S. HRG. 112–735

NOMINATIONS OF THE 112TH

CONGRESS—SECOND SESSION

HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

FEBRUARY 7 THROUGH NOVEMBER 28, 2012

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

NOMINATIONS OF THE 112TH CONGRESS—SECOND SESSION 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

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

79–797 PDF 2013

S. HRG. 112–735

NOMINATIONS OF THE 112TH

CONGRESS—SECOND SESSION

HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

FEBRUARY 7 THROUGH NOVEMBER 28, 2012

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

112TH CONGRESS—SECOND SESSION

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts, Chairman

BARBARA BOXER, California 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

WILLIAM C. DANVERS, Staff Director

KENNETH A. MYERS, JR., Republican Staff Director

(II)

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

C O N T E N T S 

[Any additional material relating to these nominees may be found

at the end of the applicable day’s hearing.]

Page

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (a.m.) ...................................................................... 1

Hon. Larry L. Palmer, of Georgia, to be Ambassador to Barbados, St. Kitts 

and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda, the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines ........................................ 6

Hon. Phyllis M. Powers, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Nicaragua .............................................................................................................. 9

Jonathan D. Farrar, of California, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Panama ................................................................................................................. 11

Julissa Reynoso, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Oriental Republic 

of Uruguay ............................................................................................................ 14

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (p.m.) ..................................................................... 35

Hon. Nancy J. Powell, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to India ................................. 40

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 ..................................................................................... 65

Hon. Frederick D. Barton, of Maine, to be an Assistant Secretary of State 

(Conflict and Stabilization Operations) and to be Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization .................................................................................. 67

Hon. William E. Todd, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of 

Cambodia .............................................................................................................. 69

Sara Margalit Aviel, of California, to be United States Alternate Executive 

Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ...... 72

Wednesday, March 14, 2012 ............................................................................... 113

Hon. Pamela A. White, of Maine, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Haiti ... 121

Hon. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, of Louisiana, to be Director General of the 

Foreign Service ..................................................................................................... 125

Gina K. Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Malta ................................................................................................................. 128

Tuesday, March 20, 2012 ..................................................................................... 147

Jacob Walles, of Delaware, to be Ambassador to the Tunisian Republic ........... 152

John Christopher Stevens, of California, to be Ambassador to Libya ................. 155

Hon. Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant Secretary 

of State (Energy Resources) ................................................................................ 157

Wednesday, March 21, 2012 ............................................................................... 185

Hon. Tracey Ann Jacobson, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador 

to the Republic of Kosovo .................................................................................... 187

Hon. Richard B. Norland, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to Georgia ....................... 191

Hon. Kenneth Merten, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Croatia .................................................................................................................. 193

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

Page

IV

Mark A. Pekala, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia ...... 196

Jeffrey D. Levine, of California, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia . 199

Thursday, March 22, 2012 ................................................................................... 221

Hon. Scott DeLisi, of Minnesota, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda 225

Makila James, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom 

of Swaziland ......................................................................................................... 227

Michael Raynor, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Benin ....... 231

Wednesday, May 16, 2012 .................................................................................... 253

Piper Anne Wind Campbell, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador 

to Mongolia ........................................................................................................... 257

Hon. Peter William Bodde, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Federal 

Democratic Republic of Nepal ............................................................................. 261

Dorothea-Maria Rosen, of California, to be Ambassador to the Federated 

States of Micronesia ............................................................................................. 265

Thursday, May 17, 2012 ....................................................................................... 277

David J. Lane, of Florida, to serve as U.S. Representative to the United 

Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture, with the rank of Ambassador .... 281

Edward M. Alford, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of The 

Gambia .................................................................................................................. 285

Mark L. Asquino, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Equatorial Guinea ............................................................................ 287

Douglas M. Griffiths, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Mozambique ...................................................................................................................... 290

Wednesday, June 6, 2012 .................................................................................... 309

Hon. Michele Jeanne Sison, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Democratic 

Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and to serve concurrently as Ambassador 

to the Republic of Maldives ................................................................................. 313

Brett H. McGurk, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq .... 315

Susan Marsh Elliott, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Tajikistan .............................................................................................................. 324

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 .................................................................................. 365

Hon. Richard L. Morningstar, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Azerbaijan ......................................................................................... 370

Jay Nicholas Anania, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Suriname ............................................................................................................... 373

Timothy M. Broas, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of the 

Netherlands .......................................................................................................... 376

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 .................................................................................. 405

Hon. Derek J. Mitchell, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the Union 

of Burma ............................................................................................................... 410

Thursday, July 12, 2012 ...................................................................................... 437

Hon. Gene Allan Cretz, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Ghana ................................................................................................................ 440

Deborah Ruth Malac, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Liberia .......................................................................................................................... 443

David Bruce Wharton, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Zimbabwe .............................................................................................................. 446

Alexander Mark Laskaris, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Guinea ............................................................................................................... 449

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

Page

V

Wednesday, July 18, 2012 ................................................................................... 461

Greta Christine Holtz, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Sultanate of 

Oman ..................................................................................................................... 464

Thomas Hart Armbruster, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of the Marshall Islands ........................................................................................ 467

Hon. Michael David Kirby, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Serbia ................................................................................................................ 470

John M. Koenig, of Washington, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Cyprus . 473

Hon. Marcie B. Ries, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Bulgaria ............................................................................................ 476

Tuesday, July 31, 2012 ......................................................................................... 497

Hon. James B. Cunningham, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Islamic 

Republic of Afghanistan ....................................................................................... 501

Hon. Richard G. Olson, of New Mexico, to be Ambassador to the Islamic 

Republic of Pakistan ............................................................................................ 507

Wednesday, September 12, 2012 ....................................................................... 549

Joseph E. Macmanus, of New York, to be Representative of the United States 

of America to the Vienna Office of the United Nations and to be Representative of the United States of America to the International Atomic Energy, 

with the rank of Ambassador .............................................................................. 552

Sharon English Woods Villarosa, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Mauritius and the Republic of Seychelles ...................................................... 557

Walter North, of Washington, to be Ambassador to Papua New Guinea, 

the Solomon Islands, and the Republic of Vanuatu .......................................... 559

Thursday, September 13, 2012 .......................................................................... 583

Hon. Stephen D. Mull, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Poland ................................................................................................................... 586

Dawn M. Liberi, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Burundi ....... 588

Wednesday, September 19, 2012 ....................................................................... 603

Hon. Robert Stephen Beecroft, of California, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Iraq .................................................................................................................... 607

Wednesday, November 28, 2012 ........................................................................ 635

Hon. Robert F. Godec, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Kenya .................................................................................................................... 638

Deborah Ann McCarthy, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Lithuania .............................................................................................................. 641

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(1)

NOMINATIONS OF LARRY PALMER, PHYLLIS 

POWERS, JONATHAN FARRAR, AND JULISSA 

REYNOSO 

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2012 (a.m.) 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

Hon. Larry L. Palmer, of Georgia, to be Ambassador to Barbados, 

St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda, the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, and Saint Vincent and the 

Grenadines 

Hon. Phyllis M. Powers, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Nicaragua 

Jonathan D. Farrar, of California, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Panama 

Julissa Reynoso, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Oriental 

Republic of Uruguay 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert Menendez, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Menendez, Lugar, and Rubio. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator MENENDEZ. Good morning. This hearing will come to 

order. 

Today the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will consider four 

nominations: Ambassador Larry Palmer to be the Ambassador to 

Barbados, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua, and Barbuda, 

and the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, St. Vincent, and the 

Grenadines. That’s a lot of territory to handle. [Laughter.] 

Ambassador Phyllis Powers to be the Ambassador to Nicaragua; 

Mr. Jonathan Farrar to be the Ambassador to Panama; and Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Central America and the Caribbean; and 

Julissa Reynoso, to be the Ambassador to Uruguay. 

Let me welcome you on behalf of the committee, and your families and friends. I’ll make a statement, and then I’ll turn to Senator 

Rubio. 

I want to congratulate you all on your nominations. If confirmed, 

you’ll serve the U.S. Government as its highest representative to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

2

the countries to which you have been nominated, and you’ll be 

called upon to implement the policies of our government and to 

protect and advance the interests of the American people. 

I know many of you have already had this opportunity in different places, though such an honor is bestowed upon relatively few 

in our country. 

I would encourage you to respond expeditiously to any questions 

that may be submitted subsequently for the record so the committee can act on your nominations as soon as possible. The deadline of submissions for the record for members will be the close of 

business on Friday. 

All of today’s nominees are being considered for ambassadorial 

positions to the Western Hemisphere. The four embassies you are 

being called upon to lead are spread throughout the hemisphere, 

from the Caribbean to Central America to the southern cone of 

Latin America. The wide range of bilateral issues that confronts 

these embassies is as broad and complex as America’s multifaceted 

relationship with the region itself. 

In light of our geographic proximity, our shared history, our economic and cultural ties, and the ability to instantly share information through the Internet, the Western Hemisphere’s 840 million 

people are inextricably linked like never before. 

America’s relationship with our neighbors in the region can best 

be described as a partnership. When one looks at the incredible 

amount of goods and services flowing across the borders, the migration of our peoples, the art and music that we share, it’s clear the 

United States and its neighbors have forged an incredibly strong 

and interminable relationship, and the bond that cements this 

partnership is called democracy. 

Over the last few decades, we have seen some incredible democratic progress in the Western Hemisphere, with most countries 

possessing a representative democracy and with more and more 

people enjoying the same rights and privileges that we have in the 

United States. 

There are, of course, notable exceptions, among them Cuba, Venezuela, and, in my view since last November, Nicaragua. When I 

think about the hemisphere, I think at a different time it would 

have been unimaginable for Ahmadinejad to have been welcomed 

anywhere within the Western Hemisphere. Is it a coincidence that 

one of the world’s pariah leaders, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, recently 

visited all three of these countries on his recent tour of tyrants, as 

my House colleague, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, has so eloquently stated? 

What does it say about the leaders of these three countries when 

they invite to their capitals a repressive leader of Iran who, in 

June 2009, was reelected through massive fraud, disputed ballots, 

and a biased electoral board? A leader who, when the people of his 

country rallied in the streets to protest, unleashed his security 

forces to crush the protesters? 

On November 6, Daniel Ortega used the Ahmadinejad election 

playbook to stay in power, and then had the gall to invite his mentor to his coronation in January. Where was the international outrage when Ortega altered the constitution, allowing him to run for 

a third straight term? Where was the Organization of American 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

3

States, who concluded that despite irregularities, that Ortega had 

actually won the election? 

Now, right in front of our eyes, we’re watching the same movie 

in Venezuela, the harassment of the opposition, the closing of independent media outlets, and restrictions on nongovernmental organizations that echo events ongoing now in Egypt. It’s all happening 

again, and I don’t see anyone speaking out except for some very 

brave human rights organizations and individuals on the ground. 

I will be pretty outraged if we have to chair another hearing in 

November to examine how Chavez stole the election in Venezuela. 

Repression is as wrong in the Western Hemisphere as it is in the 

Middle East. As Dr. King said, ‘‘Injustice anywhere threatens justice everywhere.’’ There is no better time for the leaders of our 

hemisphere to reinforce the democratic gains of the last two decades than at the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena this April, 

not just through talk but by action. The Organization of American 

States, for example, must be more effective and given all the necessary resources it needs to defend and promote human rights and 

democracy throughout the Americas, including by strengthening 

the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. 

This is not the time for the OAS to back down or retreat from 

its mission or be bullied by Chavez. This is the time to doubledown and reclaim its hemispheric leadership. 

I’m extremely supportive of Secretary Clinton’s efforts to bolster 

the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and I hope the 

State Department will continue to put more emphasis on the 

region. 

Just as the United States addresses the fires in other parts of 

the world, so too must we address the issues smoldering in our own 

hemisphere. Antidemocratic forces are gathering strength in too 

many nations. In some countries like Nicaragua, these forces are 

explicit and visible at the ballot box, and in others it is more hidden in the repression of media and civil society, and the weakening 

of society fostered by drug cartels that feed on desperation and poverty and corruption. These forces are harder to find and more 

opaque, but they are equally corrosive and self-serving. 

It’s time to wake up and start dedicating the resources and our 

attention in a hemisphere which is incredibly important to the 

national interests and security of the United States, just as we do 

in other parts of the world. I look forward to these nominees being 

part of that effort. I hope that the President’s budget, which will 

be released next Monday, will reflect this hemisphere as a policy 

priority. 

With that, I’m pleased to recognize the ranking Republican on 

the committee, my friend and colleague, Senator Rubio. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s an honor to have 

with us today as well the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Lugar, who is a legend in the foreign 

relations world. So it’s great to have you here. Thank you for being 

a part of it. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

4

Thank you all for your service to our country and for your willingness to serve in these new posts. 

The Western Hemisphere actually is, I hope, will become of 

increasing attention and importance. I think it’s been neglected. 

There are major issues going on elsewhere in the world that have 

distracted us over the last few years, but I think what’s going on 

in the Western Hemisphere very much is at the core of what American foreign policy should be about. 

The expansion of democracies around the world have led to free 

markets, and free markets have led to prosperity, freedom, and 

security, and nowhere is that more apparent than in the Western 

Hemisphere, where all but one nation has embraced democracy and 

elections. Unfortunately, one of the trends that we’re starting to 

see in this hemisphere is a little backsliding from that. We’re certainly seeing that in Nicaragua. We’re certainly seeing that in Venezuela and some of the countries allied with them, and then obviously in Cuba, where for over 50 years now has been a totalitarian 

government. 

And so at a time when there is this ongoing debate in the world 

about who is going to win, is it going to be the liberal democracies 

like the United States and some of these emerging ones in the 

Western Hemisphere, or is it going to be totalitarian governments 

like Iran and China, Russia, two of those three countries which are 

trying to increase their footprint in the Western Hemisphere? 

So your appointments come at a critical time when, more than 

ever before, the United States needs to be a clear and bold voice 

on behalf of liberal democracy, on behalf of self-determination, on 

behalf of people having their basic human rights respected. 

Now, your assignments are all different, but they’re more challenging ones in some places than in others. In Nicaragua, as this 

chairman just announced, I think we saw an absolute outrage last 

year and a fraudulent election that no international organization 

would certify, that the very candidacy of the man who won violated 

the very constitution of its own country. 

Later this year we’ll see elections in Venezuela, in Mexico and 

the Dominican Republic. And so I think it’s important for all of 

you, as you go to your new posts, that you be firm advocates on 

behalf of democracy, on behalf of freedom, on behalf of the right of 

the people of these countries to self-determination. The challenges 

are different in different places, but if there’s a growing tendency 

in the region in some places, it’s a desire to undermine all of these 

institutions, whether it’s the press, the courts, or the elections 

themselves, and it’s important that the United States clearly know 

where we stand. 

I once had a visitor—I think he was from Nicaragua; in fact, he 

was—say to me that sometimes the United States is more interested in stability than it is in democracy; that, in essence, too often 

in the past in our foreign policy, particularly in Latin America and 

in the Western Hemisphere, we have looked the other way because 

we would rather that country be stable and not have a migration 

problem or some other issue than actually speak up on behalf of 

democracy. 

But that can’t be the case, because democracy functions from 

time to time. They may elect people that don’t agree with us on 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

5

everything. They may say some things that we don’t like. But in 

the big picture, in the global picture, in the long term, it’s better 

for our country, for our region, and for the world for people to have 

a voice in selecting their own leaders. History has proven that time 

and again. And as representatives of the single greatest republic in 

all of human history, you’re going to be uniquely positioned to be 

a strong voice on behalf of these principles that have not just made 

our Nation great but have made the world safer and more 

prosperous. 

So I welcome your willingness to serve in these new posts. I look 

forward to hearing your testimony today, and in particular your 

ideas about how, in your specific assignments, you intend to be a 

voice on behalf of freedom and democracy and self-determination. 

Thank you. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Lugar, do you have opening comments? 

We thank you for being here with us today. 

With that, let me introduce the panel. So let me start off taking 

a few moments to speak about each of you and your history, and 

then we’ll ask you to make a statement of about 5 minutes. Your 

full statements will be included in the record, and certainly introduce your family or friends, since we understand that family is a 

critical part of your mission in terms of support and help, and we 

understand it is, in essence, an extended service of themselves as 

well, and we appreciate that. 

But, Ms. Reynoso, you have to limit how many people you can 

introduce. [Laughter.] 

Because as I was entering, I met several of your supporters, so 

it might take most of the hearing time. [Laughter.] 

So with that, Larry Palmer is the nominee to be the Ambassador 

to Barbados, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua, and Barbuda, 

the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, St. Vincent and the 

Grenadines. He has recently served as the Ambassador to Honduras from 2002–2005. Prior to being Ambassador to Honduras, 

Mr. Palmer served as the deputy chief of mission and Charge ́

d’Affaires in Quito, Ecuador, and counselor for Administration in 

the Dominican Republic. 

Phyllis Powers was sworn in as Ambassador of the United States 

to the Republic of Panama on September 10, 2010. She previously 

served as the Director of the Office of Provincial Affairs at the U.S. 

Embassy in Baghdad, the deputy chief of mission of the U.S. Embassy in Lima, Peru, and Director of the Narcotics Affairs Section 

responsible for Plan Colombia. 

Jonathan Farrar was the chief of mission of the U.S. Interests 

Section in Havana, Cuba. He has served as the Principal Deputy 

Assistant Secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, and was DRL’s Acting Assistant 

Secretary. Mr. Farrar also served as Deputy Assistant Secretary in 

the State Department’s International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Bureau, with responsibility for INL’s programs in the Western Hemisphere, Africa, Asia, and Europe. 

Julissa Reynoso is currently the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Central America and the Caribbean in the Bureau of Western 

Hemisphere Affairs. Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Ms. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

6

Reynoso practiced international arbitration and antitrust law at 

Simpson Thatcher and Bartlett in New York, clerked for Federal 

Judge Laura Taylor Swain of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. 

So welcome to all of you again. And with that, I know one of my 

colleagues wants to add some words of introduction, and hopefully 

by that time we will have that opportunity. 

So we’ll start with you, Ambassador Palmer. Welcome back to 

the committee, and we look forward to your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY L. PALMER, OF GEORGIA, TO

BE AMBASSADOR TO BARBADOS, ST. KITTS AND NEVIS,

ST. LUCIA, ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, THE COMMONWEALTH 

OF DOMINICA, GRENADA, AND ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES 

Ambassador PALMER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the 

honor and privilege of appearing before you as a nominee for the 

United States Ambassador to the Caribbean nations of Antigua and 

Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. 

Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. I am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their confidence and trust 

in nominating me for this position. 

My wife, Lucille, of 39 years, who has accompanied me to every 

other Senate appearance, could not be here today. She chose to be 

with my newly born grandson in Tennessee. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to representing our country and working with you to advance the interests of the United States in the Caribbean. Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean nations represent nearly half of all countries in the 

Caribbean, an important region on the United States southern border. Traditional allies and friends, with shared culture and dedication to democracy and the rule of law, these nations play an important role both bilaterally and in multilateral organizations like the 

Organization of American States and the United Nations. I am 

honored to have been nominated to represent the United States in 

this important region. 

If confirmed, I will make the continuing safety of American residents and visitors in the Caribbean my top priority. The continuing 

success of the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative is vitally important to providing for the safety and security of the United States 

by ensuring that Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean can combat 

transnational organized crime and avoid the violence and instability seen elsewhere in the hemisphere. 

As a result of ongoing CBSI programming and engagement, the 

United States and countries of the Caribbean are working more 

closely than ever before on security and justice system-related 

projects. The inclusion of anticrime and antigang youth development and empowerment programs is an important component of 

CBSI and reflects the role the youth plays in these societies and 

in the development of their nations. 

We are also working closely with Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean to combat trafficking in persons. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

7

The global economic downturn has hit the region particularly 

hard, exacerbating already significant economic hardship. Some 

Eastern Caribbean countries are struggling with very high debt 

levels, and a number have undertaken International Monetary 

Fund standby programs and are reaching out to the Paris Club for 

debt restructuring. This difficult economic situation has prevented 

the Eastern Caribbean nations from reaching their full development potential. And if confirmed, I will build on prior work and 

lead American efforts to promote economic prosperity, trade, and 

entrepreneurship in the region. 

As 2011 marked the 50th anniversary of the Peace Corps, I 

would like to note our longstanding Peace Corps presence in the 

Eastern Caribbean which plays a major role in providing U.S. 

assistance to the region. St. Lucia was among the first countries

to receive volunteers in 1961, and currently 115 volunteers work

the region in four main areas: youth development, institutional

and NGO development, small business development, and special 

education. 

Thank you again for giving me the honor of appearing before you 

today, and I would be happy to answer any questions that you may 

have. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Palmer follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY L. PALMER

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the honor and privilege of appearing before you as nominee for the United States Ambassador to the 

Caribbean nations of Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts 

and Nevis, St. Lucia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. I am grateful to President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton for their confidence and trust in nominating me for 

this position. If confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to representing our country 

and working with you to advance the interests of the United States in the Caribbean. 

Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean nations represent nearly half of all countries 

in the Caribbean, an important region on the United States southern border. Traditional allies and friends, with shared culture and dedication to democracy and rule 

of law, these nations play an important role both bilaterally and in multilateral 

organizations like the Organization of American States and the United Nations. I 

am honored to have been nominated to represent the United States in this important region. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will make the continuing safety of American residents and visitors in the Caribbean my top priority. The continuing success of the 

Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI) is vitally important to providing for the 

safety and security of the United States by ensuring that Barbados and the Eastern 

Caribbean can combat transnational organized crime and avoid the violence and instability seen elsewhere in the hemisphere. As a result of ongoing CBSI programming and engagement, the United States and the countries of the Caribbean are 

working more closely than ever on security and justice system-related projects. The 

inclusion of anticrime and antigang youth development and empowerment programs 

is an important component of CBSI and reflects the role youth play in these societies and in their development as nations. We are also working closely with Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean nations to combat trafficking in persons. 

The global economic downturn has hit the region particularly hard, exacerbating 

already significant economic hardship. Some Eastern Caribbean countries are struggling with very high debt levels and a number have undertaken International Monetary Fund (IMF) standby programs and are reaching out to the Paris Club for debt 

restructuring. This difficult economic situation has prevented the Eastern Caribbean 

nations from reaching their full development potential. If confirmed, I will build on 

prior work and lead American efforts to promote economic prosperity, trade, and 

entrepreneurship in the region. 

The high cost of energy in the region also affects Caribbean economies. The 

United States seeks to promote alternative energy in Barbados and the Eastern 

Caribbean. Our goal under the President’s Energy and Climate Partnership of the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

8

Americas (ECPA) is to assist countries to diversify energy supplies with more renewable energy, and to increase engagement on climate change adaptation. Under 

an ECPA grant, six Eastern Caribbean country proposals were selected by the OAS 

to receive clean energy technical assistance. These projects range from solar energy 

pilot projects in national parks to the development of geothermal resources. Secretary Clinton in June announced an ECPA climate change adaptation initiative 

focused on Caribbean-specific climate modeling and adaptation planning in partnership with the University of the West Indies and one or more universities in the 

United States. If confirmed, I will work to further these projects and continue to 

promote cheaper and more sustainable energy throughout the region. 

Another critical challenge in the region is HIV/AIDS. HIV/AIDS infection rates in 

Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean, while lower than those in some neighboring 

countries, are nevertheless high in vulnerable populations, especially among youth 

and women. HIV/AIDS-related illnesses are a major cause of death for persons between the ages of 15 and 44. If confirmed, I will strongly support U.S. programs 

of prevention and services in the region through the President’s Emergency Action 

Fund for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) which is integral to these efforts. 

While women in Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean have made some gains 

since the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995, significant 

barriers to full and equal citizenship still remain. Women in these countries play 

a strong role in politics, education, and social issues. Access to education is high and 

the majority of university students are women. However, after their education is 

complete, many women are either unable to find jobs or only find work in lower status and lower paying positions. While women are represented among government 

ministers, they constitute only a tenth of parliamentarians in Barbados and most 

of the Eastern Caribbean. Domestic violence and violence against women remain 

grave concerns in the region. Despite these obstacles, women leaders in Barbados 

and the Eastern Caribbean are extraordinary, and are diligently working to overcome the challenges they face. If confirmed, I will work to increase awareness and 

action to improve the opportunities available to women and girls. Along with this, 

the integration of women’s issues throughout our policies and programs is absolutely 

necessary, particularly in such programs as CBSI, ECPA, and economic participation and entrepreneurship support. 

As 2011 marked the 50th anniversary of the Peace Corps, I would also like to note 

our longstanding Peace Corps presence in the Eastern Caribbean which plays a 

major role in providing U.S. assistance to the region. St. Lucia was among the first 

countries to receive volunteers in 1961. Currently 115 volunteers work in the region 

in four main areas: Youth Development, Institutional/NGO Development, Small 

Business Development, and Special Education. 

Thank you again for giving me the honor of appearing before you today. I would 

be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Senator MENENDEZ. Ambassador, you even had extra time. So 

you’re on your way to confirmation, I can see that. [Laughter.] 

Before we turn to Ms. Powers, I see our colleague, Senator 

Gillibrand, is here and I know she wants to add words of introduction and welcome. 

So, Senator Gillibrand. 

STATEMENT OF HON. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW YORK 

Senator GILLIBRAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very honored to have the distinct pleasure of introducing Julissa Reynoso, 

an extraordinary Latina from my home State of New York, to the 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee as my colleagues consider her 

nomination by President Obama to serve as Ambassador to the 

Oriental Republic of Uruguay. 

Ms. Reynoso has the qualities and experience to be an outstanding ambassador. She served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Central America and the Caribbean in the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs at the Department of State since November 

16, 2009. Ms. Reynoso is an attorney by trade, and prior to joining 

the State Department she practiced international law, focusing on 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

9

international arbitration, antitrust, and also served as the deputy 

director of the Office of Accountability to the New York City Department of Education. 

Her education is stellar, as she holds a B.A. in Government from 

Harvard, a Master’s in Philosophy from Cambridge in the U.K., 

and a J.D. from Columbia; and her desire to make a life of public 

service was evident right after law school when she clerked for the 

Honorable Federal Judge Laura Taylor Swain. 

Ms. Reynoso has also been a prolific writer, with her work published widely in both Spanish and English on a range of issues including regulatory reform, community organizing, housing reform, 

immigration policy, and Latin American politics for both popular 

press and academic journals. 

As the first Dominican ever nominated and one of the youngest 

people to be nominated, Julissa Reynoso is poised to become a trailblazer for many, many more young women to follow. In an era 

where women serve in the highest levels of government as Secretary of State, Supreme Court Justices, and many other offices of 

great distinction, we have yet another opportunity to show young 

women and girls across our country and beyond that anything is 

possible if you put your mind to it. 

I urge my colleagues to send her nomination to the full Senate 

for consideration. I’m confident that if confirmed, her intellect and 

drive, she will represent our country with great honor and distinction. 

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator Gillibrand, very much. 

Ambassador Powers. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PHYLLIS M. POWERS, OF VIRGINIA, TO 

BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA 

Ambassador POWERS. Thank you, Senator. Mr. Chairman and 

distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor to appear 

before you today as the President’s nominee to serve as the U.S. 

Ambassador to Nicaragua. I am grateful for the trust and confidence the President and Secretary Clinton have shown in sending 

my name to the Senate for your consideration. 

I would like to recognize my family, including my sister and 

brother-in-law, Pam and Don Curley, who are here today, friends 

and colleagues who have supported me throughout my career. 

The skills and experience acquired in my career in the Foreign 

Service have prepared me to serve in this distinguished position. 

If confirmed, I will embark on my sixth tour in the region. The 7 

years I spent in the U.S. Embassy in Colombia, as well as my time 

as the deputy chief of mission in Lima, Peru, and as the Director 

of the Office of Provincial Affairs in Iraq, taught me the importance 

of developing a partnership with host governments and civil society 

to achieve our goals. 

I feel strongly that a culture of lawfulness is key to any strong 

democratic society. As the current U.S. Ambassador to Panama, I 

have seen firsthand that building and sustaining democratic institutions is the responsibility of all citizens. Our most successful programs have clearly been those with community involvement, such 

as our programs in the area of prevention with youth at risk to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

10

ensure the future leaders of Panama have the opportunities they 

deserve. 

The active participation of parents, community leaders, private 

sector, and law enforcement provides Panama’s young people with 

viable alternatives to gang membership and encouraging their 

progress as productive members of the community. I am proud of 

the role our programs have played in this effort. 

While we’re on the subject of community involvement and civil 

society, the State Department has been clear in stating its concerns 

that the recent Nicaraguan elections were not transparent and 

were marred by significant irregularities. There is a serious concern about the erosion of democracy in Nicaragua. From the 

marshes of the Euphrates in Iraq to the interior jungles of Peru 

and Colombia, I have witnessed that citizens want to participate in 

the electoral process and, when given the chance, will exercise their 

right. If confirmed, I will speak clearly and with conviction about 

the importance of protecting fundamental freedoms and democratic 

institutions, and stress the importance of an empowered civil society, independent media, informed citizenry, and effective local government and political party participation. 

Our relationship with Nicaragua is broad and complex. Bilateral 

trade between the United States and Nicaragua has grown by twothirds in the 5 years since the Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement went into effect; and, in fact, more than 

125 U.S. companies are currently doing business in Nicaragua. If 

confirmed, I will be a staunch advocate for U.S. businesses in Nicaragua. I was pleased to note that a small U.S. company with operations in Nicaragua, Sahlman Seafoods, Inc., recently won the 

Secretary of State’s Award for Corporate Excellence for global corporate social responsibility. We should promote and encourage cooperation between the people of the United States and Nicaragua 

in support of both our mutual interests. 

Protecting U.S. citizens is the first responsibility of any ambassador and, if confirmed, I will ensure that the U.S. Embassy in 

Managua continues to provide a high level of service and attention 

to our citizens. More than 14,000 American citizens live and work 

in Nicaragua. Our diplomatic representation includes representatives from eight U.S. agencies, including a Peace Corps contingent 

of approximately 220 Volunteers. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you again for 

the opportunity to appear before this committee today. If confirmed 

by the Senate, I look forward to working with you and your colleagues to advance our Nation’s interests in Nicaragua. I would be 

happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Powers follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. PHYLLIS M. POWERS

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you today as the President’s nominee to serve as the U.S. Ambassador 

to Nicaragua. I am grateful for the trust and confidence the President and Secretary 

Clinton have shown in nominating me for this critical post. 

I would like to recognize my family, friends, and colleagues who have supported 

me throughout my career. I firmly believe that no one gets here alone and am confident I would not be here if they were not beside me. 

The skills and experience acquired in my career in the Foreign Service have prepared me to serve in this distinguished position. If confirmed, I will embark on my 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

11

sixth tour in the region. The 7 years I spent in the U.S. Embassy in Colombia, as 

well as my time as the deputy chief of mission in Lima, Peru, and as the Director 

of the Office of Provincial Affairs in Iraq taught me the importance of developing 

a partnership with host governments and civil society to achieve our goals. 

I feel strongly that a culture of lawfulness is key to any strong democratic society. 

As the current U.S. Ambassador to Panama, I have seen firsthand that building and 

sustaining democratic institutions is the responsibility of all citizens. Our most successful programs have clearly been those with community involvement such as our 

programs in the area of prevention with youth at risk to ensure the future leaders 

of Panama have the opportunities they deserve. Our programs in Chorrillo, a neighborhood in Panama City with many social and economic needs are an example of 

what can be accomplished through partnerships with the community. The active 

participation of parents, community leaders, private sector, and law enforcement 

provides Panama’s young people with viable alternatives to gang membership and 

encouraging their progress as productive members of the community. I am proud 

of the role our programs have played in this effort. 

