U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

99–756PDF 2016

ASSESSING PRESIDENT OBAMA’S MIDDLE EAST

AND NORTH AFRICA FY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 13, 2016

Serial No. 114–164

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

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

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Anne W. Patterson, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State ................................................................ 9

The Honorable Paige Alexander, Assistant Administrator, Bureau for the 

Middle East, U.S. Agency for International Development ............................... 19

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Anne W. Patterson: Prepared statement ..................................... 12

The Honorable Paige Alexander: Prepared statement ......................................... 22

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 46

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 47

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

Commonwealth of Virginia: Prepared statement .............................................. 48

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

State of Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Middle East and 

North Africa: Questions submitted for the record and written responses 

from: 

The Honorable Anne W. Patterson ..................................................................... 50

The Honorable Paige Alexander ......................................................................... 54

(1)

ASSESSING PRESIDENT OBAMA’S MIDDLE 

EAST AND NORTH AFRICA FY 2017

BUDGET REQUEST 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13, 2016

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:30 a.m., in room 

2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. The subcommittee will come to order. 

After recognizing myself and Ranking Member Deutch for 5 minutes each for our opening statements, I will then recognize other 

members seeking recognition for 1 minute. We will then hear from 

our witnesses. 

Without objection, ladies, your prepared statements will be made 

a part of the record and members may have 5 days to insert statements and questions for the record, subject to the length limitation 

in the rules. 

The chair now recognizes herself for 5 minutes. 

We are here today to discuss the President’s FY17 budget request for the Middle East and North Africa Region. I fully support 

the request to honor the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, MOU, with our closest ally, the Democratic Jewish State 

of Israel and helping to ensure that she has what she needs to defend herself and her citizens. 

In the aftermath of the weak and dangerous Iran nuclear deal 

and the corresponding race to arms by many of the nations in the 

region that feel threatened by a newly-empowered Iran, Israel is 

facing a new dangerous environment, so it is critical that we ensure that Israel’s qualitative military edge is intact and vigorously 

enforced, as our policy stipulates and as our laws state. So, I 

strongly urge the administration to conclude the negotiations on a 

new robust MOU with Israel in an expeditious manner and in a 

way that reflects the new reality that the Jewish State faces in the 

region. 

I am also pleased that the administration is following through 

with the additional support for Jordan, as agreed upon in last 

year’s MOU, with $1 billion to help the Kingdom cope with the 

strain on its resources from the Syrian humanitarian crisis and the 

2

influx of refugees, as well as help provide Jordan with the tools 

that it needs to continue to fight on the frontlines against ISIS. 

However, this request for Jordan highlights one of the most noteworthy trends of the current request, which is the administration’s 

continued shift to move a significant amount of assistance from the 

regular Foreign Affairs budget to the Overseas Contingency Operations, OCO accounts. Nearly half of this year’s budget request is 

OCO funds, $3.5 billion of the $7.1 billion for the Middle East and 

North Africa in non-humanitarian bilateral aid. That is over 100 

percent more than last year’s request, with almost all of the $1 billion for Jordan coming in OCO. This is a troubling trend that the 

administration needs to explain in greater detail, as we are seeing 

funds that should be in the base budget that are being shifted into 

the OCO fund. 

Tunisia is strategically important and this is where the democratic transition has been referred to by the administration as a 

model for other states in the Arab world. However, when compared 

to Egypt, Jordan, or even Lebanon, our aid package to Tunisia does 

not really indicate that the administration views its future as a 

high priority. The people and Government of Tunisia needs us now 

more than ever. 

While this year’s request may represent an increase, foreign mili- tary financing assistance for Tunisia’s security accounts for $45 

million, while slightly more than that is being provided for democracy and governance and economic assistance. Tunisia is facing 

some trying times at the moment, and we want to support it and 

ensure that it remains on the transition toward democracy. Yet, 

the administration does not appear to be making a successful transition a priority in this request. 

While Lebanon may be facing significant problems as a result of 

the Syrian conflict, it has been mired in a political crisis for nearly 

2 years and has no elected leader, and concerns remain over 

Hezbollah and Iran’s increasing influence in Lebanon. This raises 

questions over how our assistance to Lebanon is being used to advance our interests. The same can be said over continued assistance requests for Libya or Yemen, two other countries in dire political straits. 

When it comes to strategic interest, in the region, Egypt remains 

near the top. Egypt’s security and stability are key U.S. national 

security interests, which is why we continue to provide Cairo with 

the foreign military financing assistance it needs and we will continue to work with Egypt to tackle the terrorist threat, in the 

Sinai. 

Yet, in Egypt we are facing a significant pipeline issue where between $500 million to $700 million in previous years funds have 

not been spent nor obligated. Yet, the administration continues to 

request $150 million in ESF for Egypt without presenting a concrete plan on how it will spend these unobligated funds and without having the flexibility to operate in Egypt that we once had. 

When we discuss using our assistance as effectively and efficiently as possible, we have to talk about our response to the Syrian humanitarian crisis. The United States has been the single 

largest donor in response to the Syrian humanitarian crisis by providing over $5 billion and we’ll continue to do what we can, but our 

3

policies to get at the root cause of the problem have failed and 

Assad still remains in power. While most of this assistance is being 

funneled through the U.N., it raises questions about whether or not 

we are maximizing our assistance in this humanitarian response. 

But when talking about using our assistance effectively in furtherance of our interests, perhaps the most egregious failure of this 

budget request is the continued request by the administration for 

hundreds of millions in assistance for the West Bank and Gaza. 

The Palestinian Authority and Abu Mazen have continued to incite 

violence against Israel, have continued to support terrorism, have 

continued to fund the salaries of terrorists in Israeli prisons as well 

as their family members. And the Palestinians continue to seek to 

de-legitimize the Jewish State at the United Nations and are moving forward with plans to undermine the peace process by seeking 

unilateral statehood. The administration may argue that it has 

sought less for the Palestinian Authority in this year’s budget request, but we should have cut off all assistance to the PA for violating several provisions of U.S. law. 

So, I welcome our distinguished guests. I look forward to hearing 

from the administration about the justifications for its budget request and how these line up with the administration’s objectives for 

the coming year in the Middle East and North Africa. 

With that, I am so pleased to yield to the ranking member, my 

good friend, Mr. Deutch of Florida. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I hope you feel better. 

And thank you, Assistant Administrator Alexander and Assistant 

Secretary Patterson, for being here today. It is a pleasure to welcome you back to the subcommittee. We look forward to a positive 

discussion about the region. 

I want to take a moment, again, to thank the hard-working 

USAID and State Department employees and Foreign Service Officers who work in dangerous and difficult places to help those in 

need and promote American values around the world. Their work 

too often goes unnoticed and underappreciated, and I just wanted 

to take a moment today to highlight what they do and to thank 

them for it. 

It is no doubt that some of our greatest foreign policy challenges 

are in the Middle East and North Africa. New threats have 

emerged that endanger the security of the United States, our regional interests, and our regional partners. This year’s State Department budget request for the region is $7.3 billion, a 9-percent 

increase from what we spent in 2015. Of the $6.1 billion requested 

in global humanitarian aid, $2 billion is to address the humanitarian crisis in Syria. 

For over 5 years, the region has been struggling to deal with the 

effects of the war in Syria. The devastating humanitarian crisis 

will certainly have implications not just this coming year, but for 

years to come and for decades to come. 

I have repeatedly expressed my deep frustration over the international response to the humanitarian crisis in Syria, but I would 

like to applaud the administration for the contribution that it has 

made to address this crisis, the largest from any donor country to 

date. 

4

But, as the crisis continues to drag on, we must look for sustainable ways to support those displaced by war. Efforts to shore up 

host countries like Lebanon and Jordan must focus on increasing 

capacity of schools and healthcare centers, finding work that will 

allow refugees to contribute to the communities that are hosting 

them. I was pleased to see the conclusion last spring of the new 

MOU with our ally Jordan that will help to strengthen one of our 

best partners in the fight against ISIS. 

We all know that the only end to this crisis will come through 

a political solution. Speaking yesterday, Ambassador Power said 

there is, and I quote, ‘‘an inextricable linkage between the political 

transition negotiations—which, of course, urgently have to take 

place—the deterioration in humanitarian access, and the escalation 

of violence on the ground, which is having a very negative bearing 

on the cessation of hostilities, which had reduced violence substantially.’’ There is so much that we have to be engaged in at so many 

levels in Syria. 

In addition to Syria, the humanitarian situation in Yemen continues to worsen. As political talks stall, the needs of those on the 

ground are increasing, and the U.S. and other donor countries 

must be able to respond accordingly. 

