iran, hundreds of thousands of Iranians have put their 

lives on the line to protest their regime. They are suffering in some 

cases executions, mass arrests, show trials, beatings and all kinds 

of brutality. The notion that because of the regime’s behavior their 

economic deprivation, which is already serious, may grow. The notion that that causes them to rally behind the very regime that has 

caused them to go in the streets to me makes no sense. 

And I guess I would like to get your thoughts on this issue of 

sanctions that are called smart because they have no impact on the 

Iranian people versus sanctions that could change behavior. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Mr. Chairman, first let me underscore 

what you said about the importance of the President’s strategy this 

past year. We believe strongly that the President’s leadership and 

willingness to reach out for engagement with the Iranians was exactly the right approach for two reasons. First, as he said in his 

Inaugural Address, he was willing to stretch out his hand but people had to unclench their fist. Offering the Iranian leadership the 

opportunity to engage in a serious way was a necessary and important step which the President has been willing to take against 

some political criticism, as you know. 

But secondly, the fact that the Iranian regime has failed to respond and indeed in the course of this past year has shown its bruVerDate 0ct 09 2002 07:02 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\022510\55126 HFA PsN: SHIRL
13

tality toward its own people and the revelations that have come to 

light about the undisclosed facility at Qom, their failure to accept 

the Russian, United States and French offers through the IAEA on 

helping to provide the uranium they were needing for the Tehran 

research reactor, their decision to try to enrich to a higher percentage. All of the litany that we know of the actions they have taken 

and the IAEA’s much more robust conclusions about that have 

demonstrated to the rest of the world what the facts are about 

Iran’s ambitions and about its refusal to engage in a serious manner. 

Therefore, we in the pursuit of a very aggressive diplomatic campaign believe that the broader the approach on sanctions against 

Iran, the more isolation and pressure Iran will feel. It is therefore 

important that we speak with one voice, one voice within our Government and one voice internationally against Iran’s failure to live 

up to its responsibilities. And so we have done an intensive consultation process around what we see as the most effective approaches to sanctions. And I personally have engaged in numerous 

discussions with many countries, when I was in London just recently, in the Gulf next week, in Latin America, pointing out how 

the evidence all adds up. And I think because we were willing to 

engage we have a much more receptive audience than we might 

have had otherwise. And I think that our efforts to move forward 

in the Security Council should not be viewed as our exclusive efforts because we have also stated clearly we will look at additional 

bilateral and preferably multilateral sanctions with willing nations 

on top of whatever we get out of the Security Council. 

So in sum, we believe in a broad approach, we believe that we 

have to be as focused on what could change attitudes and behavior 

within the leadership of Iran. As you might have noticed, I was 

very clear in my remarks when I was in Doha and Jeddah last 

week about the increasing role that the Revolutionary Guard is 

playing in the politics and economy of Iran. 

So our goal is your goal. If we are going to go to the international 

community through the U.N., through other multilateral efforts, we 

want sanctions that will be effective and we think the broader, the 

more likely that is to be. 

Chairman BERMAN. Thank you very much. I do note that in consultation with the ranking member we did something which should 

not be considered oppressive with respect to time, but I thought 

this was important enough issue to fully develop. I now am pleased 

to recognize the ranking member for 5 minutes. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you, Madam Secretary. 

Why is the administration doing nothing to pass the free trade 

agreements with Colombia, South Korea, Panama? Solid U.S. allies, wonderful friends, very pro-American. Will you and President 

Obama become engaged in trying to pass these FTAs? 

Secondly, why did we join the U.N. Human Rights Council if we 

were going to do nothing by being on the Council? We were supposed to change it from within, yet in the time we have been there 

the United States has not called for a special session or even sponsored a resolution to try to promote it on the human rights violaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 07:02 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\022510\55126 HFA PsN: SHIRL
14

tion in Iran, and North Korea, and Syria, Sudan, Cuba, Venezuela, 

Saudi Arabia, Russia, you name it, nada. 

And lastly, Madam Secretary, if you could please comment on the 

death of Orlando Zapata Tamayo, the Cuban dissident who I referred to in my opening statement. 

Thank you. 

Secretary CLINTON. Thank you very much. Let me start where 

you ended. The United States Government deeply regrets the death 

of Orlando Zapata Tamayo and we send our condolences to his family, and we also reiterate our strong objection to the actions of the 

Cuban Government. This is a prisoner of conscience who was imprisoned for years for speaking his mind, for seeking democracy, for 

standing on the side of values that are universal, who engaged in 

a hunger strike. The United States Government consistently requested that he be given medical assistance. And unfortunately, he 

paid for his courage and his commitment with his life. He is one 

of more than 200 prisoners of conscience held by the Cuban Government, and we continue to reiterate and in the strongest possible 

terms put forth a strong objection to the existing behavior and a 

hope that through the consistent pressure that we can place on the 

Cuban Government over matters like this that these prisoners of 

conscience will eventually be released. 

Secondly, with respect to the Human Rights Council, actually, 

Congresswoman, there was a Human Rights Council session on 

Iran and the deplorable human rights record of Iran. Just last 

week the United States was there and made a very strong and 

forceful presentation; Assistant Secretary Posner from Democracy 

Human Rights Bureau in the State Department led our efforts, and 

I think we again made a historic record in front of Iran. 

Now they don’t care about their people so they are not going to 

care about the world exposing these constant human rights abuses, 

but I think it is far better for us to be exercising our freedom of 

expression and our strong beliefs inside that Council and forcing 

others to look at the evidence that is presented. So for the past 

year that is exactly what we have been doing and we will continue 

to do so. 

And finally on the free trade agreements, as President Obama 

said in his State of the Union Address last month, we are committed to these free trade agreements and we hope that we can 

begin a process of consultation and consensus building within the 

Congress. I will be going to Latin America next week. I share your 

characterization of Colombia and Panama, two of our strongest allies and two countries that have worked very hard to make changes 

and create a conducive atmosphere to these free trade agreements 

being confirmed here in our Congress. 

So we are going to be working on this, and I appreciate your raising it because I personally believe it is a very important issue. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Madam Secretary. Yes, 

I do realize that we did have that periodic review on Iran, but it 

was not U.S. sponsored, it was not a special session, and that is 

why I raise it. I want us to be more involved now that we are part 

of that rogue’s gallery. Fortunately we are not a rogue regime, but 

unfortunately then we become part of the problem. I would like for 

the U.S. to be the sponsor and call for special sessions. 

15

Thank you, Madam Secretary. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BERMAN. Thank you very much. And now the gentleman from New York, chairman of the Middle East and South 

Asia Subcommittee, Mr. Ackerman. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good to see you, 

Madam Secretary. Difficult to let this historic moment go by without noting that so many of us are feeling buyer’s regret that in a 

previous incarnation we allowed your health plan proposal to go by 

the boards. What a different place we would be at right now. But 

this is a different committee. 

I want to spend a moment, if I might, talking about the 

Goldstone report and its implications. This report is a deeply 

flawed and grossly biased political diatribe, a club used to beat 

Israel over the head and attempt to delegitimize its very existence; 

a country that has attempted to defend itself, as have we, against 

terrorists and terrorist attacks and suicide bombers and murderers 

who would destroy so many human beings and civilization. But it 

is not Israel that I raise the concern about; it is the implication 

that this has for the United States. 

If this report, which addresses the new kind of warfare that we 

are in, warfare that isn’t traditional battlefield warfare which has 

general rules and regulations that the whole world has operated 

under, but going after terrorists who have no conscience, who 

would hide and morph themselves and meld into civilian populations, hiding their arms and weapons and shedding their uniforms the way they have in the Middle East, and the way we have 

faced them as well. The implications for the United States are 

more than serious. I won’t quantify it, but the number of civilians 

that have unfortunately and regrettably perished as we, the United 

States, have pursued terrorists whether they be in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or elsewhere are certainly a number multiplied by some huge 

multiple compared to the number of civilians that were killed as 

Israel pursued terrorists in Gaza throughout that entire incursion. 

It is not difficult to envision the short path, if that report is accepted as the international standard, to see what happens to our 

country and envision just the limitations that it would place on 

your travel ability, Madam Secretary, or the indictment of some 

American President or future Secretary, or even past, for international war crimes because civilians were killed in the pursuit of 

terrorism, would put a chilling pall on our ability to fight the war 

on terror. How do we address this? 

I do want to commend the administration for jumping out ahead 

of this as quickly as it did and doing all the things, and I know 

a lot of things got derailed because of things that were not in our 

control, without going into them, but how do we deal with this at 

this moment in time as this report moves forward? 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, you have highlighted 

one of the serious deficiencies in the report that we have also 

noted. The whole concept of self-defense and the right to self-defense is one that was not adequately addressed or even taken into 

consideration. There are a number of other deficiencies within the 

report, but you have as usual put your finger on one of the potential ramifications that go beyond the findings relating to what happened in one place at one time in history, and we believe strongly 

16

that the issues raised in the Goldstone report should be subjected 

to strong domestic review processes. We believe Israel has the capacity and the institutions to do so, and in fact Israel, as you know, 

has undertaken such review, as has, I might add, the Palestinian 

Authority. The group that hasn’t is Hamas and those who support 

and fund Hamas. And we believe strongly, too, that other countries 

have a stake in supporting our perspective on this, because it is not 

only the United States if this international standard, as you say, 

were to morph out of this report, but nearly every other country 

that would similarly be held to account. 

So I share your concerns, and we have stood very staunchly on 

the side of those who reject the underlying premises of this report. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The 

gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Smith. 

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

Madam Secretary. It is always great to see you. 

Today, Mr. Chairman, ultrasound imaging has given us a window to the womb and the child within, and micro surgery and a 

myriad of fetal health interventions are commonplace. Today as 

never before unborn children ought to be viewed as humanity’s 

youngest patients in need of proper prenatal care, nurturing, and, 

when sick, diagnosis and treatment. 

The prevention of mother to child HIV transmission got a major 

boost from PEPFAR, and I am happy to say that commitment continues and is expanded in the Global Health Initiative. The Global 

Health Initiative must, however, ensure that even the unplanned 

and unintended unborn child is welcomed, cared for, and included 

in the initiative. 

I was disappointed to read on page 14 of the consultation document that unintended pregnancy seems to be relegated to the status of a disease, juxtaposed between HIV and tropical diseases. 

Pregnancy isn’t a disease. The child in the womb is neither a tumor 

nor a parasite to be destroyed. 

I am, Mr. Chairman, deeply concerned that with the elimination 

of the Mexico City policy by Executive Order last year, NGO implementing partners may actively seek to integrate abortion with the 

many necessary and noble undertakings funded by the Global 

Health Initiative. Therefore, I respectfully ask that the administration consider that for many of us, all abortion, legal or illegal, is 

violence against children, poses significant, often under appreciated 

risks to women, and especially, and this is largely unfocused upon, 

to children later born to post-abortive women. 

The term ‘‘safe abortion’’ in my opinion is the ultimate oxymoron, 

child dismemberment, forced premature expulsion from the womb 

by chemicals like Misoprostol, and deliberate starvation by RU–486 

can never ever be construed to be benign, compassionate or safe. 

Millennium Development Goal Number 4 seeks the reduction in 

child mortality; abortion is child mortality. 