While we’re on the subject of community involvement and civil society, the State 

Department has been clear in stating its concerns that the recent Nicaraguan elections were not transparent and were marred by significant irregularities. There is 

a serious concern about the erosion of democracy in Nicaragua. From the marshes 

of the Euphrates in Iraq to the interior jungles of Peru and Colombia I have witnessed that citizens want to participate in the electoral process and when given the 

chance, will exercise that right. If confirmed, I will speak clearly and with conviction 

about the importance of protecting fundamental freedoms and democratic institutions, and stress the importance of an empowered civil society, independent media, 

informed citizenry, and effective local government and political party participation. 

Our relationship with Nicaragua is broad and complex. Bilateral trade between 

the United States and Nicaragua has grown by two-thirds in the 5 years since the 

Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement went into effect and in 

fact more than 125 U.S. businesses are currently doing business in Nicaragua. If 

confirmed, I will be a staunch advocate for U.S. businesses in Nicaragua. I was 

pleased to note that a small U.S. company with operations in Nicaragua, Sahlman 

Seafoods, Incorporated, recently won the Secretary of State’s Award for Corporate 

Excellence for global corporate social responsibility for its dedication to community 

development and environmental sustainability. We should promote and encourage 

cooperation between the people of the United States and Nicaragua in support of 

both our mutual interests. 

Protecting U.S. citizens is the first responsibility of any ambassador, and, if confirmed, I will ensure the U.S. Embassy in Managua continues to provide a high 

level of service and attention to our citizens. More than 14,000 American citizens 

live and work in Nicaragua. Our diplomatic representation in Nicaragua includes 

representatives from eight U.S. agencies, including a Peace Corps contingent of 

approximately 220 Volunteers who work at sites throughout the country. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you again for the opportunity 

to appear before this committee today. If confirmed by the Senate, I look forward 

to working with you and your colleagues to advance our Nation’s interests in Nicaragua. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Ambassador. We have a trend 

going. You had extra time as well. Not that I want to put pressure 

on the rest of the nominees. 

Mr. Farrar. 

STATEMENT OF JONATHAN D. FARRAR, OF CALIFORNIA, TO 

BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA 

Mr. FARRAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Distinguished members 

of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it’s an honor to appear 

today before you as the President’s nominee as Ambassador to Panama. I am deeply grateful to the President and to the Secretary of 

State for their continued trust and confidence. 

I’d like to introduce the members of my family who are here 

today. First of all, my wife, Terry, who has been with me throughout our 31 years in the Foreign Service and has worked tirelessly 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

12

overseas to help those in need in the countries in which we have 

served. 

Also with us today is our daughter, Melissa, and our youngest 

son, Nathaniel. Our oldest son, Jonathan, and our daughter-in-law, 

Leigh, are not with us today as last month they welcomed their 

first child and our first grandchild. 

The Foreign Service has taken our family throughout the Western Hemisphere, to North, South, and Central America, and to the 

Caribbean. I’ve had the good fortune during the past three decades 

to work on the full panoply of challenges in the hemisphere, including democracy, human rights, law enforcement, trade investment, 

and protection of the environment. 

All of these issues are relevant to our relationship with Panama. 

Panama’s location and role in global trade makes its success vital 

to our prosperity and national security. While Panama’s economic 

growth rate is the highest in the hemisphere, Panama continues to 

face the challenge of making this growth more inclusive so that all 

of its citizens can enjoy the opportunity to build a better life for 

themselves and their families. 

The recently approved Trade Promotion Agreement holds the 

promise to greatly expand our economic partnership, to the mutual 

benefit of both our peoples. U.S. exports to Panama have grown 

rapidly, and the United States is by far the leading exporter of 

goods to Panama. Yet, we are facing increasing competition for 

market share. 

If confirmed, I would take what I have learned from three 

assignments as an economic and commercial officer overseas and 

harness the resources of our entire Embassy to promote U.S. exports and create American jobs. 

Panama is making major investments in the Canal and other 

infrastructure amid annual economic growth averaging 8 percent 

since 2006. A key element of my mission, if confirmed, would be to 

work with American businesses to ensure they are able to compete 

and win on a level playing field. Our implementation of the Trade 

Promotion Agreement and our bilateral Tax Information Exchange 

Agreement afford new opportunities to increase the transparency of 

operations of governmental and financial entities, and thus 

strengthen democratic institutions in Panama. 

The ties between the United States and Panama are strong. 

Nowhere is this more evident than in our cooperation to combat 

illegal drug trafficking and other criminal activity. In 2011 alone, 

Panama seized more than 30 tons of cocaine, much of which otherwise would have made its way to our shores. The government and 

the people of Panama rightfully are concerned about the security 

threat posed by drug trafficking organizations and criminal gangs. 

If confirmed, I will bring my experience with counternarcotics 

and law enforcement programs across Latin America to direct a 

missionwide effort to deepen our bilateral security cooperation and 

ensure that it remains closely integrated into our overall efforts in 

the region. 

Above all, if confirmed, my highest priority as ambassador would 

be the protection of the nearly 45,000 Americans who reside in or 

visit Panama at any given time, and the more than 100 American 

companies that do business there. My commitment to helping our 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

13

fellow Americans abroad began 31 years ago in the consular section 

in Mexico City and continues today. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the honor of appearing before 

the committee today. If confirmed, I pledge to work with you and 

your colleagues to advance the vital interests of the United States 

in Panama, and I’d be pleased to answer any questions you may 

have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Farrar follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JONATHAN D. FARRAR

Mister Chairman, distinguished members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is an honor to appear today before you as the President’s nominee to be 

Ambassador to Panama. I am deeply grateful to the President and to the Secretary 

of State for their continued trust and confidence. 

I would like to introduce the members of my family who are here today. First of 

all, my wife Terry, who has been with me throughout our 31 years in the Foreign 

Service and who has worked tirelessly to help those in need in the countries in 

which we have served. Also with us today is our youngest son, Nathaniel. 

The Foreign Service has taken our family throughout the Western Hemisphere to 

North, South, and Central America, and the Caribbean. I have had the good fortune 

during the past three decades to work on the full panoply of challenges in the hemisphere, including democracy, human rights, law enforcement, trade, investment, 

and protection of the environment. 

All of these issues are relevant to our relationship with Panama. Panama’s location and role in global trade make its success vital to our prosperity and national 

security. While Panama’s economic growth rate is the highest in the hemisphere, 

Panama continues to face the challenge of making this growth more inclusive, so 

that all of its citizens can enjoy the opportunity to build a better life for themselves 

and their families. 

The recently approved bilateral Trade Promotion Agreement holds the promise to 

greatly expand our economic partnership to the mutual benefit of both our peoples. 

United States exports to Panama have grown rapidly and the United States is by 

far the leading exporter of goods to Panama, yet we are facing increasing competition for Panama’s import market share. If confirmed, I would take what I have 

learned from three assignments as an economic and commercial officer overseas and 

harness the resources of our entire Embassy to promote U.S. exports and create 

American jobs. Panama is making major investments in the Canal and other infrastructure amid annual economic growth averaging 8 percent since 2006. A key element of my mission, if confirmed, would be to work with American businesses to 

ensure they are able to compete and win on a level playing field. Our implementation of the Trade Promotion Agreement and our bilateral Tax Information Exchange 

Agreement afford new opportunities to increase the transparency of operations of 

governmental and financial entities and thus strengthen democratic institutions in 

Panama. 

The ties between the United States and Panama are strong. Nowhere is this more 

evident than in our cooperation to combat illegal drug trafficking and other criminal 

activity. In 2011 alone Panamanian authorities seized more than 30 tons of cocaine, 

much of which otherwise would have made its way to our shores. The Government 

and people of Panama rightfully are concerned about the security threat posed by 

criminal gangs and drug trafficking organizations. If confirmed, I would bring my 

experience with counternarcotics and law enforcement programs across Latin America to direct a missionwide effort to deepen our bilateral security cooperation and 

ensure it remains closely integrated into our overall efforts in the region. 

Above all, if confirmed my highest priority as Ambassador would be the protection 

of the nearly 45,000 Americans who reside in or are visiting Panama at any given 

time, and of the more than 100 American companies that do business there. My 

commitment to helping our fellow Americans abroad began 31 years ago in the consular section in Mexico City, and continues today. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the honor of appearing before the committee 

today. If confirmed, I pledge to work with you and your colleagues to advance the 

vital interests of the United States in Panama. 

I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you. 

Ms. Reynoso. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

14

STATEMENT OF JULISSA REYNOSO, OF NEW YORK, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE ORIENTAL REPUBLIC OF URUGUAY 

Ms. REYNOSO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and 

members of the committee, I appreciate very much the opportunity 

to appear before this committee today as President Obama’s nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Uruguay. I am very grateful and 

humbled by the confidence that President Obama and Secretary 

Clinton have shown in me by this nomination. This nomination is 

a great honor for me and I look forward to another opportunity to 

serve my country, if confirmed. 

With the chairman’s permission, I wish to recognize the many 

family and friends I have here today, and mentors and colleagues. 

I’m not going to name all of them, but they’re all here, pretty much 

on my right-hand side, that have supported me over the years, 

many of them here today, my mother in particular, and many of 

them came from New York City, my home. It is only with their 

steady support that I am here seeking the U.S. Senate’s confirmation, and I wish to sincerely thank them for their guidance and 

support throughout the years. 

The relationship between the United States and Uruguay is 

extremely strong. We share important values, including a commitment to democracy, rule of law, sound economic policies, strong 

labor rights, environmental protection, investment in people, the 

desire to see the peaceful resolution of disputes between nations, 

and a commitment to the multilateral system. If confirmed, I look 

forward to continuing the productive dialogue between our two 

countries and will work diligently to advance these goals. 

Uruguay is a constructive partner which plays an important role 

in promoting regional stability and democracy. The country is also 

a partner in conflict resolution, contributing to peacekeeping missions throughout the globe. Uruguay remains one of the top troop 

and police contributors per capita to United Nations peacekeeping 

overall. We welcome their contributions to improving security in 

Haiti, as well as in other difficult locations throughout the world. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with President Mujica, 

Foreign Minister Almagro, the Uruguayan Government, civil society and the private sector as we advance bilateral relations and 

strengthen the political, commercial, and cultural ties between our 

two countries. If confirmed, I would give the highest priority to ensuring the well-being and safety of U.S. citizens who live and travel 

in Uruguay. 

I would seek opportunities for enhanced trade between the 

United States and Uruguay and promote United States exports to 

Uruguay. I would advocate for further cooperation under our 

Science and Technology Agreement, as well as our Trade and 

Investment Framework Agreement. 

United States exports to Uruguay have steadily increased over 

the last years to $973 million in 2010, up 30 percent from 2009, 

and we enjoyed a $738 million goods trade surplus with Uruguay. 

There are approximately 100 U.S. companies currently operating in 

Uruguay at this time. If confirmed, I will work vigorously to promote U.S. businesses and believe we can continue to find new 

opportunities for increased trade between the two countries, and I 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

15

would encourage programs that improve inclusive economic growth 

as well as promote public-private partnerships. 

To build greater understanding and mutual understanding 

through direct contact between Uruguayans and Americans, I will 

work to establish more partnerships between colleges and universities in Uruguay and the United States. 

Members of the committee, my work in the Department of State 

has offered me significant insights into the vital partnerships that 

exist between the branches of government and, if confirmed, I will 

work diligently to further develop these partnerships. 

If I am confirmed as Ambassador, I look forward to working with 

you, each of you, your distinguished colleagues and your staff to 

advance our priorities with the Oriental Republic of Uruguay. 

Thank you again for the great opportunity to appear before you 

today, and I welcome any questions you may have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Reynoso follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JULISSA REYNOSO

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate very much the opportunity to appear before this committee today as President Obama’s nominee to be 

U.S. Ambassador to Uruguay. I am very grateful and humbled by the confidence 

that President Obama and Secretary Clinton have shown in me by this nomination. 

This nomination is a great honor for me and I look forward to another opportunity 

to serve my country, if confirmed. 

With the chairman’s permission, I wish to recognize my family, friends, mentors 

and colleagues that have supported me over the years—many of them are here 

today, many from New York City. It is only with their steady support that I am 

here, seeking the U.S. Senate’s confirmation and I wish to sincerely thank them for 

their generous guidance and support. 

The relationship between the United States and Uruguay is strong. We share important values, including a commitment to democracy, rule of law, sound economic 

policies, strong labor rights, environmental protection, investment in people, the desire to see the peaceful resolution of disputes between nations, and a commitment 

to the multilateral system. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing the productive 

dialogue between our two countries and will work diligently to advance these goals. 

Uruguay is a constructive partner which plays an important role in promoting regional stability and democracy. The country is also a partner in conflict resolution, 

contributing to peacekeeping missions worldwide. Uruguay remains one of the top 

troop and police contributors per capita to U.N. peacekeeping overall. We welcome 

their contributions to improving security in Haiti as well as in other difficult locations throughout the world. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with President Mujica, Foreign Minister 

Almagro, the Uruguayan Government, civil society, and the private sector as we advance bilateral relations and strengthen the political, commercial, and cultural ties 

between our two countries. 

If confirmed, I would give the highest priority to ensuring the well-being and 

safety of U.S. citizens who live and travel in Uruguay. I would seek opportunities 

for enhanced trade between the United States and Uruguay, and promote U.S. exports to Uruguay. I would advocate for further cooperation under our Science and 

Technology Agreement as well as our Trade and Investment Framework Agreement. 

U.S. exports to Uruguay have steadily increased over the years to $973 million in 

2010, up 30 percent from 2009, and we enjoyed a $738 million goods trade surplus 

with Uruguay. There are approximately 100 U.S. companies operating in Uruguay 

at this time. If confirmed, I will work vigorously to promote U.S. businesses and believe we can continue to find new opportunities for increased trade between the two 

countries and I will encourage programs that improve inclusive economic growth as 

well as promote public-private partnerships. 

To build greater mutual understanding through direct contact between Uruguayans and Americans, I will work to establish more partnerships between colleges 

and universities in Uruguay and the United States. 

My work in the Department of State has offered me significant insights into the 

vital partnerships that exist between the branches of government and, if confirmed, 

I will work diligently to further develop these partnerships. If I am confirmed as 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

16

Ambassador, I look forward to working with you, your distinguished colleagues, and 

your staff to advance our priorities with the Oriental Republic of Uruguay. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to appear today. I welcome any questions 

you may have.

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you very much. 

This is a record. All of you had extra time. 

My congratulations and those of the committee to Ambassador 

Palmer and Mr. Farrar on being granddads, either again or for the 

first time. 

We’ll do 7-minute rounds. I have a lot of questions here, so we’ll 

see how far we can get. 

Let me start with Ambassador Powers. I’d like to know what you 

make of the fiasco of election day in Nicaragua. The Carter Center 

had to send a study mission to watch the elections because the Nicaraguan Government’s regulations didn’t adhere to the Declaration 

of Principles for the International Observation of Elections. The EU 

and OAS observers were not permitted to enter into some polling 

places until after the voting had started, and so could not observe 

the ballot boxes that were brought in. Domestic experience 

observer groups were denied credentials to enter polling places 

even though they had followed all of the regulations. 

I appreciate Secretary Clinton’s statement in January noting 

that the elections were not conducted in a transparent and impartial manner and that the entire electoral process was marred by 

significant irregularities. I have two of the examples of actual certified results in a couple of districts in Nicaragua, and it’s pretty 

amazing. The fraud is so transparent. 

On these official ‘‘actua scrutinia,’’ which is basically the election 

result sheet certified by the election members, it says the total 

number of ballots received, 400. That’s the maximum number of 

votes that could be cast there. And yet when you look at the certification of results, in one of these election districts the total number 

of votes was in excess of 900 when there were only 400 ballots. 

In another one, there is a certification of three election districts 

in which again the total number of ballots received by the election 

board was 400. And yet when you add up the number of votes 

received by individual parties, they add up to 2,000, when 400 were 

the number of ballots received. 

So it’s pretty obvious that the type of fraud that has been alleged 

is pretty clear when you take the election results and you see that 

400 ballots were given, and yet there is in one district 900 ballots, 

900 votes cast when there are only 400 ballots, and 2,000 votes cast 

when there are only 400 ballots. Something is fundamentally 

wrong. 

So the question, Ambassador, is now what? What do we do now? 

And as the nominee to go to Nicaragua, how will you work with 

a government that obviously did not win through a transparent 

and open process? 

Ambassador POWERS. Thank you, Senator, for that question. Now 

what? Now we utilize the report that the OAS just completed and 

published at the end of January and the recommendations they 

made to work with our partners in the Americas and elsewhere to 

assess fully any initiative and all initiatives that we can utilize to 

help reinforce democratic institutions and ensure that recommenFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

17

dations made by the OAS are enacted by the Nicaraguan Government to ensure that future elections do not suffer from similar 

irregularities and a lack of transparency so that the Nicaraguan 

people can have their rights restored to vote in a free and transparent process and have leaders that they have selected that will 

be accountable to them. 

How do we work with the government? We work with the government at all levels, but we also work with civil society and the 

Nicaraguan people to ensure that they understand that the United 

States stands with them as they seek to move forward to rebuild 

democratic institutions and to protect their rights as citizens of 

Nicaragua. This will mean being out there, doing outreach, making 

sure that they understand and have someone out there, me if I’m 

confirmed, and the mission, to ensure that they understand that 

they’ve got people supporting them and will be working with them 

to ensure democracy and human rights are protected. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I appreciate that. I know you started 

off by using the OAS report. I have a problem with the OAS report. 

First of all, the OAS Secretary General called Ortega to congratulate him on the successful peaceful elections on the evening of

November 6, which is pretty amazing to me. Then the very essence 

of the legality of the election, Ortega running for a third term, is 

not even spoken about. And I don’t get the sense that the OAS report even considers whether the election itself was valid. 

So I worry about that, and I look at the German Government’s 

announcement that it was cutting aid to Nicaragua due to the EU’s 

concerns about irregularities in that Presidential election. Is the 

United States reevaluating the aid it provides to Nicaragua in light 

of a sham election that took place? Should it? 

Ambassador POWERS. Thank you, Senator. Yes. The United 

States is in a very vigorous process of reviewing financial assistance to Nicaragua, most of which goes to nongovernmental organizations, not to the government. We are also aggressively scrutinizing all loan projects with the international financial institutions 

to make sure that any loans that are being considered meet the 

highest standards of the institutions, and that they will have a 

direct impact on development for the people of Nicaragua. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I appreciate you mentioning the international institutions because I want to direct your attention to the 

IDB, the Inter-American Development Bank, lending to the Nicaraguan Government, much of it in the form of what we call quick 

disbursing loans. 

For example, on October the 28, less than 2 weeks before the election, the IDB granted Ortega a $45 million quick disbursing 

loan, ‘‘to improve social protection and health spending management.’’ Two weeks before the election, $45 million. I cannot believe 

that the United States, sitting on the IDB board, permitted such 

a loan to occur 2 weeks before the election, that we would provide 

an enormous infusion of money to the entity running in an 

undemocratic election and fuel the possibility to help them out 2 

weeks before the election. It’s amazing to me. 

So given the fact that we just plussed up the IDB’s capital 

account and are looking to do the same again this year, I hope that 

part of your charge, should you be confirmed, would be to provide 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

18

input to the State Department about flows of money coming from, 

in large part, U.S. taxpayers to an entity that certainly many of us 

on this committee believe is undemocratic. 

Senator Rubio. 

Senator RUBIO. I would defer to Senator Lugar if he has any 

questions first. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Reynoso, the trade that we have enjoyed with Uruguay, as 

you pointed out, has been very substantial. Long ago I suggested, 

along with many others, a free trade agreement between the 

United States and Uruguay. This administration has not shown 

interest in negotiating a free trade agreement. With that in mind, 

perhaps implementing a limited trade preference arrangement as 

a standby mechanism is in order until interest magnifies. 

Given that you have analyzed this in your various roles, could 

you tell us why we have not pursued a free trade agreement to 

begin with, and if there is any value in having a preference agreement? What suggestions do you have as to how we are going to 

accelerate trade with Uruguay? While you have already pointed out 

that such trade is substantial, in my opinion it could be significantly increased given the nature of Uruguay’s economy and the 

instincts of the people there. 

Ms. REYNOSO. Thank you, Senator, for the question. As you 

noted, our trade with Uruguay is substantial. It’s complex. It’s 

elaborate. It ranges from agriculture to energy to infrastructure. 

We do have a Trade Investment Framework Agreement in place 

with Uruguay that we use in a very robust and, I believe, an effective way. We meet regularly with our Uruguayan counterparts, and 

we have many matters in terms of commercial interests on the 

table to pursue to allow for even greater opportunity to come from 

that agreement. 

As you also noted, there was talk in the past of a free trade 

agreement with Uruguay. My understanding is that that is no 

longer on the table, and I think both parties chose not to pursue 

it for domestic reasons. 

Should I be confirmed, Senator, I do look forward to working 

within the context and the framework of the current TIFA, of the 

current Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, to expand 

its impact in terms of the opportunities for U.S. businesses and 

U.S. trade, but also consult at the highest level within the Uruguayan Government, and obviously consult with the highest levels 

in this government, to assess whether there is any interest in pursuing, in a firm and serious way, a trade agreement with Uruguay. 

Senator LUGAR. Are there protectionist sentiments in Uruguay? 

You mentioned that the free trade agreement has not progressed 

because of reticence on both sides. Sometimes that’s occurred on 

our side. But is that the case in Uruguay? 

Ms. REYNOSO. Well, Senator, my understanding is that there 

were reservations in Uruguay. I can’t tell you the particulars of 

who, how, but I do understand that there were some domestic concerns as to why a trade agreement, at the time that it was being 

considered, was not opportune. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

19

Senator LUGAR. I appreciate your mention in your testimony of 

the potential for more college student exchanges between the countries. How many Uruguayan students come to the United States 

now? Do you have any idea? 

Ms. REYNOSO. I would imagine, and I can get back to you with 

real numbers, Senator, but I would imagine in the thousands, tens 

of thousands, I would imagine. 

[The requested information follows:]

Approximately 18,000 Uruguayans were approved for travel to the United States 

last year. Tens of thousands more already possess visas. Of those travelers, approximately 400 Uruguayan students and scholars pursued academic endeavors in the 

United States last year. The Department of State is committed to promoting education, professional, and cultural exchange. Embassy Montevideo expects student 

numbers to increase in coming years. As I mentioned in my testimony, if confirmed, 

I look forward to working to expand these numbers, and to be supportive of President Obama’s 100,000 Strong initiative.

Senator LUGAR. I see. So already there is quite a bit of——

Ms. REYNOSO. There is quite a bit of back and forth in terms of 

exchange. Yes, Senator. 

Senator LUGAR. Mr. Farrar, recently an article was written by 

Andres Oppenheimer in the Miami Herald, January 18, and I cite 

his name because he suggested, in fact, that Panama has been a 

Latin American star, with a 6.8-percent economic growth rate and 

the other statistics that you mentioned. However, at the same time, 

he states that the education system of Panama, which might support this competitive aspect, is very deficient, and there appears to 

be very little movement on the part of the government to improve 

that. 

Likewise, he notes that Panamanian growth is largely fostered 

by the Canal and projects and enterprises that are associated with 

that. Economic growth there may not be as strong as it could be 

given, perhaps, the lack of education or preparation. 

What is your judgment about that situation, and in what ways 

could the United States be helpful during your ambassadorship 

there? 

Mr. FARRAR. Thank you very much, Senator, for the question. 

The Panamanian economy, as you mentioned, has shown incredible 

growth over the past 5 or 6 years. Much of it has been fueled by 

investment not only in the Canal but in other major infrastructure 

projects. 

Panama is seeking to create what it calls a ‘‘City of Knowledge’’ 

in Panama City to attract educational institutions to try and 

improve the educational system. They recognize some of the deficiencies there, and their deficiencies have been noted not only by 

Mr. Oppenheimer but also by the World Economic Forum and others as truly holding back even further economic progress. 

If confirmed, Senator, I would love to explore the opportunities 

for more engagement in the educational exchange between the 

United States and Panama. I would note that the Smithsonian 

Tropical Research Institute has been in Panama for more than 60 

years and it’s a leading institution for scientific investigation in the 

world. And I had the opportunity to visit the institution here in 

Washington last week and heard some amazing things regarding 

their operations there and their plans moving forward. 

Thank you. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

20

Senator LUGAR. Well, I thank you for that testimony. Obviously, 

the rate of growth is astounding and important. The need for our 

country to work with the Panamanians to sustain this and improve 

it is obviously of value. But I thank you for your testimony. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

Senator Rubio. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you very much. First, let me just begin 

with Ms. Reynoso. I think this applies to all the folks here, but

just reviewing your resume, it’s pretty impressive. What are you

doing in government is my biggest question. Congratulations to

you. I know your family is here, and they should be very proud

of your accomplishments, and I look forward to supporting your 

nomination. 

I do have a question about organized crime in Uruguay. I’m reading an article here from the Christian Science Monitor dated the 

26th of January, and it talks about how traditionally Uruguay has 

been one of the safest countries in Latin America, but there’s this 

increasing battle going on between different drug trafficking organizations, and the fear that some of this violence is spreading in 

that country. 

What are your thoughts about it in the short term? What can we 

be doing? What kind of assistance can we be providing? What’s the 

general mindset in regards to how serious a problem it is and what 

we can be doing to head it off before it rises to the level of some 

of the other countries in the region? 

Ms. REYNOSO. Thank you, Senator. As you noted, there is a sense 

of that there is an increase in insecurity in Uruguay. The population itself has taken notice, and the Government of Uruguay has 

also taken notice. We have a very robust and productive working 

relationship with the Uruguayan Government with respect to security. Our law enforcement agencies are very much working closely 

with them, and obviously at this point we’re looking at possibilities 

of working even more closely because, as you noted, the risk and 

the insecurity, and we understand that there is an increase in certain types of organized crime. 

Our Office of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement 

under Ambassador Brownfield has been working with counterparts 

in Uruguay to provide support in terms of assessing risks, especially around issues of illicit trafficking and organized crime. So 

there is already a dialogue with the Uruguayans in this regard. We 

have very good cooperation with them in terms of law enforcement. 

But I think, as an initial matter, we’re trying to assess, working 

with them, what the problem is, so we can get a better idea of how 

we can work with them to tackle it. 

Thank you. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. And as we move forward in your assignment there, my opinion is it ought to be one of our priorities, 

because one of the things that could really slow up the miracle 

that’s happening there and that kind of economic growth is if they 

have to divert resources to fighting off—we’ve seen the horrible 

impact that that’s had on these other countries. 

Ambassador Palmer, welcome. Thank you again for your service 

to our country. First of all, I’m very pleased that you mentioned 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

21

PEPFAR, which is a phenomenal program that our country pursues around the world, and certainly in the Caribbean as well. I’m 

pleased to see as well that you mentioned in your opening statement the challenges that women face, particularly when it comes 

to domestic violence and the lack of opportunities, and I’m glad 

that that’s something you’ll focus on. 

The one thing I didn’t hear you mention and I am concerned 

about is some of these nations’ association with a Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, or what’s known as ALBA, 

which quite frankly is, in my opinion an anti-American platform. 

More importantly, this is an alliance to which, according to a recent press report ‘‘Dominica, St. Vincent, the Grenadines, Antigua 

and Barbuda are members, and St. Lucia has applied for formal 

inclusion.’’ These are some of the things the group said when they 

met this past weekend. 

No. 1, they came out in support of the Syrian Government in the 

midst of a bloodbath that government is carrying out in that country. No. 2, they blasted England’s so-called imperialist intentions 

against Argentina over the Falkland Islands. 

Given our Nation’s close relations with these countries, what the 

United States means for them, what our relationship with them 

means, why are these countries participating in this anti-American 

bloc? Why are they involved in this, and isn’t there some point 

where we take a stand and say, you know, you’ve got to make 

choices about who you want to be aligned with and who you want 

to be associated with? Why would any nations want to be associated with such ridiculous things as statements of support for the 

Syrian Government, which just happened this weekend, on the 5th 

of February, in the midst of what we’re watching happening over 

there, which is a bloodbath? 

Ambassador PALMER. Thank you very much, Mr. Senator. As you 

mentioned, of the countries in the region, Barbados plus six, three 

of them, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica and St. Vincent and the 

Grenadines are members of ALBA. There’s much speculation as to 

why, but many of those countries are signatories to the Petro 

Caribe agreement in which they receive oil and produce at reduced 

rates and with long-term periods to repay it at reduced interest. 

However, upon close examination, all of those countries are stable democracies. They share our values of free markets. They 

believe in free press. They believe in free speech. They have respect 

for human rights and respect for the rule of law. They stand by us 

in votes with our multilateral organizations, and we engage very, 

very comprehensively in those countries. 

For example, in the region, we have the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative in which we help them fight illegal drug trafficking 

and promote social justice. We engage with their police. We help 

them fight corruption. We help them protect their borders and 

their maritime waters. 

I think all of this engagement by far out-shines any other type 

of influence that they may get from ALBA governments and ALBA 

philosophy. 

Senator RUBIO. So, without putting words in your mouth, basically in exchange for cheap oil, they’re willing to stand by and support things like the Syrian Government’s shelling and killing of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

22

civilians, as it occurred last weekend and normal countries around 

the world said it is an outrage. But in exchange for cheap oil, these 

countries are willing to sit around and listen to people like Hugo 

Chavez and Daniel Ortega say some of the most ridiculous things 

that one could imagine. 

I think it’s concerning, obviously, but I think you’ve outlined 

some of the other realities. But it was important to get to that 

because I still don’t understand why they would want to be a part 

of a block of nations like this, but I think you shed some light on 

it. 

Ambassador PALMER. I think that brings up the importance of 

our people-to-people programs, because we do have people-to-people 

programs that work with the NGOs, who proliferate our philosophies in terms of basic freedoms and democracy. And if confirmed, 

I will work diligently to support these programs and advance their 

causes. 

Senator MENENDEZ. We thank you. 

I have some more questions, so we’ll see if there are other members as well. 

Let me go back to you, Ambassador Powers. One final question, 

but I think it’s an important one. In July of this year, under section 

527 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Secretary Clinton 

will have to decide whether to grant Nicaragua a waiver for failure 

to compensate U.S. citizens for properties that were confiscated by 

the Sandinistas during the 1980s. And while there has been some 

progress made, there are many cases where this compensation has 

not been granted. 

If the Secretary fails to grant the waiver, is it your understanding that the United States would be obliged to vote against 

the loans and grants to Nicaragua at the IDB World Bank and 

IMF? 

Ambassador POWERS. Senator, yes. It’s my understanding that 

there are consequences if the waiver is not granted based on the 

Article 527 resolution. I can tell you that we are working very hard 

on these property rights issues. There’s a full-time team at the 

Embassy, and if confirmed, it will be one of my priorities under my 

responsibility to protect U.S. citizens and their rights to ensure 

that all tools are used to move this forward, resolve these cases in 

accordance with the statute, just as I have worked to help resolve 

issues revolving around land investment in Panama. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I appreciate that. Assuming your confirmation takes place speedily and you get to Nicaragua, can I ask you 

to commit to the committee that this will be one of the first things 

that you’ll look at, since a July decision will be pending and I’d like 

to have a sense of how much progress has been made and whether 

the Secretary should, in fact, not grant the waiver? 