In Tunisia, we look for ways to bolster the country’s economy and 

nascent democracy while stabilizing the security situation. The Tunisian Government has thus far responded well to the number of 

deadly attacks over the past year, and we have seen positive results from our efforts to help Tunisian security forces professionalize in these difficult circumstances. 

However, it is troubling that the largest contingent of foreign 

fighters to ISIS are Tunisian, and the entrance of ISIS to Libya 

will continue to pose a threat to the region, and especially to Tunisia. 

The security situation in Libya is tenuous. Just last week, U.S. 

General David Rodriguez, the outgoing Commander of AFRICOM, 

said that the number of ISIS fighters in Libya has doubled in the 

past year. That is why it is more important than ever that Libya 

move forward with implementing a unity government. A strong 

central government backed by Libyan security forces is the only 

way to keep ISIS at bay. 

Combating ISIS in North Africa will require strong cooperation 

across the Maghreb. Morocco and Algeria must play a significant 

role in intelligence-sharing, both with its neighbors as well as with 

the U.S. and Europe, to track foreign fighters and terrorist cells. 

As we work to combat extremism, we appreciate the cooperation 

between Egypt and Israel in the Sinai and Egypt’s efforts to control 

the flow of dangerous materials in and out of Gaza and destroy 

Hamas’ terror tunnels. 

But, however strong and necessary our security cooperation and 

coordination is, we must also prioritize human rights. Human 

rights must always be a part of the conversation, even when difficult. And I am troubled by continued reports of mass sentencing, 

restrictions on civil society, and most recently, the potential reopening of the NGO case that saw 43 NGO workers arrested and 

convicted, including several Americans. 

5

We have also deepened our coordination with our GCC partners 

to confront mutual security threats, including Iranian aggression. 

These countries must also be committed to countering violent Islamic extremism and speaking out against the radicalism and terrorism. We must always be sure that nothing we do in the region 

threatens Israel’s qualitative military edge. Israel remains under 

constant threat from Palestinian terror attacks, Hamas rockets, 

Hezbollah advanced weaponry, and ballistic missiles launched from 

Iran emblazoned with the words, ‘‘Israel must be wiped off the 

earth.’’ I would urge the administration to ramp up its efforts to 

conclude a new Memorandum of Understanding that will ensure 

that Israel has what she needs to defend herself for years to come. 

As we continue to work toward the goal of two states for two peoples, I would hope that the administration will work to prevent any 

attempts to circumvent the direct negotiation process, which is the 

only way that peace can be achieved. Our efforts would be better 

served urging President Abbas to build up state institutions, to reform his economy, to commit to transparency and accountability, 

and to return to the negotiating table. 

With respect to Iran, I cannot urge the administration enough to 

fulfill its promises to crack down on Iran’s myriad of bad behavior, 

including the repeated missile tests in blatant disregard of international law, its egregious human rights violations, and its continued support for terrorism. The U.S. Navy last week intercepted a 

shipment of Iranian weapons bound for Yemen, and this continued 

bellicosity is unacceptable. No agreement precludes this country 

from sanctioning every person, every entity, and every sector involved in these dangerous activities. The Nuclear Agreement, as we 

all know, was meant to apply only to nuclear activities and the nuclear program. International law and U.S. law permits, and I think 

requires us, to take strong action to stop and to combat Iran’s bad 

behavior in these other areas. 

And I would also be remiss if, Secretary Patterson—if, Madam 

Chairman, you will just grant me an extra 30 seconds—I would be 

remiss if I didn’t once again implore the administration to continue 

to working to bring home my constituent Robert Levinson. Just 

days before the ninth anniversary of Bob’s disappearance last 

month, I had the honor of joining Bob’s wife Christine and the 

Levinson children at a rally in Bob’s hometown of Coral Springs in 

south Florida. No family deserves to go through what the 

Levinsons are going through, being away from their husband, their 

father, and grandfather, with no answers for 9 years. And I know 

that Secretary Kerry continues to push for Bob’s return, but I 

would ask that this be the highest priority in every single discussion with the Iranians. 

There is no substitute for robust American engagement and leadership in this challenging region as a whole, and I look forward to 

hearing how the President’s budget request will help fulfill that 

goal and protect the security of this country and of our friends and 

allies in the Middle East and North Africa. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. I yield back. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you for an excellent opening statement, and thank you for your leadership, especially on the 

6

Levinson case. They are fortunate to have such a strong leader 

voicing their concerns. 

I would like to recognize members for opening statements, and 

we will begin with Mr. Wilson of South Carolina. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, Madam Chair, for your dynamic leadership. 

Secretary Patterson, you have provided that the top line for the 

State Department and for the Agency of International Development 

will have a budget of over $50 billion with around $35 billion in 

the base budget and $15 billion in OCO. I have seen firsthand 

America being successful in the Middle East and around the world 

to aid our allies for their citizens to have fulfilling lives. 

The budget number is particularly significant this year because 

of the threat of Iran who stands to gain as much or two or three 

times this amount in cash windfall due to unfrozen assets as part 

of the tragic Iranian nuclear deal. We have seen Iranian support 

and financing of the Houthi rebels in Yemen, funding and support 

for Hamas in Hezbollah, providing rockets to threaten Israel, funding for terrorists and insurgents in Iraq, and support for Afghani 

Taliban for their terrorist activities. All of these groups have a goal 

of killing American military and bringing mass murder to families 

at home in the United States. 

The concerns of Congress of the failing Iranian nuclear deal have 

been bipartisan. I particularly appreciate today the ranking member Ted Deutch raising issues and concerns. With all the United 

States can accomplish in the Middle East with the funding that we 

are providing, the damage that Iran stands to do in the region with 

$150 billion of cash windfall is dangerous. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on the committee in ensuring 

proper oversight of the implementation of the bizarre Iranian nuclear deal. 

Thank you. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Wilson. 

Mr. Cicilline of Rhode Island. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member 

Deutch, for calling this hearing to assess President Obama’s Fiscal 

Year 2017 budget request for the Middle East and North Africa. 

And thank you, Ambassador Patterson and Administrator Alexander, for being here today. I look forward to hearing from you, 

and I want to thank you both for your dedication and your service 

to our country. The Fiscal Year 2017 request of $7.17 billion for the region is an 

increase of almost 9 percent over Fiscal Year 2015 enacted levels. 

The vast security and humanitarian needs in the region certainly 

justify increased spending levels, and I look forward to hearing 

from our witnesses about how the United States will make sure 

this money is used for effectively to achieve American strategic priorities. 

This budget request is an issue of critical importance, especially 

during this time of great flux and threats to global security. From 

the civil war in Syria and its subsequent humanitarian and refugee 

crisis to the threat of ISIL, Boko Haram, and other extremist 

groups who seek to undermine stability and security throughout 

the region, to many humanitarian perils faced by millions of people 

7

in the region, it is more important than ever that U.S. foreign assistance is targeted, responsive, and able to meet our principal 

goals. 

As Ambassador Power states in her written testimony, the Middle East and North Africa present the most demanding challenges 

to U.S. foreign policy and national security. Through the work of 

the State Department and USAID, we must remain engaged and 

do all that we can to help the nations of this region to be more selfsufficient in terms of providing for its people through good governance, democratization, and less susceptible and better able to repel 

extremist threats. 

Thank you, and I look forward to your testimony. And I yield 

back. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. 

Mr. Issa of California. 

Mr. ISSA. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And for each of our two witnesses, it is incredibly an opportune 

time for you to be here. I have two areas of particular concern that 

I will be following up with questions on. 

Ambassador Alexander, in your case the education of as many as 

800,000 Syrians in Lebanon and countless more internally displaced concerns me in that USAID and all of our refugee organizations seem to be looking at doing, but not accomplishing the ultimate goal. Lebanon is ill-equipped to educate 500 to 800,000 additional students, and even if they were, they have no structural plan 

to do so. 

Some of the programs USAID has begun with are interesting, including the radio broadcast as a form of education, but they fall far 

short of two goals. One is education that can be verified for purposes of higher education later. The second is a form of education 

that clearly allows us to have our imprint of non-radicalization on 

that education process. I think both of those fall clearly within, between the two of you, a requirement to make sure there is a strategic plan for all the youth in the region, both those who work 

much of the day and get limited education and those who may be 

able to participate in more conventional. 

Secondly, Ambassador Patterson, you and I have visited many 

times. You are always at the center of tough situations. Your time 

in Egypt causes me to say this today: The multinational force observers has out lived its historic role. That has been made very 

clear by my own and another Congressman’s visit to the region into 

the North Station. They are today simply sitting ducks hunkered 

down, highly protected, including massive EOD assets, for purposes 

of a count that has not been miscounted or misunderstood or argued for more than 8 years, even with a minor exception, and more 

than a decade without any real argument. 