Safe abortion? At least 102 studies show significant psychological 

harm, major depression, and elevated suicide risk to women who 

abort. Recently the Times of London reported, and I quote in pertinent part that ‘‘Senior . . . psychiatrists say that new evidence has 

uncovered a clear link between abortion and mental illness in 

women with no previous history of psychological problems.’’ They 

17

found ‘‘that women who have had abortions have twice the level of 

psychological problems and three times the level of depression as 

women who have given birth or who have never been 

pregnant . . .’’. 

In 2006, a comprehensive New Zealand study found that almost 

80 percent, 78.6 percent to be exact, of the 15- to 18-years-olds who 

had abortions displayed symptoms of major depression as compared 

to 31 percent of their peers, and that study also found that 27 percent of the 21- to 25-year-old women who had abortions had suicidal idealizations compared to 8 percent of those who did not. 

Safe abortion? Not for subsequent children born to women who 

have had an abortion. At least 113 studies show a significant association between abortion and subsequent premature birth. For example, a study by researchers Shah and Zoe showed a 36 percent 

increased risk for preterm birth after one abortion and a staggering 

93 percent increased risk after two. Similarly, the risk of subsequent children being born with low birth weight increases by 35 

percent after one and 72 percent after two or more abortions. 

Another study showed the risk increased nine times after a 

woman had three abortions. Clearly this terrible consequence has 

been overlooked and under focused upon for far too long. 

What does this mean for her children? Preterm birth is the leading cause of infant mortality in the industrialized world after congenital anomalies. Preterm infants have a greater risk of suffering 

from chronic lung disease, sensory deficit, cerebral palsy, cognitive 

impairments, and behavioral problems; low birth weight is similarly associated with neonatal mortality and morbidity. 

Finally, I would respectfully submit that if we are truly serious 

about reducing maternal mortality, women especially in the developing world need access to proper maternal health care, skilled 

birth attendants, and safe blood. I had a hearing that I chaired 

years ago on safe blood, and a WHO representative said 44 percent 

of maternal mortality goes away in Africa if there is the availability of safe blood. 

So I would ask respectfully that these things be considered. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The 

gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Payne, chairman of the Africa 

Subcommittee, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, and let me commend you, 

Madam Secretary, on your recent trip to Haiti as you flew back 

from a previously planned trip to be there on the ground. Also, I 

want to commend you for the grueling six-country tour you took to 

Africa last year. They are still talking about it. The only negative 

is the countries you didn’t go to. Of course there are 54, so you 

have got 48 more to do. 

Let me just bring up a few quick questions. Number one, I have 

some concern about Somalia. As you know, the transitional Federal 

Government of Sheikh Sharif continues to struggle. There was not 

any increase for development aid for Somalia. I think if we get the 

governance program going we will stop the piracy because I do 

know Sheikh Sharif and his people can take that under control. 

Secondly, we do see in Sudan an agreement with JEM and the 

Government of Sudan. Of course the Government of Sudan has 

signed a lot of agreements and has broken every one, so I am not 

18

that optimistic. However, there was a 10 percent reduction in ESF 

funds for South Sudan which is coming up with a big referendum 

next year. I don’t think that is the way to go since this very important referendum is coming up. 

Thirdly, Liberia has a problem with about 3,500 Liberians who 

are here under DED. On the 30th of March, DED will expire. They 

came here under the reign of Charles Taylor. It is Homeland Security/State Department, but if you could look into this I would really 

appreciate being able to call you about that. 

[A written response to the inquiry follows:]

19

Mr. PAYNE. Finally, Nigeria’s problem of course with the President Yar’Adua being very ill. The Vice President has taken over. 

Yar’Adua has gone back to Nigeria, so we need to take a look at 

that to make sure that we don’t have a conflict of two Presidents. 

There are enough problems in Nigeria right now. 

Finally, I am concerned about Morocco’s occupation in Western 

Sahara, and I do think that the Saharan people should have an opportunity to have the referendum there in Western Sahara. The 


55126c.eps
20

United Nations said it should be done, and the Baker plan said it 

should be done. I think we should go ahead and do that. 

Finally, on another issue, on March 9th there will be a vote in 

Northern Ireland. As you know, the Hillsborough Castle Agreement 

for the UPD and Sinn Fein said the evolution process will go on. 

However, we can anticipate there may be violence coming up, because we had the car bombing last week. So I would wonder if you 

could look at that and just urge them for the March 9th vote to 

vote yes so that we can get the evolution behind us. 

I will wait to hear your answer on those that you can answer. 

Thank you. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, thank you so much, and I will try to 

speak very quickly, Congressman, and as always, thank you for 

your personal and very welcome attention to Africa. 

With respect to Somalia, there are decreases in the funding from 

the State Department, but we are working very hard in other accounts as well as with other donors. We share your commitment to 

Sheikh Sharif on the TFG. 

With respect to Sudan, however, we are actually increasing the 

request. It is about 3 percent over the Fiscal Year 2010 total estimate, and we again share your concern which is why we are putting both more funding and more diplomatic attention to what is 

going on in Southern Sudan. 

The Sudan-JEM agreement is welcome. We share your concern 

about whether it is real, but we are working hard on that and I 

met when I was in Doha with the Prime Minister of Qatar who has 

been a facilitator of that effort. 

With Liberia we are making a decision to extend that deferred 

status. 

With Nigeria, Assistant Secretary Johnny Carson was in Nigeria 

and very much involved in the peaceful transition. With the return 

of the President we are going to maintain vigilance over what is 

happening inside Nigeria. 

We support the U.N. process concerning Morocco and the Western Sahara. 

Finally, on Northern Ireland, as you may know, I went to Northern Ireland. I spoke in Stormont. I have been deeply involved with, 

and telephoning with all of the major players, just met with Shaun 

Woodward, the Secretary for Northern Ireland. I share your hope 

that the March 9th vote is affirmative. 

Chairman BERMAN. Amazing. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Burton. 

Mr. BURTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have two brief comments. I want to associate myself with the remarks of Mr. Ackerman regarding the Goldstone report. I just signed a letter to the 

Secretary along with you, Mr. Chairman, and others regarding 

that. 

The second thing I wanted to say is that the Sanctions Act that 

you graciously got through the House and has been passed in the 

Senate still has to go to conference committee, and I would hope 

we would get that passed and to the President as quickly as possible. 

21

Third, I want to thank the Secretary of State for her hard work. 

She has been working very hard. It is pretty apparent. She has 

been all over the place and we appreciate your work. 

I have two questions for you, first of all regarding Iran. Iran—

and we have been talking about this now for several years—they 

have not moved one inch from their development program. In fact, 

IAEA said they are planning 10 more sites and several thousand 

more centrifuges. They are also talking about building a bombproof 

facility in the side of a mountain. And so while we are talking 

about negotiating all kinds of measures to put pressure on them, 

I think that we ought to also be talking about an attack on those 

sites and let them know that the United States and Israel, working 

together, will do whatever it takes to stop a development program 

that will threaten the Middle East, our energy supplies and the 

State of Israel. And while we are talking about this, you know, 

working with our allies to put pressure on them through sanctions, 

I really think the message should be sent publicly or through you 

privately that we are prepared to give Israel whatever they need 

to be able to go way below the ground, maybe 100, 200, 300 feet, 

whatever it is, to knock out those development sites if necessary, 

because we don’t want them to have as a terrorist state nuclear 

weapons that can just destabilize the entire region and maybe destroy Israel. 

And so I hope you will maybe comment on that. The other thing 

I would like you to comment on, Madam Secretary, is I was informed that the Justice Department has somewhere up to nine or 

maybe even more people working there who did pro bono work for 

some of the terrorists or detainees that are being held at Guantanamo. And if that is the case, I am very concerned about the decision that is being made by the Justice Department to bring those 

people to the United States for civil trial. People may have a biased 

attitude over there, and I hope that those people aren’t involved in 

the decision-making process. 

I personally feel that the terrorists or the detainees should be 

tried at Guantanamo. There is water all the way around them, 

they can’t get away, and they should be tried by a military tribunal. And the vast majority of the American people feel exactly 

the same way. 

So I would like for you to address those two things. If you can’t 

address the first part because of classified information, that is fine, 

but I wish you would take to the President the message that many 

of us in Congress want Tehran and Mr. Ahmadinejad to know that 

we are not going to let them develop a nuclear weapons capability 

and a delivery system. As I understand it now, they are working 

on a missile with a delivery system for possibly a nuclear weapon. 

At least that is what the IAEA says and that is very troubling. 

So I hope you will deliver that message and if you could comment 

on those two things, I would appreciate it. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, I will convey the message. Our policy is to rally the international community for the 

broadest and most effective sanctions that can be brought to bear 

on the Iranian regime and thereby influence the decision making. 

One of the benefits of having the IAEA and supporting it, as we 

propose doing in this budget, is because they are viewed as an 

22

independent source of information. And I agree with you that their 

recent study under the new Director General, Ambassador Amano, 

has been given an enormous amount of credibility, which helps to 

make the case that we are making. 

With respect to your question about the Justice Department, obviously I would ask you to refer that to the Attorney General. I 

have no information on the points you are making concerning 

working there, but I would say this: I think that the President’s 

commitment to close Guantanamo has been a very valuable asset 

to us as we have made our case around the world. Fairly or not, 

Guantanamo came to be seen as not reflective of American values, 

of the strength of our Constitution and our institutions, and I think 

there are ways to accommodate the concerns that are rightly held 

about the detainees and the terrorists. But I still very strongly support the closing of Guantanamo. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. Sherman, the chairman of 

the Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade Subcommittee, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. SHERMAN. It is good to see you, Madam Secretary. 

The Iran Sanctions Act requires to name and shame those companies that invest over the triggering amount, I believe it is $40 

million, in the Iran oil sector, and to either impose sanctions or 

waive them. Your budget contains tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions to work in the world for democracy and for the 

rule of law. But for 10 years, three administrations have made a 

mockery of democracy and the rule of law here in the United 

States, as three administrations have deliberately failed to follow 

the minimum, nonwaivable portions of the Iran Sanctions Act. In 

fact, the prior administration told me flat out in foreign policy we 

don’t follow those statutes that we think are bad policy. This can 

only be called the Dick Cheney approach to the rule of law. 

Last October, a number of us, led by Congressman Ron Klein, 

sent a letter outlining 21 firms that had invested a triggering 

amount in the Iran oil sector. This was prepared not by the CIA 

but the CRS, the Congressional Research Service. We were promised by the relevant Assistant Secretary a response, a report in 45 

days. That was October. This is February. We have received a response that says he is still working on it, but that he has identified 

some transactions that are ‘‘potentially problematic.’’

Madam Secretary, will you be providing Congress with a report, 

perhaps classified, detailing the findings of this initial review? Will 

you provide us with an explanation in each instance of why certain 

transactions have been determined to be not problematic? And, 

most importantly, will you break with 10 years of State Department practice and actually follow the law by reviewing each transaction that seems to trigger the act and by naming, shaming, and 

either sanctioning or waiving with regard to the offending transactions? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, thank you very much for both 

your concern and your thoughtful approach. Deputy Secretary Jim 

Steinberg has led an internal State Department team on this issue. 

As you have well stated, there were no determinations made under 

the act in the prior administration. 

23

We have completed that preliminary review. We responded at the 

beginning of February to the inquiries you mentioned, and we indicated that some of the cases we reviewed deserved more thorough 

consideration, which is what we have undertaken. We have aggressively moved on three fronts to ensure that the review is serious 

and thorough, and we have a rigorous process in place for implementation. 