Ambassador POWERS. Clearly, Senator, yes. Given that these are 

rights for U.S. citizens, it will be one of the first things on my list 

to address at the highest levels of the Nicaraguan Government to 

ensure we can get some progress on this issue. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you very much. 

Ambassador POWERS. If confirmed. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I have a sense it’s going to happen, so that’s 

why I’m working prospectively. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

23

Mr. Farrar, do you share the concerns of some civil society 

groups that judicial independence in Panama has deteriorated 

under the Martinelli government? In particular, President Martinelli has introduced a bill in the Congress that would create a fifth 

court. If approved, the new court would have three new justices, all 

appointed by him, and would deal with constitutional issues, one 

of them being the constitutionality of presidential term limits. 

What’s your view of that? 

Mr. FARRAR. Thank you very much, Senator. First of all, let me 

just say that the United States strongly supports the principles of 

judicial independence and separation of powers, and those principles are enshrined in article 3 of the Inter-American Democratic 

Charter. 

Our human rights report on Panama also points up to this issue 

of judicial independence in Panama. And as you mentioned, it’s an 

item under vigorous public debate in Panama right now. 

Part of this debate includes a package of recommendations for 

constitutional reforms, some of which may, depending upon how 

the debate goes, result in strengthening judicial independence. I 

think looking forward, this is something that the Embassy has 

been following very closely. It’s of critical importance to us. If confirmed, I would certainly continue to follow that and would be prepared to speak out as needed to defend the principles that I mentioned at the beginning of my response. 

Thank you. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you. 

Ms. Reynoso, President Mujica is a little over a year-and-a-half 

into his term. How well do you think his administration has 

worked with the United States compared to his predecessor, President Vasquez? 

Ms. REYNOSO. Thank you, Senator. We have a very good working 

relationship with the Uruguayan Government. We had a very good 

relationship with President Vasquez. President Mujica shares a 

similar vision of Uruguay and a similar vision of our relationship 

with Uruguay. The principles of democracy, of conflict resolution, 

of economic stability and social inclusion continue under this 

administration, as they did under President Vasquez. 

So I believe, if confirmed, the engagement with the Uruguayan 

authorities and President Mujica himself will be as productive and 

as effective as we had under President Vasquez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. And finally, Ambassador Palmer, part of our 

subcommittee’s jurisdiction in the Western Hemisphere is also 

global narcotics, and we have seen the use of the Caribbean as a 

transshipment point for illegal drugs from Latin America to the 

United States. And while it has diminished over the past decade 

as we’ve seen that route go to Mexico and Central America, we 

have seen a resurgence of trafficking through the Caribbean region. 

How will you deal and engage with the countries that you’re 

going to be our Ambassador to on this issue? 

Ambassador PALMER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. As 

you mentioned, there has been an apparent resurgence in that, and 

to combat this, the Department has established a partnership with 

the countries in the Eastern Caribbean called the Caribbean Basin 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

24

Security Initiative. It is an initiative that grew out of the 2009 

Summit of the Americas. 

As a part of this initiative, we work with each—it’s a regional 

plan, and we have individual plans with all of these countries. For 

example—and, of course, the goal is to stem illegal trafficking, promote social justice, and to increase citizens’ safety. As a part of 

this, for example, this year six countries in the Eastern Caribbean 

will receive interdiction boats to protect their maritime borders. In 

addition to that, we work with their police. We train their police. 

We equip the police with the things that they need to make arrests. 

We also work with the judges and the prosecutors. We work with 

financial intelligence units so not only can the police arrest them, 

but they can be prosecuted, to look not only at drugs but also 

money laundering. 

But as part of this, we want to invest in the future. And so we 

take a look at the youth, and as a part of the Caribbean Basin 

Security Initiative we have set up youth rehabilitation academies. 

We just had 216 Caribbean youth graduate from the first part of 

these. 

We engage the resources of our Department of Health, DHS. 

They come in and they expand their activities in their ports, the 

airports. We have set up a net, a security net in which each country shares intelligence about drug trafficking with and between. 

And as well, we work with the regional security section that sets 

up an air wing that does aerial surveillance. All of these things 

relieve some of the burden on our own assets, for the Coast Guard, 

for example, in the region, and we’ve seen progress toward reducing some of this drug traffic. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you very much. 

Let me take the prerogative of the Chair for a moment just to 

recognize that our distinguished colleague from the House, Congressman Serrano, has come to be supportive of Ms. Reynoso. We 

appreciate his presence. We appreciate his support, for the record, 

of Ms. Reynoso to be the Ambassador to Uruguay, and we thank 

you for joining us. 

Do any of my other colleagues have any further questions? 

Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would like to raise a broader question about which any of you 

might have a comment. About 30 years ago, a little bit less than 

that, this committee was seized with the excitement of events taking place in countries located mostly in Central America. El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras were all nations that 

some of us went to in order to serve as election observers or help 

set up ballot paper and all the rudiments for elections. It was an 

exciting period in which our government obviously was heavily 

involved, deeply interested in the evolution of democracy in the 

Caribbean and then in South America, and often it was pointed out 

during this period of time that every country in our hemisphere 

became a democracy with the exception of Cuba. 

But that was then. The excitement has subsided. We’ve been 

involved, unfortunately, in military action in the Middle East, and 

deeply involved with the states of the former Soviet Union. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

25

I’m just wondering, as each one of you is deeply involved in the 

developments in the region, has there been a feeling of being let 

down among those countries with which we previously had this 

intense interest? In a related matter, how should we enhance our 

own communication with the people of the region? Should it be 

through our broadcasting or social media programs? Is tourism 

stronger in the midst of all of this, quite apart from political developments or things we discuss in this committee? 

Ms. Powers, do you have a thought about any of this? 

Ambassador POWERS. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I do. Speaking 

about what I’ve learned about Nicaragua, Nicaraguan people have 

a very positive view of the United States, much because of the 

types of assistance that we have provided over the years under 

three pillars: one, fighting malnutrition and poverty; two, working 

to increase and improve good governance in the country; and three, 

working with the Nicaraguan Government on security and counternarcotics issues. Recent polls have shown that the Nicaraguan people are very pleased and have a very positive view of the United 

States in spite of a difficult bilateral relationship. 

In my experience in other countries, what the United States puts 

forward in assistance and support resonates well with the people, 

even if it doesn’t always resonate well with the governments. 

Thank you. 

Senator LUGAR. Ambassador Palmer, do you have a reflection? 

Ambassador PALMER. Thank you, Mr. Senator. I agree with Ambassador Powers very much. It is our actions with the people that 

have been very, very effective. 

Senator Rubio, you mentioned my comments in terms of 

PEPFAR. For example, HIV/AIDS in the Eastern Caribbean, the 

prevalence is very high, second only to sub-Saharan Africa. But we 

have six of our agencies engaging in the PEPFAR program there, 

USAID, DOD, CDC, our Peace Corps. We are engaging in that. 

Peace Corps, for example, with 115 Volunteers, are involved in 

youth education and programs to prepare youth, to provide opportunities for jobs. We help them, as I mentioned before, with citizen 

safety. 

All of these programs ring very well with the citizens, and as a 

result the citizens of the Eastern Caribbean have a very positive 

view of the United States. 

In addition, we engage the diaspora. We have a number of citizens here in the United States, and they all help to push these 

things forward. 

So as Ambassador Powers mentioned, our programs ring well 

with the people and with most governments. 

Senator LUGAR. Mr. Farrar, do you have a thought? 

Mr. FARRAR. Yes. Thank you, Senator. I would say that there’s 

an excitement in United States-Panama relations today. The excitement you mentioned 30 years ago continues. There’s excitement 

over implementing the trade promotion agreement, to bring free 

trade between our two countries. There’s an excitement over the 

expansion of the Panama Canal, an expansion which is also sparking investment in the United States, in U.S. ports that are getting 

ready to handle the ships that will transit the Canal beginning in 

late 2014. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

26

I read a recent poll which showed that there is tremendous good 

will in Panama toward the United States. There’s tremendous 

interest in Panama toward greater cooperation with the United 

States in the area of counternarcotics and security cooperation; and 

interestingly, a lack of knowledge about what we’re doing already. 

So I think we can do more to get the word out. But there is a tremendous excitement still. 

Thank you. 

Senator LUGAR. Ms. Reynoso. 

Ms. REYNOSO. Thank you, Senator. Uruguay is a model of democracy in the region. It did, as did many other countries in South 

America, undergo a transformation in the 1980s. 

With respect to Central America in particular, I can say that 

democracy is a work in progress. We have seen some victories. We 

have seen some things go well. We have also seen some things

that have not gone well at all, as we stated with the Nicaraguan 

elections. 

The good news is that I have seen, based on my experience over 

the last 2 years, that the Nicaraguan people and the Central American people generally understand the basic principles of democracy 

and want it, and are looking for ways to make it part of their daily 

routine, and are angered. They have voiced anger to us. They voice 

their anger through their votes. They voice their anger through 

civic engagement. 

We have to create and help them create methods of accountability that allow their institutions to surpass any type of dramatic 

institutional deterioration, as has happened in Nicaragua. That is 

hopefully something that the United States and our partners in the 

region, a country like Uruguay, can help the Central Americans 

and the countries in the Caribbean and other countries that 

require support to be able to move forward in that direction. 

Senator LUGAR. I thank each one of you for your comments. 

Thank you for your previous service. I look forward to supporting 

each of your nominations and wish you every success. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

Senator Rubio. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, and I’ll be brief. Thank you all again 

for being here today. 

Just two quick observations I wanted to make for the record on 

both Nicaragua and Panama. My sense of talking to people both in 

Nicaragua that have visited us and people living here in the United 

States of Nicaraguan descent is that while generally the population 

is grateful for some of the money that Venezuela has poured into 

that country, they’re concerned about it too. Obviously, there’s real 

concern that it’s not sustainable, and rightfully so. And the second 

is some of the price they’ve had to pay in exchange for this support. 

Obviously, we’ve seen how the elections have been undermined and 

all the institutions that are critical to a democracy have come 

under attack. 

But then there’s some of the associations that Mr. Ortega has 

made around the world. Just as he took the oath of office a few 

weeks ago, he was flanked on stage by both Mr. Chavez and 

Ahmadinejad, and he pilloried the U.S. occupation, as he termed it, 

of Iraq and Afghanistan. He lamented the death of former Libyan 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

27

leader Moammar Qadhafi, and he paid respects to former Iraqi 

leader Saddam Hussein. 

This is embarrassing to the Nicaraguan people, who are rightfully concerned, but they’re also embarrassed by the image of their 

country. By the way, I saw polling that President Obama is more 

popular than Mr. Ortega is in Nicaragua. So I think that goes to 

some of the comments that were made earlier about the views of 

the United States. 

But Iran is more than just an irritant, and this relationship with 

Iran is more than just an irritant. This is a country that uses 

asymmetrical attacks, things like terrorism, as a foreign policy tool. 

We saw that very recently with the allegations, the uncovering of 

a plot to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the United States. 

I just hope that the administration, and it would be through you, 

is going to make it very clear to Mr. Ortega that if he wants to say 

these sorts of things that embarrass him with his own people, 

that’s one thing, but there are some bright redlines that he should 

not be crossing, or that any nation in the Western Hemisphere 

should not be crossing, when it comes to the relationship with Iran. 

There are things that, for the security of this Nation, we will not 

tolerate in terms of an Iranian presence in this hemisphere, and 

I think it’s important that that message be made very clear. I hope 

in your role that you’ll encourage the State Department and the 

administration to move in that direction. 

As far as Panama is concerned, Mr. Farrar, as you know in your 

previous nomination, I’ve had some disagreements about the approach that you took in your previous role in the Interests Section 

in Cuba. That being said, you’re now going to Panama, a country 

that for most of us is seen as a place with a stable democracy and 

real economic promise. But there are some troubling signs emerging from Panama. 

As was outlined earlier by Senator Lugar, in a recent article by 

Mr. Oppenheimer, who is a well-informed observer of the Western 

Hemisphere, he talked about a growing concern over Mr. 

Martinelli’s strong-arm ruling style. Mr. Oppenheimer says that 

President Martinelly already controls the National Assembly and 

the Supreme Court. His critics say that he could move to control 

the electoral tribunal, the independent agency that oversees the 

Panama Canal, and he may even seek to reelect himself despite a 

constitutional ban on reelection. 

It’s hard for people to give up power. Sometimes when these guys 

or gals get there, they don’t want to let go of it. I think we take 

that for granted in this country. Sometimes after 8 years, our 

Presidents aren’t ready to leave, but they have to. In some of these 

countries, they figure out a way to get around it. I hope that in 

your new role, if, in fact, he takes this country in that direction—

and we hope they don’t—you will be a strong voice on the side of 

democratic and independent institutions. I don’t care how good the 

economy is; I don’t care how great our relationships are on other 

issues. We cannot stand by and watch one more nation join the 

ranks of countries where their leadership are deliberately undermining the institutions of democracy and while we do nothing 

about it. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

28

So I hope in this role, when you get there, that you will pledge 

to be a strong voice to condemn any move in this direction. 

Thank you. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator. 

I think you all have a sense of where we’re at on these issues. 

I appreciate your testimony and answers here today. I look forward 

to supporting all four of you in your nomination when it comes 

before the full committee. 

I will rectify a previous statement I made. Instead of keeping the 

record open until Friday, we will keep the record open for QFRs for 

24 hours. This will give us the best chance of having all of your 

nominations before the next business meeting, which will take 

place on, of all days, Valentine’s Day. [Laughter.] 

So with that, and with no other business to come before the committee, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF JULISSA REYNOSO TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY

SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question #1. Please explain what relevant experience you have had to prepare you 

to represent the United States of America as Ambassador to Uruguay. What interaction have you had with Uruguay in an official U.S. Government capacity?

Answer. Both my professional career and my education have prepared me to represent the United States as Ambassador. As the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State 

for Central America and the Caribbean in the Bureau of Western Hemisphere 

Affairs since November 2009, I have worked diligently to advance U.S. priorities 

within the region and, if confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to utilize this experience as Ambassador to Uruguay. 

Additionally, my education, which includes a substantial international component, 

has also prepared me for this opportunity. I have a B.A. in Government from Harvard University, a Masters in Philosophy from the University of Cambridge in the 

United Kingdom, and a J.D. from Columbia University School of Law. Prior to working at the State Department, I practiced law at the international law firm of Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP in New York, focusing on international arbitration and 

antitrust law and was a fellow at New York University School of Law and Columbia 

Law School. 

In my official capacity as Deputy Assistant Secretary, I have worked with the 

Government of Uruguay on vital issues in the context of the Haiti Group of Friends, 

as Uruguay is currently the Chair, as well as with MINUSTAH. Uruguay is a leading partner in U.N. peacekeeping and, if confirmed, I look forward to continuing the 

important dialogue and cooperation with the Government of Uruguay.

Question #2. Despite Uruguay’s small size and geographic location, U.S. initiatives 

to expand diplomatic and commercial ties with Uruguay, could afford an opportunity 

for the United States to constructively and strategically, extend its influence in the 

Southern Cone, a subregion historically given less attention by U.S. foreign policymakers compared to other areas of Latin America. Please explain your views regarding the importance of countries of the Southern Cone for United States foreign policy objectives in South America. Please explain Uruguay’s importance for United 

States foreign policy objectives in the Southern Cone.

Answer. The countries of the Southern Cone are critically important for U.S. foreign policy objectives in the hemisphere precisely because these countries include 

some of Latin America’s oldest, strongest, and most successful democracies. The 

United States principal strategic goals in the region are supporting citizen security, 

strong institutions, and democratic governance. Healthy and successful Southern 

Cone democracies that respect rights, enforce rule of law, and sustain growing 

economies that welcome foreign investment serve as an important example for the 

entire region. Uruguay, in particular, is a model, high-functioning democracy in the 

Southern Cone, and, as such, is an important partner in advancing shared policy 

objectives. I am committed to continuing, and expanding, as appropriate, the range 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

29

of programs whereby the United States supports citizen security, strong institutions, 

and democratic governance in Uruguay.

Question #3. The Vazquez administration sought to reduce its reliance on Argentina and Brazil by strengthening ties with the United States. Since taking office, 

the Mujica administration has shifted the emphasis of Uruguay’s foreign policy, 

prioritizing improved relations with Uruguay’s neighbors and further diversification 

of global trade. Please explain how you would encourage President Mujica to redirect Uruguay’s foreign policy back to making the strengthening of ties with the 

United States a priority. If confirmed, what specific proposals (commercial and political) would you offer to persuade President Mujica that closer ties with the United 

States are in Uruguay’s national interest?

Answer. While it is true that President Mujica has placed more emphasis than 

his predecessor on what he has called Uruguay’s ‘‘integration in its region,’’ it is also 

worth noting that President Mujica’s efforts to diversify Uruguay’s trade relations 

are opening new avenues for commercial and investment ties to the United States. 

Among my top priorities as Ambassador, if confirmed, will be reviewing outstanding 

issues in agricultural trade between the United States and Uruguay with a view 

to enabling freer—and more mutually advantageous—trade between our two countries. Again if confirmed, it is my intention to personally engage with and support 

U.S. firms interested in doing business in Uruguay. In addition, President Mujica’s 

focus on education reform in Uruguay and his expressed desire for more scientific 

and technical exchange with the United States will be an ever more important 

source of ties between Uruguayan and American institutions and individuals, as we 

strive to achieve President Obama’s 100,000 Strong in the Americas goal. Our cooperation programs with Uruguay’s Armed Forces—building their multilateral 

peacekeeping, emergency response and border patrol capabilities—will also build 

closer ties with the United States, and can advance shared objectives.

Question #4. Uruguayan Government officials concede that Uruguay has a problematic historical, and most recently, commercial relationship with Argentina, particularly in the wake of disagreements such as the dispute over the construction in 

Uruguay of a cellulose pulp mill near the Uruguayan border with Argentina. Have 

Uruguay’s problems with Argentina weakened Uruguay’s relations with 

MERCOSUR? If confirmed, please explain how you will work with U.S investors to 

develop lucrative commercial initiatives that could also help make up for Uruguay’s 

commercial losses as a result of its difficulties with Argentina?

Answer. In spite of numerous commercial and bilateral challenges in the Uruguay-Argentina relationship, the Government of Uruguay remains solidly committed 

to MERCOSUR. It appears that the Uruguayan Government has determined to seek 

to resolve commercial differences by appealing to MERCOSUR solidarity, and by 

taking advantage of the strong relationship between President Mujica and his fellow 

MERCOSUR Presidents. 

Our Embassy in Montevideo is working closely with the U.S. business community 

to advocate for greater opportunities in the logistics, information technology, agriculture, energy, security, and infrastructure/construction sectors, among others. We 

have seen enthusiastic responses to our commercial initiatives, and we are confident 

that U.S. investment and exports will continue to increase in Uruguay as the local 

economy expands. The Embassy is also pursuing opportunities for U.S. firms 

through innovative public-private partnerships in Uruguay, a new mechanism that 

has opened public works and infrastructure projects to private sector participation.

Question #5. Would you characterize Uruguay’s political relationship with Brazil 

as closer than Uruguay’s relationship with the United States? Would you characterize Uruguay’s commercial relationship with Brazil as being closer than Uruguay’s 

commercial relationship with the United States?

Answer. Uruguay’s foreign policy and political relations with Brazil are strong. 

President Mujica personally invests time and effort in his relationship with President Rousseff, and he also maintains a productive and close friendship with former 

President Lula. Geography, joint membership in MERCOSUR and UNASUR, and 

economic relations in the context of the dynamic success of the Brazilian economy, 

are all important factors in the strong relationship between Uruguay and Brazil. Brazil is Uruguay’s largest export market (approximately $1.6 billion in 2011), 

and Brazilian exports account for the largest share of total imports from any country (just over $1.9 billion). The United States was Uruguay’s fourth-largest supplier 

of goods in 2011, with $734 million, while Uruguay exported roughly $245 million 

to the United States last year. United States-Uruguayan economic ties remain 

robust, and if confirmed, I will work diligently with American companies to find 

expanded markets for American products and services.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

30

Question #6. Would you characterize Uruguay’s commercial relationship with 

China as being closer than Uruguay’s commercial relationship with the United 

States?

Answer. China has become an increasingly important trading and investment 

partner for Uruguay, as it has for many countries in the Americas, including the 

United States. Chinese foreign direct investment in Uruguay is centered on auto 

manufacturing and port development, while Chinese exports are found across a 

range of sectors in Uruguay. China is an important purchaser of Uruguayan soy and 

beef, as well as other commodities that transit through free trade zones. 

In 2011, China was the third-largest exporter to Uruguay (roughly $1.4 billion), 

while Uruguayan exporters supplied $664 million in goods to China—the secondlargest export destination after Brazil. The United States stood as the fourth-largest 

exporter to Uruguay in 2011 with $734 million, compared with $245 million in 

Uruguayan goods exported to the United States. United States-Uruguayan economic 

ties remain strong, and if confirmed, I will work with American companies to find 

expanded opportunities for enhanced trade and commerce.

Question #7. Trade ties between the United States and Uruguay have grown since 

2002, when the countries created a Joint Commission on Trade and Investment. The 

joint commission has provided the means for ongoing United States-Uruguay trade 

discussions, which led to the signing of a bilateral investment treaty in October 

2004 and a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) in January 2007. 

The TIFA is a formal commitment to pursue closer trade and economic ties. 

Although then-President Bush and Vazquez initially sought to negotiate a free trade 

agreement with Uruguay, in your confirmation hearing on February 7, 2012, before 

the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, you mentioned that both the United 

States Government and the Government of Uruguay chose not to pursue a free 

trade agreement due to ‘‘reticence’’ from both sides in the fall of 2009. 

Please provide a detailed explanation regarding why the United States Government (USG) chose not to pursue a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) agreement with 

Uruguay in 2009. What is the likelihood of beginning talks regarding negotiating 

an FTA with Uruguay during the Obama administration? Is it a priority of the 

Obama administration to pursue an FTA with Uruguay?

Answer. The United States and Uruguay have utilized the TIFA as the principal 

mechanism to advance bilateral commercial and investment issues. This agreement, 

which includes advanced supplementary protocols on trade and the environment as 

well as trade facilitation, provides for yearly meetings of a bilateral trade and investment council. If confirmed, I look forward to working within the framework of 

the TIFA to facilitate expanded commercial opportunities and advance trade between the two countries. 

The MERCOSUR charter does not permit MERCOSUR members, which includes 

Uruguay, to negotiate individually an FTA with another country. We have no indication that MERCOSUR, as a bloc, is prepared at this time to take on the commitments that would be required to enter into an FTA with the United States.

Question #8. Uruguay is now losing markets and jobs to countries that have free 

trade agreements with the United States. In Uruguay there is particularly concern 

about the situation of the Uruguayan textiles and apparel industry, which has 

shrunk over the last decade, with a slight recovery since 2003. Heavily based on 

wool production, this sector employs about 21,000 workers, though its unemployment rate remains high. Uruguayan textile and apparel producers face high tariffs 

in the U.S. market (17.5 percent for wool-based apparel and 25 percent for wool fabrics), as well as strong competition from FTA signatories with the United States 

(mainly Chile, Mexico, and Peru). Uruguay also faces difficulties in exporting fabric 

to these countries since the FTAs require that apparel be produced with U.S.-

sourced or local fabrics. The combination of MERCOSUR restrictions, high entry 

tariffs, and rules of origin specifications has caused Uruguay to lose its market 

share in the United States. U.S. trade preferences for textiles and apparel would 

help Uruguayan exporters regain market access in the United States and have a 

dramatic positive economic impact on Uruguay. These industries are key sources of 

employment in Uruguay that have been hurt by both U.S. tariffs and the economic 

downturn. 

By granting Uruguayan goods expanded access to the U.S. market, the USG 

would solidify its image as a reliable and strategically important partner, thereby 

strengthening the bilateral relationship with Uruguay. U.S. trade preferences would 

be viewed as a vote of support for the Government of Uruguay (GOU). The Obama 

administration seems disinterested in the negotiation of an FTA with Uruguay, but 

unilateral tariff preferences might be an appropriate intermediate step toward deepFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

31

ening our relations with Uruguay—unilateral trade preferences can lead to the 

negotiation of a reciprocal FTA.

• Please explain your views regarding granting unilateral tariff preferences for 

Uruguayan textiles and apparel, to expand commercial ties between the United 

States and Uruguay, as an intermediate step toward an FTA.

Answer. The U.S. Government remains committed to deepening commercial ties 

between the United States and Uruguay. As Ambassador, one of my top priorities 

will be the health and strength of the bilateral relationship, and the promotion of 

U.S. interests in Uruguay. The granting of trade preferences to any nation, either 

unilaterally or through a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), is a matter for the President 

and the Congress to decide and, if confirmed, I would work to advance our foreign 

policy initiatives. 

We currently have a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) with 

Uruguay, which is typically a precursor to an FTA. However, the MERCOSUR charter does not permit MERCOSUR members, which includes Uruguay, to negotiate individually an FTA with another country. We have no indication that MERCOSUR, 

as a bloc, is prepared at this time to take on the commitments that would be required to enter into an FTA with the United States. 

RESPONSES OF JULISSA REYNOSO TO FOLLOWUP QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Please provide a detailed explanation regarding why the United States 

Government (USG) chose not to pursue a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) agreement 

with Uruguay in 2009.

Answer. It is my understanding that former President Bush discussed the idea 

of negotiating an FTA with Uruguay’s President Vazquez in the spring of 2006. 

Later in September 2006, the Uruguayan Government expressed interest in negotiating an FTA under Trade Promotion Authority (TPA). However, with the expiration of TPA on June 30, 2007, and MERCOSUR’s limitations, the two governments 

did not move forward with negotiations. The nature of the MERCOSUR charter presented complications for Uruguay to pursue an FTA with the United States, because 

the charter does not permit MERCOSUR members, which includes Uruguay, to 

negotiate individually an FTA with another country. 

Instead, the two sides worked very hard to negotiate a rigorous Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA), which was signed on January 25, 2007, and 

reaffirms the commitment of our two governments to expand trade and economic 

opportunities between both countries. I understand that the Government of Uruguay has not expressed interest in pursuing an FTA. I do believe, however, that 

there are opportunities to expand on current agreements and partnerships to enhance both our political and economic relationship with Uruguay, and if confirmed, 

I will look to actively utilize these existing agreements and instruments to further 

advance commerce and trade between our two countries. Additionally, if confirmed, 

I will work closely with you, your staff, and the Foreign Relations Committee, to 

advance trade and economic ties between the United States and Uruguay.

Question. Please explain with specifics, how if confirmed, you will work through 

the framework of the TIFA to further expand commercial opportunities and advance 

trade between our two countries. What sectors will be your priority to facilitate expanded commercial opportunities and trade between our two countries? Are textiles 

and apparel areas where commercial opportunities can be expanded under TIFA?

Answer. The TIFA has two main protocol agreements, one focusing on overall 

trade facilitation and the second on the environment. We utilize the TIFA as an umbrella agreement in which we can facilitate the active dialogue between our countries and aggressively consider new, expanded avenues for trade. Indeed, in the context of TIFA discussions, we incorporate many aspects of our commercial, trade, and 

economic agenda including the Energy Climate Partnership of the Americas (ECPA), 

the USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) program and related instruments. 

If confirmed, I look to broaden and deepen our bilateral relations and will evaluate 

the possibility for textiles and apparel opportunities. Another area I look forward 

to expanding, if confirmed, is Uruguay’s participation within ECPA. Uruguay is a 

partner country in an ongoing FAS-led program to promote agricultural production 

and use of renewable biomass for energy, an ECPA initiative. This ongoing 2-year 

FAS program promoted agricultural production and use of renewable biomass for 

energy, and included an initial planning workshop and subsequent scientific exchange of fellows, a study tour, and in-country demonstration projects. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

32

Another opportunity is through our existing partnership within the energy industry and our MOU on Alternative Energy and Energy Efficiency which was signed 

in September 2008. Through the MOU, our Embassy in Montevideo has pursued a 

series of biofuels and alternative energy-related initiatives with the Government of 

Uruguay. For example, visiting experts have given seminars on topics such as cellulosic biofuels, the EPA’s Methane to Markets program, land use management, the 

use of carbon credits to fund biofuels projects, and biofuels’ compatibility with current engine design. Our Embassy also provides technical assistance to identify 

equipment suppliers as well as information on standards for ethanol. 

I believe there are opportunities to expand on these agreements and partnerships 

to enhance both our political and economic relationship, and if confirmed, I will look 

to actively utilize these existing networks and instruments to further advance commerce and trade between our two countries.

Question. In answering question #3 of the first round of questions you stated, 

‘‘Among my top priorities as Ambassador, if confirmed, will be reviewing outstanding issues in agricultural trade between the United States and Uruguay with 

a view to enabling freer—and more mutually advantageous—trade between our two 

countries.’’ What outstanding issues in agricultural trade are you referring to? 

Through what mechanism will you be ‘‘enabling freer—and more mutually advantageous—trade between our two countries’’ in the area of agricultural trade?

Answer. Uruguay and the United States continue to look for opportunities to 

expand our trade in agricultural products as both countries have significant and 

mature domestic industries with a wide range of exportable products and services. 

Agricultural machinery and fertilizers are key U.S. exports to Uruguay currently 

and, if confirmed, I will work with American companies operating in Uruguay to 

seek new markets to expand trade and create opportunities for these American 

products. I also would look for opportunities for American companies not already 

operating in Uruguay to enter the Uruguayan market and utilize Uruguay’s position 

within Mercosur as an additional avenue to gain market access to Mercosur 

countries. 

Examples of expanding agricultural trade and the removal of trade impediments 

between our countries include the pending market access for Uruguayan ovine meat 

and citrus fruit to the United States and American beef in Uruguay. The process 

of gaining market access, while detailed and possibly lengthy, offers avenues for 

additional and complementary markets for American products and services. If confirmed, I will aggressively seek these opportunities.

Question. In answering question #3 of the first round of questions you stated, ‘‘In 

addition, President Mujica’s focus on education reform in Uruguay and his expressed desire for more scientific and technical exchange with the United States will 

be an ever more important source of ties between Uruguayan and American institutions and individuals, as we strive to achieve President Obama’s 100,000 Strong in 

the Americas goal.’’ 

If confirmed, how do you intend to do this in concrete terms? Would you consider 

encouraging and assisting Uruguay to pursue a strategic bilateral agreement with 

a specific U.S. state, such as the Chilean Government’s strategic bilateral agreement with the state of Massachusetts (which focusses on collaborative research in 

the areas of education and biotechnology)? Please provide your views on pursuing 

strategic bilateral agreements. If you approve of this approach, please provide your 

specific ideas, if confirmed, for developing strategic bilateral agreements with 

Uruguay.

Answer. The United States and Uruguay have a long history of collaborating on 

science and technology-related projects. On April 29, 2008, the United States and 

Uruguay signed a bilateral Science &Technology agreement that provides a framework to advance science and technology cooperation. Priority areas include health 

and medical research, alternative energies, and Antarctic research. Other areas of 

cooperation include agriculture; meteorology; hydrology; fisheries; atmospheric 

sciences; disaster response and management; science policy networking; capacitybuilding and research and professional exchanges; and fostering innovation through 

public-private partnerships. This foundation of collaborative research represents a 

wealth of opportunities for expanded cooperation between scientific institutions in 

Uruguay and the United States. 

If confirmed, I will work to create new linkages between American and Uruguayan universities and research centers in the key fields of science, technology, 

engineering, and mathematics—the so-called STEM fields—as well as in other academic disciplines. These linkages would facilitate expanded educational exchanges. 