As you know, Israel today counts on very large forces of Egyptians to help with the fight against ISIS in the Sinai. I urge you 

to recognize that now is the time to recognize that that force existed, although technically to count number of soldiers and police, 

it really existed to ensure a peace in the region between two countries. Today that force must be positioned to assist both Israel and 

the Egyptians in recognizing where ISIS and Hamas are operating, 

what they are doing, and providing the eyes necessary to help them 

8

do their job better. I am not calling for a moment for the withdrawal of those troops or those personnel, brave as they are, but 

I want their purpose to be one of peacekeeping between two allies 

today in the war against ISIS. I hope you can take that back to 

Secretary Kerry on behalf of the committee. 

And I thank the chairwoman for her indulgence. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Very good items that you bring up. 

Ms. Frankel of Florida. 

Ms. FRANKEL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I just thank you all for being here again, once again. 

I had the honor of traveling with our chair, Mr. Royce, this past 

week. We were in Jordan, Iraq, and Tunisia, and it was quite an 

enlightening and rigorous schedule. Madam Chair, my back is still 

hurting from the body armor really. 

But some takeaways. It is not only the threat of terrorism, which 

is real in so many of these countries in the Middle East, but they 

are in terrible economic crisis, to the point where—I will use Iraq 

as an example. I mean, they are not even able to pay for their own 

army. 

There are a lot of moving parts, but what was very clear to me, 

No. 1, our own security and the security of allies, not only in the 

Middle East, but in Europe and other places, will be affected greatly by the stability in the Middle East. 

My second takeaway was that, or this may be my third 

takeaway, is that our leadership is absolutely needed. There is no 

question about it, not only from a military point of view, but just 

in terms of economic development, education, humanitarian, other 

humanitarian assistance. 

So, I very much look forward to what you have to say this morning. And again, thank you for your service. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Ms. Frankel. 

Mr. Trott? 

Mr. TROTT. I would thank Chairwoman Ros-Lehtinen and Ranking Member Deutch for holding this hearing, and to our esteemed 

witnesses for testifying and sharing their valuable insight on an 

unstable, but crucial part of the world. 

Ambassador Patterson, before assuming your current post, you 

were our Ambassador to Egypt and served during a very turbulent 

time. You had a unique perspective on the Muslim Brotherhood, 

one that I am hoping to hear more about from you today. For reasons unclear to me, the State Department still refuses to recognize 

the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. 

I am proud to cosponsor legislation in the House, the Muslim 

Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act, and I am eager to see it on 

the Floor for a vote in front of the full House. In recent years, the 

copts have suffered terrible attacks and violence. The attacks were 

clearly well-planned and coordinated, not random acts of violence, 

as some have suggested. After listening to their rhetoric laced from 

remarks coming from their leadership, it is not surprising that they 

would take out their anger on Egypt’s most vulnerable. To make 

matters worse, the Muslim Brotherhood’s official account still espouses and congratulates violence while implicitly, if not explicitly, 

trying to encourage violence against the state and religious minorities. 

9

I am disappointed the State Department hosted them for official 

meetings last year. When I questioned Secretary Kerry about this, 

he claimed that the State Department somehow didn’t know they 

were part of the Muslim Brotherhood until after the visit, something I find difficult to believe. 

As a country that promotes religious tolerance and acceptance all 

over the world, I find it reprehensible that the administration 

claims to promote these values, yet goes around and invites and 

holds meetings with the various people that have dedicated themselves to religious intolerance and violence. 

I look forward to your testimony and explanation as to how much 

more damage the Muslim Brotherhood needs to cause before we 

call them terrorists. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Amen. Thank you very much, Mr. Trott. 

And we are so happy to welcome back wonderful witnesses who 

are always accessible to us, and anytime we call them, they say, 

‘‘Yes. When do you need us?’’ So, thank you, ladies, very much for 

being so good to our subcommittee. 

First, we are pleased to welcome back Ambassador Anne Patterson, who is Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. 

Ambassador Patterson has served as the U.S. Ambassador in El 

Salvador, in Columbia, in Pakistan, and in Egypt. She has also 

been Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and 

Law Enforcement Affairs, Deputy Permanent Representative to the 

United Nations, and the State Department’s Deputy Inspector General. 

Welcome back, Ambassador Patterson. 

We also want to welcome back another good friend, Assistant Administrator Paige Alexander of the Bureau of the Middle East at 

USAID. Previously, Ms. Alexander has served as the Assistant Administrator of the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia, as well as Associate Director of Project Liberty at Harvard University’s John F. 

Kennedy School of Government. She has also served on the Board 

of the Basic Education Coalition and the Project on Middle East 

Democracy. 

Thank you so much, ladies, and the floor is yours. We will start 

with Ambassador Patterson. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ANNE W. PATTERSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF NEAR EASTERN AFFAIRS, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Ms. PATTERSON. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Ranking Member 

Deutch, members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting us 

to appear before you today to discuss the President’s Fiscal Year 

2017 budget request. We appreciate the subcommittee’s continued 

support and congratulate its initiatives, most recently, for the 

Hezbollah International Financing Prevention Act of 2015. 

The Middle East and North Africa present the most demanding 

challenges to U.S. foreign policy and to our national security. As 

you know, the administration’s highest priority continues to be the 

safety and security of the American people and the American 

homeland. This is why we are leading the global coalition that will 

defeat ISIL, are actively engaged in supporting the cessation of 

10

hostilities and political negotiations in Syria, and are advancing 

peace in Yemen and Libya. Each of these conflicts poses its own 

unique challenges to our national security with the potential for serious economic repercussions. 

Continued full implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan 

of Action will ensure Iran’s nuclear program remains exclusively 

peaceful. Nevertheless, we remain deeply concerned about Iran’s 

destabilizing activities. 

The President’s foreign assistance request for the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs is $7.3 billion. This includes $3.1 billion to support 

our enduring commitment to Israel’s security, $1.5 billion for bilateral cooperation with Egypt to advance our national and regional 

security interests, and $1 billion to continue our strategic partnership with Jordan on issues ranging from countering violent extremism to advancing Middle East peace. 

In the coming year, potential openings in Yemen and Libya further highlight how we must work to support U.S. engagement. We 

must be poised to further our relationship with the Libyan Government of National Accord as it works to reunite the country, revive 

the living economy, and confront ISIL. In Yemen, we must help the 

Yemenis reestablish governance, reclaim space from AQAP, and 

counter a growing ISIL threat, as well as revise their badly-damaged economy. 

Our capacity to react quickly in changing environments like 

these will require your continued support and flexibility. However, 

we cannot focus on crises alone. There are examples of success in 

the region, and it is in our long-term interest to invest strategically. 

In Tunisia, we see a burgeoning democracy in need of our support, and in Morocco our strong partnership spans from security cooperation to addressing economic challenges. This budget provides 

the resources to support U.S. engagement with both Morocco and 

Tunisia. 

As part of our efforts to degrade and defeat ISIL, the U.S. is 

leading a coalition of 66 states and organizations. The request also 

includes funding to provide training and equipment to forces fighting ISIL, help stabilize communities liberating from ISIL and Syria 

and Iraq, strengthens our regional partners, and supports a political solution to the Syrian civil war. 

For Iraq, the FY17 request includes $510 million, an increase 

over previous years, largely to provide increased economic assistance to stabilize the Iraqi economy and maintain critical security 

assistance. 

In Syria, the request of nearly $239 million will provide support 

to the moderate Syrian opposition to help achieve a political solution and counter extremist threats, including from ISIL and Jabhat 

al-Nusra. 

In Jordan, we remain a strong supporter of the government’s efforts to maintain security, stability, and prosperity, particularly in 

light of the crises on Jordan’s border. 

And in Lebanon, we are supporting their efforts to cope with the 

spillover effects of the crisis in Syria. 

Our request also represents our firm commitment to working 

with Israel and other regional partners to counter Iran’s destaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 08:02 Jun 27, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\WORK\_MENA\041316\99756 SHIRL
11

bilizing activities in the region. Let me assure you that Israel’s security remains a top priority for the administration. It is critical for 

both the Israelis and the Palestinians that steps are taken to promote stability. So, we are requesting $364 million in foreign assistance to support the Palestinian people with programs to bolster 

economic development, improve health and education, and enhance 

security on the ground. 

In Egypt, we have long enjoyed a strategic relationship which 

furthers our national interests. Nonetheless, we continue to press 

the Egyptians about our concerns regarding their human rights 

record. 