First, we continue to raise in our bilateral engagements with 

countries the need to strengthen their own reaction and present a 

united front in restricting investment in Iran’s energy sector. 

Second, we have worked with our embassies overseas to collect 

information on potentially sanctionable activity. There wasn’t a big, 

thick file when we got there, Mr. Sherman. We were very much 

starting pretty well from scratch, and we have already engaged 

with all of the companies and the governments that were included 

in the House letter, as well as some additional companies that we 

believe could be engaged in similar activities. 

Finally, we are undertaking a review with the intelligence community with respect to certain activities of some companies that 

are warranting further scrutiny and have requested an all-source 

intelligence community assessment so that we can make whole of 

government assessments. 

I understand that the State Department is working to arrange 

a briefing, a classified briefing, with Members on the outcome of 

this preliminary review. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I look forward to that. I would like to squeeze in 

three more questions to which I would like response for the record. 

First is as to Armenia. I am glad that you are providing more 

aid, but I think Congress should be against that. Thank you for 

having parity on military financing, but you do not have parity between Armenia and Azerbaijan as to international military training, and there should be a specific aid request for NagornoKarabagh. 

As to Sri Lanka, I would like you to respond for the record how 

the administration is working with the government to ensure the 

rights of the Tamil minority are protected, particularly of the over 

300,000 refugees. 

As to Sudan, given the likelihood that Southern Sudan will 

choose independence, what is the United States doing to support a 

successful, independent south, and more broadly a peaceful Sudan, 

and I await your responses in writing. 

Secretary CLINTON. Thank you. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The 

gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Manzullo, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MANZULLO. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary, a fellow Illinoisan. Welcome here. 

The state of America’s economy continues to struggle with unemployment still unacceptably high, and I am sure you have heard 

the jobless claims for February jumped to a record 496,000 for the 

week ending on February 20. At the same time the Institute for 

Supply Management shows for the 7th month in a row, I believe, 

it is above 50 and continues to climb to show that orders are coming in to our manufacturers. However, despite this promising sign, 

there are two chokepoints that remain. Yesterday we brought the 

24

first one up with Chairman Bernanke, and it is the inability of 

manufacturers and small business people to access credit; and obviously without credit they can’t meet the payroll, replace inventory, 

or buy new equipment, and these are the real job creators because 

the orders are out there waiting because we have to manufacture 

our way out of this recession, not try to buy our way out of it. 

The second chokepoint is the outdated and inefficient export control system that unnecessarily prohibits export of items that do not 

pose a national security threat. The House addressed these inefficiencies by giving the State Department new tools to process export 

licenses in the House version of the State authorization bill. Unfortunately, the Senate has not acted on this. 

Because of your Midwest roots giving rise to a love and appreciation for manufacturing and the fact that you have always been an 

outstanding proponent of exporting our manufactured goods, we 

are asking you to use your leadership and influence to help move 

this process forward. 

I am just wondering, first of all, I know that you agree with everything that I have said, and my question to you is what more can 

be done? What can you do individually and as Secretary of State 

to break through on these export controls so we can ship more 

things overseas? Last year we had an outstanding bipartisan working group that modified section 17(C) of the Export Administration 

Act making it easier to ship aircraft parts overseas. That has resulted in $1 billion more in exports. That is 20,000 jobs that were 

added in manufacturing, or saved just because of that shipment. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, I do agree with everything you have said, and I thank you for strongly advocating for 

American manufacturing. You are right, there is an uptick. We are 

seeing some positive signs. The President has directed that the 

State Department and the Commerce Department and the Defense 

Department and other elements of the government work together 

to come up with a strong proposal to modify the entire export regime because there are so many outdated and inefficient aspects to 

it. 

But as you rightly point out, we have to get congressional buyin across the board on this. So we are working at the governmental 

level. We are reaching out to Members of Congress. Your bipartisan working group could be a great partner to us in doing this. 

And you know what the debate comes down to. There are some 

people who say if we lift the export restrictions on certain nuts, 

bolts, and screws we are going to be undermining American security. I don’t buy that. But there is a very strong resistance within 

the Congress to making the changes that I think are not at all dangerous to our security but would help our manufacturing. 

I will have someone follow up with you specifically, but we need 

the help of the bipartisan, on both sides of the Hill, members who 

will support what we are trying to do. 

Mr. MANZULLO. The other question is we are working—I have 

the world’s only fish processor of gefilte fish. Thank you, thank you. 

Believe it or not, it is Asian carp that is being caught in the Lower 

Mississippi and—this is true—and in the Great Lakes. Israel has 

imposed a 120 percent duty. There are nine containers of this that 

are locked up. We are in contact with the ambassador from Israel. 

25

Passover is coming quickly to Israel. We are working with the rabbis there who inspect this facility in Thompson, Illinois, and I just 

want to make this public and see if there is anything that you can 

do to get the gefilte fish to Israel by Passover. 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, I will take that mission on. 

Mr. MANZULLO. Thank you. Thank you. 

Secretary CLINTON. I don’t know if I can promise that we can get 

it done, but I will give you my best efforts. And if not, we will have 

to figure out what to do with nine containers. 

Mr. MANZULLO. It is 55 percent of their product. They could lose 

a couple hundred jobs if we don’t get the gefilte fish there. 

Secretary CLINTON. We should consult with the chairman and 

Congressman Ackerman. This sounds to me like one of those issues 

that is something that should rise to the highest level of our Government. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Madam Secretary. 

Chairman BERMAN. The menu of the next State dinner. The time 

of the gentleman has expired. 

The gentleman from New York, Mr. Engel, the chairman of the 

Western Hemisphere Subcommittee. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Manzullo, I would like to place an order for two jars of the 

gefilte fish. Passover is coming very soon. 

Madam Secretary, thank you very much for the wonderful, extraordinary job that you are doing as our Secretary of State. I know 

Mr. Manzullo talked about your Illinois roots. You mentioned a 

New York minute before, and New York is very, very, very proud 

of you. I would like to just throw out a couple of things and then 

ask you to comment. 

I have just come back from a trip to Israel. I met with top leaders. All anyone wanted to talk about was Iran, and we have had 

a lot of discussion here about Iran. Obviously, it is a very serious 

situation and we all agree that Iran must not be allowed to have 

a nuclear weapon and I really believe ultimately nothing should be 

taken off the table because they really must not be allowed to have 

a nuclear weapon. 

Syria. I was the author of the Syria Accountability Act, which 

slapped sanctions on Syria for aiding and abetting terrorism. I 

know that as of last week we have opened diplomatic relations with 

them and exchanged ambassadors with them for the first time in 

many, many years. I know the rationale for it is to get them to engage and help; but, frankly, I haven’t seen any change. This is the 

game that Syria has been playing for years and years. I haven’t 

seen any change in that regime’s behavior. Perhaps something is 

going on behind the scenes that I am not privy to, but I am wondering if you can comment on that. 

We talk about Iran and the dissidents in Iran. I know that the 

feeling in some quarters is that we don’t want to publicly identify 

with them too much because it will just help the regime to identify 

the dissidents or agents of the United States. But I really think we 

need to have more public support for the brave people of Iran who 

are standing up under extraordinary conditions against their regime. 

26

Kosovo. It just turned 2 years old last week, and we are trying 

very hard to get other countries to recognize them. I know the administration has been doing that as well. The officials of Kosovo 

are very interested in getting into the EBRD, which is the European Bank for Reconstruction Development. They need some countries to vote them in, and I would hope that behind the scenes we 

are helping to convince countries to support them in that. 

I want to quickly talk about, since I chair the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, a couple of those issues. First of all, thank 

you for the extraordinary effort of you personally and the administration with Haiti. This has been something of course that has all 

gripped us, and I think it is very, very important. 

I am delighted to hear of your upcoming travel to Latin America. 

I think we are reengaging the hemisphere after years of neglect, 

and I think it is very, very important. I want to talk about drug 

policy. I believe we need a more holistic approach to our counternarcotics strategy in the Western Hemisphere. I support strongly 

the Andean Drug Initiative, the Merida Initiative, and the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, but I think we need to do a better 

job in weaving all of these things together. I would like to hear you 

are thoughts on that and what efforts you are taking to better integrate these efforts so our successes in certain countries don’t contribute to problems in other countries. 

I personally have suggested designating a coordinator at the 

State Department to oversee all of our Western Hemisphere security initiatives, and would you consider doing this? Would you 

think about this? 

Lastly, two comments. Number one, Venezuela. Yesterday the 

OAs’ human rights agencies criticized Venezuela for its deteriorating human rights situation, and this follows their recent condemnation of Chavez’s closure of RCTV and several other cable television stations. How are we working with our partners in the OAS 

to call attention to this? 

Finally, as was mentioned before, I am extremely concerned 

about the Cuban imprisonment of USAID contractor Alan Gross. I 

met with his wife yesterday at the Capitol, and needless to say, everyone is concerned. 

Can you comment on any or all of those things? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, I will certainly give you responses to these important issues in writing. 

Let me just briefly say on Syria, the President decided to return 

an ambassador because it is in our national interest to do so. This 

is not any way a reward because there is no basis for such a reward for Syria, but it is because we think having an ambassador 

on the ground in Damascus helps to ensure our national interests 

are taken care of, and also to avoid strategic miscalculations on the 

parts of the Syrians. 

So we are very committed to making clear to the Syrians what 

we expect. There is a lot that we do expect. But we think having 

an ambassador back on the ground actually gives us more leverage 

and more opportunity to pursue those expectations. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. Royce, is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

27

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I appreciated very 

much your comments last week on Iran, but we should be doing 

more, I think, to target those who are hanging, who are raping, 

who are maiming Iranians. The ranking member and I have legislation that would target Iran’s human rights abusers with travel 

sanctions, with financial sanctions, and I think a concerted effort 

here would do much to discredit the regime both inside and outside 

Iran. 

Second, I wanted to point out that there are some 200,000 political prisoners. We discussed a little bit the problem in Iran. We 

have the same problem in North Korea. People are being tortured 

and worked to death, starved to death in the gulags in North 

Korea, and I think pressing human rights should be part of our 

strategic policy toward North Korea. 

Lastly, and I think most importantly for me, is an issue that 

came to light that we are all conversant with now, but a Nigerian 

banker going to the U.S. Embassy stating that his son is under the 

influence of religious extremists in Yemen, as he shared with us. 

And then we find that we have months of communication that 

come through our U.S. intelligence intercepts about al-Qaeda having a plan to attack us using a Nigerian. And then the response 

comes from one of the administration’s spokesmen, and these are 

his words, ‘‘hunches are not enough to constitute reasonable suspicion.’’ Really. Why is that? 

Well, if you look at the language adopted from a legal case, and 

here we get into the worry that we are becoming too legalistic on 

this, there is Terry v. Ohio, it is a Supreme Court case back in 

1968 that determined when fourth amendment protections against 

unreasonable searches allow the police to frisk American civilians. 

Somehow the administration went forward, and I can’t understand 

how we have foreign terrorists somehow being granted fourth 

amendment reasonable rights that the courts intended to protect 

Americans from being searched by local police. Those are two different issues. 