Beyond these linkages between institutions, I also would encourage the development 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

33

of strategic bilateral agreements between our two countries at either the state or 

local levels and would work to facilitate these avenues of cooperation. If confirmed, 

I will encourage all sections of our Embassy to develop close relationships with key 

academic institutions in Uruguay with whom visiting U.S. delegations can engage 

to build productive partnerships. I am a firm believer in educational exchanges and 

would dedicate time and energy to furthering these opportunities. 

I wish to highlight that I would look first to the State of Minnesota as a possible 

partner for Uruguayan institutions, given the existing connections with numerous 

academic and research institutions and the high interest in sustainable urban development in Minneapolis. Additionally, the University of Minnesota with its strong 

agricultural base would be a natural fit for cooperation with Uruguay’s leading universities. The State of Connecticut might be another possibility as it has an existing 

and active U.S. Department of Defense State Partnership Program that, if confirmed, I would look to leverage for expanded opportunities.

Question. In answering question #8 of the first round of questions you stated ‘‘The 

MERCOSUR charter does not permit MERCOSUR members, which includes Uruguay, to negotiate individually an FTA with another country. We have no indication 

that MERCOSUR, as a bloc, is prepared at this time to take on the commitments 

that would be required to enter into an FTA with the United States.’’ 

On July 15, 2005, the new FTA between Mexico and Uruguay entered into force, 

as the result of an intense process of negotiations boosted by the Presidents of both 

nations with the aim to reinforce the 54 Complementary Economic Agreement 

signed by MERCOSUR and Mexico. 

Since Uruguay is a member country of the Common Southern Market, it operates 

as a gateway for Mexico to enter into the MERCOSUR. Mexico aims to participate 

in the block as an associated country in the free-trade area. The prospect of a similar kind of agreement for the United States is very attractive not only because of 

the advantages of a trade agreement with Uruguay, but also because it would operate as a gateway for the United States to enter into the MERCOSUR and trade with 

Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay, as well. 

Please explain your views regarding the process that took Uruguay and Mexico 

to sign an FTA, normally outlawed by MERCOSUR. Please explain why the United 

States can, or cannot pursue a similar process.

Answer. Interlocutors inform us that the trade agreement, which is an Economic 

Complementation Agreement signed by Mexico and Uruguay in November 2003, is 

an exception to Mercosur’s prohibition on bilateral agreements between a member 

and a third party. It is built on an existing 1999 economic agreement between Mexico and Uruguay, as well as the 2002 Mexico-Mercosur complementary economic 

agreement. The 2002 agreement endorsed the idea of pursuing closer trade with 

Mexico and helped to justify the exception afforded to Uruguay and was ‘‘grandfathered’’ into the agreement. 

At this time, we have no indication that MERCOSUR, as a bloc, is prepared to 

take on the commitments that would be required to enter into an FTA with the 

United States. That said, if confirmed, I will look to utilize all existing agreements, 

like the TIFA and all other related instruments, to expand trade and commercial 

opportunities for American products and services.

Question. Please provide specific information regarding your role as U.S Deputy 

Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs for Central America, 

Caribbean, and Cuba, in efforts to gain the humanitarian release of Alan Gross from 

Cuba. Alan Gross has been held since his arrest in December 2009, accused of 

bringing satellite and other communication equipment into the country illegally. He 

has acknowledged he was working on a USAID-funded democracy program, but says 

he meant no harm to the government and was only trying to help the island’s small 

Jewish community.

Answer. Alan Gross has been unjustly imprisoned for more than 2 years. He is 

a dedicated international development worker who has devoted his life to helping 

people in more than 50 countries and he was in Cuba to help the Cuban people connect with the rest of the world. We deplore the fact that the Cuban Government 

specifically excluded Mr. Gross from the 2,900 prisoners it decided to release at the 

end of December. 

For more than 2 years, in close coordination with Mr. Gross’s family and lawyer, 

we have used, and will continue to use, every opportunity to seek his release from 

this unjust imprisonment. We have also used every channel to press the Cuban Government for Mr. Gross’s immediate release so he can return to his family, where 

he belongs. The Department has urged more than 40 countries around the world 

to press the Cuban Government on this issue. At the United Nations, we have 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

34

raised Mr. Gross’s case to the General Assembly. We have met prominent figures 

traveling to Cuba and encouraged them to advocate for Mr. Gross’s release, which 

they have done. And, we have done the same with religious leaders from many different faiths. Additionally, we have also made numerous public statements pressing 

for Mr. Gross’s release. 

As Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, I have worked especially closely with Mr. 

Gross’s family and lawyer, and have been involved in all of the efforts mentioned 

above. In addition, I have also directly pressed for Mr. Gross’s release in meetings 

with Cuban Government officials, including raising Alan Gross countless times with 

the Chief of the Cuban Interests Section in Washington. In these meetings, I have 

made clear that the Cuban Government should immediately release Mr. Gross. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(35)

NOMINATION OF NANCY J. POWELL 

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2012 (p.m.) 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Nancy J. Powell, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to India 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John F. Kerry 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Kerry, Menendez, Webb, Udall, and Lugar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS 

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. 

It is my great, great pleasure, together with Senator Lugar, to 

welcome Nancy J. Powell, who has been nominated to be Ambassador to India. 

And before we start talking about India, I want to say a few 

words, if I can, at the top of this hearing about Egypt. Egypt is 

much on the minds of all of my colleagues right now, and the 

recent events in Egypt are particularly alarming. 

The attacks against civil society in Egypt, including American 

organizations like NDI, IRI, the International Center for Journalists, and Freedom House, are particularly disturbing. Yesterday’s 

prosecutions are, frankly, a slap in the face to Americans who have 

supported Egypt for decades and to Egyptian individuals and 

NGOs who have put their futures on the line for a more democratic 

Egypt. 

Right now, it appears some people are engaging in a very dangerous game that risks damaging both Egypt’s democratic prospects and the United States-Egyptian bilateral relationship. I have 

traveled to Egypt three times now since the events of last year—

the revolution. And it is of particular concern to see things moving 

in this direction. 

The challenge in front of Egypt is predominantly an economic 

challenge. Egypt has burned through much of its reserves—Treasury reserves. From some $40 billion, $42 billion, they have gone 

down to less than $20 billion, burning perhaps $1 billion to $1.5 

billion a month. 

In order for Egypt to make it, to provide for its citizens, Egypt 

is going to have to turn its economy around. And to turn its econFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

36

omy around, it is going to have to reattract the investors, the 

businesspeople who helped to create an economy that was growing 

at 7 percent a year before the events of Tahrir Square. 

Now that economy is moribund. A tourist trade which equaled 

about 8 percent or more of the gross domestic product is at a standstill. When I was in Egypt, the hotel occupancies were at about 3 

percent, 5 percent, maybe 11 percent on one of the trips. 

Clearly, without the ability to revitalize tourism, it is going to be 

difficult to revitalize the economy. And without a revitalized economy, it is going to be difficult to sustain any kind of political leadership. 

And unless people get a message of stability and a message that 

is warm and welcoming to business and to capital, it is going to be 

very hard to turn that economy around and provide the stability 

necessary. This is a revolving circle, and it needs to be a virtuous 

circle. 

Egypt faces an array of critical challenges: a pending fiscal crisis, 

a worsening security environment, a difficult political transition. So 

I believe it is important that the Egyptian Government recognize 

that it just can’t continue to undermine civil society and persecute 

the very talent that is seeking to bring Egypt security and 

prosperity. 

America stands as a ready and willing partner to support Egypt’s 

democratic transition and economic stabilization, but it requires an 

atmosphere in which Egypt’s civil society and its American friends 

are protected. So I hope that this current crisis or challenge, standoff, what everyone wants to term it, can be resolved in a thoughtful 

and intelligent way, or it may become very difficult to be able to 

do the kinds of things necessary. 

And Egypt, obviously, is important. It is a quarter of the Arab 

world. It is important to the stability of the region, and it is important to a peace process ultimately with respect to Israel and the 

Palestinians. 

And with all the other turmoil in Syria and other parts of the 

world, the challenge of Iran, the last thing one needs is an Egypt 

that isn’t moving strongly and directly and forthrightly on the path 

to democratic transition and to a strengthening of its economy. 

Now turning to India, we are really pleased to have this opportunity to discuss what is, without doubt, one of the most significant 

partnerships in U.S. foreign policy. There are few relationships 

that will be as vital in the 21st century as our growing ties with 

India and its people. 

On all of the most critical global challenges that we face, India 

really has a central role to play, and that means that Washington 

is going to be looking to New Delhi not only for cooperation, but 

increasingly for innovation, for regional leadership. 

India’s growing significance has been clear to many of us for 

some time now. In the 1990s, I traveled to India, took one of the 

first business trade missions right after the economic reforms were 

first put in place, and I have been there many times since. 

And President Obama, immediately upon entering office, invited 

Prime Minister Singh to be his guest at the very first state dinner. 

Secretary Clinton has visited India twice. And both countries inaugurated the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue 2 years ago. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

37

Republicans and Democrats alike understand the need to capitalize on the democratic values and strategic interests that our 

two countries share. And that is why it is important that we work 

together every day, as I believe we are right now, to further cultivate the relationship. 

Given the significance of that relationship, we are particularly 

pleased that President Obama has nominated Nancy Powell to represent us in New Delhi. Nancy is a former Ambassador to both 

Nepal and Pakistan, and she has served tours of duty in both India 

and Bangladesh, making her one of the foremost South Asia 

experts in the Foreign Service. She is one of our best, and it is only 

appropriate that she be tasked with one of the State Department’s 

most important postings. 

I think Ambassador Powell would agree with me that United 

States and India interests and values are converging today, as perhaps never before. And consequently, America is an interested 

stakeholder in India’s increasing ascent to greater economic and 

greater global power and participation. 

India’s economy is projected to be the world’s third-largest in the near future, and total trade between our countries reached $73 billion in 2010 and could exceed $100 billion this year. 

On defense, our security cooperation has grown so dramatically 

that India now conducts more military exercises with the United 

States than any other country. 

Education is fast becoming one of the strongest links between 

our nations, and I look forward to building on the progress that we 

made at the higher education summit last fall. Whether it is helping India to build a network of community colleges that could revolutionize access to education or whether it is creating educational 

opportunities via the Internet, we can give millions of people a 

greater set of choices and opportunities for the future. 

As our economies and education systems grow more intertwined—and I am convinced they will—our peoples will have 

greater opportunity to work together on technological breakthroughs. Already, India is playing a leading role in clean energy 

innovation. A report released last week found that India saw a 52-

percent growth in clean energy investment in 2011, a rate higher 

than any other significant global economy. 

With leadership from companies like Suzlon and Reliance Solar, 

India has the world’s fourth-largest installed wind capacity and incredible solar energy potential. That is why I strongly support the 

2009 U.S.-India Memorandum of Understanding on Energy and 

Climate Change signed by President Obama and Prime Minister 

Singh, which is being implemented through initiatives like the 

Partnership to Advance Clean Energy. 

It is clear that India’s strategic role is also growing. We all agree 

that the dynamism of the Asia-Pacific region requires India’s 

sustained presence and engagement, whether to combat nuclear 

proliferation, to promote economic stability in Afghanistan, or to 

encourage human rights in Burma and Sri Lanka. 

India enjoys strong cultural, historical, people-to-people, and economic links to East Asia, and I frequently hear that its eastward 

neighbors see real merit in India’s contributions to regional peace 

and prosperity. In the coming years, I hope our two countries can 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

38

deepen our cooperation throughout Asia not based on any common 

threats, but on the bedrock of shared interests and values. 

One area that is showing signs of promise, especially on economic 

cooperation, is the India-Pakistan relationship. I am encouraged 

that Pakistan granted India most-favored-nation status and that 

the two nations are continuing their dialogue on a host of issues. 

And I hope both countries can seize this moment to break with the 

perilous and somewhat stereotyped politics of the past. 

There is no doubt that even as India moves forward and even as 

we celebrate the pluses that I just enumerated, it is clear that 

India will also have to continue addressing its own complex domestic challenges, including the challenge of building its own infrastructure, of dealing with booming energy demand, of dealing with 

some restrictive trade and investment practices, and also the problem, which is not just India’s, but a global problem of human 

trafficking. 

Moreover, there are some 500 to 600 million people living in poverty. But clearly, India is moving rapidly, through its own economic 

development, to address that, and I am confident that that will 

continue to change. 

So we can be real partners in this effort, and we can do so in 

ways that empower all classes of Indian society. And Indians, I 

hope, will feel that a partnership with the United States delivers 

real, tangible benefits to their everyday lives. 

So, Ambassador Powell, we thank you and your family for your 

service, and we look forward to the Senate moving your confirmation as quickly as possible. 

Senator Lugar. 

May I just say that we have a Finance Committee markup this 

afternoon on the transportation bill. So I am going to have to turn 

the gavel over to Senator Udall shortly in order to be at that, and 

I appreciate Ambassador Powell’s understanding of that. 

Senator Lugar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me just take the liberty of joining you in the concern you 

expressed about events in Egypt. I was startled, I should say 

shocked, by the arrest and detainment of those Americans involved 

in attempting to work with citizens of Egypt to promote democracy. 

I think each one of us over the years who have been involved in 

delegations going to other countries to monitor elections or to assist 

citizens with the National Democratic Institute, the International 

Republican Institute, and various other groups, know how much we 

cared about those countries and the follow-through that we have 

exemplified. 

It is especially important, as the chairman has pointed out, that 

given the status of the Egyptian economy and those in the countryside, far away from Tahrir Square, who lack adequate food supplies, that the United States is generous and eager to be helpful. 

But we are facing certainly comments from our colleagues who are 

wondering how we can consider providing $1.5 billion in assistance 

to Egypt given both this new development and, more broadly, the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

39

deficit situation we have in our own country. I am hopeful that the 

Egyptians will reconsider their position and that this matter will 

be resolved promptly. 

In any event, I join the chairman in welcoming Ambassador Powell back to the Foreign Relations Committee. This hearing presents 

us with an opportunity not only to evaluate the distinguished 

nominee, but also to examine the current state of our evolving ties 

with India. 

I start from the premise that enhancing our relationship with 

India is a strategic and economic imperative. India is poised to be 

an anchor of stability in Asia and a center of economic growth far 

into the future. 

It has a well-educated middle class larger than the size of the 

entire U.S. population. It is already the world’s second-fastestgrowing major economy, and bilateral trade with the United States 

has more than tripled during the past 10 years. 

The United States and India are working to build a strategic 

partnership that will benefit both sides, and we have ongoing 

cooperation with India on many fronts. This includes efforts to 

ensure security in South Asia. India and the United States have 

strong incentives to cooperate on counterterrorism in the region 

and beyond. We also share concerns about the stability of Afghanistan and Pakistan and the growing military capabilities of China. 

Energy cooperation between the United States and India also 

should be at the top of our bilateral agenda. India’s energy needs 

are expected to double by 2025. The United States has an interest 

in expanding energy cooperation with India to develop new technologies, cushion supply disruptions, address environmental problems, and diversify global energy supplies. 

The United States own energy problems will be exacerbated if we 

do not forge energy partnerships with India and other nations experiencing rapid economic growth. In 2008 the United States concluded the civil nuclear cooperation agreement with India. The legislation lifted a three-decade American moratorium on nuclear 

trade with India and opened the door for trade in a wide range of 

other high-technology items, such as supercomputers and fiber 

optics. 

This agreement remains important to the broad strategic advancement of the United States-Indian relationship. But in the 

narrower context of nuclear trade with India, it has yet to bear significant fruit. In large measure, this stems from the Indian Parliament’s adoption of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage bill. 

This legislation effectively rules out Indian accession to the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage, the 

CSC, and could frustrate the United States nuclear industry’s 

efforts to play a role in India’s expanding nuclear power sector. 

The bill’s plain terms are fundamentally inconsistent with the 

liability regime that the international community is seeking to 

achieve in the CSC. To date, this administration has made very 

little progress on the CSC with India, and I am hopeful that you 

will address the Obama administration’s strategy for advancing 

United States-Indian nuclear cooperation. 

What high-level exchanges have occurred between our governments regarding the status of liability protections for United States 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

40

nuclear exporters to India? More broadly, what is the current state 

of our energy dialogue with New Delhi? 

I would also appreciate the Ambassador’s views on ongoing security cooperation efforts in South Asia. In light of the Obama administration’s intent to reduce U.S. forces in Afghanistan and our 

complex relationship with Pakistan, what opportunities exist for 

United States-Indian initiatives designed to combat terrorism? 

I look forward to hearing Ambassador Powell’s thoughts about 

how to address these and other important issues in the United 

States-India relationship. I thank the chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thanks very much, Senator Lugar. Appreciate it. 

Ambassador Powell, we welcome your testimony. And I don’t 

know if you want to introduce any family members or anybody who 

may be here with you, but we welcome that also. 

STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY J. POWELL, OF IOWA,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO INDIA 

Ambassador POWELL. Mr. Chairman, Senator Lugar, I am honored to appear today as President Obama’s nominee to be the 

Ambassador of the United States to the Republic of India, and I am 

grateful for the President and Secretary Clinton’s trust and 

confidence. 

I would like to thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to appear again before you. If confirmed, I look forward to 

working closely with you to advance our strategic partnership with 

India. 

I would like to say a special thank you to my State Department 

family members who are here today with me and for their support 

and advice during my preparations for the hearing. 

I have had the pleasure of serving in India previously from 1992 

through 1995 as the Consul General in Kolkata and Minister Counselor for Political Affairs in New Delhi. I thoroughly enjoyed my 

time in India, where I had the opportunity to observe the beginnings of India’s dramatic economic transformation and to participate in the early efforts to expand our bilateral relations. 

Today, I see an India that has catapulted itself onto the global 

stage. India is becoming an economic powerhouse, having averaged 

7 percent annual economic growth over the last decade, lifting tens 

of millions of its citizens out of poverty. 

India will also be a leading security partner of the United States 

in the 21st century. The number and kinds of interactions between 

our two countries at all levels is staggering in its breadth and 

depth. At its heart are the people-to-people links—students, businesses, and tourists, along with the 3-million-strong Indian-American community. 

At the government-to-government level, our relations are firmly 

grounded in a set of shared democratic values and an increasingly 

shared strategic vision of both the opportunities that can promote 

those values, as well as the threats that can undermine them. 

If confirmed, I will be working with an interagency team at the 

Embassy in New Delhi and our four consulates to advance a growing agenda that includes issues that are most vital to our national 

security and prosperity. Among our top priorities will be the 

following. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

41

Bolstering trade and investment. We have made unprecedented 

progress in expanding our economic relations with India. Our bilateral goods and services trade will top over $100 billion in 2012. 

This represents an astounding quadrupling of trade since 2000, 

moving India up from our 25th-largest trading partner to our 12th. 

I look forward to working with the interagency team and with 

our Indian counterparts to reduce barriers, including through the 

negotiation of a bilateral investment treaty, and to expand the 

areas where we do business. I am eager to support efforts to ensure 

full implementation of the civil nuclear cooperation agreement, 

including ensuring a level playing field for American companies in 

the commercial applications of nuclear energy. 

The U.S. mission in India actively seeks opportunities to keep 

and create jobs in America. In response to the President’s National 

Export Initiative, the U.S. mission promotes the export of U.S. 

products, services, and technologies supporting tens of thousands of 

jobs in the United States. India, with its population of 1.2 billion 

and its large consumer economy, represents a huge fast-growing 

market for U.S. manufactured goods. 

Our exports are growing at nearly 17 percent a year. At this 

rate, exports from the United States to India are expected to nearly 

double in 5 years. 

Another priority is our defense cooperation, which currently is at an all-time high. U.S. defense sales to India reached nearly $8 billion last year, and India holds more military exercises with the 

United States than with any other country. 

As stated in the National Security Strategy, we see India as a 

net security provider in the Indo-Pacific region. As India continues 

to modernize its armed forces, there are additional opportunities 

for us to expand our cooperation across all the services and at all 

levels. I appreciate the Congress’ support for expanding defense 

ties and note the report delivered to Congress in November on 

potential defense cooperation with India. 

We will also work to enhance our cooperation in international 

and multilateral fora. Reflecting its growing importance, India is 

an increasingly active member of key international bodies, including its current tenure on the United Nations Security Council, its 

inclusion in the G20, the East Asia summit, the South Asian 

Association for Regional Cooperation, and the World Trade Organization. 

In December, we held the first-ever trilateral consultations with 

Japan, India, and the United States. Encouraging India’s leadership in cooperation across the Asia-Pacific will be a top priority. 

If confirmed, I look forward to expanding our consultations and 

collaboration, narrowing our differences on key multilateral issues, 

and working with the Government of India to advance international peace and security through common understandings and 

approaches to strengthening these bodies and the international 

community’s ability to address the threats that face our world. 

Another priority will be encouraging India’s role in supporting 

peace and stability in the Indian Ocean region. India and the 

United States share a common interest in supporting continued 

efforts to establish a peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Indian 

Ocean region. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

42

Taking a cue from history, the new silk road vision foresees a 

network of economic, transit, trade, and people-to-people connections across South and Central Asia. India supports this vision and 

is a significant donor in Afghanistan and has taken steps to facilitate better trade with Pakistan. 

I look forward to increasing cooperation on counterterrorism and 

global threats. Terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba pose a critical 

threat not only to our partners like India, but also to United States 

strategic objectives in the region. 

If confirmed, I will work to expand the current level of consultation and coordination on key counterterrorism exchanges, as well 

as to advance our efforts to expand cooperation in the areas of nonproliferation and nuclear security. As national intelligence officer 

for South Asia, these were issues that I dealt with firsthand. 

If confirmed, I will also continue United States engagement with 

Indians to advance human rights and freedoms that are constitutionally protected in both our countries and to work to encourage 

democratic institutions in countries like Afghanistan. 

If confirmed, I look forward to participating in and advancing the 

U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, as well as the substantive exchanges 

on more than 20 distinct policy areas, including education, agriculture, energy, and development. I hope we can use this framework 

to address issues of mutual concern and to enhance collaboration 

to achieve concrete results that create additional opportunities for 

our two peoples and that eliminate threats to our two democracies. 

I take seriously my role as chief of mission in the management 

of our Government resources—the people, infrastructure, and programs that are committed to this relationship—and will work to 

ensure that they are protected and used creatively to enhance U.S. 

interests. 

If confirmed, I will devote my energies and experience to enlarging and expanding our relations with India. I believe we can continue to convert our vision for a future of peace and prosperity 

based on our mutual democratic values into a reality through 

expanded exchange, dialogue, and engagement at all levels of society and government. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Powell follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY J. POWELL

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am honored to appear today as President Obama’s nominee to be the Ambassador of the United States to the Republic 

of India and am grateful for the President’s and Secretary Clinton’s trust and confidence in me. I would like to thank the committee for giving me the opportunity 

to appear before this esteemed body today. If confirmed, I look forward to working 

closely with you to advance our strategic partnership with India. 

I have had the pleasure of serving in India previously from 1992 through 1995 

as Consul General in Kolkata and Minister-Counselor for Political Affairs in New 

Delhi. I thoroughly enjoyed my tour in India where I had the opportunity to observe 

the beginnings of India’s dramatic economic transformation and to participate in the 

early efforts to expand our bilateral relations. Today I see an India that has revolutionized itself onto the global stage. India is becoming an economic powerhouse, having averaged 7 percent annual economic growth over the last decade, lifting tens of 

millions of its citizens out of poverty. India will also be a leading security partner 

of the United States in the 21st century. The number and kinds of interactions between our two countries at all levels is staggering in its breadth and depth. At its 

heart are the people-to-people links—students, businesses, and tourists along with 

the 3 million strong Indian-American community. At the government-to-government 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

43

level, our relations are firmly grounded in a set of shared democratic values and 

an increasingly shared strategic vision of both the opportunities that can promote 

them as well as the threats that can undermine them. 

If confirmed, I will be working with an interagency team at our Embassy in New 

Delhi and the four consulates to advance a growing agenda that includes issues that 

that are most vital to our national security and prosperity. Among our top priorities 

will be the following:

• Bolstering trade and investment: We have made unprecedented progress in expanding our economic relations with India. Our bilateral goods and services 

trade will top $100 billion in 2012. This represents an astounding quadrupling 

of trade since 2000, moving India up from our 25th largest trading partner to 

our 12th. I look forward to working with a wide interagency team and with our 

Indian counterparts to reduce barriers, including through negotiation of a Bilateral Investment Treaty, and to expand the areas where we do business. I am 

eager to support the efforts to ensure full implementation of the Civil Nuclear 

Cooperation Agreement, including ensuring a level playing field for American 

companies in the commercial applications of nuclear energy. 

• The U.S. mission in India actively seeks opportunities to keep and create jobs 

in America. In response to the President’s National Export Initiative, the U.S. 

mission promotes the export of U.S. products, services, and technologies, supporting tens of thousands of jobs in the United States. India, with its population 

of 1.2 billion people and large and balanced consumer economy, represents a 

huge, fast-growing market for U.S. manufactured goods, and our exports are 

growing at nearly over 17 percent a year. At this rate, exports from the United 

States to India are expected to nearly double in the 5 years from 2009 to 2014. 

• Expanding our defense cooperation, which currently is at a cumulative all-time 

high: U.S. defense sales to India reached nearly $8 billion last year and India 

holds more military exercises with the United States than any other country. 

As stated in the National Security Strategy, we see India as a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific region. As India continues to modernize its armed 

forces, there are additional opportunities for us to expand our cooperation 

across all the services and at all levels. I appreciate the Congress’ support for 

expanding defense ties, and note the report delivered to Congress in November 

on potential future defense cooperation with India. 

• Enhancing our cooperation in international and multilateral fora: Reflecting its 

growing importance, India is an increasingly active member of key international 

bodies, including its current tenure on the United Nations Security Council, its 

inclusion in the G20, the East Asia summit, the South Asian Association for 

Regional Cooperation, and the World Trade Organization. In December, we held 

the first ever trilateral consultations with Japan, India, and the United States. 

Encouraging India’s leadership and cooperation across the Asia Pacific will be 

a top priority. If confirmed, I look forward to expanding our consultations and 

collaboration, narrowing our differences on key multilateral issues, and working 

with the Government of India to advance international peace and security 

through common understandings and approaches to strengthening these bodies 

and the international community’s ability to address the threats that face our 

world. 

• Encouraging India’s role in supporting peace and stability in the Indian Ocean 

region: India and the United States share a common interest in supporting continued efforts to establish a peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Indian Ocean 

region. Taking its cue from history, the New Silk Road vision foresees a network of economic, transit, trade, and people-to-people connections across South 

and Central Asia that will embed Afghanistan more firmly into its neighborhood. India supports this vision and is a significant donor in Afghanistan and 

has taken steps to facilitate trade with Pakistan. 

• Increasing cooperation on counterterrorism and global threats: Terrorist groups 

like Lashkar-e-Taiba pose a critical threat not only to our partners like India, 

but to U.S. strategic objectives in the region. If confirmed, I will work to expand 

the current level of consultation and coordination on key counterterrorism exchanges, as well as advance our efforts to expand cooperation in the areas of 

nonproliferation and nuclear security. As National Intelligence Officer for South 

Asia, these were issues I dealt with firsthand. 

• If confirmed, I will continue U.S. engagement with all Indians to advance 

human rights and freedoms that are constitutionally protected in both of our 

countries, and work with India to encourage democratic institutions in countries 

like Afghanistan.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

44

If confirmed, I look forward to participating in and advancing the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, as well as the substantive exchanges on more than 20 distinct policy 

areas, including education, energy, agriculture, and development. I hope we can use 

this framework to address issues of mutual concern and enhance collaboration to 

achieve concrete results that create additional opportunities for our two peoples and 

that eliminate threats to our two democracies. 

I take seriously my role as chief of mission in the management of our government 

resources—the people, infrastructure, and programs that are committed to this relationship—and will work to ensure that they are protected and used creatively to enhance U.S. interests. 

If confirmed, I will devote my energies and experience to enlarging and expanding 

our relations with India. I believe we can continue to convert our vision for a future 

of peace and prosperity based on our mutual democratic values into reality through 

expanded exchange, dialogue, and engagement at all levels of society and government. Thank you.

Senator UDALL [presiding]. Thank you, Ambassador Powell. 

We really appreciate your testimony. And I came in a little bit 

late, and I think, as Chairman Kerry said, I am supposed to take 

over for him. 

Let me just say initially that in looking at your resume and seeing your long history of service to the State Department that we 

really appreciate that public service. I mean, some of the areas you 

have served in are very difficult areas in the world, and I am sure 

you have done it with enthusiasm and a great spirit of public service. So thank you for doing that. 

I just returned, Ambassador Powell, from recently visiting India 

for the first time. I was lucky to go with a group, a CODEL headed 

by Senator Warner, and we had both of the cochairs of the India 

Caucus. Senator Warner is the cochair in the Senate, and Joe 

Crowley, the Congressman from New York, is the cochair in the 

House. And they had been there a number of times. I think Representative Crowley had been there eight times. 

And so, I learned a lot from that discussion. And one of the 

things I did was meet with the Nobel Laureate, Dr. Rajendra 

Pachauri. Dr. Pachauri and I had a long discussion about India’s 

energy needs and energy demands and the need to address climate 

change. 

He expressed his disappointment with the outcome in Durban, 

South Africa, and his belief that a multilateral solution is needed 

to really make progress on this issue. With regards to the scientific 

issues, he stated he believes that the findings on the committee 

that he cochairs are stronger and that heat waves and other abnormal climatic events are increasing in frequency and intensity. 

And while meeting with him and other business leaders, I 

stressed not only the need to invest in renewable energy, but also 

the opportunities presented by increased investment and partnership between the United States and India. With India in need of 

increased sources of energy to maintain its economic growth, how 

do you think the United States should work to facilitate partnerships between the United States and India to promote renewable 

energy? 

Ambassador POWELL. Senator, I am pleased that you had the opportunity to visit India and look forward, if confirmed, to welcoming you back often. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Ambassador POWELL. On the energy side, I think those who look 

at India’s progress and its potential almost universally will point 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

45

to energy as one of the key determinants in how India addresses 

its growing energy needs not only for its economic development, but 

also for advancing the needs of its people for electricity and other 

sources of energy. 

I think we are poised to be very, very good partners on this. We 

have an energy dialogue as part of the 20 that I mentioned in my 

testimony. It is done at the highest levels and involves a look at 

traditional sources of energy, as well as new technologies. 

We also have a partnership that Senator Lugar mentioned in his 

testimony that is looking particularly at innovations in energy. I 

think, given the very strong scientific communities, the very strong 

entrepreneurial communities in both of our countries, that this is 

an extraordinarily important complement to the government 

efforts. 

There will certainly have to be support for some of these technologies, support for the research regulatory framework that allows 

them to be used. But the ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit of 

our two countries I think provide us with opportunities to look at 

these new sources. 

The partnership provides funding. AID is also working with what 

they consider to be an innovation incubator approach to development in India that will allow for programs to be—experiments and 

others to be looked at for plus-up by the private sector in India for 

use in other parts of the developing world. 

I think all of these are very important. Obviously, the civil 

nuclear energy piece is another important part of the dialogue of 

trying to make sure that as India turns to nuclear energy to provide some of its energy resources that it can benefit from the 

extraordinary technology that United States companies bring to 

nuclear energy, to the safety and security standards, and to working with those companies with the Government of India to find a 

way for us to have a level playing field for that endeavor. 

Senator UDALL. Ambassador, thank you very much for that

answer. 