Madam Chairman, I also want to stress the importance of our regional programs. They not only complement our ongoing bilateral 

assistance, but they are also a tool for advancing our interests. 

The Middle East Partnership Initiative furthers U.S. engagement 

with civil society across the region. It empowers women, fosters entrepreneurship, engages at-risk youth, and develops the capacity of 

local organizations. 

I want to thank this subcommittee for your ongoing support as 

we continue to advance our interests in the Middle East. I look forward to answering your questions. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Patterson follows:]

12


99756a-1.eps
13


99756a-2.eps
14


99756a-3.eps
15


99756a-4.eps
16


99756a-5.eps
17


99756a-6.eps
18


99756a-7.eps
19

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Madam Ambassador. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE PAIGE ALEXANDER, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR THE MIDDLE EAST, U.S. 

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

Ms. ALEXANDER. Thank you, Chairman Ros-Lehtinen and Ranking Member Deutch, members of the subcommittee. We appreciate 

the opportunity to be up here to talk about the President’s Fiscal 

Year 2017 budget. 

The region is faced with complex challenges driven by deep political divides, economic and social forces. It is critical that the U.S. 

maintain its engagement and interest in this region. Conflict and 

the resulting humanitarian and refugee crisis have significantly 

compounded the challenges. These conflicts have cut economic output in Syria by 30 percent. The influx of refugees has lowered 

wages in some of the most vulnerable host communities. And most 

alarming is 13 million children are out of school due to this conflict. 

It may be useful to think of USAID’s response in three critical 

areas: Mitigating the human impact of ongoing conflicts, supporting core U.S. national security objectives, and fostering inclusive development and reform opportunities as they arise. My statement for the record includes more details of AID’s priorities, but I 

wanted to go through a few here. 

Serious development challenges and indicators show a rollback of 

nearly four decades due to the conflict. In addition to the U.S. remaining the world’s largest donor of humanitarian assistance for 

the Syrian conflict, the President’s budget will request continued 

American people’s support for the development needs within Syria 

as well as critical support for Syria’s neighbors. 

The crisis has placed an enormous strain on the neighbors, many 

neighboring countries, including our ally Jordan. We continue our 

six-decade partnership with Jordan to address the development 

challenges, including low economic growth, overcrowded schools, 

and scarce water resources. 

NBC Nightly News recently did a story about a school principal 

in Jordan who was trying to talk about the overcrowding in her 

school and that Syrian parents continued to come and ask that 

their children be allowed in. She offered that they could come if 

they just brought a chair. We work with this principal and thousands of other educators like her to make sure that we are providing these services. 

In Lebanon, some estimates say that one out of every three people is a refugee. The President’s request would support the Lebanese communities hosting refugees, helping them provide basic 

services like education, water, infrastructure, and support municipalities and civil societies, as well as job creation and economic 

growth activities. 

For Iraq, the President’s 2017 request includes an increase of 

funding to help address the grave economic challenges that they 

are facing. We will also work with Baghdad and the local governments in support of decentralization efforts. Our support will ease 

the burden of Iraq’s fiscal crisis as it struggles to defeat ISIL and 

stabilize liberated areas. 

20

The U.S. Government and the American people have a longstanding relationship with Egypt and the Egyptian people. USAID 

continues to work in partnership with the Egyptian people, but we 

remain deeply concerned about the restrictions in space for civil society and the reported investigations in NGOs by the Government 

of Egypt. USAID and the State Department continue to engage 

with our Egyptian counterparts on this issue. 

Given the current challenging environment, AID continues to 

focus its programs in areas where we believe we can achieve results. In the West Bank and Gaza, U.S. assistance to Palestinian 

people is a key part of the U.S. commitment to negotiate a twostate solution. Our assistance contributes to building a more democratic, stable, prosperous, and secure Palestinian society, a goal 

that is in the interest not only of the Palestinian, but of Israel and 

the United States as well. 

For Fiscal Year 2017, we will promote stability in the West Bank 

by improving service provision and healthcare, education, water, 

and roads, while also supporting the private sector and civil society. In Gaza, we will provide needed humanitarian assistance while 

at the same time addressing pressing needs, particularly in the 

water sector. 

As the peace process proceeds in Yemen and the security environment allows, USAID will provide the expertise to support the 

negotiation process while supporting civil society and the inclusion 

of women and youth. 

In Libya, the 2017 funding will support the Government of National Accord and deliver targeted assistance to support a stable 

political transition. 

Where we are able to in the region, we aim to help our local partners address frustrations brought on the people in the streets 5 

years ago. In Morocco, USAID is well-positioned to advance the 

country’s critical economic and social reforms. 

Among those who benefit from our programs were to teenaged 

boys in northern Morocco who were planning to head to Syria and 

stopped in first at a USAID-supported youth organization. A 

trained youth officer was able to convince them of an alternate 

path, setting them up, instead, with jobs at a local construction 

company. 

Before I conclude, I would like to speak about Tunisia, which has 

been relatively successful in its transition, but still needs our support. Tunisia is the only country from the 2011 Arab Awakening 

that has defined a path toward democracy. The President’s 2017 request will provide additional resources to support Tunisia as it consolidates these gains, including expanding economic and governance partnerships between the U.S. and Tunisia. 

AID’s efforts in Tunisia have created nearly 4,000 sustainable 

private sector jobs last year, and we expect our interventions will 

result in more than 5,000 additional jobs this year. 

We face significant challenges in the Middle East and North Africa, but the American people can be proud that, through USAID and 

with the support of Congress, we are helping millions of people in 

the region, whether it is the girl at the STEM school in Egypt who 

has conquered intel science or whether it is the teacher and the 

principal in Jordan who have invited other Syrian children into her 

21

classroom. These are some of the concrete examples of our programs. 

I am proud of the innovative work that we have been doing to 

meet the many challenges of the region, and we will continue to 

work better, smarter, and faster to support the people of the Middle East and North Africa on behalf of the American people. 

Thank you for your support, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Alexander follows:]

22


99756b-1.eps
23


99756b-2.eps
24


99756b-3.eps
25


99756b-4.eps
26


99756b-5.eps
27


99756b-6.eps
28


99756b-7.eps
29


99756b-8.eps
30

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you very much to both of our witnesses. I would like to, once again, welcome you both back here and 

thank you for your continued service on behalf of our country. 

Assistant Secretary Patterson, I wanted to follow up on a question that I had posed to Secretary Kerry in February. I asked if the 

administration will veto any resolution at the U.N. supporting Palestinian statehood. He stated that it was the policy of the administration to oppose any one-sided resolution that would be unfair to 

Israel, but he didn’t give a blanket statement that, yes, the U.S. 

would veto. 

So, I want to clear this up just a bit more because last week the 

Palestinian Authority, the PA, distributed a draft resolution to a 

number of members at the U.N. Security Council similar to the one 

that the U.S. did, in fact, veto in 2011. This absence of an American voice saying that we will veto gives wind beneath the wings 

of the Palestinians to continue this unilateral statehood scheme. 

So, will the administration state unequivocally that we will not 

introduce, we will not support, that we will block, that we will veto 

any resolution at the U.N. Security Council that seeks to impose 

a two-state solution on Israel or that offers some artificial timeline 

for negotiations? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Madam Chairman, let me answer this question 

this way: This administration, there was an article in the newspaper a few days ago that this administration has been the most 

vigorous in history in pursuing and protecting Israel’s interest in 

the United Nations system. And I can speak to that from personal 

experience, both at the Security Council and the GA and in the 

specialized agencies. 

I can’t say without seeing a resolution—and we are familiar with 

this resolution——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. But there is—it is not a hypothetical. 

Ms. PATTERSON. No, it is no hypothetical. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Have you seen the resolution? 

Ms. PATTERSON. But it has not been introduced into the Security 

Council. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. But the draft exists. 

Ms. PATTERSON. A draft exists and——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Have you seen it? 

Ms. PATTERSON. And I haven’t personally seen it, but it hasn’t 

been introduced into——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Do you think that perhaps this lack of clarity 

to say we vetoed it before, we are going to veto it again, and here 

is the draft, and if this draft is going to be worked, we will veto 

it—when we don’t say that, they are going to continue with their 

unilateral statehood schemes. Wouldn’t you? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Madam Chairman, all I can say is I think the 

administration’s record on this is pretty clear. It is very clear——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I know. That is why it is worrisome. It is 

clear. 

Ms. PATTERSON. And we have defended Israel vigorously. So, I 

can’t say without seeing the resolution because, like most 

things——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Well, it is not a hypothetical. It exists. 