Americans enjoy special rights and protections because we carry 

out the responsibility of being Americans. Those outside our border 

have no part in that compact, especially enemy combatants. But increasingly we have this issue. Are intelligence officers allowed now 

to make these hunches? That hunch should have been that the visa 

should be reviewed and searched and he should be searched before 

being allowed to get on that plane. So we have to allow our intelligence agents to make those determinations. 

I would ask, with the Obama administration leaning toward 

treating terrorism as a matter for domestic law enforcement, such 

as trying terrorists in civilian courts instead of military tribunals 

and making decisions like this that hunches are not enough to constitute a reasonable suspicion, are we allowing a legalistic culture 

here to get in the way of allowing our intelligence agents to do 

their job? 

Secretary CLINTON. I think the answer, Congressman, is no. Obviously there were some deficiencies in how the visa of the Christmas Day bomber was treated. And certainly speaking for the State 

Department, we have moved to plug any slight gap that we needed 

to. 

28

But, you know, since 2001, the State Department has revoked 

51,000 visas for a variety of reasons, including more than 1,700 for 

suspected links to terrorism. In addition to revocation, in just Fiscal Year 2009, consular officers refused nearly 2 million visas; 

1,885,000, to be exact. So we have people acting on their gut on evidence, on hunches, on the feel of their fingertips when they sit 

across from an applicant in a consular interview, and I don’t think 

that story gets out. So, yes, there is——

Mr. ROYCE. I think that is a good point. But if we have someone 

in the administration who believe that hunches are not enough to 

constitute reasonable suspicion, it only takes one terrorist getting 

through, and that is why I bring the point up. 

Secretary CLINTON. I appreciate that, and I take it very seriously, Congressman. It is on the top of my mind every single day 

since I was privileged to serve as a Senator from New York on 

9/11. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

The chairman of the Europe Subcommittee, the gentleman from 

Massachusetts, Mr. Delahunt. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Welcome, Madam Secretary. I am not going to 

talk about Europe, but I would note that yesterday the committee 

had an excellent interparliamentary exchange with the state members of the Russian Duma, and it would appear that significant 

progress is being made on the START treaty. Let me congratulate 

you. If we can get that done, that is a significant achievement in 

terms of you and the President’s ambition to deal with this issue 

of nuclear proliferation. 

But I want to talk about Iraq. I am very concerned about these 

upcoming elections in Iraq. Chairman Berman and Chairman Ackerman and several of us on this side of the aisle sent a letter to 

the President last month. We hear a lot about the deficits, and my 

understanding is that we are quickly approaching $1 trillion in 

terms of not the human but the financial cost of the war in Iraq. 

So that is obviously a significant component of the deficit challenge 

that we have to address. 

And there is a lot of talk about Iran. There was an interesting 

op-ed piece this morning in the Post by David Ignatius where he 

reports the observation by General Odierno that the administration 

is clearly concerned about the possible manipulation of the Iraqi 

elections by Iran. I found it interesting that according to that oped piece, the primary agent in this effort is none other than Ahmed 

Chalabi, whom we all remember was a key player in terms of providing intelligence that led the previous Congresses under the previous administration to authorize the war in Iraq. 

But just to quote one section and then to ask for your response 

to the question, what are we doing about this apparent manipulation by the Iranians in terms of the Iraqi elections that are going 

to mean so much in terms of what post-occupation Iraq looks like 

and whether we have an ally in Iraq or whether there is a state 

in Iraq that is more aligned with Iran, as some of us said 6, 7 years 

ago was a possibility? 

This is just an observation by General Odierno: Iran interferes 

in Iraq’s political process, urging alliances that not all Iraqi politicians favor. In an effort to consolidate power among parties supVerDate 0ct 09 2002 07:02 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\022510\55126 HFA PsN: SHIRL
29

ported by Iran, for example, Ahmed Chalabi met with the Commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the Iranian Foreign Minister to discuss the merger of two slates of Shiite candidates backed by Iran. 

Your comment, please. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, we are very focused on 

these elections. I will make three quick observations. 

First, there is no doubt that not only Iran but other neighbors 

are doing what they can to support or influence the outcome of the 

election. We are most concerned and focused on Iran because of 

their ties with many Iraqis who had previously sought exile or refuge in Iran who were supportive of the efforts against Saddam 

Hussein. You know very well the story. 

Yet at the same time we see on balance the Iraqis are much 

more nationalistic and much more willing to stand up for themselves vis-a`-vis Iran with the exception of some Iraqis who have a 

different agenda, who are carrying water, if you will, for the Iranians. 

So I cannot sit here and predict what the outcome of the election 

will be, but we are trying to ensure as big a participation as possible, which we think mitigates against the Iranian influence. We 

are trying to ensure that Iraqi refugees in Syria, Jordan and elsewhere are empowered to vote. We are trying to ensure insofar as 

possible that there are significant electoral observers, both of the 

voting and of the 2-week counting process. And then we are going 

to be very active in supporting the government formation process.

Mr. ACKERMAN [presiding]. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. Paul from Texas. 

Mr. PAUL. Welcome, Madam Secretary. I have a question about 

the cost of our foreign operations. We are now in the midst of a financial crisis. We have a heavy burden of debt. We know what 

debt can do. Greece is experiencing that type of problem. We could 

reach that problem, I believe, if we continue to do what we are 

doing. The international affairs budget 10 years ago was $23 billion 

and now it is $54 billion. That is a tremendous increase and that 

is not all from this administration, obviously. But during that same 

period of time the real wages of most American workers has gone 

down, and the unemployment right now, according to the Department of Labor, the under employment, is 20 percent. So this is 

nothing to ignore and it is related to all of our spending. 

A lot of Americans can’t justify the amount of money we are 

spending, both in the war effort and in our affairs around the 

world. Quite frankly, there are some who don’t feel a lot safer for 

it, but there is a human price that we are paying. We have lost 

over 5,000 Americans in fighting these wars, over 1,000 now in Afghanistan alone. There are hundreds of thousands of casualties of 

veterans coming back with both physical and mental problems. 

They are going to be needing care for many, many years. The cost 

of all of this is probably, in the last 10 years, could easily be $1.5 

trillion. 

Also there is the refugee problem. We have hundreds of thousands of refugees still, you know, experiencing difficulty both in 

Iraq and Afghanistan. Just this very last month 24,000 refugees 

30

were added in the invasion into Afghanistan. Yesterday we had a 

report from the United Nations that there were 346 children killed 

in Afghanistan. So the violence affects everybody and that truly is 

a cost. 

But the more specific question I have for you is one of priorities. 

Obviously what is going on here in the Congress is everybody justifies all of their spending. People here justify the domestic spending, 

and people justify the overseas spending and the war spending, 

and they worry about not having enough bipartisanship. I worry 

about too much because they get together and they enjoy spending 

both places and nobody cares about the deficit. 

I want to specifically ask you about the Embassy in London because people can see that and they can feel it. We built an Embassy in Baghdad and it cost close to $1 billion. We built one in 

Kabul which cost close to $1 billion, and then there are always cost 

overruns and the maintenance. It is very, very expensive. I think 

the American people have a hard time understanding what we are 

doing in London. 

Assume for a minute that you could come to my district and talk 

to some of my unemployed people and explain to them why it is 

in their interest to spend, for the American people to spend $1 billion building a fortress in London when they are falling through 

the cracks and their wages have gone down, the ones that have 

work. See if you can relate to them and explain to them the importance, and you have to say that that $1 billion will have to be more 

debt because where are you going to save it. Can you explain that 

to these unemployed people? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, with respect to the Embassy, 

we are selling 11 sites that we currently rent at very high cost in 

London to consolidate in one building. Therefore, the money that 

we gain from the sale of these buildings will be used to fund the 

Embassy. So we are not asking for additional or new money. The 

reason we need a platform like that Embassy in London is because 

we do so much work in every department of our Government 

through London. It is not just our diplomats, but obviously every 

other part of the American Government is represented there. 

So I believe I can make the case that we are not asking for new 

money on that. But I take very seriously your larger point, Congressman. It breaks my heart that 10 years ago we had a balanced 

budget, that we were on the way to paying down the debt of the 

budget of the United States of America. I served on the Budget 

Committee in the Senate, and I remember as vividly as if it were 

yesterday when we had a hearing in which Alan Greenspan came 

and justified increasing spending and cutting taxes, saying that we 

didn’t really need to pay down the debt. Outrageous, in my view. 

Mr. PAUL. Is there any place in your budget where you could cut 

anything significant? 

Secretary CLINTON. We are cutting. Part of our problem is that 

we are now assuming so many of the post-conflict responsibilities, 

and that is the bulk of our increase, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. PAUL. Thank you. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. Carnahan from Missouri for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Welcome, Secretary Clinton. 

31

Yesterday our Oversight Subcommittee had Special Inspector 

General for Iraq Reconstruction, Stuart Bowen, testifying about reports they had done a year ago and recently talking about hard lessons learned in terms of vast amounts of money that was thrown 

into Iraq without having adequate structures in place, as well as 

overlap, money—literally billions of dollars—not being able to be 

accounted for. And I guess as we ramp up the military and civilian 

presence, tripling the civilians on the ground under this budget, 

what measures are in place to be sure that we are doing this in 

a targeted way that we can account for? 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, I take the lessons from 

the mistakes in the last years in Iraq and Afghanistan very seriously. We are trying to apply those lessons with much greater accountability, with much greater oversight of contractors. It is one 

of my highest priorities because I do believe strongly that I or 

someone should have to be able to justify not just to you but to 

your constituents why we are doing what we are doing and to do 

the very best job we can in order to eliminate the outrageous overruns and fraud, waste and abuse. I cannot justify the past. We are 

going to work as hard as we know how to make the present and 

the future better. 

We are looking at every single contract. There is so much waste 

in these contracts and so much that was literally just allowed to 

continue in the rush of everything that accompanied military action. So we are looking very hard at that and trying to make these 

adjustments. We will be reporting to you as we go forward. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Thank you. I wanted to ask additionally about 

the Global Engagement Fund. I understand that it is a follow-up 

to the President’s speech in Cairo and will focus on expanding opportunity, science and technology partnerships and human development issues. Could you provide us some details on what you hope 

that can accomplish? 

Secretary CLINTON. Yes. We can give you certainly more specifics 

than the time permits. But this did arise out of the President’s 

Cairo speech and his vision for a new beginning with Muslims 

around the world. We are enhancing our public diplomacy outreach. We are using more of the tools that America has, like our 

science and technology and education strengths. We have science 

envoys, distinguished Nobel Prize winners, and other very well 

known leading scientists going to Muslim majority countries. We 

have a lot of English language programs for young people that we 

are expanding. So we have a full range of such issues that bring 

a different message. 

And we don’t want to forget that we have a very diverse Muslim 

population in the world. People get focused on just one part of the 

world, often to the exclusion of the entire spread of Islam from 

North Africa to Indonesia. So what works in one place or what we 

are trying doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be the same somewhere else. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. One other point I want to make: I want to voice 

my support for your request to increase funding to Bosnia, particularly with the political challenges they face—Presidential and parliamentary elections in October. How do you see us, strategy-wise, 

moving forward to help them once they get through the election 

32

process and to be sure that they are on track with constitutional 

reforms and momentum to be able to join the EU and NATO? 

Secretary CLINTON. I appreciate your raising Bosnia, and I know 

that is a particular concern of yours because there does have to be 

constitutional reform, and we are pushing that as an important 

part of our outreach. 