And I think one of the areas—and thank you for your willingness 

to work on the renewable energy issues—I think one of the areas 

that could be a welcome development would be with the villages in 

India. As you know, I mean, you have served over there. We have 

double than the people who live in the United States, 700 million 

people that live in villages, many times without adequate drinking 

water, clean drinking water, no electricity. 

And those kinds of conditions are really ripe for deploying solar 

panels or wind or something out in those villages. Dr. Pachauri, by 

the way, has an NGO where he has started an entrepreneurial 

model. He puts a solar panel in a village, has one of the women 

who really organizes the village take charge of it. She then leases 

out the solar panel to charge solar lanterns, and this replaces the 

kerosene lanterns, which are very dangerous and can’t be used 

under mosquito nets and things like that. 

And it seems to me that this whole area is one that there is a 

huge potential, if we work with them, if we partner with them, to 

help them get electricity into the villages without moving all of the 

village people into the cities, which I think could end up causing 

serious problems. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

46

And with that, I am not really asking a question there, but it is 

an honor to be here with Senator Lugar and to be up here chairing 

this. And I look forward to his questions and any others as we 

move along. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me just raise a different subject for the moment because at 

least today’s press reports indicate that India’s Oil and Natural 

Gas Corporation, the ONGC, has come under pressure to finalize 

a service contract for natural gas production with Iran. Now could 

you please give us your thoughts on an Indian company’s involvement in Iran’s energy sector, particularly something of this significance? 

Ambassador POWELL. So, Iran and India have a long tradition of 

trade across energy and other fields. It is one that is clearly a part 

of our sanctions regime that we are hoping to see it significantly 

reduced. 

I noted in Foreign Secretary Mathai’s speech yesterday, he indicated that the current efforts to diversify India’s sources of oil and 

petroleum and a reduction in their use of Iranian oil to 10 percent 

or less, and I think these are positive developments. I think our 

own efforts to support India in looking at other sources of energy 

will be a contributor to this, and we will certainly, if confirmed, I 

know that this is going to be one of the issues that I will be spending a great deal of time on and working with the Iranian sanctions 

legislation with our own policies and with the Indians to work with 

them. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, speaking of our assistance in this respect, 

as you pointed out earlier, large numbers of Indians lack access to 

electricity, and energy poverty limits their economic advancement 

options. The scale of this challenge, however, demands transformational technologies, such as Senator Udall was pointing out, and 

this leads to my question. 

Could you please describe the efforts, as you see them, which are 

being made by Indian entrepreneurs to tackle energy poverty? Furthermore, what barriers stand in the way for American entrepreneurs to enter the Indian market for the so-called transformational 

strategies that are going to be able to meet the doubling of 

demand? 

Ambassador POWELL. The two official government-to-government 

dialogues are on energy policy specifically and then on trade, which 

includes a variety of looking at various ways to encourage trade, 

to determine how barriers can be reduced, and to look at ways to 

make it possible for American companies to participate. We have 

some very good success stories. 

I was looking at the results of an Arizona company that has been 

quite successful on solar energy and to find, using our resources at 

the Embassy, our commercial services, our discussions with the private sector through the India Business Council, U.S.-India Business Council, the American Chamber of Commerce, and others, to 

find those links where we can put American companies in touch 

with opportunities for them to provide their expertise. 

I would also point to what USAID is doing. Although the 

amounts of money are relatively small, I think the payback potential is very, very high if we can encourage innovation. We are 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

47

partnering with Indian private sector on this. We are also providing a mechanism for funding, called the Clean Energy Finance 

Center, that will develop opportunities to think creatively about 

how to finance new and somewhat risky adventures sometimes. 

But to make it possible for the private sector to participate in this, 

not to depend strictly on government funding. 

I think although our projects are relatively small in their scope, 

the Indians have a very good network of working with the many, 

many villagers and trying to work on this. So if I could just piggyback on Senator Udall’s comments? My experience in Nepal with 

the lanterns was a fantastic one. It made an enormous amount of 

difference in the ability of children to do their homework, to stay 

in school, and to have an opportunity to encourage literacy. 

It also, in a similar way, empowered women and provided a 

source of income for them through the sales of these very smallscale entrepreneurships with the lamps. And I think it is a very, 

very good program. It has been used in other countries as well. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, we are counting on you to reduce the barriers to American entrepreneurs working with Indian entrepreneurs to the benefit of the people. 

Ambassador POWELL. Thank you. 

Senator LUGAR. You mentioned earlier the dialogue between the 

United States and India on 20 different areas. Last year, Secretary 

Clinton visited India and engaged in the U.S.-India Strategic 

Dialogue which, as you pointed out, includes security, regional cooperation, partnership, and technology. 

Can you highlight for us the most effective parts of the dialogue 

and the ones on which you believe the administration hopes to 

make the most progress in the coming year? 

Ambassador POWELL. I think my timing is quite good. Foreign 

Secretary Mathai is in the United States right now. And although 

I am not in a position to meet with him, my colleagues at the State 

Department are. And he had, I believe, extensive meetings this 

morning, setting up the agenda for the June or July meeting, the 

next meeting here in Washington of the strategic dialogue. 

He also spoke yesterday, and I believe I could certainly endorse 

the agenda that he put forward, of the things that are very, very 

important. Certainly, the energy dialogue is one of those, the trade 

dialogue, our cooperation in looking at our defense partnership, our 

look at making sure that we are looking at what we would call our 

homeland security dialogue. Our counterterrorism dialogue is a 

new and, I think, a very dynamic part of the dialogue that will continue to be a priority for both countries. 

Maritime security I feel certain will be part of the dialogue as 

well this summer. And as a former high school teacher, I would 

like to see the education dialogue raised to the Cabinet-level strategic dialogue as well. 

Senator LUGAR. And presumably intelligence-sharing will be a 

part of that? 

Ambassador POWELL. Absolutely, as part of the homeland security and counterterrorism. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much. 

Senator UDALL. Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

48

Ms. Powell, congratulations on your nomination. 

Ambassador POWELL. Thank you. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I have a concern. I am a strong believer that 

the relationship between the United States and India is a critical 

one, but, as I am sure you are aware, in December, I, along with 

other colleagues, sponsored legislation in the Congress by amendment that the Senate passed unanimously and the President 

signed into law with reference to comprehensive sanctions on the 

financial institutions of the Central Bank of Iran. 

And I have been encouraged by the efforts of Japan, South 

Korea, and others to look for ways to come into compliance with 

the law. They have come to it even as they face challenges, with 

the attitude of how do I meet the spirit of these sanctions and try 

to ensure that we are not subject to any sanctions and that we are 

working not only with the United States, but the international 

community to ensure that Iran does not achieve nuclear power. 

However, the Indian Government, which is one of Iran’s largest 

crude customers, seems to be rebuking the sanctions and looking 

for workarounds, including considering payments in gold and 

transactions that detour around the Central Bank of Iran, which 

at the end of the day still is helping the Iranian Government have 

the resources to fuel its nuclear ambitions. 

For our sanctions to be effective, it is really crucial that all 

nations, particularly democratic nations like India, work together 

to confront Iran and insist that it terminate its efforts to achieve 

nuclear weapons capability. 

What is your view of the Indian Government’s rationale behind 

supporting the Iranians in this regard? And if you are confirmed 

as our Ambassador, will you carry the message to New Delhi that 

this is a policy priority for the United States and that we will not 

hesitate, as appropriate, to pursue the law as it exists? 

Ambassador POWELL. Senator, certainly, if confirmed, I understand and appreciate that this is going to be a very important topic 

and one of those that I will be dealing with very seriously and very 

early in my tenure. 

I think approaching it perhaps a little bit differently than you 

did, but to recognize that India shares with us a desire to see a 

nonnuclear state in Iran. They have supported us in the IAEA four 

times. We continue to have a very important dialogue at the most 

senior levels of the U.S. Government, and I fully intend to be a 

part of that dialogue. 

I believe that making sure that there is clarity on what the legislation and the U.S. sanctions mean, what their implications are for 

India is one step. Also looking to make sure that we understand 

what actions India is taking. Foreign Secretary Mathai yesterday 

in his republic remarks commented that there already appears to 

be a reduction in the amount of oil, the percentage of oil that India 

receives from Iran out of its total imports. That would be a very 

good sign. 

But I will certainly commit to working very hard on this issue. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I appreciate that. This is incredibly 

important to us. If countries like India are going to pay in gold or 

find other ways to circumvent the sanctions, then while I appreciate what you said about India sharing our goals, it could 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

49

ultimately continue to facilitate the resources that are necessary 

for Iran to achieve its nuclear power. 

And so, we need more than their goodwill of sharing our goals. 

We need their actions to join us and the rest of the international 

community in that regard. And I hope that, if confirmed and in 

short order will hopefully be in India, that this will be one of your 

top priorities. 

Would you tell the committee, that this will be one of your top 

priorities when you get there? 

Ambassador POWELL. It most certainly—it will be one of the top 

priorities. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Now, last, and I won’t take all of the time 

that I have left, but I do want to ask a question that I would like 

you to answer for the record. And it has to do with the work that 

has to be done for our overall recruitment. I am seriously concerned that despite years that I have been raising this, including 

with your advent to this office, that the issue of Hispanic recruitment at the State Department remains pathetic. 

The 2010 Census has indicated that there are over 50 million 

Hispanics in the United States, 16 percent of the population. Yet, 

however, Hispanics make up only 5 percent of the State Department’s employees, 3.9 percent of the Foreign Service officers, and 

about 6 percent of Foreign Service specialists. 

So, I would like two things for the record. One, can your office 

share the most recent statistics with the committee as well as what 

barriers you have encountered in any effort to improve your outreach, recruitment, and retention of qualified Hispanics? 

In all of my work in this regard, this is really one of the worst 

departments of the Federal Government as it relates to Hispanic 

participation. I appreciate what has been said about the State 

Department reflecting the look of America but when Hispanics 

make up 16 percent of the population and their rate of growth is 

not reflected at the State Department, that doesn’t include a full 

look of America. 

So, as you move on to your next assignment, I would like to get 

the benefit of whatever challenges there were so that we can look 

at your successor in this role and have a strategic plan as to how 

we turn those numbers around. 

[The requested information follows:]

The Department of State is committed to a workforce that reflects the diversity 

of America (racial/ethnic/national-origin, gender, geographic, educational, and occupational) with the skills, innovation, and commitment to advance our national interests in the 21st century. 

Hispanics make up 4.7 percent of State Department Civil Service employees, 3.9 

percent of Foreign Service officers, and 6.6 percent of Foreign Service Specialists. 

The number of self-identified Hispanics who took the Foreign Service officer test 

during 2011 was 2,030 or 10 percent of the total. In FY 2011, the Department hired 

49 Hispanics into the Foreign Service, or 4 percent of all new Foreign Service hires, 

and 27 into the Civil Service, or 2 percent of all Civil Service hires. Our statistics 

are based on individuals who self-identify, and do not take into account individuals 

who are multiracial. 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE’S LARGE-SCALE RECRUITMENT EFFORTS

Targeted outreach is the cornerstone of the Department’s recruitment strategy. 

Specific recruitment portfolios include African-Americans, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, American Indians and Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders, 

women, military veterans, and those with disabilities. In FY 2011 our Diplomats in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

50

Residence and Washington-based recruiters personally engaged an estimated 50,000 

potential candidates at events across the country, supported by an events management system which markets our public events across our social recruitment networks. The system also facilitates ongoing engagement and communication between 

the Department and prospects/candidates. 

The Department’s careers Web site (www.careers.state.gov) is the hub for all online recruitment engagement and receives an average of 60,000 visitors a week. 

Public forums that provide quick and open responses to questions regarding Department career opportunities have proven extremely successful, continuously receiving 

more than 20 million views since their inception in 2010. 

Marketing studies demonstrate that minority professionals use social media at 

higher rates than nonminority professionals. Our public outreach is integrated with 

a comprehensive marketing and recruiting program that includes leveraging new 

media and networking technologies (Facebook, Linked-In, Twitter, YouTube), direct 

sourcing, e-mail marketing, and online and limited print advertising with career 

and niche-specific sites and publications (Hispanic Business, NSHMBA, LatPro, 

Saludos, LATINAStyle). In FY 2011, the Department spent $42,350 on advertising in Hispanic print and 

electronic media. In addition, 39.5 percent of the total we spent on print and electronic media included general diversity-specific sites which incorporated Hispanics. 

In FY 2012, we are allocating $95,789 to Hispanic-focused, career-specific media 

which is 21 percent of our total spending on advertising in print and electronic 

media. An additional 20 percent of the total media buy will include diversity-specific 

sites which incorporate Hispanics. 

The Department’s Recruitment Outreach Office developed and hosted Diversity 

Career Networking Events as a tool to target diverse professionals for Department 

of State careers, specifically highlighting deficit Foreign Service career tracks. In FY 

2011, events were hosted in Los Angeles; Denver; Santa Fe, Albuquerque, and Las 

Cruces, NM; Miami; Cincinnati (to attract attendees at the National League of 

United Latin American Citizens conference), Houston, Dallas, New York, and Washington, DC, reaching over 1,000 candidates including African Americans, Asian 

Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, women, and critical language speakers. In 

addition, over 900 Department employees have volunteered to support our strategic 

outreach, highlighting the diversity of our existing workforce and leveraging existing 

networks of internal affinity groups like the Hispanic Employment Council in Foreign Affairs Agencies (HECFAA). 

COOPERATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAMS

The Department strives to achieve diversity throughout its workforce through various career-entry programs, including the Presidential Management Fellowship. All 

qualified applicants referred to the Department by the Office of Personnel Management are given full consideration. The Office of Recruitment conducts regular outreach to institutions that serve Hispanics in order to increase the pool of applicants 

from the Hispanic community and promote awareness of entry-level employment 

opportunities. 

Our outreach to college students plants the seeds of interest in global public service and promotes a long-term interest in our internships, fellowships, and careers. 

In FY 2009, Congress funded additional paid internships for recruitment purposes. 

In 2009, 2010, and 2011, our Diplomats in Residence identified outstanding, diverse 

candidates for those internships, providing them the chance to experience work in 

Washington, DC, and embassies and consulates around the world. In 2011, 20 percent of these 80 paid interns were Hispanic. 

Two particularly successful student programs are the Thomas R. Pickering Foreign Affairs Undergraduate and Graduate Fellowships and the Charles B. Rangel 

International Affairs Fellowship. These ROTC-like programs provide financing for 

graduate school and paid professional experience in Washington and at our embassies to highly qualified and mostly minority students, in exchange for their commitment to the Foreign Service. Diplomats in Residence help recruit candidates for 

these fellowships, which have been essential to increasing the presence of underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service. In FY 2011, 10 out of 40 (25 percent) Pickering Fellows and 4 out of 20 (20 percent) Rangel Fellows were Hispanic.

Ambassador POWELL. Senator, may I respond just briefly? 

Senator MENENDEZ. Absolutely, sure. 

Ambassador POWELL. We clearly will give you more details in the 

taken question, but I took very seriously your charge to me when 

I accepted the Director General position, was confirmed by the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

51

committee, to try to improve the outreach to the Hispanic and 

other minority communities, to make sure that they understood 

what opportunities were available to them at the State Department, whether it was the Foreign Service or the civil service and 

to expand the information that they had, their ability to ask questions, to be informed, and to participate with us. 

I share with you a desire to see a better than 5-percent ratio for 

the Hispanics in the Foreign Service and a 4.9 for the civil service. 

But I do have some encouraging statistics about the efforts of a 

very, very vigorous and targeted recruitment effort that we have 

undertaken over the last 2 to 3 years. 

In the past year, we have among the people who have taken the 

Foreign Service test, we had an increase of 82 percent among the 

Hispanics. From those who passed the test, having taken it, 172-

percent increase by Hispanics, and for the hiring, a 43-percent increase. Those statistics, if we can maintain them—and I certainly 

think that my successor will be committed to the effort that we 

started—represent an opportunity to improve on our total percentage of Hispanics. 

I would also like to share one other statistic with the committee 

because the other part of our outreach, in addition to our minority 

populations, was to our disabled veterans. And we have been able 

in the Foreign Service generalists to increase by 350 percent the 

hiring of disabled veterans. And among our specialists, a whopping 

4,700-percent increase. 

So I would also like to comment that the number of minorities, 

including Hispanics, that are part of our Pickering and Rangel 

Fellowship Programs, and these are opportunities that provide 

graduate education opportunities as well as internships and other 

experience in the department, has increased dramatically. 

And I personally served as the mentor for our Hispanic affinity 

group, which has been reenergized under the leadership of its new 

president, and I took great pride in working with them. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I appreciate that. I look forward to seeing the employment figures which you gave, which sound promising, what sections across the spectrum they are. 

But thank you very much. 

Senator UDALL. Senator Webb. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And Ambassador—congratulations. I wish you well in the new 

assignment, for which I know you are going to be confirmed. You 

have got a terrific wealth of experience in this region. I think you 

are going to be very valuable to our country when you go there. 

India is a long way from Iowa. I went to high school in Nebraska. 

I can remember one cold winter morning working in a grocery 

store, I was reading ‘‘Hawaii’’ by James Michener and becoming 

fascinated with the stories of Asia, and he talked about mangoes. 

I looked over on a shelf in this grocery store I was working in—

and there was a mango. I had never seen one before and I bought 

it with all my tip money. I brought it home that night, and I could 

not figure out how to peel it. 

But I said someday I am going to go where they grow these mangoes, and of course, a couple of years later, Uncle Sam helped me 

out and sent me to Vietnam. But I know what it is like to really 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

52

become so intensely interested in an area, and you certainly have 

the background when it comes to South Asia and India. 

That leads me to a question. Just something that I have been 

wondering for some time, and I think from your background, 

maybe you can help me understand it—help us understand it. 

We consistently speak about India as a democracy, and in political terms, one would think that is true. It certainly seems demonstrably true. We talk consistently about the entrepreneurship that 

comes out of India. Some of the most wealthy entrepreneurs in the 

world are in India. Those who have come to this country from India 

do extremely well. 

And yet, if you look at ‘‘The World Factbook,’’ the per capita in- come in India is about $800—at least the one that I just looked at, 

‘‘The Economist World Factbook’’—which is less than $3 a day. 

What would be your observations about the nature of this democracy in terms of the obvious, glaring inequality from top to bottom 

in its society? 

Ambassador POWELL. Senator, I think India’s democracy is a 

thriving one with right now they are engaged in five states voting, 

with over 200 million residents in one of those states. So that part 

of the democracy, in terms of its forms and its norms, is well established. 

They are voting after a very vigorous debate over policies and, 

particularly in these five states, are looking at the economic 

reforms, whether they have answered the question that we would 

ask here in the United States. Are you better off than you were at 

the last election? 

They are very, very vigorous in that debate. They are looking at 

it very seriously. 

I take a lesson from my time as a teacher of American Government and American history of reminding myself that our Constitution starts with the words about ‘‘forming a more perfect union.’’ 

I think that India is in the process of doing that as well. 

It has enormous societal inequalities based on historic caste systems of economic differences. But surely, one of the engines that 

moves a society is the commitment to democracy, a ballot box that 

allows people to vote for their leaders and to vote for change, but 

also a rising economy. 

I contrast my earlier time in India, where they were just emerging from a very, very closed economic system, one which required 

enormous amounts of work to start a business or to close one, for 

that matter, with the current system. It is not perfect yet. It still 

takes a long time in India. It is still not a redtape free society. But 

all of those things are freeing up India. 

I think we have seen over the 20 years of economic reforms a tremendous number of people who have been removed from absolute 

poverty. They are into the Indian middle class now. They are able 

to afford education for their children. They are dedicated to that as 

one of the first things that they use their disposable income for, but 

also a rising consumer network, better housing. 

Senator WEBB. So you would say—and I have got one other question I want to ask you, You are optimistic about the potential for 

broader sharing of the wealth in that society? 

Ambassador POWELL. I am. I am very optimistic about India. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

53

Senator WEBB. I wanted also to get your comment on the obvious 

and growing interrelationship among the United States, ASEAN, 

and India in terms of naval activities, but also security activities 

not only in the Indian Ocean and around into what we call the 

Western Pacific or the South China Sea. 

We have seen cooperative naval maneuvers between India and 

Vietnam, for instance. At the same time, we have seen over the 

past couple of years on many different levels increased Chinese 

naval activity into the Indian Ocean. What are your thoughts about 

this new mix? 

Ambassador POWELL. I think India is certainly one of those countries that is a rising power in this part of the world. It has interests that match ours in many ways, particularly as we have looked 

at our defense dialogue of looking at maritime security, of looking 

at the potential for cooperation and humanitarian relief and disaster assistance. And also in looking at piracy, particularly off the 

coast of Somalia, of cooperating with the international effort there. 

The dialogue that we have through the Defense Policy Group, 

through ASEAN, through the Indian Ocean rim conferences, with 

India playing a growing role in that, I think will assist us in aligning a policy that works internationally to make sure that we can 

protect those sea-lanes, that we will have a peaceful area there. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. Ambassador, the ongoing friction between India 

and Pakistan is a strategic concern for the United States and for 

the region. Do you believe that there may be a more proactive role 

for the United States to play, which could help ease tensions 

between the countries? 

For instance, Sandia National Laboratories Cooperative Monitoring Center—Sandia is located in Albuquerque, NM—has programs to help create trust between countries, such as border monitoring. As part of its mission, Sandia’s Cooperative Monitoring 

Center assists political and technical experts from around the 

world to acquire the technology-based tools they need to implement 

nonproliferation, arms control, and other cooperative security 

measures. 

It is a soft power tool that I believe could be utilized in such hot 

spots. I would note that this is not a new proposal, that a paper 

released by the Cooperative Monitoring Center in 2001, which was 

written by retired Pakistani Major General Mahmud Ali Durrani, 

called for a ‘‘cooperative border monitoring experiment.’’

What are your thoughts on these and other proposals to relieve 

security tensions in the region? 

Ambassador POWELL. Senator, I firmly believe in encouraging a 

dialogue and the resolution of problems between India and Pakistan. I believe that ideas that are supported by both countries, if 

General Durrani’s ideas were to be endorsed through the Track II 

or Track I negotiations that are very active on both levels, that 

there would be a role for the United States to play. 

I have had the opportunity to meet many of the people that are 

engaged in these dialogues and certainly think that the United 

States plays a role in encouraging ideas and looking for additional 

creative solutions, but that the primary responsibility rests with 

the two countries. Having worked with so many of their leaders 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

54

and their diplomats, I am very confident that they have the ability 

to do that, but certainly don’t rule out our ability to assist. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

During our visit to India, we visited a USAID site in Jaipur. This 

site truly highlighted the needs of rural and impoverished Indians. 

Work being done by USAID included aiding women with prenatal 

care, vaccinations and other child services, and training for women 

to help them interact with other groups to help discuss community 

needs and solutions. 

Madam Ambassador, what are your thoughts on such programs, 

and how do you think our relations would be impacted if there are 

substantial cuts to such USAID programs? 

Ambassador POWELL. I am very, very supportive of these efforts. 

I think particularly supporting women’s health has a major impact 

on the health of their children. I have a particular interest in looking at women’s education opportunities. Particularly in rural India, 

as in many parts of the developing world, women have not had 

equal opportunity and access to education. This is an area that as 

India needs to expand its economy is one that I think is very 

important. 

The AID programs that are being conducted in India are ones 

that I look forward to visiting and to having a better understanding of. But I think particularly the one you visited is one that 

would warm my heart. I would like to have the opportunity to do 

that, if confirmed, but also to look at the opportunities to do things 

like the new stoves that are both ecologically and in terms of 

health a much improved facility. This is something that Secretary 

Clinton has taken a great deal of interest in. 

In terms of the impact of our aid program, our numbers and the 

amount of assistance to India has been reduced substantially from 

what I remember. But I think it is a quality program, and I would 

like to see it continued so that it can be this incubator for innovation and development technology and development programming, 

that we can identify things that work in this environment and see 

how they can be plussed up by the private sector, by the government of India, but also exported to other developing countries that 

may have similar problems. 

Senator UDALL. Ambassador, we went into a village and saw—

you mentioned the cookstoves and Secretary Clinton’s initiative. 

We went in and saw in a village locals cooking on traditional 

stoves. It was fueled, I think, by dung. It was very dirty. The 

smoke was all over the house. I mean, it was a pretty dreadful 

situation. 

Could you tell us a little bit more about the initiative Secretary 

Clinton has on the stoves and how that has progressed? 

Ambassador POWELL. I am going to have to take the question to 

get you the details on it, but I know that it is one she is committed 

to. And I have had the similar experience that you had. Not only 

do you deprive the fields from the benefits of having the fertilizer, 

but you also spread enormous amounts of smoke that, particularly 

for the lungs and health of children and the women who are doing 

the cooking, is quite dramatic. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

55

And the new smokeless stoves both cut down on the amount of 

energy that is required, but also contribute far, far less to pollutants that damage their health. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

And if you would supplement the record a little more on that, I 

think that would be great. 

Ambassador POWELL. I will be glad to do so. 

[The requested information follows:]

Secretary Clinton announced the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves in September 2010 as an innovative public-private partnership led by the United Nations 

Foundation to save lives, improve livelihoods, empower women, and combat climate 

change by creating a thriving global market for clean and efficient household cooking solutions. Today, the Alliance comprises of over 250 partners, including 27 countries. In November 2011, the Alliance published a roadmap to achieve universal 

adoption of clean cookstoves and fuels. Under this strategy, the Alliance will work 

with its public and private partners to focus on three core thematic activities: enhancing demand for clean cookstoves and fuels; strengthening supply of clean cookstoves and fuels; and fostering an enabling environment for a thriving market for 

clean cookstoves and fuels. The U.S. Government’s commitment to the Alliance includes diplomatic support and an investment of up to $105 million across 10 Federal 

agencies over the first 5 years of the Alliance, with a focus on financing, applied 

research, capacity-building, stove testing, field implementation, and evaluation. The 

Secretary held a public event in Chennai, during her July 2011 visit to India, to 

announce new Indian private sector partners and raise international awareness and 

engagement on these issues. Special Representative for Global Partnerships, Kris 

Balderston, would be happy to provide you a detailed briefing on the activities of 

the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves.

Senator UDALL. Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. I have no further questions. I simply wish the 

very best to the Ambassador. 

Ambassador POWELL. Thank you. 

Senator LUGAR. I look forward to strongly supporting your nomination. 

Ambassador POWELL. Thank you very much. 

Senator UDALL. Ambassador, let me, on behalf of the committee, 

just thank you very much for your testimony today. 

We are going to keep the record open for questions for the record 

for 24 hours. We would ask that all members please submit any 

questions before tomorrow afternoon. 

Senator UDALL. Also, I have been informed by Chairman Kerry 

that the committee is working to get Ambassador Powell’s nomination on the agenda for the business meeting to take place on February 14, and I believe, Senator Lugar, the ranking member, is 

also aware of that? Yes. 

Ambassador POWELL. Thank you very much. 

Senator UDALL. So, thank you. 

And being no further questions and no further business, the 

hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF HON. NANCY J. POWELL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY

SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. How can the United States best support India and Pakistan in their 

talks and efforts to resolve regional tensions? If confirmed, what types of steps will 

you take to facilitate improved relations between India and Pakistan?

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

56

Answer. The United States has always welcomed dialogue and better relations between India and Pakistan. The pace, scope, and character of the dialogue are for 

Indian and Pakistani leaders to decide. If confirmed, I will encourage all dialogue 

between India and Pakistan, particularly including the expansion of trade and 

strengthening of people-to-people linkages between the countries. The United States 

should continue to encourage both Track I and Track II efforts to improve relations. 

We particularly welcome the upcoming meeting of trade ministries and the planned 

visit to Pakistan of a large commercial delegation. Normalizing trade relations will 

bring benefits to both countries. 

We applaud the dialogue between India and Pakistan on bilateral issues, including on expanding economic contacts. The latest rounds of dialogue have produced 

concrete steps to improve relations in ways that will directly benefit the Indian and 

Pakistani people, particularly on easing barriers to trade and commerce. It is our 

hope that this process of normalization in both directions, including the eventual extension of most-favored-nation status by Pakistan and the reduction of nontariff barriers by India, will lead to expanded economic opportunity and stability for both 

countries that also could serve as a much-needed catalyst for regional integration.

Question. What steps can the Indians realistically take this year to liberalize their 

economy, particularly to encourage more foreign investment?

Answer. In November 2011, India’s Cabinet voted to allow 51 percent FDI in the 

multibrand retail sector and 100 percent investment in the single brand retail sector. Multibrand retail implementation has been postponed, but we remain hopeful 

it will be implemented. The FDI increase in single-brand retail has moved forward, 

though with local procurement and small business provisions that foreign companies 

will need to work through before they can enter the Indian market in a significant 

way. We have also continued to encourage liberalization in the aviation, pensions, 

and insurance sectors, as well as in defense-offsets. The release of India’s FY 2013 

budget and 12th Five-Year Plan in March may provide some additional clarity into 

the government’s plans for its economic reform agenda.

Question. How can the United States work with India to encourage further political and economic reforms in Burma?

Answer. India serves as a model for the values we hope will become universal 

across East Asia and is in a strong position to encourage Burma to deepen its democratic reform efforts. Although India and the United States have historically approached Burma differently, both countries have welcomed the significant Burmese 

reforms, share a strong desire to see these reforms continue, and support Burma’s 

reintegration into the region. In support of this goal, the Indian Government hosted 

a Burmese parliamentary delegation in December 2011 to study India’s democracy 

ahead of Burmese by-elections this spring. India’s continued outreach, both to the 

Burmese Government, as well as to opposition leaders, such as Aung San Suu Kyi, 

reinforces this message. In fall 2011, India offered Burma a $500 million line of 

credit to support development of transport and energy infrastructure and is exploring the development of new transport corridors through Burma that would link 

India with markets in Southeast Asia. We continue to urge the Indian Government 

to use its deep historical friendship and cultural ties with Burma to engage its civil 

society and encourage concrete action on political and economic reform and national 

reconciliation. In addition, Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for 

Burma, Derek Mitchell, has proposed to visit India in the coming months to explore 

ways to deepen our bilateral cooperation.

Question. How can the United States work with India to encourage further political and economic reforms in Sri Lanka?

Answer. The Department of State believes the Government of Sri Lanka needs to 

take concrete actions to promote national reconciliation, strengthen democratic institutions, and credibly investigate violations of international humanitarian law and 

international human rights law alleged to have occurred during Sri Lanka’s 26-year 

separatist conflict. We continue to engage closely with India on encouraging Sri 

Lanka to implement a comprehensive national reconciliation process that includes 

holding those credibly alleged to have violated international humanitarian law and 

international human rights law accountable for their actions. Both the United 

States and India have also emphasized the need to implement the recommendations 

of Sri Lanka’s own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission in a timely 

manner.

Question. Last week Bloomberg New Energy Finance released a new report showing that India led in the growth of renewable energy investments in 2011, with a 

52-percent jump to over $10 billion. This jump in investments was helped by India’s 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

57

growing wind and solar sectors. If confirmed, please describe what you plan to do 

to connect this growing market demand with the technologies and private sector 

investment based in the United States, where we are a leading innovator and developer for many of these clean energy technologies. What would you do to help implement the Partnership to Advance Clean Energy, one of our largest bilateral relationships in this area?

Answer. In 2009 Prime Minister Singh and President Obama agreed to strengthen United States-India cooperation on energy and climate change through a number 

of bilateral and multilateral initiatives. One of these initiatives is the U.S.-India 

Partnership to Advance Clean Energy (PACE), which seeks to improve energy access and promote low-carbon growth through the research and deployment of clean 

energy technologies. PACE includes bilateral public-private projects that have advanced the goals under the CEO Forum. 