31

But, staying with the PA, Madam Ambassador, money is fungible, and any amount of money that—oh, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. ROYCE. Good to see you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Let me just wait right here. I heard a lot of 

rumbling here, but I did not look aside. So, I will stop here and 

let me recognize the chairman of our committee, Mr. Royce, for his 

questions. 

Mr. ROYCE. Well, thank you. I thank our chairman emeritus 

here. 

And, Secretary Patterson, it is good to see you again. 

Let me ask, since that issue was the one you were speaking on, 

and Mr. Deutch and I have had some discussions about this as 

well, and you have really led on this issue: What concerns us is 

twofold. It is not just that for some years now you have a system 

where, basically, there has been an inducement to pay human assassins to seek out innocent people and kill them. And then, a stipend is given for the time that those individuals serve in custody 

for their crime, and that stipend is dependent upon the severity of 

their crime. In other words, the amount per month paid into the 

fund or going to the family is dependent upon how heinous the 

crime, how many victims. In addition, if it is bad enough, you serve 

enough time, then you are automatically given a position in a Palestinian Authority once you get out. That was the old system. 

Now you were before the committee before and were asked about 

this. At the time you indicated, well, that is being—what were your 

words at the time?—I think ‘‘phased out’’ or something, words to 

that effect, and that we should give them more time because they 

are phasing it out. 

Let me just share for you and for the committee members here, 

Mr. Deutch and others, what we have observed since then. And 

that is that this process is not only continuing, but rather than the 

PA make the stipend directly out of the budget, what they have instead done is go to the PLO budget and make a transfer to the 

PLO for a sum. Let’s say the original budgeted item for assistance 

with the Palestinian Authority’s prison funding was $8 million. 

Suddenly, it goes up. Suddenly, it goes up to $140 million. Well, 

the difference is the sum taken off of the books of the PA, but it 

is in the same building. The PA Ministry of Prison Adjudication, 

or whatever, is the same ministry as the PLO. As a matter of fact, 

it is the same minister. I believe you will find that to be the case. 

So, in fact, they weren’t phasing it out. What they were simply 

doing was transferring the entire sum over to the PLO, so that that 

payment could continue to be made. And I think we should understand that, besides the fact that the donor community is paying 

into the Palestinian Authority and the end result is to create a system to recruit human beings to carry out attacks and, then, serve 

their time and be rewarded with a stipend not just for the family, 

but a retirement afterwards and a job in the Palestinian Authority 

if it is egregious enough. These are real concerns about how we 

prepare people to put the foundation down for peace. 

Second, I want the Europeans to know what is going on, and you 

are going to have the opportunity to dialog with Europe about this 

and other problems. As I shared with Dr. Abbas and Mr. Deutch 

shared as well, when we were there talking with him about the 

32

issue of incitement, it is very, very important that the right foundation be laid for preparing future generations of young Palestinians 

and young Israelis to live in peace. And surely a system which tries 

to recruit more girls to do killing because you get an additional stipend if you are a girl or there is a stipend upon a stipend if you 

are an Israeli and commit an act against another Israeli—this is 

a very perverse creation, unbelievably perverse. And I would like 

your response there. 

Second, how did you mean that to be taken by us at the time, 

by the committee, when you said they are phasing this out? Did 

you know that they were going to simply transfer this to the PLO, 

and in that sense they were phasing it off their books, but they 

weren’t phasing it out? They were simply disguising the funding. 

I wanted to ask you about that. 

Ms. PATTERSON. Well, thank you. Thank you, Chairman Royce. 

No, I didn’t know that. What I was basing that on was my own 

discussions with Palestinian members who said they had been 

phasing it out for financial and the other reasons that you discuss. 

And I totally agree with you that this is an egregious practice. 

But let me also stress, Mr. Chairman, that I think our assistance 

to the Palestinian Authority does many beneficial things in maintaining security and promoting entrepreneurship and promoting 

better health standards and infrastructure development, and is absolutely essential for the stability in this part of the world. 

So, we will continue to press them on this issue, which I entirely 

agree with you is an unacceptable one. 

Mr. ROYCE. Ambassador, the donor community is helping the 

Palestinian Authority basically pay people to slay other people. So, 

here is my point: I want us to use our considerable leverage to end 

that practice. And second, I would really like the European community, in our dialog with them, to fully comprehend what is going 

on in this process of the inducements of paying people to get them 

to go out and slay other human beings. Can you do that? Can you 

assure us——

Ms. PATTERSON. Yes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ROYCE [continuing]. That both of those——

Ms. PATTERSON. We will certainly take that up with——

Mr. ROYCE [continuing]. Will be at the top of your agenda, conveying that? So that, when the European delegations come in, they 

will be asking me as well, ‘‘What are we doing as Members of Congress to end this practice?’’

Ms. PATTERSON. No, we will certainly talk to our European colleagues. 

There is a point, another point, I would like to make, Mr. Chairman. None of our money goes to this. It is not fungible in that respect. Our money goes essentially to pay PA Authority debts to 

Israel and to other creditors. So, the budget relief, the budget support that you see in the budget goes to creditors and cannot be diverted to these stipends. 

Mr. ROYCE. Yes, but the reality is that the donor community is 

coming together internationally to fund the Palestinian Authority. 

Our hope had always been that this would be used for a certain 

type of textbooks, to actually teach kids in education, instead of 

how to hate; for a certain kind of broadcasting that would be incluVerDate 0ct 09 2002 08:02 Jun 27, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\WORK\_MENA\041316\99756 SHIRL
33

sive, that would maybe be about political tolerance and about, oh, 

you know, religious tolerance and laying the foundation for peace. 

And that, also, in terms of the prison system, it might be about rehabilitation instead of creating a system where you are encouraging additional people to go out and commit murder in order later 

in life to get a position of high authority in the Palestinian Authority itself. 

And so, since the donor community is putting money into that 

pot in order, in one way or the other, to help the Palestinian people, regardless of how we perceive it, we have to use our leverage 

to cut this out. And now is the time to do it, and now is the time 

to have this dialog, because they just upped the ante basically by 

now paying people an additional—an additional—stipend if you 

commit crimes within Israel, within the borders of Israel. 

I know they don’t recognize borders because I asked Mr. Abbas 

that very question. Mr. Deutch will remember I asked him, ‘‘By the 

way, where is Israel on your map?’’ when we were discussing incitement. And he said, ‘‘Where is your map? Show me your map.’’

Here is the point: We, the donor community, are putting the 

money in. Let’s make sure that it goes to the next generation of 

young Palestinians having an attitude of wanting to have peace, 

wanting to negotiate with Israelis, and wanting to do something 

other than wipe them off the map or slay them. And that is my 

point. 

Ms. PATTERSON. Mr. Chairman, rest assured that this will be a 

subject of discussion with the rest of the donor community. We see 

Europeans and other donors all the time. And rest assured your 

points will be conveyed with our full concurrence. 

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you. Thank you, Secretary Patterson. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, you are welcome to come in 

and crash our subcommittee anytime. [Laughter.] 

Please do so more often. 

Mr. ROYCE. Well, actually, I am a member of the committee, too. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Okay. 

Mr. ROYCE. But I appreciate your forbearance. I appreciate the 

forbearance. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. It is much more fun to say ‘‘crash.’’ [Laughter.] 

Are you sure you are done? 

Mr. ROYCE. Yes. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Because you are fired-up. We will keep you 

going. 

Mr. ROYCE. No, no, I yield back, Madam Chairman. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. All right. Thank you. 

And I will just wrap up, because everything he said, ditto. 

Let me just ask a question on Morocco. Recently, U.N. Secretary 

General Ban Ki-moon claimed Morocco is occupying the Western 

Sahara, an unbelievable violation of U.N. neutrality. The U.S. is 

tasked with drafting the resolution that will renew the mandate of 

MINURSO. It is very important that the draft resolution be clean 

without any divisive language. Is the administration willing to 

work with Congress and our ally Morocco to strengthen our bilateral relationship while avoiding this mess created by Ban Ki-moon? 

And where does that draft resolution currently stand? 

34

Ms. PATTERSON. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Yes, this was a very, very unfortunate occurrence. The Secretary 

has been on the phone with the King and with his counterpart, 

Foreign Minister Mezouar. And we have tried to do everything possible to basically help them restore relations, because, again, a very 

unfortunate incident between the U.N. and the Government of Morocco. 

Morocco is one of our strongest allies. They are a critical partner 

in the counterterrorism field. They have made very significant advances in governance and human rights. We very much value our 

relationship. 

The resolution, Madam Chairman, hasn’t been drafted. We are 

discussing that in the administration. We certainly will take your 

views into account, and I stress the——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. What is the timeline for the resolution? 