I wanted to just specifically respond to you that as we look at 

Bosnia, this has been a priority for me this past year. We have to 

do it with the Europeans. We cannot do it alone. The EU and the 

neighbors have to take more responsibility. We have worked with 

the European Union, and I made this one of my highest agenda 

items with the new High Representative, Baroness Catherine Ashton. The EU and Europe has to make a stronger case to Bosnia as 

to why constitutional reforms are in their interest and will assist 

in their integration with the rest of the Europe. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. The gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much. 

Madam Secretary, I am sorry I have had to come in and out. We 

have a space program hearing that needed some attention. Just a 

few questions, Madam Secretary. 

I understand in your foreign aid budget that we provide nearly 

$10 million for programs in China. Now how does that make any 

sense at a time we are borrowing money from China, we actually 

are giving foreign aid to China? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, we are not giving any foreign 

aid to China. Let me just flip here to give you the best answer that 

I can. 

What we do is try to foster civil society inside China. We try to 

support Chinese activists who are working on issues that are important to our entire engagement with China, issues that have to 

do with human rights, with the rule of law, and environmental protections. The kinds of actions that we think are important. 

Our programs provide pilots and models that the Chinese people 

can subsequently adapt using their own resources. And we also 

provide assistance programs working with Tibetan communities to 

promote their interests as well. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I notice that $5 million of it is economic support. 

Secretary CLINTON. That is right. Economic support is provided 

to U.S. higher educational institutions and U.S. nongovernmental 

organizations working in China in line with earmarks. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. In line with earmarks? 

Secretary CLINTON. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. This was forced upon you by Congress? 

Secretary CLINTON. Those were your words. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. All right. I am happy to see that we agree 

on something that should not be in the budget then. Thank you. 

Madam Secretary, the President when he first came into office 

and over his first year has done his best to basically use a conciliatory tone toward Iran in hopes of trying to create a situation where 

we could actually have some progress, and I have been one of the 

ones criticizing him for that. Has this worked out? We have had 

33

1 year now. Has this conciliatory process or tone with Iran, has it 

worked to make the mullahs more open and interact with us in a 

better way? Or has it been looked at as a sign of weakness by this 

oppressive mullah regime? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, I think the President’s policy 

of engagement has been very beneficial and welcomed by the rest 

of the world. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. What about the mullahs? 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, clearly the President came with a twotrack approach. One was an offer of engagement if the Iranians 

would engage seriously on matters that were critical to us; namely, 

their nuclear program, and there has not been a response. But the 

fact that the President reached out has brought us an enormous 

amount of credibility and goodwill in the rest of the world. But at 

the same time the President always said we have a dual track approach, and the approach of sanctions and pressure, it wasn’t an 

afterthought, it went simultaneously with his offer of engagement. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I want to suggest, Madam Secretary, that 

playing to our liberal, willy-nilly friends in Europe is less important for us than to be tough with a repressive regime, a murderous 

regime that has engaged in murdering people on their streets. 

Don’t you think that this conciliatory tone, which as you just admitted certainly has not been accepted by the mullahs, has in some 

way depressed or at least hurt the spirit on the streets of Iran of 

those young people who are trying to struggle to end this mullah 

regime? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, no, we do not see evidence of 

that. We actually believe that if you take everything that we are 

doing together, including working to make sure that information 

continues to flow into Iran over the efforts by the government to 

block the Internet and satellite television and the like, if you look 

at the information coming out by those who have been detained, 

and I have talked to several people who have imprisoned by the 

Iranian regime, they actually think that President Obama has 

struck exactly the right tone and approach to give heart to the people who are putting their lives on the line, who know that we stand 

with them, know that we support their efforts, but also recognize 

that they have a long hard road ahead, and what we are trying to 

do is get international opinion that will force the Iranian regime 

to change its calculation. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. The gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee, 5 minutes. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Secretary, thank you again. I think it 

is important to acknowledge the seismic change of the policies of 

the Obama administration with your leadership and policy knowledge, that we have really changed the story of America around the 

world. I think that is an important point that we should affirm. 

We should also make note that in actuality our budget is very 

fiscally responsible. It is a budget that includes some of the 

hotspots of the world, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. And so in 

my comments I would like you to make mention and might I pubVerDate 0ct 09 2002 07:02 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\022510\55126 HFA PsN: SHIRL
34

licly say I am delighted to note that President Clinton is mending 

and we thank him for his work in Haiti. 

Let me also acknowledge the loss of a civil foreign officer in 

Haiti. Many of us have had our eyes on Haiti and I was down just 

about 2 weeks ago. What do you think going forward would be a 

potential supplemental on Haiti? What is the going forward approach for reconstruction and rebuild? Many Americans want to be 

engaged. Thank you for your work on the evangelists and others 

who had missteps and were arrested. We talked about that, too, 

and I asked for them to be given mercy, released, and they are 

gone. But I do think it is important to have some standard for faith 

organizations. All of them are trying to come down. Their intentions are good and I would like to see us have that. 

I would like to get your assessment of the progress and the work 

of Pakistan. As you well know, I have advocated for Pakistan in 

the bad days. But I have seen, just as I had expected and hoped, 

a major commitment by the government and of course their work 

on the border. 

Two last points. I would like you to assess any focus that the 

State Department is having on the children of Afghanistan. My colleague talked about the loss of life. I would like to get a sense of 

whether you have a focus. 

My last point is a comment for your staff, if they could take this 

down. I have a constituent whose daughter was killed in America 

by a Peruvian student. The name is Lindsey Brasier in Austin, 

Texas. The perpetrator was Evelyn Denise Mezzich. That person is 

in Peru, and we have not been able to have that person brought 

back for justice. They have a felony of skipping bail and Interpol 

has this matter. This has been a tragedy which occurred in 1998. 

You know how tragic that is. I would appreciate being able to work 

with you on this extradition issue as relates internationally. Brief 

comments on those questions. I thank you again for your service 

and the President’s policies. 

Secretary CLINTON. Thank you, Congresswoman, and thank you 

for your attention to Haiti. We are working on a supplemental that 

we hope will come to the Congress in the next few weeks. It will 

include both replenishment of funds in the State Department and 

USAID principally, but also funding for the recovery and reconstruction efforts going forward. 

I think that the leadership role that the United States has 

played has redounded so greatly to our benefit, not only in the 

hemisphere but around the world. We will be having a conference 

March 31 co-hosted by the U.S. and the U.N., along with other 

major donor countries, that will look very specifically about the 

way forward. So we will hopefully continue to have strong bipartisan support in the Congress. 

Thank you for your continuing attention to Pakistan. I agree 

with you. I think this last year has demonstrated significant 

changes in approach and commitment from the Pakistani Government, the democratically elected government, as well as the military and intelligence services. Their cooperation with us in the recent arrests and apprehension of leading Taliban figures is I think 

very strong evidence of that. 

35

I share your concern about children in Afghanistan or anywhere 

in the world, really, and we are focused on doing what we can in 

cooperation with our partners who are sharing the donor responsibility in Afghanistan, and we can give you more information on 

that. 

Finally, my staff will work very closely with you on this request 

on behalf of your constituent and see what, if any, action we can 

take. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you. I look forward to working with 

you on the children issue. And thank you for the help with the 

mother who has been grieving for so long. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Flake for 5 minutes. 

Mr. FLAKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Since Dana took the only earmark question, I am left with just 

Cuba. 

Cuba has been mentioned a couple of times. You mentioned the 

dissident Tamayo who recently died, a tragic situation in that regard. Also we have the situation of Alan Gross, an American who 

is being held by the Cuban Government, was a USAID contractor 

there. 

The gentlelady from Florida mentioned in light of recent events 

there, that it is her hope that the Obama administration not offer 

any concessions to the Cuban Government. I would go a bit further. 

I would hope that this administration would stop offering concessions to the Cuban Government. These concessions have been offered not just by this administration but by many administrations 

in the past. I would argue that the policy we have where we deny 

Americans the freedom to travel to Cuba is a concession to the 

Cuban Government. Whether they admit it or not, whether they 

quietly lobby or publicly lobby for that change, I don’t think they 

want it. And every time we seem to get close, they provoke us 

somehow and so we change our policy. I think we ought to do it 

because that is simply what is right. 

I was excited to hear that the Obama administration would recast our Cuban policy, and they took a good first step by allowing 

Cuban Americans the ability to visit their family members without 

restrictions and to remit money to their family members. That does 

a good deal to help the dissidents who are there and the families 

of those who are held prisoner. 

That is a good thing. But beyond that it seems our policy is on 

autopilot. The contractor who is being held by the Cuban Government, he was on a contract that was awarded by the Bush administration. We still have policies going forward that don’t serve us 

well, I would argue. It goes from $400,000 in scholarships that 

brought two Cubans to America. Hundreds of thousands of dollars 

in Europe to try to persuade European governments to change 

their Cuba policy. Bumper stickers, ‘‘Made in Miami,’’ that Cuban 

dissidents and others were supposed to put on their cars, for crying 

out loud. We have some of the craziest things going, and I see your 

smile so I think you probably agree, when we simply could say, and 

I am assuming we have put some of these USAID contracts on ice, 

given that we have one contractor in jail. Why don’t we simply 

allow Americans to travel to Cuba unabated? 

36

I have no doubt that the Cuban Government will try to impose 

its own restrictions. They want the revenue that would come with 

travel but not the influence. But if somebody is going to limit my 

travel and the travel of my constituents, it should be a Communist, 

not this government. We should not be in that business. We should 

be able to say Americans should be able to travel. 

We talked about this the last time you were here. I know you are 

open. We have legislation moving. There are more than 180 cosponsors to lift the travel ban, but there are things that the Obama administration can do prior to the passage of that legislation. We 

could lift some of the restrictions or dial back some of the restrictions imposed by the Bush administration on people-to-people travel and allow more of that. 

Can I have your thoughts on that? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, the reason I am smiling is because I think that we all share the same goal. The goal is to create 

changes for the better in the lives of the people of Cuba, promote 

democracy and freedom and hopefully see the time soon when the 

Cuban people have the same rights as we do. That is our goal, and 

that is what we are pursuing. 

The President’s April announcement last year changed United 

States policy toward Cuba in a number of ways based on the evidence that we should try some different approaches, and we should 

really look at what it is we are doing that is actually helping the 

Cuban people because there is evidence that every time we try to 

encourage more free flow of people and information, the Castro regime shuts down. That is the last thing that they want. They do 

not want Americans traveling freely, remittances coming in, more 

communications systems, back and forth. We are working very 

hard to break through the control of the media but in a smart way. 

I am looking at every single program because frankly I want 

things that work. If we have been doing something over and over 

and over again and it is not working to help the people in Cuba, 

then we need to take a look at it. 

Mr. FLAKE. Let me just offer, TV and Radio Marti, we can move. 

Thank you. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The gentleman from North Carolina for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MILLER. Madam Secretary, I very much understand the need 

to support development, but I worry about the next set of conflicts 

that may involve us, and even if they don’t involve us, will be catastrophic for the people who live in the societies in conflict. General 

Anthony Zinni said that ungoverned areas and extreme poverty 

were a Petri dish for extremism and radicalism. And certainly 

there is an unholy mix of weak states, ungoverned areas, extreme 

poverty with a lack of any real economic development and conflict. 