If confirmed, I would continue to promote and encourage the sale of U.S. technology to India to meet India’s ambitious targets for the deployment of renewable 

energy, energy efficiency, and other clean energy solutions in support of the 

National Export Initiative. Over the next 10 years, India is expected to be one of 

the largest sources of new solar capacity and other clean energy solutions. India will 

look to the United States to supply the most advanced solar technology in the world. 

If confirmed, I would continue the Embassy’s strong support of the Energy 

Cooperation Program, a public private partnership in PACE that leverages the U.S. 

private sector to promote commercially viable project development and deployment 

in clean energy and energy efficiency. 

The United States also has the opportunity to shape India’s clean energy market 

through financing and investment. If confirmed, I would fully support the efforts of 

the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, Export-Import Bank, and U.S. Trade 

and Development Agency to promote U.S. clean energy exports and ensure U.S. 

companies can play a significant role in developing India’s clean energy market. 

Largely due to clean energy contracts, India has become the largest loan portfolio 

for the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and will soon constitute the largest 

portfolio for the Export-Import Bank. If confirmed, I would continue to advocate for 

the sale of U.S. technology in clean and renewable energy and energy efficiency to 

keep India as the top destination for U.S. Government-supported sales. Finally, if 

confirmed, I would help bring to fruition the Joint Clean Energy Research and 

Development Center that will bring together industry and academic experts in the 

United States and India to mobilize $100 million in funding for clean energy research to benefit both countries.

Question. What is the status of the TAPI pipeline, particularly with respect to securing Western multinational involvement in pipeline operation and the associated 

gas field development in Turkmenistan? What is the status of plans between Pakistan and India to jointly develop the Daulatabad gas field in Turkmenistan? What 

is the administration’s position on these plans? Pakistan has reportedly proposed a 

uniform transit fee for the import of gas under the TAPI pipeline project, which it 

would receive from India and pay to Afghanistan. What is the administration’s position on the pipeline transit fee? What are its economic implications?

Answer. Since the TAPI Intergovernmental Agreement was signed by the Presidents of Turkmenistan, Pakistan, and Afghanistan and the Minister of Petroleum 

and Natural Gas of India in December 2010, the parties have been negotiating gas 

sales and purchase agreements. We believe these agreements may be finalized in 

the next few months. All four TAPI parties welcome the participation of international oil companies (IOCs) in the project, although there are differing views on 

exactly what the role of the IOCs would be. There has been some erroneous reporting on development of the gas field that will feed TAPI. Although the Daulatabad 

field had initially been selected, the current plan is for the gas to come from the 

South Yolotan/Galkynysh gas field. Although we understand that both Pakistan and 

India would like to participate in development of the gas field feeding TAPI, we are 

not aware that any agreements have been reached. We believe the prospects for the 

TAPI project would be enhanced if an IOC, perhaps working together with Pakistani 

and Indian companies, were involved along with Turkmengaz, the Turkmen Government gas company, in developing the gas field that would feed the TAPI pipeline. 

We have advocated for American companies to play this role. The transit fee and 

other commercial issues are a matter for negotiation among the TAPI parties and 

the companies that ultimately compose the consortium that will build and operate 

the pipeline, so it would be premature for us to comment on the transit fee. If realized, the TAPI pipeline could help meet India’s fast growing need for natural gas 

and also foster regional economic development.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

58

Question. What steps is the administration taking to implement the New Silk 

Road initiative, consistent with the recommendations put forth by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee December 2011 report on ‘‘Central Asia and the Transition in Afghanistan’’?

Answer. The report on ‘‘Central Asia and the Transition in Afghanistan’’ put forth 

by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in December 2011 recommended that 

U.S. policy should ‘‘translate the New Silk Road (NSR) vision into a working strategy for the broader region beyond Afghanistan.’’

In 2011, high-level engagement on the New Silk Road (NSR) vision supported this 

recommendation by achieving broad international consensus on the need to promote 

greater economic integration throughout Afghanistan, Central Asia, and South Asia. 

India has been particularly vocal in endorsing publicly this New Silk Road vision. 

In 2012, we plan to take additional concrete steps to operationalize the NSR concept, focusing on the expansion of energy, trade, and transit between South and 

Central Asia, with Afghanistan at its heart. We will also capitalize on people-topeople linkages that support the NSR vision, such as follow-on activities related to 

the 2011 Women’s Economic Symposium in Bishkek, promotion of regional commerce associations, and enhanced cooperation with multilateral organizations active 

in the region such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and 

OECD. 

RESPONSES OF HON. NANCY J. POWELL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY

SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. As a growing oil consumer, India plays an increasingly important role 

in global oil markets. However, since India is not in the OECD, they also are not 

formally party to oil crisis response mechanisms. In your view, should the United 

States advocate for full Indian membership in the International Energy Agency?

Answer. Noting India’s growing weight as a major energy consumer (No. 2 in the 

non-OECD world) and as part of a broader USG effort to integrate India into institutions of global governance and multilateral cooperation, we continue to encourage 

India’s growing cooperation with the International Energy Agency (IEA). At present, 

there are several prerequisites for IEA membership, such as OECD membership, adherence to shared IEA principles and a requirement of 90 days of strategic petroleum stocks (for emergency response). We have been working with India on energy 

security through the U.S.-India Energy Dialogue and other bilateral mechanisms 

and support India’s Enhanced Engagement program with the OECD, with a view 

toward eventual IEA membership for India. India should have a seat at the table 

with the world’s major consumers to coordinate on a possible collective response in 

the event of a major oil supply disruption, exchange views on key energy dynamics, 

and discuss energy security issues.

Question. The Indian economy offers tremendous opportunities for U.S. trade and 

investment in both conventional energy and clean energy technologies. Yet, numerous obstacles exist from pricing controls to local content requirements. Is the administration playing a role in spurring pricing reform in the oil and gas sector, which 

allow investors are reasonable return on investment? What is the administration 

doing to encourage the liberalization of the Indian power markets? Please describe 

local content requirements in renewable energy, and the administration’s position 

on those rules.

Answer. Energy and climate change cooperation is a strategic pillar under the 

U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, and the Energy Dialogue is the main bilateral platform to advance our efforts to improve energy access, infrastructure development, 

regulatory frameworks, and energy security. During Prime Minister Singh’s November 2009 visit to Washington, he and President Obama announced a Memorandum 

of Understanding on clean energy, now known as the U.S.-India Partnership to 

Advance Clean Energy (PACE). PACE incorporates an ambitious energy agenda, 

focused on bilateral cooperation on energy security, climate change, clean energy 

research, shale gas, and private sector participation in India’s energy sector. 

Department of Energy Deputy Secretary Poneman traveled to India in July 2011 

for the most recent meeting of the Energy Dialogue, which included senior-level representatives from Indian Government ministries in the energy sector, including 

petroleum and natural gas, and new and renewable energy. Both sides noted the 

importance of appropriate policy and regulatory frameworks in improving energy 

policies and energy access. We have engaged with numerous Indian Government 

ministries, including the Ministry of Commerce and Industry and the Ministry of 

Renewable Energy on local content requirements both during policy development 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

59

and during policy implementation. U.S. companies, such as Azure Power Ltd. and 

First Solar, are active players in India’s solar market. India has become the largest 

loan portfolio for the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and will soon become 

the largest portfolio for the Export-Import Bank, largely due to clean energy development financing. The Export-Import Bank has financed 75 million dollars’ worth 

of solar power generating projects in India and is considering loans worth an additional $500 million to support India’s growing solar infrastructure. The U.S. Department of Commerce facilitated expanded trade and commercial partnerships in clean 

technology products through a November 2011 trade mission. 

As India’s solar industry matures, Indian regulators are revising their regulations 

for the industry. If confirmed, I would work with the Indian Government to ensure 

that India’s regulations continue to allow access to products manufactured by U.S. 

companies so that India can enjoy the best technologies at the lowest prices.

Question. India has the sought the support of the U.S Government in securing a 

permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. Can you give us an update 

on efforts between the U.S. and Indian Governments to promote greater cooperation 

on U.N. and multilateral measures generally?

Answer. India has partnered with the United States at the U.N. and other multilateral fora on several key issues, including its support in February 2012 for a (ultimately unsuccessful) Security Council resolution calling for an end to the current 

violence in Syria. Moreover, India has joined the United States four times in support of International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors votes on Iran’s nuclear program and has been a strong proponent of a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty 

at the Conference for Disarmament. Given India’s status as a current member of 

the U.N. Security Council, and its historic role as one of the leading providers of 

U.N. peacekeeping troops, we have welcomed the opportunity to increase our bilateral exchanges on these issues, including the Government of India’s decision last 

March to resume the bilateral U.S.-India Peacekeeping Joint Working Group. India 

also participates with the United States in a wide range of East Asian multilateral 

forums, including the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia summit, where Indian Prime Minister Singh met with President Obama last fall. Consistent with the 

administration’s foreign policy ‘‘pivot’’ to Asia, we look forward to continuing to consult with India closely on issues affecting the Asia-Pacific region and the globe.

Question. The United States and India have pledged to work together to share 

knowledge and technology as part of an ‘‘Evergreen Revolution’’ to extend food security in India as well as to countries in Africa. This partnership includes plans to 

increase agricultural productivity, reduce trade barriers, and develop long-term sustainable economic development. Can you give us an update on these efforts and describe what further steps can be taken to achieve food security for the greatest number of people?

Answer. As one of our strategic partnership countries, India is actively engaged 

in our food security efforts, and is itself a driver of global solutions in food security. 

Through the Partnership for an Evergreen Revolution, the United States and India 

are working together to leverage expertise to enhance weather and climate forecasting for agriculture, improve food processing and farm-to-market links, and partner for global food security in Africa. 

As a key regional player, India is an active partner in our efforts to make sustained and accountable commitments to fight against global hunger, address the 

longer term challenges of global food security, and build future markets. USAID is 

currently transforming its relationship in India to highlight Indian innovations 

which may have global applications. On his recent trip, USAID Administrator Raj 

Shah launched the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII)–Food and Agriculture 

Center of Excellence (FACE) event which aims to develop a partnership strategy for 

expanding rural business hubs to eastern India, and then to Africa. Developing the 

30 hubs in eastern India and promoting the adoption of agrobusiness hubs for agriculture growth globally, including in Africa, will expand innovations in post-harvest 

technologies and establish greater food safety/security standards. If confirmed, I will 

support private sector partnerships such as the CII–FACE initiative, which will play 

a catalytic role in transferring innovations to improve food security in India and 

Africa. The U.S. Government and the Government of India are currently exploring 

opportunities to train African participants from Kenya, Liberia, and Malawi at Indian universities and research and technical institutes in mutually agreed capacity 

building programs. I believe Indian private sector and civil society hold great promise in advancing innovations and leveraging resources which can improve development outcomes.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

60

Question. How can the United States play a constructive role in the India Pakistan dialogue? As Ambassador, what could you do to increase cooperation in the 

areas of security and intelligence sharing between the United States and India?

Answer. The United States has always welcomed dialogue and better relations between India and Pakistan. The pace, scope, and character of the dialogue are for 

Indian and Pakistani leaders to decide. 

We applaud the dialogue between India and Pakistan on bilateral issues, including on expanding economic contacts. The latest rounds of dialogue have produced 

concrete steps to improve relations in ways that will directly benefit the Indian and 

Pakistani people, particularly on easing barriers to trade and commerce. It is our 

hope that this process of normalization in both directions, including the eventual extension of most-favored-nation status by Pakistan and the reduction of nontariff barriers by India, will lead to expanded economic opportunity and stability for both 

countries that also could serve as a much-needed catalyst for regional integration. 

With respect to security cooperation with India, homeland security and counterterrorism cooperation are areas where our partnership with India now operates at 

unprecedented levels. If confirmed, I will continue to encourage a close, productive, 

and cooperative relationship with India in these areas that includes regular and frequent exchanges of information. We are committed to providing India full support 

in ongoing counterterrorism investigations, through continued exchanges between 

designated agencies and by bringing the perpetrators of the 2008 Mumbai terrorism 

attack to justice, which killed Americans along with citizens of many other countries. We remain deeply concerned about the potential of another terrorist attack—

in India, the United States, and elsewhere in the world—and are working very 

closely with our Indian and Pakistani colleagues to prevent such an incident.

Question. What steps is the administration taking to pressure the Pakistan Government to bring those responsible for the November 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks 

to justice? What further steps would you suggest be taken?

Answer. We continue to press Pakistan to bring those responsible for the 2008 

Mumbai attacks—which claimed the lives of six Americans among the scores of innocent victims—to justice. Moreover, we have stressed to Pakistani authorities the 

dangers of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the importance of efforts to disrupt the 

group’s activities. We also remain concerned about the potential of another terrorist 

attack—in India, the United States, or elsewhere in the world—and are working 

closely with our Indian and Pakistani colleagues to prevent such an incident. We 

have a close, productive, and cooperative relationship with India on counterterrorism that includes regular and frequent exchanges of information. We are committed to providing full cooperation and support in ongoing counterterrorism investigations, through continued exchanges of information between designated agencies 

and by bringing the perpetrators of the 2008 Mumbai terror attack to justice. Homeland security and counterterrorism cooperation are areas where our partnership 

with India operates at unprecedented levels.

Question. The Indian Government has traditionally been slow to open its doors 

to foreign investment. How can we advance the ability of U.S. companies to invest 

in India? There are regulations now permitting foreign single brand retailers to operate in India. How can we further discussions with India to allow a broader range 

of retail industries to fully operate in India?

Answer. We encourage India to have an open and welcoming environment to foreign investment including investment from the United States. We are always looking for new ways to support U.S. businesses overseas and facilitate opportunities 

for investment that India needs to support its development goals, particularly in 

infrastructure. Though businesses interested in investing in India do face some challenges, we are encouraged by the Indian Government’s intention to liberalize investment into some sectors, including retail. One mechanism we have to directly advance the ability for U.S. companies to do business or have a level playing field 

when they invest in India is continued negotiations on and completion of a bilateral 

investment treaty (BIT). A BIT would deepen our economic relationship with India 

and provide important protections to investors of each country. If confirmed, I will 

encourage India to continue making progress on economic liberalization, which supports jobs and growth in both our countries.

Question. We have had on-and-off negotiations with India on a bilateral investment treaty. How would completion of such a treaty advance the ability of U.S. companies and enterprises to invest in India?

Answer. We had very positive Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) technical discussions with our Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Commerce counterparts last 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

61

October, and are looking forward to the next round of discussions being scheduled 

for this spring. High-standard BITs like that which we hope to conclude with India 

can encourage investment by improving investment climates, promoting economic 

reforms, and strengthening the rule of law. Completion of the BIT could provide investors in India and the United States increased market access; protections that 

guard against discriminatory, arbitrary, or otherwise harmful treatment of investments; and legal remedies for breaches of the treaty. If confirmed, I will encourage 

continued, robust engagement to work together to conclude a BIT that will support 

our efforts to promote economic growth and job creation, and to advance our strategic engagement with India.

Question. In India there is a large community of exiled Tibetans, led by the Dalai 

Lama and the new democratically elected Kalon Tripa (whom the Tibetans refer to 

as their Prime Minister), which has been hosted by the Indian Government for 

many years and which receives some funding from the United States. Will you include this programmatic assistance in your oversight of U.S. programs in India, and 

will you meet with His Holiness Dalai Lama and the Kalon Tripa to discuss issues 

of mutual concern?

Answer. We appreciate the fact that India for many years has provided a welcome 

reception for refugees from Tibet. The State Department, through the Bureau of 

Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), oversees U.S. assistance to the Tibetan 

refugee population in India and Nepal. In India, support has centered around humanitarian assistance for Tibetan refugees in the area of new refugee arrivals, 

health, and education. PRM also funds two Tibetan Refugee Reception Centers in 

New Delhi, and Dharamsala, as well as a transit center in Kathmandu, through 

regular contributions to the Tibet Fund ($2.3 million in FY11). The USG is in the 

process of increasing support for Tibetan settlements in India and Nepal through 

a USAID-funded grant to support organic agriculture and livelihood development. 

The U.S. mission to India supports the Tibetan Scholarship Program through a congressionally mandated grant to the Tibet Fund. Mission India has been and will remain involved in supporting this assistance. 

Like previous Ambassadors to India, if confirmed, I plan to continue the tradition 

of engagement on Tibetan refugee issues, including meeting with His Holiness, the 

Dalai Lama, as an internationally recognized religious leader and Nobel Laureate, 

and recipient of the Congressional Gold Medal.

Question. What high-level exchanges have occurred between our governments regarding the status of liability protections for U.S. nuclear exporters to India? What 

further steps would you suggest to encourage greater cooperation on this issue? And 

more broadly, what is current state of our energy dialogue with New Delhi?

Answer. Completing our civil nuclear cooperation partnership is central to both 

our nations’ long-term prosperity and India’s future energy security. Senior executive branch officials from State, Energy, Commerce, and the White House have 

raised our concerns with their counterparts in the Indian Government over the past 

year. Prime Minister Singh agreed last November to host a delegation of U.S. officials and private companies to discuss our concerns and to find a way ahead ‘‘within 

the four corners’’ of Indian law. We heard clearly in this first meeting India’s commitment to ensuring a level playing field for U.S. companies, which was reiterated 

during Foreign Secretary Mathai’s early-February visit to Washington. Our companies are interested in continuing our discussions on liability as well as in making 

tangible progress on commercial arrangements this year. If confirmed, I will continue our engagement at all levels on this matter—political, legal, and commercial—

and believe we will make measurable progress this year. 

RESPONSES OF HON. NANCY J. POWELL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY

SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. Although international conventions place liability for nuclear accidents 

solely with the operators of nuclear reactors, current Indian law would also make 

suppliers potentially liable. American companies like Westinghouse that wish to 

provide peaceful nuclear technology to India could be held at unreasonable liability 

levels, and maintain that they can not bid on Indian nuclear contracts until the liability law is changed. Meanwhile, French and Russian companies, which might not 

have the same reservations with respect to the liability law, are aggressively pursuing this market.

• Based on the United States assessment of the Indian political situation, how 

possible is a change in Indian liability law? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

62

• As Ambassador, what specific steps will you take to ensure that U.S. companies 

are able to compete for this critical market?

Answer. Completing our civil nuclear cooperation partnership is central to both 

our nations’ long-term prosperity and India’s future energy security. Senior executive branch officials from State, Energy, Commerce, and the White House have 

raised our concerns with their counterparts in the Indian Government over the past 

year. Prime Minister Singh agreed last November to host a delegation of U.S. officials and private companies to discuss our civil nuclear cooperation and to find a 

way ahead ‘‘within the four corners’’ of Indian law. We heard clearly in the first 

meeting of this group India’s commitment to ensuring a level playing field for U.S. 

companies. Indian Foreign Secretary Mathai reiterated this during his earlyFebruary visit to Washington, declaring at Center for Strategic and International 

Studies, that American firms will be provided a level playing field, and the Indian 

Government is prepared to address specific concerns within the framework of the 

law. We have remained engaged and must now take practical steps to advance our 

cooperation with Foreign Secretary Mathai. Our companies are interested in continuing our discussions on liability as well as in making tangible progress on commercial arrangements this year. If confirmed, I will continue our engagement at all 

levels on this matter—political, legal, and commercial.

Question. Despite mounting international support for isolating the Iranian regime, 

India continues to not cooperate fully in sanctioning Iran. While it has taken steps 

to diminish its financial and energy ties with Iran, it continues to do a limited 

amount of business with the country.

• What is the United States doing to translate India’s stated opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran into concrete action aimed at preventing the regime’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon? 

• As Ambassador, how will you work to increase India’s commitment to isolating 

the Iranian regime? What specific steps will you encourage India to undertake 

in the near term to demonstrate this commitment?

Answer. India is very cognizant of the significant regional implications that would 

result from Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon, and Prime Minister Singh has stated 

on multiple occasions that an Iranian nuclear weapons program would be unacceptable to India. Moreover, India has voted four times with the United States in the 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors on Iran’s nuclear 

program and consistently has called on Iran to fulfill its international obligations 

as a nonnuclear weapon state under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and comply with EU and UNSC resolutions. If confirmed, I will work closely with my counterparts in India to ensure that our governments continue to send a strong message 

to Iran that its behavior is unacceptable and carries serious consequences. Already, 

Indian companies have, to the best of our knowledge, ceased activities such as selling refined petroleum products to Iran. However, Iranian oil continues to represent 

a significant—though steadily declining—share of Indian oil imports. If confirmed, 

I want to work closely with Indian officials to identify and encourage alternative 

sources of imported oil that also will help to ensure India’s energy security for the 

future.

Question. Despite the high demand for physicians in many areas of the United 

States, Indian physicians have encountered difficulty in obtaining their J–1 visas to 

enter the United States. Hospitals in underserved areas of Pennsylvania have benefited greatly from their experience with visiting Indian physicians, but undue delays 

in issuing visas have prevented some physicians from entering the country.

• What steps is the United States taking to improve the efficiency of the J–1 visa 

process for foreign physicians, particularly those with agreements to work in 

Medically Underserved Areas? 

• As Ambassador, how will you work to ensure that Indian physicians with the 

required licenses and certificates are able to obtain visas and enter the United 

States in a timely manner?

Answer. Upon completion of a J–1 medical residency program sponsored by Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates, many physician applicants who 

wish to adjust to an H–1B status in order to work in a U.S. hospital must obtain 

a waiver of the 2-year residency requirement required by INA 212(e). Once an applicant completes the J–1 waiver application adjudication process with the Waiver 

Review Division, it forwards any favorable recommendations to U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services (USCIS), which has the authority to grant waivers. The 

Department is committed to completing these decisions within 4 to 6 weeks, so that 

applicants can receive a timely decision from USCIS. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

63

Currently, Consular Team India works diligently to facilitate all legitimate travel 

to the United States. We have not experienced any significant delays in issuing

J–1 visas to Indian physicians with the appropriate licenses, certificates, and documents. We anticipate strong future growth in visa demand in India and will continue to focus on leveraging our resources and expertise to maintain our short 

appointment wait times, currently less than 10 days across the country, and efficient handling, with 97 percent of cases processed by the next business day. 

Although we recommend that everyone apply early, any visa applicant who urgently 

needs to travel can request an expedited visa appointment. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(65)

NOMINATIONS OF FREDERICK D. BARTON, 

WILLIAM E. TODD, AND SARA MARGLIT AVIEL 

TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Frederick D. Barton, of Maine, to be an Assistant Secretary 

of State (Conflict and Stabilization Operations) and to be Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization 

Hon. William E. Todd, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Cambodia 

Sara Margalit Aviel, of California, to be United States Alternate 

Executive Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Tom Udall presiding. 

Present: Senators Udall and Corker. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will 

now come to order. 

Let me welcome our nominees who are here this morning: the 

Honorable Frederick D. Barton, of Maine, to be Assistant Secretary 

of State for Conflict and Stabilization Operations and also the 

Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization; the Honorable 

William E. Todd, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of 

Cambodia; and Ms. Sara Aviel, of California, to be the United 

States Alternate Executive Director of the International Bank for 

Reconstruction and Development. 

We meet this morning to consider these three nominations, 

which are important to achieving the smart power goals of the 

United States—Ambassador Frederick Barton to be Assistant Secretary of Conflict and Stabilization, as I have said, and the Honorable William Todd and Mrs. Sara Aviel. All of these nominees play 

a crucial role in promoting the smart power of the United States. 

In 2009, Joseph S. Nye Jr., a Harvard professor, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security and a former 

chair of the National Intelligence Council, wrote a piece in Foreign 

Affairs titled, ‘‘Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power.’’ In 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

66

this piece, he began with a statement by Secretary of State Hillary 

Clinton, who, at her confirmation hearing, stated: ‘‘America cannot 

solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot 

solve them without America. We must use what has been called 

smart power, the full range of tools at our disposal.’’

Joseph Nye Jr. would conclude in his piece that, ‘‘The United 

States can become a smart power by once again investing in global 

public goods, providing things that people and governments in all 

quarters of the world want but cannot attain on their own. Achieving economic development, securing public health, coping with climate change, and maintaining an open, stable international economic system all require leadership from the United States. 

‘‘By complementing its military and economic might with greater 

investments in its soft power, the United States can rebuild the 

framework it needs to tackle tough global challenges. That would 

be true smart power.’’ And he ended there. 

The three nominees we are considering today will all serve, if 

confirmed, at the front lines of smart power for the United States. 

Since the earliest days of our republic, our Ambassadors have 

served at the tip of the spear of our diplomatic mission, using 

smart power when it was simply known as diplomacy. 

Our Ambassador to Cambodia will continue the long legacy of 

past Ambassadors to the region. The formation of the International 

Bank for Reconstruction and Development was one of the early 

tools the United States employed immediately after World War II 

to help promote stability and development across the globe. 

The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development has 

been responsible for fostering economic development and stability 

in developing countries, improving lives, and working to prevent 

conflict through economic development before it occurs. The Alternate Executive Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development plays a key role in tackling the World 

Bank’s development goals. 

And today, we will also consider the nominee to fill a new position, the Assistant Secretary of State for Conflict Stabilization 

Operations and Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization. 

These new positions present many opportunities to improve coordination between agencies from within the State Department to 

respond to conflicts and prevent them from occurring. 

So we welcome our nominees today, and as I am going to—if Senator Corker wants to make any opening, or we can go directly to 

your statements. Feel free to introduce family members that are 

here and any description you have of them. I know some of you 

have some family members that have some history either with the 

Department or service overseas. And we very much appreciate the 

sacrifice we know that the entire family makes in these kinds of 

positions. 

And with that, Senator Corker, if you want to say a few words, 

welcoming, and then we will proceed to the witnesses. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BOB CORKER,

U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE 

Senator CORKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

67

The chairman knows I don’t make a lot of opening statements. 

But we welcome each of you and certainly your families. Sometimes 

the families can have greater impact than the nominees. But we 

thank you all. 

I know that Ms. Aviel has been in our office several times since 

last fall. I may not stay for a lot of questioning after your original 

testimony, but we will follow up with other questions. 

But we thank all of you for your willingness to serve in this way 

and coming before us today, and I look forward to your statements. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

And please, your full statement will be in the record. So we’re 

asking you to just address the committee for 5 minutes at this 

point. And why don’t we start with Mr. Barton? 

STATEMENT OF HON. FREDERICK D. BARTON, OF MAINE, TO 

BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, CONFLICT AND 

STABILIZATION OPERATIONS, AND TO BE COORDINATOR 

FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND STABILIZATION 

Ambassador BARTON. Great. Thank you very much, Senator 

Udall. Thank you, Senator Corker. It is great to be here today. 

I would also like to give a special thanks to your colleagues, Senator Kerry and Senator Lugar, for their path-breaking work in this 

conflict and crisis space. They have been pushing for us to do what 

we are trying to do right now for a number of years, and happy 

to have this opportunity, if confirmed. 

I would also like to thank the SFRC staff. They have been working this issue for as long as I have been around, and would to say 

that since my father was on this staff many, many years ago, it is 

great to be back in this place. I think he might be making it here, 

but he is 91, and sometimes he will move at his own pace, I find. 

But he is an old friend of Bertie’s and others. And so, it really does 

feel good to be back here. 

My deepest thanks to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for 

giving me this opportunity and, obviously, to Ambassador Rice for 

having called upon me to serve in New York. 

Mine is a lifelong commitment to public service, and the advancement of peaceful democratic change is what I have been trying to 

do for the last 18 years. Obviously, much of that foundation is built 

on the service of my parents, and it has been reinforced by my wife, 

Kit Lunney, who is here, and our daughter, Kacy, who is serving 

the public in her own way as well. 

So it is great to have everybody here today. I have heard ‘‘break 

a leg’’ more often in the last 24 hours than I have probably in the 

rest of my life, so. 

Senators, you have my written testimony. So what I would like 

to do is just bring together three of the elements of the testimony. 

First, today’s conflicts and crises present fresh challenges. 

Whether it is popular revolts, economic collapses, threats without 

borders, or hyperemergencies where a combination of factors come 

together, we are being challenged in a very different way. The 

United States will continue to play a pivotal, if not a dominant 

role, and we must be more ready. 

To be more effective, we have to especially expand in the area 

of local ownership. And CSO can help by making sure that the U.S. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

68

Government model is built off of an analysis that is driven by local 

voices. Second, that has to lead into an integrated strategy with 

really clear priorities, two or three priorities. And then the 

resources that the U.S. Government has have to be driven at those 

particular elements. 

We can’t be all over the place. We have to answer the question 

‘‘What is most needed?’’ rather than ‘‘What can the United States 

do?’’

And third, I believe that CSO’s success in the coming year is 

going to be determined by two key elements. Whether we will have 

a real impact in two to three places of significance to the United 

States, and will we be able to build a trusted and respected team? 

If confirmed, that will be my intent, and I will make sure that 

our relationship with the Congress is open and responsive in every 

way. 

Thank you again for this honor. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Barton follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FREDERICK D. BARTON

Chairman Udall, Senator Corker, and members of the committee, it is an honor 

to appear before you today. Thank you for your support in creating the Bureau of 

Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO), and to President Obama and Secretary 

of State Clinton for giving me this opportunity. Public service is a family commitment, and I am grateful to my wife, Kit Lunney; our daughter, Kacy; my late 

mother, Nancy; and my father, Bob, who served this committee at the end of his 

career, for their encouragement. 

The State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review 

(QDDR) concluded that ‘‘we must be faster, more innovative, and more effective 

than [the] forces of instability and we must be flexible enough to adapt to rapid 

changes that occur in conflict.’’ To strengthen our coherence and cohesion in preventing and responding to conflict and crisis, Secretary Clinton established CSO. 

Its mission is to prevent countries’ descent into crisis and speed their emergence 

from conflict, thereby contributing to a more peaceful, just world. If we succeed, our 

investments will save the lives of both local civilians and Americans. Our work will 

also save money by avoiding expensive military interventions, and help produce 

resilient societies that contribute to the global economy. 

CSO will build on the valuable conflict-related work of its predecessor, the Office 

of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/CRS), and other parts of 

the U.S. Government. This work has ranged from helping to facilitate South Sudan’s 

referendum on independence to supporting efforts to stamp out the Lord’s Resistance Army, from working to allay ethnic violence in the Kyrgyz Republic to helping 

the Transitional National Council take charge in Libya. CSO is now looking at engagements on Kenya, Burma, Syria, and northern Central America. 

In its engagements, the Bureau first asks: ‘‘What is most needed?’’ And then: 

‘‘What can the U.S. do?’’ Too often in conflict we begin by deploying costly tools regardless of whether they are right for the situation. Critically, solutions must be 

driven by local dynamics and actors. As Secretary Clinton has said, our job is to 

‘‘work to make sure a government’s first obligation is to its own people.’’ 

CSO will improve our effectiveness by driving a rigorous four-step engagement 

process. We must start with an inclusive, joint, independent analysis, driven by 

local voices and avoiding predetermined answers. Second, that analysis should lead 

to a strategy that identifies a few main priorities. Third, resources—funding and 

personnel—should be directed to address these priorities, consistent with U.S. interests and capacity. And finally, the process must include ongoing, transparent measurement, evaluation, and adaptation. That includes applying lessons that we have 

learned in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. 