Ms. PATTERSON. The timeline for the resolution, I think we have 

a few more weeks. Thank you. But we will talking with the committee. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Please keep us abreast. Thank you so much. 

And thank you, Mr. Deutch, for your patience, and take as much 

time as you would like. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. 

Ambassador Patterson, there were a lot of stories in the media 

over the past couple of weeks that Congress was not in session 

about the administration’s plans with respect to Iran, stories about 

giving Iran direct access to dollars or to the U.S. financial system 

as part of sanctions relief, the rules about indirect use of dollars 

from transactions with Iran as long as they didn’t go through U.S. 

banks. 

Obviously, there are real concerns that many of us on this subcommittee share about looking for ways to provide access to the 

U.S. financial system that is not permitted, nor should it be permitted, since it is not part of the Iran deal, or access to the dollar. 

So, understanding that much of this falls under the purview of 

your colleagues at Treasury, can you tell us anything to help clarify 

some of these reports, help us understand what it is we have been 

reading? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Yes. Thank you. 

Secretary Lu said to the Council on Foreign Relations—and let 

me repeat that and make it very clear—Iran will not have access 

to the American financial system. I think there was some confusion 

about this in the financial press. 

But let me say that we do want to carry out our commitments 

under the JCPOA, and companies have not done business in Iran 

for a long time and they need to get comfortable with the prospects 

of this nuclear deal remaining in effect. So, our colleagues in Treasury and other agencies are talking to businesses. They come to 

visit us in the State Department because our sanctions policy is 

very complex, so we try to explain how they can do business in 

Iran, should they wish to do so. 

But let me say that, while Iran so far has followed the letter of 

the agreement, they also need to send signals to the business community that they are not going to engage in provocative behavior. 

When, as Mr. Wilson said, Iran is sending weapons to the Houthis 

35

in Iran and when they are helping out Hezbollah, when they are 

shooting off ballistic missiles, this raises concern in the business 

community about the safety and security of their investment. So, 

Iran needs to understand what a financially-successful country 

does, that you need to provide a safe and secure environment for 

businesses. So, that is also at play here. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Just a couple of followups. The confusion in the financial press, has the administration—I understand what Secretary Lu has said. At a lower level has there been an engagement 

with that financial press to help clarify, if there were mistakes 

made, to help them understand, so that they could write about 

those as well? 

Ms. PATTERSON. I think so, Mr. Deutch, because I, frankly, was 

in a meeting where this was discussed. And one leading financial 

newspaper, I think, was in the forefront of this. I think there has 

been outreach to sort of clear up this issue. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Just before moving on, I would just point out, when 

we talk about Iran having lived up to its obligations under the nuclear deal, without engaging in a longer back-and-forth about this, 

the Security Council resolution which does lay out the obligations 

of Iran under the nuclear deal also includes the prohibition on ballistic missile tests. And for those of us who have real concerns 

about their ability to continue to test ballistic missiles and to develop ballistic missile programs, the fact that there have now been 

multiple tests, which clearly violate that Security Council resolution, I am appreciative of the administration’s position of the sanctions that have been imposed, of the strong statements by Ambassador Power at the United Nations. I, also, though, would take this 

moment to suggest that, if the Security Council, despite our best 

efforts, will not take action in response to these violations of the 

Security Council resolutions, then the ballistic missile tests, which 

were not part of the nuclear deal, as you explained, there needs to 

be more done to penalize Iran. And if the international community 

won’t do it, then the United States Congress I think has an obligation to do that, something that I know we are looking at, and I 

think it is important for us to move forward on. 

Just quickly—I see I don’t have a lot of time—we are over 5 

years now. The London Donor Conference took place February 4th. 

The State Department announced over $925 million in additional 

assistance with more than $600 million going to lifesaving humanitarian assistance and over $300 million in development assistance, 

including $290 million for education, Jordan and Lebanon. And the 

budget request continues our tradition of robust humanitarian assistance. 

But, Ambassador Patterson, given the unfulfilled pledges of past 

years, what do we do to work to ensure that the money that is 

pledged by others is actually received, that they actually live up to 

that commitment? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Could I first say about the ballistic missiles, 

first, we are pursuing this at the U.N. We are imposing sanctions. 

And critically, I think, we are helping our Gulf partners increase 

their capacity to handle this ballistic missile problem, which they 

are, of course, the most vulnerable to Iran’s ballistic missiles. 

36

On the pledges on Syria, I think there has been considerable improvement in the compliance with the pledges, but it is certainly 

not perfect. And we are in a very constant dialog with the other 

donors on this to encourage them. I will get you the figures later 

in the afternoon. 

Mr. DEUTCH. And just one very quick question, Madam Chairman. And I am sure this is a question that my staff and others on 

the committee could easily answer, if I had asked them, but I 

didn’t. 

Can you help those of us who—we are all so concerned about the 

situation in Syria and the slaughter of Syrian civilians by the 

Assad regime with the support of Hezbollah. The number of people 

killed went up in reports from month to month as reviews were 

conducted. The last official report, the number was 200,000, 

250,000. There are some who now suggest the number is closer to 

a 1⁄2 million people. I have heard 350,000. Do we have a sense of 

what the number is? Because the fact that we are now well into 

the hundreds of thousands can’t let us just accept that the number 

is so big that 200,000, 400,000—we know that Assad is terrible. We 

know that there is a slaughter. We know that the humanitarian 

impact has been so dire. It is important to recognize every one of 

the people, every one of his own citizens that Assad has butchered. 

Do we have a current number? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Mr. Deutch, the number we use is somewhere 

between 250,000 and 300,000, which I appreciate lacks specificity. 

But it is hard to access some of these areas. For instance, mass 

graves exist. I don’t think we really will know until this conflict is 

over. 

But let me also say that that is why it is so important this cessation of hostilities holds. Violence has dropped very significantly. 

There are still areas of very intense conflict, but throughout most 

of the country violence is down. So, the most important thing we 

can do now with Syria is try to maintain that ceasefire in place. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Deutch. Excellent questions. 

Mr. DeSantis of Florida. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Ambassador Patterson, I just want to be clear. 

You said that Iran under the proposed changes would not have access to the U.S. financial system. Does that mean they would have 

no even indirect access to the U.S. dollar? In other words, would 

the dollar be allowed to be used to facilitate transactions between 

Iran and other countries? 

Ms. PATTERSON. They can use the dollar offshore. I mean, they 

can access, if a bank in Malaysia holds dollars and trades with a 

bank in India, yes, they could use dollars. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Okay. So, that represents a change from how 

those regulations have been interpreted in the past, correct? 

Ms. PATTERSON. I don’t believe so, sir, but I will have to check 

on that. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Because I think there was a lot of talk about 

whether the administration, when the Iran deal has said no access 

to the financial system at all, and that was very clear, and now 

people are saying, ‘‘Well, it is not necessarily going to be access beVerDate 0ct 09 2002 08:02 Jun 27, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\WORK\_MENA\041316\99756 SHIRL
37

cause the transactions may be dollarized, but no money is going to 

actually come into the U.S. financial system.’’

But, as I understand it, there were members of the administration who said even dollarized transactions were not going to be 

something that was going to be permitted. And so, am I wrong 

about that? Have we been getting mixed signals throughout these 

many months? 

Ms. PATTERSON. I don’t know, sir. This is at an extraordinarily 

technical level, and I will get somebody up here who knows this 

subject backward and forward to talk to you. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Okay. Well, we definitely want to hear that. 

There have been a lot of great questions about money going to 

the Palestinian Authority. I know under the appropriations, as 

those are done annually, there is usually a requirement that the 

President ask for a waiver by certifying that there is a single Palestinian treasury and payroll and that the Palestinian Authority is 

acting to counter incitement of violence against Israelis. Have those 

certifications been made in the last several years? 

Ms. PATTERSON. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know. Well, 

I will find out. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Well, do you believe that the Palestinian Authority is acting to counter incitement of violence against the Israelis? 

Ms. PATTERSON. This is, as you probably know, a subject of constant dialog with us and the Palestinian Authority. We have many 

discussions about this. 

On the issue of the single payroll, I was a little surprised at that, 

but we have many discussions with Minister Bashar, the Minister 

of Finance of the Palestinian Authority. I honestly would not expect that to be a problem, but we will look into this. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Because there are, I think, really, really grave 

questions about these families of terrorists who are getting paid. A 

lot of them, they end up better off, their families are better off if 

they commit acts of terrorism against the Israelis than if they were 

to just work at a normal job inside areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority. 