And a quarter to a third of the states that are in conflict will fall 

into conflict again within 5 years, whether it is the same conflict 

or another conflict. And conflict leads to poverty and poverty leads 

to conflict, and all of it leads to very weak states, states that cannot survive the pressures on them. 

The budget increases development assistance by 18.3 percent, 

the proposed budget; 23.1 percent for economic support funds, but 

there are other areas that seem to be important for avoiding conVerDate 0ct 09 2002 07:02 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\022510\55126 HFA PsN: SHIRL
37

flict, for conflict-prone societies; a 13 percent decrease for the Transition Initiatives Account. How much of the increases for the Development Assistance and Economic Support Fund goes to those frontline states? Is the budget sufficient to meet the needs in the other 

parts of the world where there is extreme poverty and either conflict now or potential for conflict, and what are the pressures on the 

budget, on that part of the budget? 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, it is a balancing act. I mean, 

that is what we do every single day. We have incurred responsibilities in the frontline states in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan because of policies that were there when we came into office, but 

which we have responsibility to fulfill. So as you rightly point out, 

a significant percentage of what we are doing in development and 

assistance is going to those three countries. 

At the same time we have tried to identify countries that are in 

that Petri dish that you describe, that are really on the brink of 

collapse or becoming a failed state, from which extremism is being 

exported. Yemen is obviously the key example. And we are bolstering our involvement and assistance in ways that we hope will 

stabilize those countries, but there are so many places now and 

particularly in Africa that are vulnerable, and it concerns me 

greatly what I see happening across that continent. And I think we 

have to do a better job coordinating other investments from nongovernmental donors, from the private sector, so that we know 

what is happening, where it is, and what the consequences are. 

And we also need to do a better job of making sure what we are 

doing actually has good results, we are not just putting money in 

for the sake of saying we have done it. So it is a very difficult calculation. 

Mr. MILLER. You mentioned Yemen and obviously Yemen has 

gotten a fair amount of attention. It is an ungoverned or lightly 

governed area with severe economic problems, but it also looks like 

in a decade the people of Yemen will look back on the way things 

are now as the good old days. They are running out of oil. Oil is 

the great bulk of their government revenue. They are running out 

of water. I don’t know what you do with a country that runs out 

of water. What are we doing in Yemen and, as you put it, how are 

we making sure that the assistance we are providing is being effective, it is meeting needs and it is actually anticipating the problems that are coming at them? 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, this is a country that there is increasing interest from many others as well. I represented the United 

States at a conference about Yemen in London about a couple of 

weeks ago, and we are trying to do a better job coordinating. Some 

of the Gulf countries are much larger contributors than we are. 

What is hard is the Government of Yemen came to that meeting 

with a plan for development that they had adopted, which was sensible, and a recognition of a lot of their shortcomings. They have 

to change their agricultural product production if they are going to 

save their water, and that is a huge undertaking. But we are working in concert with others to try to help the government fulfill its 

own objectives. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Boozman, for 5 

minutes. 

38

Mr. BOOZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And again I want to 

send you warm greetings from your many, many friends in Arkansas, and we appreciate having you here today. 

I would like to ask you real quickly about the fact that the committee seems to indicate that they are going to propose the Armenian genocide resolution. And right now—currently the Turks and 

the Armenians are in the process of having protocol, normalization, 

talks and things. What I would like to know is your opinion of how 

that would affect that. And also the impact on the Turkish United 

States. Several years ago when I was in Incirlik visiting with the 

commanders there, they were really concerned about force protection, really far reaching problems if that were allowed to go forward. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, on Turkey-Armenia relations it is our position that the normalization process that Turkey 

and Armenia have undertaken carries important benefits for both 

sides and it should take place without preconditions and within a 

reasonable time frame. Last year in his Armenia Remembrance 

Day statement, President Obama made clear that our interest remains a full, frank and just acknowledgement of the facts related 

to the historical events. But the best way to do that with all respect is for the Armenian and Turkish people themselves to address the facts of their past as part of their efforts to move forward, 

and in that spirit we are working very hard to assist Armenia and 

Turkey in their efforts. We would like to continue to support that 

effort and not be diverted in any way at all. 

Mr. BOOZMAN. Very good. 

While testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee last 

October Assistant Secretary Jeff Feltman said that the State Department was in the process of reviewing 20 countries—20 companies, rather, that could be sanctioned under the Iranian Sanctions 

Act. He indicated this review would last about 45 days and an answer on those companies would be released at that time. Recently 

a few of my colleagues received a single page response in that regard. 

Can you enlighten us a little bit in that regard. 

Secretary CLINTON. Yes, Congressman. In response to Congressman Sherman, I laid out the process we have followed. The preliminary report was delivered in February and it made clear that we 

are doing in-depth investigation into a number of companies. We 

have already reached out to other countries on this. We have asked 

our embassies around the world to acquire additional information 

and we are offering in the near future a classified briefing for 

Members who wish to get into depth. There is a lot of information 

that would be better conveyed in a classified setting. 

But we are taking this very seriously. There wasn’t any action 

taken in the prior 8 years. The only time there has been action on 

the Iran Sanctions Act was by former Secretary Madeleine Albright 

and then that was waived because of national security interests. So 

this is an incredibly complex arena, but we are moving in a deliberative and thorough way and we look forward to briefing you in 

a classified setting. 

Mr. BOOZMAN. Good. Thank you. One other thing real quick, I 

know that the economic support funds for 2011 has been cut nearly 

39

$26 million. Can you comment on—you know, that is a pretty significant cut at a time when Sudan is due for its first democratic 

elections in decades, and the future of the comprehensive peace 

agreement for Sudan really does hang in the balance. Can you comment a little bit about that and if that is going to be a problem? 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, our information is that 

we actually have an increase in assistance for Southern Sudan. So 

we will get to you a written response because that is the second 

time I have been asked that question. So either we haven’t presented it in a clear enough way or there may be some interpretation we are not aware of. But I take the point, the larger point very 

seriously. We have to do more to help prepare Southern Sudan for 

a future dependent upon the choice it makes. If it is going to choose 

independence, then it needs a lot of work to have the institutions 

of statehood. And we are putting more diplomatic and development 

assets in order to try to help the Southern Sudanese as they work 

through these decisions. 

Mr. BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Secretary. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Scott, 5 minutes. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Welcome 

again, Madam Secretary. It is always a pleasure to see you, and 

let me compliment you on the extraordinary job that you continue 

to do as our Secretary of State. 

I would like to focus on Yemen again, having been there last 

year. I think we need to go a little deeper into this because this 

is a very dangerous place and it appears to me we are on the front 

lines there now, our State Department personnel, our embassies 

and our special operations people, particularly our Navy Seals. And 

at a recent questioning I asked about any effort from a military 

standpoint of getting in there and of course the question is no. So 

that leaves it that you are on the front lines there in trying to combat this and in trying to deal with it. 

Yemen is seriously I think approaching and utilizing and training with al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, their relationship with Somalia and training camps there. When I was there 

with Special Ops we visually saw these things happening. Now in 

your referral to your comment to my colleague, Mr. Miller, you 

mentioned of our aid that is going in there, but the problem is 

President Saleh has two reluctances. First of all, he has the reluctance to go after al-Qaeda and he has the reluctance of wanting 

more of our aid. So it is sort of like we are in a Catch-22 here. 

So I would like your assessment of how do we effectively use our 

resources in this kind of an environment where the people of 

Yemen themselves and the President’s reluctance to be seen taking 

our aid, taking more of it and at the same time is his reluctance 

to even go after al-Qaeda. 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, that is an astute description of 

the challenges that we face. In addition to what you have stated, 

there are also continuing problems in the north and the south in 

addition to AQAP. In the international conference about Yemen in 

London it became clear that other countries, particularly in the 

Gulf, provide much more funding for Yemen than we do or that we 

will. Therefore, they have to be united with us in the messages 

40

that we convey to President Saleh. And I agree that we have to 

work very hard to have a united front with all the international donors. Some of the European countries have long-standing connections with Yemen, certainly Saudi Arabia, Qatar and others in the 

region do. And I am focused on how we send as clear and unequivocal a message as possible as to what is expected in return for this 

aid. We do have to be sensitive to some of the local concerns about 

American involvement, but at the same time Yemen sits 25 miles 

across the Gulf from Somalia, and we know that there is that constant continuing connection. 

We will have more to report to you as we follow through on our 

policy here, but it is a mixed policy, it is an international policy. 

It is all aimed at influencing Presidential decisions, because as you 

saw, that is where they all come from and we have to support the 

President in making the right decisions. But this is going to be 

challenging. 

Mr. SCOTT. What do you suggest that we should do specifically 

about the evidence of the growing al-Qaeda training camps in both 

Yemen and Somalia? 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, I think the Government of Yemen has 

in the last few months been very active in going after training 

camps and identified members of al-Qaeda. So they are beginning 

to do what we would hope they would do, which is to protect their 

own country against the threat of growing extremism. But I think 

we and others in this international effort have to continue to support them, provide intelligence assets, provide surveillance assets, 

provide military equipment and training, all of which we are doing 

and all of which is very necessary if they are going to be successful 

in going after this threat. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. The gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Fortenberry. 

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, 

Madam Secretary. Welcome. Thank you so much for coming today. 

I would like to ask you two questions centered on Iran and bioterrorism. But before I do, given our previous dialogue, my conscience 

demands that I raise the issue with you again of including abortion 

as reproductive health care and including it as an integral component of our foreign affairs considerations. I believe this actually undermines our good diplomatic initiatives. Abortion is not health 

care; abortion is so often the result of abandonment. Women deserve better and certain taxpayers should not be put in the position 

of paying for it either here in the United States or underwriting 

it in our international programs. So I respectfully request that you 

reconsider your position. 

With that, let me return to Iran. I fear that we will all awake 

to the headline one day soon that Iran has the bomb. This would 

be a geopolitical game changer. I am very appreciative of your intensified efforts of late in this regard. I would like to hear your outlook though for the next 6 months. There is just so little time left. 

Secondly, I would like to hear what the State Department is 

doing to lead international diplomatic efforts to prevent bioterrorism, especially within the context of the G–8 Global Health Security Initiative for medical countermeasures, including stockpiling 

and delivery. As you are aware, the Weapons of Mass Destruction 

41

Commission unanimously concluded that bioterrorism is the most 

likely WMD threat that the world faces. 

Secretary CLINTON. Thank you very much, Congressman. And let 

me respond to your point and to some of the points made by Congressman Smith. First of all, the United States Government does 

not fund abortions. We don’t. We are increasing our funding to organizations that provide family planning services and maternal 

health. In fact, the budget provides $700 million to combat maternal mortality, with expanded coverage of prevention and lifesaving 

interventions such as the prevention and management of 

postpartum hemorrhaging and other terrible consequences of 

uncared for pregnancy that I take very seriously. 

I think that in many ways you and Congressman Smith and I 

have actually some of the shared views and concerns, but we do believe it is important to provide money, which we do in this budget, 

$590 million, for family planning and reproductive health, because 

so much of what happens in the health of women in developing 

countries is because they cannot control their reproductive health, 

and it is a matter of great concern to me because many of these 

women are very young, they are not prepared for pregnancy, they 

often suffer grievous injuries during labor and birth because they 

do not have adequate treatment, and that is one of the reasons why 

in our Global Health Initiative we are expanding America’s commitment to maternal and child health. 