We must partner with those who will make us most effective, building inclusive 

teams from the start, making timely decisions, and ensuring we are all moving in 

the same direction. CSO works with its sister bureaus in the Undersecretariat for 

Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights, and depends on close partnerships with USAID, the Department of Defense, and others. It goes without saying 

that CSO must act as an accessible and responsive partner with Congress. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

69

As I met with more than 200 stakeholders in the Department, on the Hill, and 

elsewhere, I learned that CSO faces real pressure to prove itself. If confirmed, I will 

focus on three goals for the next year: Bring high-impact engagements to a few strategic places where targeted prevention and response can be most effective; add innovation and agility to the approaches we use; and build a respected team and trusted 

partnerships. 

CSO is already expanding its ability to deploy while shrinking its overhead, simplifying its structure, consolidating offices, targeting efforts on key countries, and 

building a stronger leadership cadre in the Civilian Response Corps. The Corps is 

becoming more flexible and conflict-focused. 

In the last 10 years, we have learned the hard lesson that conflict in even the 

most remote state can have a serious impact on our national security. In over 17 

years of work in more than 30 of the world’s most unstable places, I have seen that 

nothing is more wasteful to human potential than violent conflict. If confirmed, I 

will bring to the job my personal dedication to help the United States expand the 

course of peaceful, democratic progress for people around the world and ensure our 

security here at home. Many lives—within and beyond our borders—depend on a 

more timely, efficient, and organized response. 

Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

Senator UDALL. Mr. Todd, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM E. TODD, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA 

Ambassador TODD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator Corker. 

Before I get started, I would like to introduce my wife, Ann. She 

has been the inspiration throughout this entire process. She is 

probably happier about this day than I am, getting it over. 

I would also like to introduce the heroes in my life, my parents, 

Jack and Marie Todd. My dad was a combat helicopter pilot. He 

served two tours in Vietnam, won the Silver Star. And my mother 

was a career Federal employee. And they basically gave me the 

commitment to Federal service. So, thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Great to have you here. 

Ambassador TODD. I will also try to be brief, but it will be a little 

longer than my colleague. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am deeply honored to come before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be 

the next American Ambassador to the Kingdom of Cambodia. I 

want to thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their 

confidence in nominating me for this position. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the kind words on my background. 

For the sake of time, I will just highlight my last two assignments. 

As you mentioned, in 2008, I was confirmed as U.S. Ambassador 

to Brunei, where I proudly promoted democracy, human rights, and 

religious freedom and worked with Brunei to become a more active 

player in APEC, ASEAN, and as a contributor to regional security. 

I am excited by the opportunity to give back to the region, if 

confirmed. 

In 2011, I finished a 1-year tour in Afghanistan as Coordinator 

of Development and Economic Affairs. In that capacity, I was 

responsible for overseeing a $4 billion development program, managing over 600 Americans, and running the mission’s regional and 

provincial civilian operations. It was the most challenging, but 

rewarding job I have had in my career, and I would happily do it 

again if asked. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

70

Mr. Chairman, I believe these past assignments, as well as the 

variety of other positions I have held in the Federal Government 

over the past 25 years, provide me with the skill set that will effectively advance our interests in Cambodia. 

Cambodia’s modern history is one marked by tragedy, conflict, 

and survival. Today, however, we see a Cambodia that is refusing 

to let its past dictate its future and is looking to that future with 

a new sense of confidence and optimism. 

Cambodia’s economy is one of the fastest-growing economies in 

Asia. That growth has created thousands of new jobs. The Khmer 

Rouge tribunal secured its first conviction in 2010, and the trial of 

case No. 2 is underway, bringing to justice the people who caused 

so much pain and suffering. 

The HIV infection rate has been reduced by two-thirds. 

Death and injuries caused by unexploded ordnances have been 

reduced by almost 75 percent, and roads that were once impassable 

have been demined and rebuilt. And Cambodia has been a model 

partner in our efforts to achieve the fullest possible accounting of 

American servicemen missing from the Indochina war. 

These successes have been transformative, but much work 

remains, particularly in the areas of rule of law, democratic institutions, human rights, combating human trafficking, and corruption. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I assure you that I will continue to 

take each of these issues head on and will take the lead in advancing the causes of freedom, democracy, rule of law, and respect for 

human dignity. 

Mr. Chairman, I would also like to highlight two additional 

issues that I will focus my efforts on, if confirmed. First, as you 

know, Cambodia is the ASEAN chair this year. As the United 

States pivots toward the Asia-Pacific and deepens its engagement, 

we will look to ASEAN to play a crucial role in maintaining and 

promoting regional peace and security, coordinating humanitarian 

assistance and disaster relief, and fulfilling the region’s promise for 

democracy, respect for human rights. I see the chairmanship as an 

opportunity for the United States to partner with Cambodia, helping where we can and addressing together challenges when they 

arise. 

Second is the Lower Mekong Initiative, which is designed to increase cooperation within the subregion for those who live, work, 

rely on the Mekong. I believe that as ASEAN chair, Cambodia can 

help push this initiative forward by promoting cooperation on the 

environment, education, health, and infrastructure in order to 

make the region more peaceful, prosperous, and secure. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, if confirmed, I will dedicate all of my energy and experience to advance 

United States foreign policy objectives in Cambodia and to 

strengthen the relationship between our two great countries. I look 

forward to working with you, this committee, and any interested 

Members of Congress to advance our shared interests in Cambodia. 

I would be happy to answer any of your questions. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Todd follows:]

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

71

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM E. TODD

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am deeply honored to appear 

before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the Ambassador of the United 

States to the Kingdom of Cambodia. I want to thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have shown in me by nominating me for this 

position. If confirmed, I will work closely with this committee and other interested 

Members of Congress to advance U.S. interests in Cambodia. 

Cambodia’s history is marked by tragedy, conflict, and survival. Today, however, 

we see a modern Cambodia that refuses to let its past dictate its future. Although 

Cambodia is still recovering from three decades of strife and war, including the 

atrocities of the Khmer Rouge era, there are a number of good reasons that Cambodia is imbued with a new sense of confidence and optimism. Cambodia boasts one 

of the fastest growing economies in Asia over the past decade, and it is reforming 

and attempting to improve its business and foreign investment climate. The Khmer 

Rouge Tribunal, which the United States has supported since its inception in 2006, 

secured its first conviction in 2010 and the trial of the surviving leaders of the 

Khmer Rouge is underway. These trials are important for accountability and national healing. Cambodia has also started to combat human trafficking, and its 

cooperation with the international community to combat terrorism is to be commended. Local and national elections in 2012 and 2013, respectively, offer an opportunity for Cambodia to renew its commitment to multiparty democracy. In these 

ways, the Cambodian people are seeking justice to close the darkest chapter of their 

recent history and build a new era of greater prosperity and more capable government and democratic institutions—and for that I believe they deserve our support. 

Nevertheless, despite the many significant accomplishments of the past 20 years, 

Cambodia’s development remains a work in progress. Notwithstanding its strong 

record of economic growth, Cambodia is among the poorest countries in the world. 

Weak rule of law inhibits progress and threatens the promise of inclusive development. In addition, every year, hundreds of men, women, and children are killed or 

maimed by unexploded ordnance left behind as remnants of war. Food security and 

adapting to global climate change represent emerging challenges for the country. 

Most significantly, Cambodia’s democratic transition is still unfolding. Although civil 

society and public media have made important gains in achieving political space and 

greater freedoms, much work still needs to be done to strengthen Cambodia’s rule 

of law, democratic institutions, and respect for human rights. 

U.S. engagement in Cambodia has made—and can continue to make—a real and 

lasting difference. Since the United States reestablished relations with Cambodia in 

1993, we have served as a buttress of support for democratic development and the 

protection of human rights. Cambodia’s civil society now flourishes due to the 

strength and dedication of Cambodians willing to take action to accomplish extraordinary things. The United States is proud to stand by them and provide our support. If confirmed, I will ensure that we continue to take the lead in advancing the 

causes of freedom, democratic governance, the rule of law, and respect for human 

dignity. 

In addition to encouraging a more democratic Cambodia, our bilateral engagement 

is fostering change in other ways as well. Our military-to-military ties assist the 

Cambodian Armed Forces in their own efforts to professionalize, adhere to international human rights norms, and contribute to regional and global peace and stability. U.S. economic engagement helps open doors to increased U.S. investment and 

trade—something I believe will be a positive driver of change and development in 

Cambodia. Finally, the United States has been intimately involved in improving the 

health and livelihoods of Cambodians. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to deepen 

our relationship with Cambodia in order to achieve greater progress on these and 

many other bilateral objectives. 

U.S. engagement with Cambodia is increasingly focused on regional objectives. 

Like the rest of Asia, Cambodia has welcomed an increased U.S. commitment to the 

region and seeks to strengthen its ties to the United States in order to secure its 

own future. Over the course of this year, Cambodia is serving as Chair of the 

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), an important collective that has 

a population of half a billion people and is already the United States fourth-largest 

trading partner. The United States has made clear that as we deepen our engagement with the Asia-Pacific region, we will look to ASEAN as a valued partner in 

maintaining and promoting regional peace and security, committing to intraregional 

coordination on disasters and humanitarian crises, fulfilling the region’s promise for 

democracy and respect for human rights, and creating economic opportunities for 

U.S. business in order to increase exports and create jobs here in the United States. 

As ASEAN Chair, Cambodia can demonstrate regional leadership on these and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

72

other critical issues in the ASEAN Regional Forum and East Asia summit. In addition, the Secretary of State’s Lower Mekong Initiative is fostering cooperation and 

building capacity on the ‘‘connective tissue’’ of the subregion—especially education, 

public health, and the environment. We welcome Cambodia’s partnership in this 

multicountry initiative and its efforts to make the region more prosperous, secure, 

and peaceful. 

Mr. Chairman, I believe the broad range of experience I have gained during my 

28-year career in public service will assist me in further advancing our goals with 

the Kingdom of Cambodia. I have been in the Senior Executive Service for over 14 

years and have had the privilege of managing a number of the Department’s most 

important and complex programs. Recently, I finished a 1-year assignment in 

Afghanistan, where I was Coordinator of Development and Economic Affairs. I was 

responsible for overseeing a $4 billion development program, managing 600 Americans, and running the mission’s regional and provincial civilian operations. It was 

the most challenging and rewarding job I have had in my career and I would happily do it again if asked. 

From 2008 to 2010, I served as the U.S. Ambassador to Brunei, where I proudly 

promoted democracy, human rights, and religious freedom initiatives. As Ambassador, I worked closely with Brunei to help it play a more active role in the AsiaPacific Economic Cooperation forum, in ASEAN, and as a contributor to regional 

security. 

Prior to serving in Brunei, I held several senior positions in the State Department, including Acting Inspector General. In the Bureau of International Narcotics 

and Law Enforcement, I directed global operations and spearheaded anticrime, 

counternarcotics, and antiterrorism programs, as well as initiatives to strengthen 

rule-of-law capabilities and institutions all over the world, including Southeast Asia. 

During the mid-1990s, I helped develop and implement the Big and Emerging Market Strategy for the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service, which expanded U.S. exports to countries like China, and opened U.S. Commercial Centers overseas, including three in Asia. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will dedicate all of my energy and experience to 

advance U.S. foreign policy objectives in Cambodia and strengthen the relationship 

between our two countries. 

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to appear before you. I would be happy 

to answer any questions you may have.

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

And Ms. Aviel, please. 

STATEMENT OF SARA MARGALIT AVIEL, OF CALIFORNIA, TO 

BE UNITED STATES ALTERNATE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF 

THE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND 

DEVELOPMENT 

Ms. AVIEL. Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Corker, thank you 

for the opportunity to appear before you today. 

It is an honor to have been nominated by the President to serve 

as the Alternate Executive Director at the World Bank. I am extremely grateful to Secretary Geithner, Under Secretary Brainard, 

and U.S. Executive Director Ian Solomon for their support. 

I also want to thank you and your staffs for taking the time to 

meet with me. If confirmed, I look forward to advancing our shared 

commitment of making the World Bank a more effective and 

accountable organization. 

I was blessed to grow up with parents who ingrained in me a 

deep respect for other cultures and traditions. For my mother, who 

is here with me today, as a professor of international relations, this 

was her life’s work. And for me, that meant trips that often 

included meetings with government and civil society officials and 

lessons about local history and politics. 

At the same time, my parents instilled in me a deep appreciation 

for my country and the tremendous opportunities, privileges, and 

responsibilities that come with being an American. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

73

For my father, it was particularly personal. As a Holocaust survivor, his childhood was one of horrific deprivation and suffering 

that is hard for me to even imagine. So when he told me that just 

by being born in this country was like winning the lottery, I 

believed him. 

So to now come before you with the opportunity to represent this 

great country at the World Bank, an institution formed in the wake 

of that dreadful war, is a particular honor for me. 

American leaders helped create the World Bank in the recognition that a multilateral institution would advance our smart power. 

In a time of high unemployment and tight fiscal constraints at 

home, the importance of the World Bank may not always be readily 

apparent. 

Yet my experience in the administration, both in my current role 

as Director of International Economic Affairs at the National Security Council and National Economic Council and previously as a 

senior adviser to Secretary Geithner, has reaffirmed the belief that 

support of the World Bank is a moral, strategic, and economic imperative for our country and that U.S. leadership at the institution 

is essential. 

The World Bank has played a central role in promoting open 

economies that become growing export markets for American companies. During the global financial crisis, the World Bank acted 

quickly, dramatically increasing lending to help protect the poorest 

from the worst impacts of the crisis and to restore liquidity for 

world trade flows. 

As we grapple with how best to support transitions in places 

where we have important interests at stake, like Afghanistan and 

the Middle East, we find ourselves turning again and again to 

institutions like the World Bank. Strong American leadership is 

essential. I have seen firsthand how often we are the driving force 

for action. 

Before joining the administration, my career was focused on 

international development. From war widows in Afghanistan to 

AIDS orphans in Zambia, I have worked with the world’s most vulnerable people and experienced the successes and challenges of 

development firsthand. 

As President Obama has said, broad-based economic growth is 

the most powerful force the world has ever known for eradicating 

poverty and creating opportunity. That understanding led me to 

make leveraging the private sector a focus of my work. Prior to 

joining the Treasury Department, I served on the leadership team 

of a social investment fund that provided financing to small and 

medium enterprises in developing countries. 

Another theme that cuts across much of my experience is the 

need to demonstrate impact and improve effectiveness through rigorous evaluations of projects and sharing of best practices. As a 

lecturer at Yale University, I brought these experiences into the 

classroom as I taught my students to look beyond the latest 

development trends to the enormous complexity of implementation 

in challenging environments. 

If confirmed, I will work diligently to advance U.S. objectives at 

the World Bank by serving as a careful steward of U.S. taxpayer 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

74

resources and promoting greater accountability, transparency, and 

effectiveness. 

I have learned invaluable lessons from being a part of international diplomacy and policy at the highest levels of the U.S. Government. And those lessons, combined with the hard-earned experiences of working in some of the most complex settings, will make 

me an effective representative and advocate for U.S. interests at 

the World Bank. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the members 

of this committee and your staff. I have seen firsthand how congressional involvement can provide leverage to U.S. negotiators, 

and I will seek ways to partner together on behalf of the American 

people. 

Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to any 

questions you might have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Aviel follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SARA MARGALIT AVIEL

Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Corker, members of the committee, thank you 

for the opportunity to appear before you today. 

It is an honor to have been nominated by the President to serve as the Alternate 

Executive Director at the World Bank. I am extremely grateful to Secretary 

Geithner, Under Secretary Brainard, and the U.S. Executive Director, Ian Solomon, 

for their support. 

I also want to thank you and your staffs for taking the time to meet with me. 

If confirmed, I look forward to advancing our shared commitment of making the 

World Bank a more effective and accountable organization. 

I was blessed to grow up with parents who ingrained in me a deep respect for 

other cultures and traditions. For my mother, as a professor of international relations, this was her life’s work. And for me, that meant trips that often included 

meetings with government and civil societyofficials and lessons about local history 

and politics. 

At the same time, my parents instilled in me a deep appreciation for my country 

and the tremendous privileges, opportunities, and responsibilities that come with 

being an American. For my father it was particularly personal. As a Holocaust survivor, his childhood was one of horrific deprivation and suffering that is hard for 

me to even imagine. So when he told me that just by being born in this country 

was like winning the lottery, I believed him. 

So, to now come before you with the opportunity to represent this great country 

at the World Bank—an institution formed in the wake of that dreadful war—is a 

particular honor for me. 

American leaders helped create the World Bank in the recognition that a multilateral institution focused on reconstruction and development would advance our strategic and economic interests and moral values. In a time of high unemployment and 

tight fiscal constraints at home, the importance of the World Bank may not always 

be readily apparent. 

Yet my experience in the administration—both in my current role as a Director 

of International Economic Affairs at the National Security Council and the National 

Economic Council, and previously as a Senior Advisor to Secretary Geithner—has 

reaffirmed the belief that support of the World Bank is a moral, strategic, and 

economic imperative for our country and that U.S. leadership at the institution is 

essential. 

The World Bank has played a central role in promoting open economies that become growing export markets for American companies. During the global financial 

crisis, the World Bank acted quickly, dramatically increasing lending to help protect 

the poorest from the worst impacts of the crisis and to restore liquidity for world 

trade flows. 

As we grapple with how best to support transitions in places where we have important interests at stake like Afghanistan and the Middle East and North Africa, 

we find ourselves turning again and again to institutions like the World Bank. 

Strong American leadership is essential. I have seen firsthand how often we are 

the driving force for action, forging consensus in the midst of seemingly intractable 

international disputes. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

75

Before joining the administration, my career was focused on international development. From war widows in Afghanistan to AIDS orphans in Zambia, I have 

worked with the world’s most vulnerable people and experienced the successes and 

challenges of development firsthand. 

As President Obama has said, broad-based economic growth is the most powerful 

force the world has ever known for eradicating poverty and creating opportunity. 

That understanding led me to make leveraging the private sector a focus of my 

work. Prior to working at the Treasury Department, I served on the leadership team 

of a social investment fund that provided financing to small and medium enterprises 

in developing countries. 

One theme that cuts across much of my experience is the need to demonstrate 

impact and improve effectiveness through rigorous evaluations of projects and sharing of best practices. As a lecturer at Yale University, I brought these experiences 

into the classroom as I taught my students to look beyond the latest development 

trends to the enormous complexity of implementation in challenging environments. 

If confirmed, I will work diligently to advance U.S. objectives at the World Bank 

by serving as a careful steward of U.S. taxpayer resources and promoting greater 

accountability, transparency, and effectiveness. 

I have learned invaluable lessons from being a part of international diplomacy 

and policy at the highest levels of the U.S. Government. Those lessons, combined 

with the hard-earned experiences working in some of the most complex settings, will 

make me an effective representative and advocate for U.S. interests at the World 

Bank. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the members of this committee and your staff. I have seen firsthand how congressional involvement can provide leverage to U.S. negotiators and I will seek ways to partner together to advance 

our shared goals on behalf of the American people.

Senator UDALL. Thank you for your testimony, all of you. 

And Ambassador Barton, as—oh, OK. Here, Ambassador Barton, 

is this your father who has just arrived here? Please, OK. 

Yes, I believe Ambassador Barton’s father used to work for the 

committee and knows the gentleman here that helps us every day 

keep the committee rolling along. 

Thank you. Great to have you here today. Great to have you 

here. 

I am just about ready to start firing a question at your son. So 

you arrived right in time. [Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. Arrived right in time. 

Ambassador Barton, what role, if any, do you foresee for the CSO 

Bureau in complementing the work of the recently created Office 

of the Special Coordinator for Middle East Transitions, and how 

can USAID workers effectively assist countries in transition, given 

the enormous political, economic, and security challenges Arab 

States are currently facing? 

In what fields could the U.S. Conflict and Stabilization Operations make the most difference, and would Arab States even 

accept this kind of aid? 

Please. 

Ambassador BARTON. Well, first off, in my various meetings that 

I have been going around and having, Bill Taylor was one of the 

first people that I met with. And he is one of those people that I 

feel if we can’t work with him, we have no future in the State 

Department. He is just a first-rate public servant, and he is focused 

mostly on North Africa right now, and we are definitely working 

with him on—the CSO Bureau has already started to work with 

him on Libya in particular of the countries that he is working in. 

All of these places are so tough and so complicated that anybody 

who doesn’t look for friends and partners within the U.S. Government is making a very big mistake. And so, I would hope that our 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

76

Bureau, and if confirmed, under my leadership would fashion a 

pretty high degree of modesty in terms of both the challenges of 

these places and recognizing that we have to work closely with 

others. 

So we have already had extensive meetings with AID. As you 

know, I worked there. I helped to start the Office of Transition Initiatives, which is, I think, thought of as one of the really agile 

parts of the U.S. Government in these places. 

We need more assets and resources that are directed the way 

that OTI does it. So they are going to be a key partner as well. 

So then, in terms of the welcome, CSO is looking at three particular country cases right now in the Arab Spring world. We are 

trying to work in Libya. We are hoping CSO also has people working on Syria and on Yemen. And each one of those cases is so dramatically different. 

In Syria, we really cannot—CSO cannot work inside of the country. So it is all about how do you help to grow the opposition from 

within? And I know that a couple of CSO people have already—

last week were meeting with about 25 representatives of local 

governing councils inside of Syria, trying to figure out ways to 

strengthen that relationship. And I think that is the way to move 

in that space. 

Libya is a very different challenge because the U.S. Government 

is there. We have an Embassy. We have a mission. The CSO is 

already backing up the existing post operation there. 

But we are also being asked, CSO is also being asked to really 

address the border security issues and the militia issues, and those 

are the kinds of strategic concerns that I hope that the CSO will 

continue to be focused on. 

Yemen, again, is a very different case—much, much more fragile. 

Much, much more in transition with its new government. And in 

that case, CSO has been asked by the national security staff to 

work on the strategic planning process, which is really underway 

right now. 

So that gives you an idea of sort of the way we would go. I think 

we will—the United States help is welcome in most of these places, 

as long as it is not too heavy a hand and we don’t take over. And 

there is no reason to take over because we don’t have that ambition, and we won’t be effective if we do. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Ambassador Todd, there are increasing concerns that Cambodia’s 

ruling party has become more authoritarian and that human rights 

and corruption issues have not been adequately addressed. Human 

Rights Watch has concluded that, and I quote from one of their 

reports, ‘‘The government of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party, 

the CPP, continues to use the judiciary, the penal code, and threats 

of arrest or legal action to restrict free speech, jail government critics, disperse peaceful protests by workers and farmers, and silence 

opposition party members.’’

What will you do to address these human rights concerns, and 

what are the best ways for the United States to work with the 

Cambodian Government to improve Cambodia’s human rights 

record? 

Ambassador TODD. Thank you, Chairman. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

77

The overall human rights situation in Cambodia is not good. 

There are many, many, many challenges. We consider each one of 

those challenges to be a work in progress. 

As you mentioned, freedom of speech, freedom of expression is a 

problem. There are several others. We have land seizures. We have 

titling problems, where today you own something, tomorrow you 

don’t. And it is subject to political whim. 

We have corruption. Transparency International ranked Cambodia as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. 

And then, last, we have a weak and vulnerable judiciary where 

the elite believe that they are immune from the law. 

I think the ‘‘get well, stay well’’ plan is to stay the course with 

civil society. It is to promote the political freedoms that has made 

America great. It is doing what we do best in human rights. It is 

doing what we do best by doing Leahy vetting. 

We also, I think, have a great opportunity with the youth of 

Cambodia. Seventy percent of Cambodia is 30 or younger, and 

believe it or not, the young—now that I am 50, 30 is young—they 

love America. They think that we are the greatest thing since 

sliced bread. 

And so, if confirmed, what I would like to do is to deliver the 

hard messages to the leadership on these human rights issues and 

also promote the political freedoms that we hold near and dear as 

Americans to all of society, but particularly the youth. 

Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Ambassador Todd. 

Ms. Aviel, in your previous position, you have worked hard on 

finding a path forward out of the ongoing financial crisis. How do 

you think the World Bank has responded to the financial crisis, 

and what do you think the World Bank could have done to improve 

its effectiveness? 

Ms. AVIEL. The World Bank played a very important role in helping us respond to the financial crisis. By tripling lending dramatically, it was able to prevent and mitigate the impacts of the crisis 

on the poorest. It was able to restore liquidity for global trade 

flows. 

Financial flows dropped dramatically, and the World Bank was 

able to make up some of that difference, which was very important. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Senator Corker, if you would like to proceed with questioning? 

Senator CORKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you again, all of you, for being here and with your 

families. And Mr. Barton is used to Senate time, and so he came 

here when we would normally start. But you got us going in good 

shape, and we are glad all of you are here. 

I am going to focus my questions with Ms. Aviel and really on 

the World Bank. Mr. Todd, I know we spent some time in Afghanistan while you were there, and Mr. Barton, certainly I have known 

of your past. And Ms. Aviel, you come with very high recommendations, I might add, and I thank you for being here. 

One of the things I guess people might focus on a little bit is just 

age and experience. It is a pretty big—I know on the other hand, 

you have 32 years a professor of international studies. And so, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

78

probably way beyond both the chairman and mine as far as experiences. 

But your role as the alternate, can you describe what those 

responsibilities are to everyone here? 

Ms. AVIEL. Certainly. The Alternate Executive Director serves as 

the deputy to Ian Solomon. The World Bank has an in-house board 

of directors, which is sort of an unusual arrangement, and they 

meet twice a week at least, and there are numerous committees. 

And so, to have a second person to be able to represent the 

United States will enable us to expand the influence of U.S. leadership at the institution, especially since one of the most important 

ways that you can make a difference in these roles is not actually 

waiting until things come to the board, but helping to work 

through issues beforehand. And so, having two people appointed by 

the President, confirmed by the Senate, enables the Executive 

Director’s office to expand its reach. 

I believe that I have had significant experience, that the credibility that I have had from working in development settings around 

the world will enable me to speak with credibility about development issues on the ground. And I have also been a part of policy 

and diplomacy within the Government at the highest levels, and I 

have seen very effective U.S. leadership and——

Senator CORKER. And very ineffective U.S. leadership? 

Ms. AVIEL. And I believe I will take the lessons from those experiences and be able to represent the United States well. 

Senator CORKER. Yes. Thank you. 

How would you—and I know Mr. Solomon has been there, I 

guess, for almost 2 years now. And I don’t know what the normal 

length of time is for someone to serve in this role. But do you see 

a period of time where, in essence, it is almost a mentoring role, 

or you will be working closely with him? How will that relationship 

be? 

Ms. AVIEL. Well, I certainly would work hand-in-hand with Ian 

Solomon and believe that we both have different expertise that we 

will bring to the table. So certainly I would work closely with Ian 

Solomon. 

Senator CORKER. Some of the developing countries really would 

like a very different role or a different type of presidential leadership at the World Bank, and some of them are saying that we 

really ought to—because of what the World Bank does, we should 

have a group of non-American countries deciding who the next 

leader of the World Bank should be. I am just wondering what your 

views might be on that? 

Ms. AVIEL. Senator, I think American leadership has served the 

institution well. I think President Zoellick has done a tremendous 

job. Secretary Geithner issued a statement a few weeks ago that 

the President will be putting a candidate forward to lead the World 

Bank soon, and I look forward to supporting that candidate. 

Senator CORKER. OK. Did you say the President is getting ready 

to nominate somebody in the next few weeks? 

Ms. AVIEL. That is correct. 

Senator CORKER. Yes. Very good. Do you know who that is? 

Ms. AVIEL. I don’t. [Laughter.] 

Senator CORKER. Are you on the short list? [Laughter.] 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

79

Ms. AVIEL. I promise you, I am not. 

Senator CORKER. The World Bank provides a lot of financial assistance to middle-income countries that really could access financial assistance from other places. There has been some commentary 

about that. I am just wondering what your views might be on the 

World Bank making loans available to countries that might seek 

financing from China or other places just as easily? 

Ms. AVIEL. Senator, that is a very important issue. I certainly 

would like the World Bank to focus on the poorest. But two-thirds 

of the poorest do live in middle-income countries, and the World 

Bank has tremendous expertise in helping to target and encourage 

broad-based economic growth that is very relevant for those 

countries. 

The World Bank brings with it important safeguards and procurement standards that serve as an important model for those 

countries in terms of the projects they do across the board. And so, 

countries that could access financing from the capital markets find 

it an advantage to come to the World Bank because of the technical 

expertise and the safeguards that it provides. 

And it is very important that the World Bank serves as this 

model of how to finance projects. You have said, as you mentioned, 

countries can get financing from China and others, and it is important that the World Bank serve as an alternative to China financing because it brings with it much higher standards. It enables 

American companies to compete for procurement contracts. It 

brings with it environmental and social safeguards. 

So we greatly value the role that the World Bank plays in ensuring those high standards across the board. 

Senator CORKER. And then, just my last question, the World 

Bank—I know you answered a question from the chairman regarding how it has handled the financial crisis. 

But generally speaking, where would you rank the World Bank 

today as it relates to its effectiveness and leadership and ability 

overall to address the issues that it is chartered to address? 

Ms. AVIEL. Senator, I think the World Bank has proven itself as 

a very effective organization. It is one of the premier development 

institutions, and you can see that when international leaders are 

looking to deal with pressing issues, such as food security, for example, they look to the World Bank to lead those efforts because 

it has such a strong track record of effectiveness. 

That being said, there is always room for improvement. I think 

U.S. leadership has played a very important role in making the 

World Bank a more accountable and effective organization, and I 

would look to continue those efforts. 

Senator CORKER. Well, to all three of you, thank you very much 

for coming today. Thank you for bringing family members with you, 

and thank you for being willing to serve in these positions. 

And all are very important. I think in particular the World Bank 

is a place, an institution that can certainly play a very vital role, 

and I thank you so much for your answers and look forward to seeing all of you again very soon. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

80

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Corker. We really appreciate 

you being here today and your insightful questioning always. 

Appreciate it. 

Senator CORKER. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Ambassador Barton, as the United States and its allies continues 

to transition to an Afghan-led mission, the role of the State Department and USAID will increase dramatically. What do you think 

needs to be done today to create a smooth and effective transition 

in light of the many problems still facing Afghanistan, including 

corruption, which I think is still among the worst in the world? 

And what is the role envisioned for the conflict, the CSO operations 

in Afghanistan in the future? 

Ambassador BARTON. Thank you, Senator. 

CSO is currently focused on trying to help the Embassy, the military, the U.S. military, and a range of Afghan ministries to 

advance their transition planning. That is really—that is what the 

Ambassador has asked us to focus on, and that is where we are 

concentrating our effort. 

We are on a little bit of a glide path ourselves in terms of leaving 

Afghanistan. But this particular task seems to be one that our people are really well suited for. And since we have been involved with 

quite a lot of the planning processes in the last couple years, focusing on this transition planning is exactly what we need to do. 

The toughest part here is obviously to make sure that the 

Afghans are in as capable a position as possible as soon as possible. 

And that is really what I think we can be helpful with, and that 

is where we are going to stay focused. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Ambassador Todd, while the United States is one of the largest 

donors of foreign aid to Cambodia, I understand that the United 

States is far behind in foreign direct investment compared to 

China. By some measures, China is contributing foreign direct 

investment at a rate 10 times of the United States. 

How does this shortfall impact our ability to influence and conduct diplomacy with Cambodia, and what should the United States 

Government do to make up for this shortfall? 

Ambassador TODD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

There is no denying that China is making a full-court press in 

Cambodia and throughout Asia. President Obama said recently, 

talking about China in the region, that we shouldn’t look at this 

in terms of a zero-sum game. He said we have strong bilateral relationships. He said we are a Pacific power. 