And I listened to your back-and-forth with the chairwoman and 

with Chairman Royce, but I am just not clear. Is the administration going to do something to address this problem? Because it 

seems like we have money going over there. They may say it is 

with other funds that they are paying it, but money is fungible. So, 

we are effectively helping them do that. So, what do we do? Are 

we deducting the amount that we give them based on how much 

money they are paying families of terrorists? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Well, no, sir, because we think that our program 

for Palestinian Authority is absolutely necessary, all elements of it, 

and particularly the advances they have made in development of 

the police and the justice system and the humanitarian relief that 

is going both into Gaza and the West Bank. But, as I say, we discuss this with them. We take it up with them. There are always 

in all these assistance programs conflicting priorities, but I would 

just stress how important this program is for overall stability in 

the region. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Well, I think that if they are actually facilitating 

payments to families of terrorists who are killing Israelis, then we 

38

should be deducting the amount of money, at a minimum. I mean, 

I would go further than that. But, I mean, at a minimum, we can’t 

be complicit in that. 

Let me ask you, there is a bill that is working its way through 

the House of Representatives to have the State Department categorize the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization. 

Does the State Department have a position on that? 

Ms. PATTERSON. The State Department’s position, the administration’s position for many long years has been that the Muslim 

Brotherhood is not a terrorist organization and that they denounced violence many years ago. I can’t remember the exact year, 

but they denounced violence many years ago. They are a legitimate 

political party in a number of countries in the Middle East. 

Mr. DESANTIS. So, you don’t believe that they are involved with 

international terrorism, the Brotherhood? 

Ms. PATTERSON. I am sure that some elements of the Muslim 

Brotherhood as well as many other parties are involved with terrorists, of course. There may be individual members who are involved. But, as an organization, they denounced terrorism many 

years ago. I haven’t seen the most recent version of the legislation, 

so I couldn’t comment on that. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Well, I think that they are really a problem aspect of all this. President Sisi, you know, he views the Brotherhood 

as a major threat to security in Egypt. 

I guess, is it the administration’s view still that the Brotherhood 

is largely a secular political organization and less an Islamist organization? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Of course it is an Islamist organization. It is 

based and it is the oldest of the Islamist organizations and, of 

course, it advocates, and did in Egypt and elsewhere, has a preference, of course, for Sharia law over what we would call typical 

civil law. So, of course, it is an Islamist organization. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Yes, I mean, I think that their views, they do support Sharia. They have a totalitarian ideology. Certainly, the treatment of women is terrible. The treatment of religious minorities is 

terrible. And their tentacles really stretch. They are involved, I believe, financially in supporting violent Islamist groups, and I think 

that they are very much a cause for concern throughout the region. 

I am out of time. I thank you guys for coming, and I yield back. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. DeSantis. 

Mr. Cicilline? 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Ambassador Patterson, the President’s budget removes Egypt’s 

partial aid conditions, the company national security waiver, and 

the reporting requirement entirely. Would you describe the justification for proposing this removal of language? And do you think 

Egypt has made substantial progress on human rights that would 

warrant removal of these conditions? This is a pretty significant action. 

Ms. PATTERSON. Congressman, I think you will find that the administration in all these budget documents has removed most of 

those restrictions because, of course, the administration, as I mentioned in my oral statement, wants the maximum flexibility to implement its programs. So, I wouldn’t comment, but I will comment, 

39

of course, Egypt’s human rights situation is of great concern to us. 

There have certainly been reverses, significant reverses, in the past 

few months. So, yes, we are very concerned about that, but I 

wouldn’t read the removal of that as a comment on the administration’s view of Egypt’s human rights. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Well, I guess my concern is, is it read that way 

by the Egyptians? I mean, it may be that that is the policy of the 

Department, but it just seems to me, in the context of what we see 

happening in Egypt, it sends a very strange message at a time of 

increased human rights violations to remove these conditions. And 

so, I would just raise that because I think it is very important that 

that not be the message. 

Would you also describe how the budget reflects resources being 

devoted to combat Iran’s terrorist and destabilizing activities in the 

region? There has been a lot of conversation about the limitation 

of JCPOA and our expectation that we would be pushing back hard 

on Iran in a variety of other areas. I would like you, if you could, 

speak to how the budget supports responding to Iran’s activities in 

the region. And if there is any indication of a change in Iran’s behavior and, as a result, particularly in the area of human rights, 

has there been an increase in the imposition of sanctions for 

human rights violations by Iran? 

Ms. PATTERSON. I think the budget supports countering Iran’s influence in the region in several ways. One is to strengthen Iraq, 

and you notice a very substantial increase in our budget for Iraq. 

So, they are certainly running an influence in Iraq that we need 

to counter, a malign influence. 

In Yemen, we have asked for a substantial amount. We also have 

a good pipeline with Yemen. But it is very important to get the Iranians out of Yemen and, to do that, we have to have process and, 

then, strengthen the government, so it can counter Iranian influence. 

I might also add that we are very active with our GCC partners 

in strengthening their capacity through maritime, through 

cybersecurity, through ballistic missile defense, through improved 

special forces activities. They pay for most of this themselves. It 

isn’t reflected in the budget. But we are engaged in a very active 

dialog. The President is going to Riyadh next week to talk to them 

in more detail about this. 

Then, finally, sir, our Navy and Armed Forces are very active in 

this. There have been, for instance, four interdictions of Iranian 

weapons going to Yemen in the past few weeks. So, this is a very 

high priority for our military colleagues operating in the Gulf. 

Mr. CICILLINE. And my last two questions, Ambassador. What is 

the status of the MOU negotiations with Israel? Are there some additional options being considered, a lot of new threats to their security? 

And finally, does the budget reflect any rebuilding in Syria or is 

it really still focused on responding to the immediate crisis? And 

how are we supporting this work to ensure that the ceasefire 

holds? And does the budget provide some resources to do that and 

in what way? 

Ms. PATTERSON. On the MOU with Israel, there have been a 

number of meetings, very intense and long meetings with the 

40

Israelis about this. They were extremely useful in giving us a good 

picture of Israel’s security needs. As the chairman said, they are 

certainly more acute over the next few years. So, we have had a 

lot of intensive discussions. I honestly don’t know if we are going 

to finish this before the end of the administration because it is 

hard, and there are a lot of issues underway. 

Let me also stress, Madam Chairman, that protection of QME is 

a centerpiece of this. There is no doubt that that is going to be rigorously observed. So, I don’t know if we are finished. There are lots 

of financial implications. There are implications on sourcing of materials. But we are working hard on this. It is a very high priority 

for the administration. 

And you asked, sir, about Syria. We have asked for additional resources for Syria. Some of it will go into rebuilding. We have a 

fund. We have a multinational donor fund for rebuilding. It has 

about $100 million in it. That is probably going to be a drop in the 

bucket. But our efforts through Turkey to support the moderate opposition—for instance, we have managed to keep 30,000 civil servants and teachers and policemen employed through all this. We 

have given grants to local councils. We managed in some places to 

keep health clinics open, even in places that were overrun by ISIL. 

So, we have asked for an increase in Syria, and we hope that these 

mechanisms will provide at least some kind of baseline for rebuilding Syria. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you, Madam 

Chair. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. 

And now, we turn to Mr. Issa. 

Mr. ISSA. Thank you. 

Administrator, I will start with you. As I mentioned in my opening statement, the number is staggering, but let’s just look at Lebanon with 500 to 800,000. In this particular case, unlike the usual 

numbers in the Middle East, I think the number is probably accurate at 800,000 school-age children who are beyond Lebanon’s ordinary capability to educate. 

I am going to pose a minute question. My understanding is the 

Minister of Education, who is here in the U.S. right now, has 

issued a number of MOUs. As a matter of fact, it appears as 

though anyone who comes in saying they would like to educate 

these Syrians with Lebanese standards is getting an MOU. And 

then, my understanding is they come to you for money. Is that a 

fair statement, that you are getting a lot of people with proposals 

of how to do it, if you will just provide the dollars? 

Ms. ALEXANDER. We have worked very closely with Minister Abu 

Saab, and we are meeting with him again this week. My colleague 

signed an MOU with him last week. 

Mr. ISSA. That is the 42——

Ms. ALEXANDER. That is the $41 million for the basic education 

program. And this program is going to address needs for firstthrough fourth-graders to give them access to basic education and 

early grade reading. This is going to affect over 100,000 or over 

10,000 children. 

Mr. ISSA. But it is conventional education expansion? 

41

Ms. ALEXANDER. It is conventional education. But, at the same 

time, as you had asked in your opening statement as well, we are 

talking to the minister about verification or certification of being 

able to take students who have been out of school and get them 

back into formal education through non-formal education programs. 