So we share some of the very same goals, and I hope to be able 

to work with you. Where we differ is on the question of a woman’s 

right to choose, but we would like to avoid the choice that could 

lead to abortion by providing better resources and support for 

women around the world. 

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Before we pivot to the other two questions, 

though, you have redefined abortion as a part of reproductive 

health care for the first time and overturned the Mexico City policy 

which would again underwrite organizations who would participate 

in the act of abortion. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, you know, this is a debate that goes 

back many, many years and, you know, we do not believe in the 

gag rule, we do not believe that women should be deprived of information that might be important to their health and to plan for 

their own families. And as we exchanged views the last time I was 

here, I have seen the consequences of just terrible medical treatment that women have been subjected to because they didn’t have 

the right to pursue what was in their own interest, but we will not 

agree on that, but we will agree that we need to do more to help 

with maternal and child health I hope. 

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you. 

Secretary CLINTON. With respect to the outlook for Iran, obviously we believe that we have made progress in changing the attitudes of a number of nations toward Iran. We are going to continue 

to do so. We share your concern about Iran’s ambitions and its program and we are making the case very vigorously around the world 

about what the consequences would be for other countries. 

I think when I started 1 year ago many countries were not convinced that this is a problem that had anything to do with them, 

and we have every day made the case that a nuclear armed Iran 

42

will create an arms race in the Gulf that will destabilize the region 

that so much of the rest of the world depends upon for oil and gas. 

It could even lead to conflict, which would be an economic catastrophe for many countries that are so reliant, and therefore countries should join with us in doing everything we can to demonstrate 

international unity in pressuring Iran to change direction, and that 

is what we are engaged in vigorously right now. 

Finally, Congressman, the United States leads the world in 

terms of overall biopreparedness but there is a lot more we need 

to do. We are trying to work with the international community to 

pay more attention to the bioterrorist threat, to implement new 

policies, to stockpile vaccines. We are assisting with that through 

a wide range of activities. For example, we have foreign assistance 

programs that are specifically aimed at biological threats across 

South and Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and expanding into Africa, and we take it very seriously and will work to that end. 

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you. 

Chairman BERMAN [presiding]. The time of the gentleman is expired. The gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Ellison, is recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ELLISON. Good morning, Madam Secretary. Let me join some 

of my colleagues in applauding you. I like the budget and I intend 

to support it. 

My first question has to do with the administration’s commitment to try to support UNRWA and people who are trying to make 

it in Gaza, not the people who are engaged in terrorist activities 

but the regular folks who are trying to survive, but some of the assistance that we have given already has not really made it to the 

people and I would just be curious as to your thoughts as to how 

we might be able to actually get some of this humanitarian assistance into the hands of folks who we intended in to help. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, we happen to believe that UNRWA is 

a vital humanitarian actor that does provide critical services and 

assistance that would otherwise be provided by extremist groups. 

We can’t have it both ways. If we are not in there supporting 

UNRWA and actually providing services, I believe that the situation would become even more threatening to us and to Israel. So 

UNRWA is an indispensable counterweight to radicalism, to terrorism, particularly in Gaza and Lebanon. And in fact UNRWA’s 

efforts are supported by the Governments of Israel, Lebanon, Syria 

and Jordan and the Palestinian authority. So that is a pretty broad 

cross-section of the region. And we do closely monitor what 

UNRWA does. We make sure it meets all of the conditions for funding under our law and the Foreign Assistance Act provision. And 

we have worked to make sure that UNRWA implements measures 

designed to ensure the neutrality of its staff, including preemployment checks, sharing the list of staff member names with host governments on an annual basis, and so much else. 

And I share your concern that we are not getting enough help 

into Gaza. I have raised this consistently with the Israeli Government. They have made certain moves which have increased the 

flow of food and clean water and medicine, but I think more could 

be done that would not provide any threat to Israeli security and 

we raise that with the Israelis on a regular basis. 

43

But I think you are right that what we want to do is support the 

regular folks, not do anything that empowers Hamas. And much of 

the material that gets into Gaza, which still comes through the 

tunnels, through smuggling actually, is taxed by Hamas, which 

then provides Hamas with the money that they use to buy arms 

and other material that is used against Israel. 

So I look at things from a real logical perspective. What can we 

do to undermine Hamas, to support the security of Israel, and to 

help the ‘‘regular folks’’ so that they don’t turn to extremism. 

Mr. ELLISON. I couldn’t have said it better myself. 

About 60 percent of the 2.5 million internally displaced people in 

Pakistan are women. What is the USAID package or programs 

doing specifically to address the need of female refugees in Pakistan? 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, Congressman, we are working very 

hard. We have a range of programs that assist refugees. We also 

have tried to target aid to women refugees. One example, which 

was a great public/private partnership, is last summer we reached 

out to Pakistani-American doctors and nurses and asked them to 

go to the refugee camps because women were not getting adequate 

medical services. And we had several dozen Pakistani doctors, 

mostly women, who took time off from their practices, took 6 

weeks, went to Swat, worked with refugee women. 

So we are always looking for ways that we can get the aid to 

women and children because they are often the ones that are most 

severely dislocated and damaged by any kind of conflict. 

Mr. ELLISON. Well, Madam Secretary, I just want to say that I 

appreciate that, because as you and the President reach out to the 

Muslim world, and I certainly commend that, you should just bear 

in mind that the United States is part of that world, and to draw 

upon American talent, medical talent or otherwise is just a very 

good idea. 

I will just end with an editorial comment, and that is the people 

who stood up against the position to condemn the Goldstone report 

never claimed that the Goldstone report was completely accurate. 

The point was that most of us hadn’t read it and we would hope 

that Israel would participate in that report to make its points, 

which it certainly had evidence to make, and so that is—my time 

is out. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The 

gentleman from Texas, Mr. McCaul. And I just mentioned to the 

committee members that the Secretary has to leave at 12:15. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield 15 seconds to 

the gentlelady from Florida. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. So thankful to you. Madam Secretary, I will 

be handing you a letter that I have written regarding the protection of the Iranians who are in Camp Ashraf in Iraq. We are very 

worried about their plight. We have made commitments to them to 

make sure that certain action would not be taken against them, 

and I fear that as we keep moving those protections are going to 

be taken away and certain guarantees. 

Thank you, Mr. McCaul, and I have that letter for you in writing. Thank you, Madam Secretary. 

44

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you. And thank you, Madam Secretary, for 

being here today. I introduced a resolution today, and I thank the 

ranking member for cosponsoring it, condemning the human rights 

violations in Iran and supporting voices of freedom and democracy. 

I hope you will take a look at that. I think it is something that we 

need to be doing. I am also concerned about Iran’s influence in the 

region, both in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and I wanted to 

see if you could touch on that point. 

And my second question from a budgetary standpoint has to do 

with—I think we are making some great military success in Afghanistan now. I think the Pakistan military, ISI are really starting to step up to the plate really for the first time in years, and 

I commend you and the administration for that. 

We honored Charlie Wilson at his funeral the other day, and of 

course after we defeated the Soviets his big point was we left a vacuum, and I think he was right. Joanne Herring, who was a constituent mine was sort of the driving force behind Charlie. You 

probably know Joanne. She is very flamboyant, a very passionate 

voice for the Afghan people and Pakistan. She has this idea of a 

Marshal plan sort of for the region. 

I know that State through USAID has outlined in the budget an 

Afghan-Pakistan regional stabilization strategy to achieve some of 

this. I wanted to see if you could comment on what State is doing 

in that respect because I think we have to win militarily, but we 

also have to provide economic stability and win the hearts and 

minds. 

Secretary CLINTON. Congressman, I agree with that, and I hope 

every Member has gotten a copy of the Afghanistan and Pakistan 

Regional Stabilization Strategy. If not, we will be sure that you do, 

because it is very specific about what we are trying to do, what we 

are doing in agriculture, education, women’s rights and so much 

else. 

In order to do that we have to have the civilians on the ground. 

We have 920. That is more than triple what we had when we started last year. They are doing extraordinary work. I mentioned earlier that we had civilians embedded with our forces going into 

Marja, and they are now literally moving in to help stand up the 

presence of Afghanistan governmental authority. 

It is a very challenging task, but we have people that are dedicated to doing that and to make sure that what Charlie Wilson 

said doesn’t happen again. You know, I am glad he was so honored 

at Arlington and so many people who really understood his contributions. And yet this is going to be hard work. Part of it is that 

there are no quick answers to begin to rebuild Afghanistan culture, 

and to move people away from poppies to pomegranates is a longterm investment. We are seeing results already, but we have a long 

way to go. Building up local governance when we cleared Marja by 

the courage of our military forces, you know, we have to have the 

presence of an Afghanistan Government at the subnational level 

that can begin to build the confidence of the people, a police force 

that will keep law and order. 

We are working hard on all of these, which are laid out in the 

stabilization strategy, but I appreciate your reminder of what 

45

might happen if we did walk away again. So we are going to keep 

working on it. 

Chairman BERMAN. 3 minutes, but the only reset policy we have 

is with Russia, not with the clock. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Okay. 

Chairman BERMAN. It got reset for some reason that I don’t 

know about. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you, Madam Secretary. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

The gentleman from American Samoa, the chairman of the Asia, 

the Pacific and the Global Environment Subcommittee, Mr. Faleomavaega. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Madam Secretary. Let me begin by stating my firm conviction that under your 

leadership and that of President Obama the United States is well 

on its way to restoring the credibility of the United States in the 

eyes of the world. I also want to especially thank you and President 

Obama for all the support that you showed the Samoan people in 

the aftermath of the earthquake and the tsunami that struck the 

islands of Tonga and Samoa in September of last year. Your help 

was critical in cutting the red tape and allowing critical emergency 

donations from our Samoan and Tongan communities in the United 

States to be airlifted. For your leadership and quick response I, on 

the behalf of all Samoans, will always be grateful. 

I also want to congratulate you, Madam Secretary, for the special 

emphasis you and the President have placed on reengaging and upgrading our relationships with the countries of the Asia Pacific region, the world’s most dynamic, in my humble opinion. The time 

and thought you have put into our policies toward the region have 

demonstrably improved the United States position in this important part of the world. 

I also want to say that I had an excellent meeting a couple of 

days ago with Assistant Secretary Kurt Campbell, and I want to 

thank you personally for your decision recently to reestablish the 

presence of USAID in the Pacific region. As you know, Madam Secretary, I have been screaming about this for years and years and 

I sincerely hope this is not just a token presence, but a substantive 

one to help some 17 to 18 Pacific Island nations that I feel are so 

important for us as part of our foreign policy in this region. 

Madam Secretary, it was announced this month that the President is going to visit Guam, Indonesia, and also Australia. May I 

also suggest, if at all possible, that on the President’s return from 

Australia, he stop by in American Samoa just to say thank you to 

the thousands and thousands of our men and women who are in 

the military. I don’t know if you are aware of the fact that on a 

per capita basis, our little territory sustains more casualties and 

deaths as a result of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. And I just 

think that our veterans and our people would deeply appreciate it 

if the President would just stop by there and say hello on his way 

back from Australia. 