This is a very important part because, as I stated, there are 13 million children out of school because of this crisis. Those that are in 

Lebanon and Jordan are both suffering. Without non-formal education, you can’t have a student who left school as a 9-year-old to 

go back to school as a 15-year-old. They need something in between, and they need to get back into the system. 

Mr. ISSA. So, how do we leverage e-learning and other abilities 

to provide, if you will, free, notwithstanding the delivery device, 

free education to people on both sides of the conflict area? I mentioned the radio one because I became aware of it. It is novel. But 

it is pretty much old school. Most people in the Middle East that 

learn English learn it by American songs. Many people who learn 

Arabic learn it by Arab songs. But that isn’t necessarily any more 

productive to real education than memorizing the Quran is to producing moderates. 

So, briefly—and you are welcome to follow up with me beyond 

this hearing—what is it we can do to sort of leapfrog the incremental dollars where $41 million is proposed to provide you 

100,000? And those are probably the easiest 100,000 because they 

don’t include the expansion of schools and conventional brick-andmortar, which could easily be in the many billions for what we 

hope is a shorter period of time. And it wouldn’t address the people 

on the other side of the conflict line. 

Ms. ALEXANDER. Thank you. I would be happy to follow up with 

you. 

We are actually in the process right now of a co-creation with a 

number of organizations that do non-formal education and informal 

education to look at what some of the best practices are worldwide 

in trying to bring education to populations like this. And we would 

be happy to follow up with you. 

Mr. ISSA. Okay. I am going to not make a suggestion that is anything more than just a thought that I have had listening to many 

of the groups. In the day of the internet, it would seem that today 

the entire curriculum necessary to provide a Baccalaureate, including teaching, should be online, hosted somewhere in the world, 

probably by us in the Cloud, for Arab-speakers at least in the Levant language designation area to get their degrees. It would seem 

like that is a question of producing the content. 

Now, then, getting that delivered is a complex question of bandwidth, servers, iPads, whatever the delivery system is. But it would 

seem that, until USAID finds who is going to produce, if you will, 

a complete content that would lead to a Baccalaureate and get the 

Lebanese and other Arab countries to buy into the idea that this 

is moderate, educational, and doable, we don’t yet, then, have the 

distribution. 

And I appreciate you keeping teachers working, but I don’t think 

we can produce enough teachers ever and paper to deal with this 

in a way that is going to address the young man or woman who 

is working 14 hours a day and only got a fourth grade education 

42

and will never get more education until we come up with an alternate delivery plan. 

Madam Chair, since I appear to be the last, would you mind if 

I go a little longer? 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. No. Please do. 

Mr. ISSA. Thank you. 

Ambassador, I am going to switch to you. I mentioned the multinational force, and I think I was fairly bold in echoing, to be honest, The Washington Post and others who have recognized that we 

have a substantial investment there of people who are daily often 

being shelled, who are in harm’s way, for a mission that is now, 

from your own experience in Egypt, is now by anyone’s reasonable 

expectations no longer the mission they were placed there for in 

the late 1970s. 

What would you say, recognizing that you can’t speak for the 

whole administration, to that basic concept that their obligation is 

to peace in the region and not necessarily to counting heads at borders? 

Ms. PATTERSON. Mr. Issa, we are, as you probably know, concerned about some of the same issues that you have raised, particularly about the safety of American and other——

Mr. ISSA. And our allied partners. 

Ms. PATTERSON [continuing]. And our allies, the Colombians, the 

Fijians, the others that work with us there——

Mr. ISSA. The Czech? 

Ms. PATTERSON [continuing]. Who have bravely for many years. 

So, we are discussing a reconfiguration plan that would reduce the 

risk to our personnel and still maintain the necessary monitoring 

through better technology and other instruments that have evolved 

over the past few decades. 

I think the Israelis and Egyptians may not quite see it that way, 

that the mandate is outmoded. And there were, in fact, when I was 

there, some events that required sort of the traditional role of MFO 

to take care of. 

But I thought your idea was an interesting one. I think it is contrary to sort of the mandate of MFO, that it would stay there as 

a peacekeeper, but I think it is an interesting idea. Let me say 

that. 

Mr. ISSA. Okay. Well, in closing, I love interesting ideas. When 

Congressman Farenthold and I went there now more than a year 

ago and looked at where rounds had landed, met with the explosive 

ordnance disposal team, looked at the threat, recognized the active 

engagement by the Egyptians, active both in the air and ground of 

the newly-formed, if you will, or new partnership of ISIS in the 

Sinai, it became obvious that we were currently not participating. 

And yet, we were there and we were, obviously, being attacked by 

ISIS. 

So, I guess as we look at the interesting idea, I would only ask 

that, if not something similar to the direction that I was suggesting 

that Secretary Kerry and the administration might be able to convince—and I am happy to go there. I am, fortunately, very well-received on both sides of the Sinai. For the fact that we can do more 

if we have a will to do it and if they are willing to let us do it, 

but if we do just what we are doing, we are, in fact, sitting there 

43

inevitably waiting to lose brave peacekeepers for something which, 

quite frankly, is unlikely to happen. 

As you know, the Egyptians are not likely to mount an offensive 

across the border, and the Israelis are not in particular peril, that 

that would occur. That doesn’t change the fact that they don’t want 

us to leave, but I do think they want us to do more, if we can, and 

do it in cooperation with both countries. So, I leave that with you 

because I have no greater message from that trip than the status 

quo would seem to be less than we should do. 

Ms. PATTERSON. Mr. Issa, let me say, we entirely agree with you 

about the status quo. This is, frankly, unsustainable. And since you 

were there a year ago, the security situation has deteriorated. So, 

a mandate that needs modernization I think is fair to say and a 

force configuration that needs a reassessment to minimize risk, if 

nothing else. As you know, security cooperation between the 

Israelis and the Egyptians, particularly in the Sinai, has never 

been better. 

Mr. ISSA. Yes, we got to witness that. Madam Chair, that was 

the good part of that visit, that the relationship between the current Government of Egypt and the current Government of Israel is 

one with common enemies of both the ISIS in the Sinai and, of 

course, Hamas, both of which are know terrorist organizations. 

I would close by saying I am equally concerned that the Muslim 

Brotherhood is a political organization with a strong bent against 

the type of freedom that America stands for. And if we cannot determine them to be a terrorist organization in this body, we certainly have to recognize that they showed their true colors during 

their short time heading Egyptian Government. And to the Coptic 

community and others that people on the dais talked about, I think 

it goes without saying that America must take a stand against the 

activities of the Muslim Brotherhood, both as a political organization and as what I believe to be a terrorist wing. 

And so, Madam Chair, thank you so much for the indulgence. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Issa. 

They are a terrorist group. It is ‘‘The Emperor has no clothes,’’ 

but if we don’t want to see it, it doesn’t mean that he is, nonetheless, naked. 

And I wanted to ask just one question. Even though Mr. Deutch 

is not here, he has allowed me to do this, so I am not speaking out 

of school. 

All of us in our subcommittee, we are very interested in keeping 

the Iraqi Jewish Archives operating here in the United States because many people want to see these historical artifacts, and it 

would find a good home here. We understand that perhaps they 

will eventually go back to Iraq. But have any of the 3,500 items, 

do you know if they have been returned to Iraq and, if so, how 

many, if you could let us know? And have we been able to secure 

the Iraqi Jewish Archives going to other museums, other exhibition 

sites? 

I had talked to Brett McGurk and he assured me that State was 

working with NARA to identify venues where the archives could go. 

And we are willing to work with the State Department to see how 

we can be of help to making sure that these very important artiVerDate 0ct 09 2002 08:02 Jun 27, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\WORK\_MENA\041316\99756 SHIRL
44

facts of the Iraqi Jewish Archives stay safe and in a place where 

people can see them. 

They were there in my District in Miami Beach, the FIU Jewish 

Museum. And what a great turnout. So, people are interested. They 

want to see them and this is a great place for them here in the 

United States where people can admire them. Maybe in Iraq they 

are not as appreciated. We are willing to have it go back, but once 

they do the whole tour. I want to be a roadie for that tour. 

Ms. PATTERSON. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will get back to you 

on that. I think that that is right; they were on a trip around the 

United States to suitable museums. And at some point they would 

go back to Iraq under proper security and appreciation for their 

historic value. But let me get back to you on exactly where they 

are now. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I would love that. Thank you very much. 

With that, our subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 1:02 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(45)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

46

f


99756n.eps
47

f


99756m.eps
48


99756c-1.eps
49

f


99756c-2.eps
50


99756d-1.eps
51


99756d-2.eps
52


99756d-3.eps
53

f


99756d-4.eps
54


99756e-1.eps
55

Æ


99756e-2.eps