The last Presidential visit that my little territory had was in 

1967. That was 43 years ago. Now I realize the President wants 

to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the treaty of friendship with 

Australia. But I would just like to say that this year in April, we 

46

will be celebrating the 110 anniversary of when the American flag 

was raised in American Samoa. We have a unique political relationship between American Samoa and this great Nation of ours. 

So I just wanted to convey my humble request, that, if at all possible, the President would do this. 

A couple other issues I want to share with you, Madam Secretary. I know there is not enough time. I visited Laos. We have 

got a serious problem with unexploded ordnance and cluster bombs 

that we created. This country never attacked us. We need to make 

improvements on that. 

Debt forgiveness in Cambodia, the problems of Agent Orange in 

Vietnam that we have never really addressed properly, and also 

the current negotiations going on with the Federated States of Micronesia and Palau. I think we need a little better attention in 

terms of the needs of these important countries. 

It was my privilege recently, Madam Secretary, to travel with 

Senator Cardin and Congressman Alcee Hastings to attend the 

OSCE meeting of some 56 nations in Europe. And I want to implore you on your good grace to make sure that Kazakhstan is well 

understood in terms of the importance that the country plays, not 

only as part of the Central Asian region, but the important role 

that it plays especially when it comes to nonproliferation, and you 

are well aware of that. 

Madam Secretary, I know my time is about up, but I just want 

to say thank you again for all your help. 

Secretary CLINTON. Thank you for that, Representative. I so appreciate your kind words. I will convey them, along with your invitation to President Obama. And I have enjoyed working with the 

heads of state from the Pacific Island nations, both at a meeting 

that I chaired at the United Nations General Assembly and again 

in Copenhagen. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. And 

the gentleman from Texas, who is not here. The gentleman from 

Florida, Mr. Mack, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And it is good to see you 

again, Madam Secretary, and I thank you for your time and your 

hard work. 

I have a bunch of questions and ideas and I am going to try to 

go through them quickly and give you time to speak, but I am 

going to make a formal request to you to spend some time on the 

Western Hemisphere and Latin America and so we might be able 

to have the time to talk about some of these issues more then. 

First of all, on the free trade agreements, both the President and 

you have talked about the support for the free trade agreements in 

Colombia, Panama and South Korea. I have a resolution that I will 

be dropping today to try to push the Congress into moving on these 

issues and I know we need to get them from the President. I would 

like you, if you could, to talk to us about what is holding that up. 

I was excited to hear in the State of the Union that this is something we can work on in a bipartisan fashion. So I would like to 

get your thoughts on that. 

I am also very concerned about the relationship with Iran and 

Venezuela and now that you, Madam Secretary, seem to be taking 

47

a much harder stance when it comes to Iran, that we can get some 

policies that really send a message to Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, 

that we are not going to continue to stand for his complete destruction of democracy in Venezuela and that we are going to support 

the Venezuela people and the people of Latin America. 

As you know, I have sponsored legislation that would put Venezuela on the state sponsor of terrorism list, and I would like to 

get your thoughts on that. 

Also in Haiti I want to commend the State Department and our 

Government on its swift actions in Haiti. There are a lot of people 

who are suffering and continue to suffer and who will be suffering 

for a long time, and one of the requests that I would make, instead 

of sending a lot of this money to the U.N. to then be used to help 

and aid in Haiti, that we just go directly and buy things like water 

and tents so there is no skimming off the top, we can get the best 

bang for the buck in Haiti, and that we really look at restroom facilities because it has become a big problem. 

I am also concerned or I just need to make a statement about 

Cuba if I can. We heard earlier, to me there never can be a time 

when the U.S. Government policies can support a dictator like 

Fidel Castro, who is willing to murder his own people, as well as 

imprison people from the United States, U.S. citizens for political 

purposes. So I would like to get your thoughts on that. 

And the last thought is on the budget. I have concerns that we 

are continuing to spend, to give aid to countries like Bolivia and 

Nicaragua. I think it sends the wrong message when we are going 

to show support for someone like Evo Morales in Latin America but 

we don’t move on these free trade agreements. 

Secretary CLINTON. Well, I will try to go quickly, Congressman. 

We are working on the free trade agreements. I mean, as the President said, we support them, we would like to move them, we have 

to get the votes for them. So we are reaching out and anything that 

Members can do on their own we welcome to make the case why 

this is good for America. It is not just good for the countries. This 

is a plus, plus for the American economy by our analysis, but we 

have to be able to make that case. 

Secondly, Venezuela is already certified as not cooperating fully 

with U.S. antiterrorism efforts. We renewed that certification in 

May and so there is a prohibition against the sale or licensing of 

certain items. We agree with you completely about the need to 

stand up to what we see happening with Chavez’s attack on democracy. I was pleased to see the OAS come out finally and criticize 

Venezuela on what it is doing in that area, and we are going to 

continue to try to put greater pressure. 

With respect to Haiti, we do buy directly most of what we are 

using and we also try to better coordinate with other donors, the 

Red Cross, the Clinton-Bush fund, a lot of others who are trying 

also to target effective aid. You are absolutely right, one of the biggest needs, I had a meeting about this earlier this week, are restroom facilities, sanitation facilities. 

And finally, on Cuba, Congressman, we share the same goal. We 

do not want to do anything that supports the regime, but we do 

want to create more movement toward democracy, and it is a quesVerDate 0ct 09 2002 07:02 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\022510\55126 HFA PsN: SHIRL
48

tion of what will work and what won’t, and that is what we are 

trying to figure out. 

Chairman BERMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The 

gentleman from New York, Mr. McMahon. 

Mr. MCMAHON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good afternoon, 

Madam Secretary. It is a thrill and a pleasure to see you again. 

And as you know, the people from where I think is the most dynamic place in the world, Staten Island and Brooklyn, New York, 

send their regards and love to you and look to see you come back 

for a visit. 

I want to just echo the comments of some of my colleagues, to 

thank you for putting forth the budget that is a continued reflection of your work of resetting, if you will, America’s foreign policy 

and really bringing forward a true American foreign policy which 

first and foremost protects and promotes the national security and 

concerns of interests of our country, stands by strongly our allies, 

our democratic allies and those with whom we have good partnerships, and also continues to engage those parts of the world that 

we hope some day will be our allies, strong security but also enlightened development and aid, and I think that certainly you were 

writing a great new chapter on American foreign policy and we 

thank you for that. 

Also, if you would, express for myself and my constituents our 

good wishes for President Clinton’s speedy and healthy recovery. 

And also thank him for his work in a bipartisan fashion with President Bush again to help those who need help in Haiti. Many who 

have relatives, in Brooklyn in particular, and also some in Staten 

Island, but also again appealing to the better angels of us in America to help those who need help. 

Madam Secretary, I would also like to just go on record by reiterating many of my colleagues’ concerns in regards to Iran. It is 

certainly time to move on the sanctions effort and I know you have 

spoken to that. But in particular human rights abusers should be 

sanctioned as well as the petroleum manufacturers and smugglers. 

I just want to call to your attention a bill, a bicameral bill, that 

I have introduced in the House, H.R. 4647, which follows the 

Lieberman bill in the Senate, which will bring sanctions to those 

individuals from the Revolutionary Guard who bring about human 

rights violations. 

I would also just like to ask one or two questions. One is last 

year you were leading very strongly and continue the initiative 

which looks at the protocols between Armenia and Turkey. I was 

just wondering if you would think it would be appropriate in that 

regard to appoint maybe someone from the State Department who 

would focus on bringing about the adoption of the protocols in the 

two parliaments of those two countries, if that is something you 

would consider. 

And then also in that regard, being that our relationship with 

Turkey is so important, we need to maintain our leverage, our 

strong relationship, which is very much that leverage, and I was 

just a little concerned to see when America’s Ambassador to Turkey, James Jeffrey, recently said in a newspaper interview that 

Turkey has ‘‘security concerns on Cypress.’’ Certainly he can’t be 

49

supporting this rationale for keeping Turkish troops on Cypress, 

and I would just ask you if he misspoke on that point. 

Secretary CLINTON. Thank you very much, and thank you for the 

kind wishes for my husband and say hello to everybody in Staten 

Island and Brooklyn. 

First, on the protocols, we are very committed to working with 

both Armenia and Turkey, and I have personally been involved in 

this. I was deeply involved in the negotiations in Zurich some 

months ago that led to the signing of the protocols. I am on the 

phone probably more with the leadership in Turkey, Armenia, and 

Azerbaijan than in any other part of the world on a regular basis, 

and we are very committed to doing everything we can both in furthering the protocols for normalization between Armenia and Turkey and working for a durable diplomatic solution of the conflict 

over in Nagorno-Karabagh. That is not a precondition for the normalization process between Turkey and Armenia, but it is essential 

for the long-term regional stability in the Caucasus. So we have a 

whole team committed to that, Congressman, and we are working 

it as hard as we can. 

With respect to what the Ambassador said, it is my understanding that he was reflecting the Turkish belief, not that we endorsed it, ascribed to it, supported it, but that is what the Turkish 

position is, that they, agree with it or not, they view a continuing 

security interest. 

We are working to support the U.N. process of mediation to try 

to get to a resolution in Cypress between the Greek and Turkish 

Cypriots. Some progress has been made. There have been intensive 

negotiations own over the last 6 weeks, but a lot more needs to be 

done. 

Chairman BERMAN. Well, Madam Secretary, as we notified our 

staff members, the committee members and announced earlier, it 

is 12:15, a deal is a deal. And so without objection, members have 

2 legislative days to submit questions for the record. We thank you 

very much for coming and wish we had time for almost everybody, 

but we almost did. Thank you. 

Secretary CLINTON. Thank you. 

Chairman BERMAN. The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(51)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

52


55126n.eps
53


55126m-1.eps
54


55126m-2.eps
55


55126a-1.eps
56


55126a-2.eps
57


55126e-1.eps
58


55126e-2.eps
59


55126e-3.eps
60


55126e-4.eps
61


55126f-1.eps
62


55126f-2.eps
63


55126f-3.eps
64


55126f-4.eps
65


55126f-5.eps
66


55126f-6.eps
67


55126f-7.eps
68


55126f-8.eps
69


55126g.eps
70


55126h.eps
71


55126i-1.eps
72


55126i-2.eps
73


55126j-1.eps
74


55126j-2.eps
75


55126j-3.eps
76


55126j-4.eps
77


55126j-5.eps
78


55126k-1.eps
79


55126k-2.eps
80


55126l-1.eps
81


55126l-2.eps
82


55126l-3.eps
83


55126l-4.eps
84


55126l-5.eps
85


55126l-6.eps
86


55126l-7.eps
87


55126l-8.eps
88


55126l-9.eps
89


55126l-10.eps
90


55126s.eps
91


55126n-1.eps
92


55126n-2.eps
93


55126n-3.eps
94


55126n-4.eps
95


55126n-5.eps
96


55126n-6.eps
97


55126n-7.eps
98


55126n-8.eps
99


55126n-9.eps
100


55126n-10.eps
101


55126o-1.eps
102


55126o-2.eps
103


55126o-3.eps
104


55126o-4.eps
105


55126o-5.eps
106


55126o-6.eps
107


55126o-7.eps
108


55126o-8.eps
109


55126o-9.eps
110


55126o-10.eps
111


55126o-11.eps
112


55126o-12.eps
113


55126p-1.eps
114


55126p-2.eps
115


55126q-1.eps
116


55126q-2.eps
117

Æ


55126r.eps