Last year, Secretary Clinton also announced that this would be 

the century for the Asia-Pacific, and we would be pivoting our 

resources, both financial resources and human resources, from Iraq 

and Afghanistan toward Asia because it is that important and because they know that this full-court press is going on. 

And so, if I am confirmed, my goal is to obviously implement the 

pivot, if you will, of those resources. And I plan to do it, again, by 

promoting the political freedoms that we as Americans hold near 

and dear, as well as continuing the great programs that we have 

in Embassy Phnom Penh. 

Thank you. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

81

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

The high amount of Chinese foreign direct investment is changing Cambodia and the region in many different ways. One of the 

ways is an increase in environmental degradation. I was concerned 

to read a report that the Botum Sakor National Park, a home to 

tigers, elephants, and many other species, is being slowly sold to 

Chinese investors, including a Chinese real estate company, which 

is working to turn 130 square miles of these forests into a gambling resort. 

Is there a way for the United States to work with Cambodia to 

prevent or mitigate against such environmental destruction, and 

what will be the long-term impacts of losing critical pristine forest 

land to the developers? 

Ambassador TODD. That is an excellent question, Mr. Chairman. 

Cambodia is one of the poorest countries in the world. There is 

a tradeoff between protecting the environment and promoting economic development. At the mission in Embassy Phnom Penh, we 

have many programs that promote the environment. 

We have the Lower Mekong Initiative that has an overarching 

goal of basically promoting the environment not only within Cambodia, but through the four other countries. We have a number of 

programs that focus on forestry management, watershed management. We have the President’s initiative on global climate change. 

We have a number of programs that address these issues and try 

to build capacity with the Cambodians. We also have a number of 

programs like Forecast Mekong, which is a climate change type 

program that basically takes the data that is gathered in Cambodia 

and compares it to other main watersheds around the world, particularly the Mississippi River. 

And if you have 10 minutes, if you Google it, Forecast Mekong, 

you have a wonderful video about the effects of global climate 

change on the Mekong River basin. One of the things that it talks 

about, aside from deforestation and other things, are the dams that 

are being created on the Mekong. 

And for me as a neophyte in terms of hydraulics on a river, one 

of the things that I learned is that the silt and sediment that 

comes from the north part of the river basically supports the southern part of the river. And what it does is it feeds the fish. It also 

replenishes the land, if you will, where the Mekong enters the 

ocean. 

And that is very important because as global climate change 

occurs, the predictions are that sea levels are going to rise. And 

studies that the Cambodians have had done and the internationals 

have done have shown that if the sea level rises 3 feet, the country 

will be in very, very difficult straits. 

The rice crop will be significantly reduced. The population will 

have to move. And so, Cambodia is taking this very seriously, and 

thus, the U.S. Embassy is taking it seriously. 

So, for me, if I am confirmed, there is no more important thing 

to do than this because time is of the essence. 

Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Aviel, the World Bank supports a wide range of projects 

around the world, and they often have an environmental compoFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

82

nent. Many projects fall within the theme of environment and natural resources management. These projects fall under the following 

categories—biodiversity, climate change, environmental policies 

and institutions, land administration and management, other environmental and natural resources management, pollution management, environmental health, water resource management. 

How should natural resource conservation factor into the planning for World Bank projects? 

Ms. AVIEL. Senator, thank you for that question. It is a very important issue. 

The world’s poorest often depend on natural resources the most 

for their livelihoods, and they are often the most vulnerable to 

environmental degradation and the impacts of environmental destruction. So it is very critical that the World Bank factor in environmental considerations and issues regarding sustainable management of natural resources across the work that it does. 

And so, it does so in two different ways. One is sort of a defensive approach, making sure that in any project that it does there 

is a strong environmental impact assessment that occurs and that 

there are strong environmental safeguards to make sure that any 

damage the project might do is mitigated. 

And then it also does so by having an affirmative environmental 

agenda, by working in all of the areas you mentioned—biodiversity. 

The World Bank has helped to support the largest tropical conservation region in the world in Brazil. It works to help promote 

sustainable management of fisheries. 

So it works in a variety of different ways to make sure that the 

environment and development can go hand in hand, and it plays 

a very important role in doing so. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that answer. 

One of the keys, it seems to me, is—and it falls in the area of 

what we call ‘‘sustainability.’’ And I think all of you realize this, 

that when we do our development and we work with other countries that we hope that the projects over the long term are sustainable. And my next question to you has to do with the standards 

and how we reach for that goal of sustainable development. 

What standards does the World Bank have in place to ensure 

that projects funded by the World Bank do not facilitate logging 

and other resource development that is in conflict with international agreements and standards? And if confirmed, will you 

work to ensure the World Bank does not foster unsustainable natural resource development practices? 

Ms. AVIEL. Senator, thank you for that question. 

If confirmed, I absolutely commit that I will be an active advocate for sustainability across the board. The World Bank has very 

careful policies in place. It has a forestry policy. It has safeguards 

in place to make sure that it does not contribute to degradation of 

those resources. 

And I would work very hard to make sure that those standards 

are upheld and strengthened, if needed. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Thank you. I guess we don’t have any other Senators attending 

today and going to ask questions. So you are spared some additional questions here. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

83

We very much appreciate your testimony, your commitment to 

service, and we really look forward to seeing you serve in these 

positions and continuing to visit with us on the committee and with 

Members of Congress. 

So, with that, we are going to keep the record open for 48 hours 

so that any additional questions can be submitted to you, and we 

hope you will get back with us promptly on that. 

Senator UDALL. And we would hope that the committee will 

move expeditiously on these nominees. 

And having no further questions, the committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF FREDERICK D. BARTON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. In your testimony, you stated that CSO must partner with those who 

will make us most effective. However, there have been some concerns that agencies 

such as the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Justice will play 

much smaller roles in the new Civilian Response Corps. What role do you envision 

for other agencies and what steps will you take to ensure that a whole of government approach continues to be a key element of the program?

Answer. The Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) calls on 

the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) to improve U.S. Government effectiveness in conflict areas. To be more innovative and agile, CSO is developing a new model for the Civilian Response Corps (CRC) that will focus its work 

on conflict-related issues and expand its access to interagency skills. 

Rather than support a larger standing group that can address the panoply of 

issues facing a country (a just-in-case model), the Corps will focus on deploying targeted experts quickly to address priority issues in conflict (a just-in-time model). 

This reduction in the size of the CRC-Active component will help address the need 

to move resources toward field operations in a restrictive budget environment. 

If I am confirmed, we will seek to build the CRC-Active component on a leadership cadre made up of those with proven effectiveness in the field and conflictfocused skills, such as conflict analysis, prevention tools, contingency planning, and 

expeditionary operations. In CSO engagements, the ability to understand conflict 

dynamics and U.S. Government responses has proven more important than reconstruction-related technical expertise. 

To tap more specific areas of expertise such as rule of law or food security, CSO 

plans to rely more upon its CRC-Standby capacity. The model will allow CSO to 

reach more broadly across the Federal Government to find the right people at the 

right time. 

In addition, CSO will seek to include the widest possible range of partners, including the interagency, from the beginning of its engagements. The result should be 

a single expeditionary team made up of leaders and experts, rather than the inefficient parallel structures that previously existed. 

This model is the product of extensive analysis and deliberation, including examination of:

• Use of CRC and related personnel from 2005–11, and our evolving relationship 

with posts and bureaus seeking our support; 

• The QDDR; 

• A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Force Review of the Corps conducted in 

2010; 

• Observation of peer organizations’ interagency relations; and 

• The work of the transition team designing CSO in summer 2011.

In sum, CSO will maintain a whole-of-government approach, albeit in a more targeted manner.

Question. As you also noted in your testimony, CSO was established in order to 

strengthen our coherence and cohesion in prevention and responding to conflict and 

crisis. Please expand on the role you envision for CSO in conflict prevention, if confirmed. As part of this discussion, please comment on what role CSO could play in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

84

training other Foreign Service officers in conflict prevention through the Foreign 

Service Institute?

Answer. CSO advances conflict prevention through policy, strategy, and practical 

applications in conflict/preconflict areas around the world. 

In the policy realm, CSO works with the State Department, National Security 

Staff, and other departments and agencies to ensure that the U.S. Government can 

identify where creative approaches can head off violence and channel conflicts toward peaceful solutions. CSO is already supporting policy initiatives such as Presidential Study Directive 10 on prevention of genocide and mass atrocities, including 

creation of an Atrocities Prevention Board. CSO is also supporting efforts to make 

the National Action Plan for Women, Peace and Security vital and productive. These 

cross-cutting efforts offer practical ways to influence how U.S. agencies work to prevent conflict. 

In CSO’s engagements, the critical first step is analysis. CSO uses a systematic, 

participatory approach to capturing local voices and understanding the deep causes 

of conflict and community strength. Through analytical tools, such as the Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework (ICAF) and Conflict Prevention Matrix, 

CSO can identify and build on indigenous resilience so that U.S. policies and programs can focus on the root causes of the conflicts, and be sustained by our partner 

nations. 

CSO is exploring innovative ways to help U.S. embassies or host-nation partners 

respond to conflicts. Its staff members have a wide range of skills and experiences 

from both the government and private sector. CSO can provide technical advice, research capacity, mediation and negotiation support, lessons from past experience, 

and other assistance. For example, CSO is currently working with an embassy and 

host country to design and implement community-based mediation, focused on 

gangs. Providing mediation training to local communities, including gang members, 

ensures the sustainability of the endeavors. 

Since its creation in 2004, the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and 

Stabilization (S/CRS) and now CSO has played a leading role in providing conflict 

prevention training to Department of State personnel. We have worked closely with 

our partners at the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) to determine the best means—

whether through social media, classroom instruction, or blended learning—of training Foreign Service Officers (FSO) and other U.S. Government personnel on 

mainstreaming civilian security and preventing conflict. 

CSO’s new Office of Learning and Training (OLT) will continue working closely 

with FSI to add further innovation to the approaches we use when preparing FSOs 

for response activities across the globe. If confirmed, one of my priorities will be to 

expand and institutionalize conflict prevention and response learning opportunities 

throughout the Department. 

RESPONSES OF WILLIAM E. TODD TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Cambodia will chair the Association of Southeast Asian Nations 

(ASEAN) this year. In what ways will you seek to promote common interests and 

values in venues such as the U.S.-ASEAN Leaders Meeting, the ASEAN Regional 

Forum, and the East Asia summit in 2012?

Answer. As Chair for ASEAN and its associated multilateral bodies such as the 

East Asia summit, the ASEAN Regional Forum, and the ASEAN Defense Ministers 

Meeting Plus, Cambodia plays a critical role in setting the tone and agenda of these 

bodies over the course of the year. The United States supports Cambodia’s chairmanship and will urge Cambodia to view 2012 as an opportunity to demonstrate to 

the world that it is a responsible leader at home and in the region. 

The United States is looking to ASEAN to play a key role in maintaining and promoting regional peace and security. I see Cambodia’s chairmanship as an opportunity for the United States to partner with Cambodia, helping where we can, and 

addressing together regional challenges within the ASEAN framework. Specifically, 

if confirmed, I will work closely with the Cambodian Government to use its ASEAN 

year to secure progress on U.S. objectives, such as regional and maritime security, 

nonproliferation, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, fulfilling the region’s 

promise for democracy and respect for human rights, and deepening our trade with 

Southeast Asia to increase U.S. exports to the region and create jobs in the United 

States.

Question. A number of well-informed observers contend that a draft law on associations and NGOs in Cambodia could seriously constrain their ability to operate. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

85

What role does civil society play in Cambodia, how does the United States support 

their role, and how would you encourage the Cambodian Government to protect this 

important political space?

Answer. The United States firmly believes that a healthy, independent civil society is absolutely vital for the advancement of democracy and prosperity around the 

world. Civil society organizations play a key role in promoting respect for human 

rights, defending human dignity, and advancing human progress. Cambodia is no 

exception. Cambodian civil society organizations contribute to growing grassroots 

activism. International NGOs are also invaluable to monitoring developments in 

Cambodian society, advancing key protections, and providing assistance programs. 

The United States has worked to nurture these developments. 

In December 2011, following a year of intense scrutiny and pressure by national 

and international NGOs, as well as public and private engagement by the United 

States, Prime Minister Hun Sen announced that his government would continue 

consultations with civil society on the draft law until 2014 if necessary to achieve 

government-civil society consensus. 

The United States has strongly and consistently expressed in private and public 

venues our deep concern for the status of civil society in Cambodia, and we remain 

absolutely dedicated to advancing and protecting civil society and its role in Cambodia’s development. The United States has encouraged the Cambodian Government 

to consult with civil society groups on the substance of any future draft law and 

has publicly called on the Cambodian Government to reconsider pursuing any 

legislation that would hinder the development and important work of civil society 

organizations. 

The United States is a strong supporter of civil society organizations in Cambodia, 

and engages with them in a number of ways. For example, USAID funding builds 

political party and civil society capabilities to improve greater transparency and engagement of citizens in public policy and political processes. The State Department 

and USAID partner with civil society to monitor and report human rights violations, 

protect human rights defenders, and increase the capacity of government institutions and the judiciary. The United States also works closely with NGOs who are 

engaged in efforts to improve the health, safety, and economic well-being of the 

Cambodian people. 

I view our civil society friends as vital partners and, if confirmed, will work 

closely with them. I will do everything I can to protect and support Cambodia’s 

flourishing civil society. If confirmed, I will make U.S. support for civil society a pillar in every U.S. foreign policy objective I pursue in Cambodia, including humanitarian and foreign assistance, political and economic diplomatic engagement, and 

security and law enforcement cooperation.

Question. The Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI) is a multinational effort spearheaded by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to promote cooperation and capacitybuilding among the United States and Lower Mekong Delta countries (e.g., Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam) in the areas of education, health, environment, 

and infrastructure. If confirmed, how would you further the aims of the LMI 

program? From your perspective, is the program adequately resourced to meet its 

objectives?

Answer. Since Secretary Clinton launched the LMI in July 2009, the United 

States has worked in cooperation with Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam to 

launch and expand a number of projects designed to address the pressing 

transnational environmental and developmental challenges affecting the communities in the lower Mekong basin. The United States welcomes Cambodia’s partnership in this multicountry initiative and its efforts to make the region more prosperous, secure, and peaceful. If confirmed, I will strongly support and advance the 

LMI’s efforts to nurture and build the ‘‘connective tissue’’ of the subregion by emphasizing the strength of the U.S. commitment to, and the importance of, the LMI 

in my discussions with Cambodian officials as well as by raising specific issues relative to the LMI as they develop. As likely host of the next LMI Ministerial and 

Friends of Lower Mekong donor coordination ministerial meeting, if confirmed, I 

will work closely with the Cambodian Government to ensure these meetings 

advance the Secretary’s vision by identifying tangible areas to build the capacity of 

the region and combine our efforts with other partners. 

Overall fiscal constraints in the foreign affairs budget have placed limits on our 

ability to increase direct resources for EAP regional programs, including LMI. However, we are working in close coordination with a wide spectrum of interagency partners to leverage and expand existing programs to support our key objectives for this 

important initiative. If confirmed as Ambassador, it will be my job to effectively and 

efficiently implement the LMI budget in Cambodia.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

86

Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 imposes restrictions 

on assistance to any unit of a foreign country’s security forces for which there is 

credible evidence that the unit has committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. 

embassies are heavily involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement.

• If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively 

implements section 620M? 

• In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a case in which there 

is credible evidence that a gross violation of human rights has been committed, 

that assistance will not be provided to units that committed the violation? 

• What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust capacity to 

gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of human 

rights by units of security forces?

Answer. Under standard State Department vetting procedures, every individual 

and unit proposed for State-funded security assistance or Defense Department training is vetted, both in Phnom Penh and Washington, DC, for credible information of 

involvement in gross violations of human rights and in strict accordance with U.S. 

law and State Department policy. ‘‘Leahy vetting’’ is conducted under the International Vetting and Security Tracking (INVEST) system, the Department’s uniform 

system for vetting worldwide since January 2011. In addition to the various internal 

background checks conducted at the U.S. Embassy, which uses information the 

Embassy has amassed from contacts and open sources, Embassy personnel also 

check names against a database maintained by a prominent human rights NGO. 

This database tracks human rights violations throughout the country and includes 

cases submitted by NGO monitors and contacts in the provinces. In Washington, the 

Department of State’s Bureaus of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor and East 

Asian and Pacific Affairs vet Cambodian candidates by reviewing information from 

multiple sources to ensure that U.S. funding is not used to train individuals or units 

if there is credible information implicating them in gross human rights violations. 

Senior Department of Defense visitors to Cambodia discuss human rights issues 

in their meetings with senior officials of the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces (RCAF) 

and Ministry of National Defense (MoND). The RCAF and MoND are fully aware 

of our position on gross human rights violations as it pertains to security training, 

and all units and individuals receiving training are required to receive human 

rights awareness training prior to the start of any U.S.-funded program. 

If confirmed, I pledge to continue strict adherence to U.S. law and State Department procedures. Where credible information exists of gross human rights violations, candidates implicated in the violations will not receive any assistance per the 

law. I will ensure that adequate human resources are devoted to properly carrying 

out local vetting at the Embassy, and that all Embassy personnel clearly understand the law and procedures, and that they seek guidance from me and Washington, DC, if they are unclear about a unit or individual’s background or unsure 

how to proceed. In keeping with Department practice, I will ensure that any review 

takes into account not only the results from the Embassy’s internal background 

checks, but also credible information gathered from open sources and by civil society. Finally, if confirmed, I will regularly and proactively engage the MoND and 

RCAF to ensure that they are aware of the law’s requirements and implications.

Question. The first trial of the Extraordinary Chamber in the Courts of Cambodia, 

an international tribunal set up by the United Nations and the Cambodian Government to try former Khmer Rouge leaders of crimes against humanity and war 

crimes, secured its first conviction in 2010. A trial of three new defendants began 

in November 2011. Human rights groups have pushed for expanding the scope of 

prosecutions to include more cases, while Prime Minister Hun Sen has opposed the 

idea, arguing that bringing more persons to trial would undermine ‘‘national reconciliation.’’ What are your views on this subject?

Answer. The United States has long supported bringing to justice senior leaders 

and those most responsible for the atrocities perpetrated under the Khmer Rouge 

regime. The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (‘‘ECCC’’ or 

‘‘Khmer Rouge Tribunal’’) needs to fulfill its judicial mandate, not only to fulfill its 

promise to find justice for the victims, but just as importantly, as a vehicle for national reconciliation and a mechanism to strengthen the rule of law in Cambodia. 

The RGC and U.N. established the ECCC in 2006, as a national court with U.N. 

assistance in order to bring to justice ‘‘senior leaders and those most responsible’’ 

for atrocities committed under the Khmer Rouge regime. To date, the ECCC has 

completed the legal process on one case, Case 001, and is undergoing deliberations 

on a second case, Case 002. Two additional cases (Cases 003 and 004) are currently 

in the investigative phase. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

87

In Case 001, the ECCC found Kaing Guek Eav (aka Duch, commandant of the 

Tuol Sleng prison, who sent at least 14,000 people to their deaths) guilty in July 

2010 of crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the Geneva Convention, and 

sentenced him to 35 years imprisonment. On February 3, 2012, the Supreme Chambers extended his sentence to life in prison. The United States welcomed the final 

outcome as a landmark moment in Cambodia’s efforts to find justice for the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge era, and for Cambodian national reconciliation. 

Case 002, the trial against three surviving members of the Khmer Rouge’s senior 

leadership, began in November 2011. A fourth defendant was found mentally incompetent to stand trial, but the ECCC has not yet released her from custody. Stephen 

Rapp, U.S. Ambassador at Large for Global Criminal Justice, calls Case 002 ‘‘. . . 

the most important trial in the world,’’ given the gravity of the alleged crimes and 

the level of the defendants in the Khmer Rouge regime. 

In Cases 003 and 004, where investigations are still ongoing by the Office of the 

Co-Investigating Judges (OCIJ) of five suspects, the United States has consistently 

called on the U.N., the RGC, and all interested stakeholders to protect the ECCC’s 

judicial independence from political interference of any kind. I believe the question 

of whether a suspect falls within the jurisdiction of the ECCC is a judicial one, and 

should be made free from outside interference or pressure. Therefore, the OCIJ 

must be allowed to investigate Cases 003 and 004 according to the facts and the 

law. The United States has called on the U.N. and the RGC to follow through on 

their commitments under the agreement that established the ECCC. If confirmed, 

I will clearly advance this message to the government and people of Cambodia, and 

will support the United Nations and the ECCC as they attempt to ensure that nothing is cut short, and that the ECCC’s implementing statute is fully respected.

Question. Following last year’s national elections in Thailand, relations between 

Cambodia and Thailand appear to be on a more even footing, including in particular, over the disputed border region that houses the Preah Vihear Temple. 

Please provide an update on this situation and the current status of Cambodia-Thai 

relations.

Answer. Cambodia’s bilateral relationship with Thailand was complicated in recent years due to unresolved and longstanding border disputes—including over territory surrounding the Preah Vihear Temple—that flared up in the first half of 

2011. Relations have warmed significantly since a Puea Thai Party coalition came 

to power in Thailand in August 2011, led by former Prime Minister Thaksin 

Shinawatra’s youngest sister and current Prime Minister, Yingluck Shinawatra. 

The United States does not take a position on the legitimacy of either side’s territorial claims. Since the 2011 border clashes, the United States has consistently 

called on both sides to exercise maximum restraint and take every necessary step 

to reduce tensions and return to peaceful negotiations. In this regard, the United 

States has supported the efforts of Indonesia as ASEAN Chair in 2011to facilitate 

a resolution to the conflict. 

While tensions have lessened, the underlying territorial dispute around Preah 

Vihear remains unresolved. There is a 1962 judgment by the International Court 

of Justice (ICJ) relevant to the dispute; in 2011, Cambodia asked the Court to interpret that earlier judgment, and asked for temporary ‘‘provisional’’ measures. In July 

2011 the ICJ issued a provisional decision that created a demilitarized zone around 

Preah Vihear and ordered implementation of Indonesia’s offer to deploy border observers. Both sides have pledged to implement the ICJ’s decision and are working 

with Indonesia to develop terms of reference. The ICJ has authorized both sides to 

submit further filings as it considers a final decision on Cambodia’s submission, 

which Cambodia did this month; Thailand’s filings are not due until June 2012. In 

addition to action at the ICJ, the two sides are also using existing bilateral dialogue 

mechanisms, such as the Joint Boundary Commission and the General Border Committee to discuss outstanding boundary disputes. 

The United States strongly supports Cambodia and Thailand’s efforts to improve 

their bilateral relationship in all ways. 

RESPONSES OF SARA MARGALIT AVIEL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. The World Bank Board recently approved the ‘‘Program for Results’’ 

(P4R) in an effort to streamline its development operations while improving the 

accountability of borrowers to produce concrete results.

• Please discuss how you believe the Bank should ensure community engagement, 

transparency, and accountability for specific investments within a P4R program.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

88

Answer. I believe that community engagement, transparency, and accountability 

are critical elements to the success of P4R, and all the work the World Bank is engaged in. If confirmed, I will work with the Bank to provide affected communities, 

the private sector, and other stakeholders with the ability to review and provide 

input on the individual program risk assessments, proposed capacity-building measures, and proposed activities. Upon the project’s completion, these stakeholders 

should also be informed of the results at the activity level. 

Under a P4R program, the borrower government will make information available 

to the public at both the program and project/subproject level through methods that 

are appropriate to the scope and nature of the program. 

As part of any P4R program, the World Bank will conduct an assessment of the 

borrower country’s environmental and social systems, including the arrangements 

by which program activities that affect local communities will be disclosed, consulted upon, and subject to a grievance redress process. Key considerations during 

the review will be whether stakeholders’ views and concerns are solicited in an open 

and effective manner, and whether these views and concerns are considered in program design and implementation. If relevant, the World Bank will identify measures to improve effectiveness. 

Relevant stakeholders, including local communities, will be consulted regarding 

the findings of these environmental and social assessments, and the Bank will make 

both the draft and final assessments available to the public. In addition, a summary 

of the assessments will be disclosedin the Program Appraisal Document (PAD). Furthermore, Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISRs), which are available 

to the public, will provide an overview of progress in the implementation of the 

operation, including agreed actions to improve environmental and social systems 

performance. 

If confirmed, I will engage closely with the Bank to verify that all P4R programs 

which are brought to the Board for review have followed the above guidelines in 

conducting environmental and social assessments, in consulting all relevant stakeholders and in providing adequate disclosure of the assessments and transparency 

into the P4R program.

• How should the Bank ensure that information reaches the most affected communities regardless of income or language?

Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the World Bank to undertake considerable 

efforts to provide information to affected communities, regardless of income or language. World Bank information (documents, data, materials, projects, or research) 

is available online as well as in person at more than 200 locations around the world. 

In partnership with universities and other local organizations, the Bank established 

these Public Information Services so that local citizens can access information at the 

country level. If confirmed, I would encourage the World Bank to work with local 

civil society organizations to take advantage of this information and share it with 

the communities where they work. 

The World Bank also has a set of guidelines for translation of documents, publications, and Web content, which call for the translation of ‘‘country- and projectspecific information into the national language of a country, local languages within 

a country and/or language(s) understood by people affected by, or likely to be affected by, a project.’’ I support these guidelines, and if confirmed, I would work to 

make sure they are implemented effectively.

• In a time when an increasing number of people across the globe are learning 

to use new communication technologies to share information and viewpoints, 

what can the Bank do to promote greater community involvement in projects 

at all stages—planning, monitoring implementation, and evaluation?

Answer. As was made vivid in the Arab Spring, new communication technologies 

are connecting and mobilizing people across the globe. If confirmed, I would support 

the World Bank taking advantage of these tools to promote greater community involvement in its work. The World Bank is already making impressive strides in this 

area. President Zoellick launched the Open Data Initiative, enabling individuals 

around the world to access all of the World Bank’s rich data. Similarly, ‘‘Apps for 

Development’’ is encouraging innovators around the world to design new tools for 

development. There have also been efforts to pilot the use of SMS technology and 

social network tools for greater community and beneficiary feedback and to improve 

accountability. Across the board, civil society organizations play an important intermediary role and if confirmed, I would work to encourage the World Bank to continue strengthening the role of civil society in its work.

Question. As the Bank has extensively documented, climate change threatens us 

all, but it will impact low-income countries and vulnerable populations the hardest. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

89

In addition to doing their part to reduce greenhouse gases, countries that are the 

largest contributors to climate change need to improve the integration of efforts to 

adapt and respond to the impacts of climate change.

• How will you improve the World Bank’s role in integrating climate change in 

their development assistance?

Answer. The poor are most likely to depend on natural resources for their livelihoods and thus suffer the most from environmental degradation and weather related disasters. Accordingly, it is appropriate that the World Bank focus on sustainable development assistance, including helping affected communities respond and 

adapt to the impact of climate change. The World Bank already does considerable 

groundbreaking research on the climate change-development nexus as evidenced by 

its flagship publication, the World Development Report, which focused on this issue 

in 2010. 

If confirmed, I will urge the World Bank to continue to serve as a convener and 

leader on sustainable development. I will encourage the Bank to continue to support 

innovative new approaches and products to address this global issue. Finally, the 

World Bank should take into account climate vulnerability and risk management in 

its country programs in key sectors including: health, water supply and sanitation, 

energy, transport, industry, mining, construction, trade, tourism, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, environmental protection, and disaster management.

• What measures will you advance at the Bank to support increasing resilience 

to the impacts of climate change in vulnerable countries and within vulnerable 

populations?

Answer. Adaptation is a critical issue for all countries but particularly the poorest. Building climate resilience into development plans, projects, and programs is 

good practice. If confirmed, I will encourage the World Bank to continue to build 

climate change adaptation considerations into Country Assistance Strategies and 

apply its adaptation screening tool to projects and programs to assess and address 

potential sensitivities to climate. I will urge the Bank to conduct further work on 

sector-specific tools and guidance to address adaptation in its work.

Question. In a series of papers, the International Energy Agency has demonstrated that delivering universal energy access for the poor would require dramatically scaling up off-grid clean energy investments. Currently, the World Bank 

Group (including the International Finance Corporation) is underinvesting in this 

sector.

• Will you push for the Bank to adopt clear metrics to measure energy access for 

both grid-tied and off-grid populations, and for such metrics to be essential components in project selection?

Answer. A lack of access to energy is a significant constraint to economic growth 

and poverty reduction—the two key pillars of the World Bank’s work. The Bank has 

worked on this issue for a number of years and, I understand, is committed to improving energy access in its partner countries. It currently measures and reports on 

a number of statistics related to energy (including energy access) in its data products such as the World Development Indicators. The Bank also strongly supports 

the development of a set of sustainable development goals by 2030 to complement 

the MDGs for energy, sanitation, water, oceans, biodiversity, and land. These are 

sound measures and if confirmed, I would support continued work on them.

• The upcoming Rio+20 Conference provides a platform for the World Bank 

Group to make a commitment to delivering on energy access and increasing offgrid clean energy investments. What commitments would you push the Bank 

to make at Rio+20?

Answer. While it is hard to say what the outcome of Rio+20 will be at this point, 

the World Bank is actively working for a positive outcome for the summit. The Bank 

is participating in the U.N. High Level Group on ‘‘Sustainable Energy for All’’ which 

is feeding into the Rio+20 process. In this context the Bank has expressed its support for the three global energy goals outlined in this U.N. action agenda: 

(1) Universal access to modern energy services; 

(2) Doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency; and 

(3) Doubling the share of renewable energy—all by 2030.

Answer. I understand that the Bank also supports efforts to develop more sustainable development goals. If confirmed, I would support these commitments and work 

with the Bank to follow through on these issues through its programs, projects, and 

research.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

90

• Recognizing the need to balance the importance of increasing energy access 

with access to clean and renewable resources, how would you move forward an 

energy strategy at the institution that would phase out fossil fuel financing 

while scaling up investments in clean energy?

Answer. Access to energy and increasing renewable energy and energy efficiency 

are all priorities for the United States and the World Bank. I would expect that any 

energy strategy at the World Bank would need to have a strong focus on these 

priority areas if it were to move forward with support from the executive board of 

the Bank. The Bank has already scaled up investments in clean energy and efficiency significantly. The World Bank Group has invested $17 billion in low carbon 

investments since 2003, of which $14.2 billion were in renewable energy and energy 

efficiency.

Question. The administration has made the expansion of U.S. exports a priority 

in its economic strategy. Procurement opportunities overseas in Bank projects could 

potentially provide billions in revenues for U.S. firms.

• Please describe how you will work with the Commerce Department to help U.S. 

firms take advantage of MDB procurement opportunities and to promote improvements, if necessary, in the Bank’s data management systems to be able 

to monitor procurement trends.

Answer. If confirmed, I would make it a priority to conduct outreach to the private sector to highlight the various ways that American companies can benefit from 

the work of the World Bank. While perhaps the biggest impact comes from the work 

the World Bank engages in around the world to create open markets and sound investment climates, there are also a number of specific opportunities including:

—Debt and equity financing from the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to 

support private overseas projects, including public private partnerships with a 

development impact. 

—Procurement opportunities both to support the Bank’s own needs and for contracts that flow from sovereign lending or credits under the Bank’s oversight. 

—Guarantees for international trade transactions under the Global Trade Finance 

Program. 

—Political risk insurance provided through the Bank’s Multilateral Investment 

Guarantee Agency (MIGA). 

—Dispute resolution mechanism for issues between American companies and foreign governments through the Bank’s International Center for Settlement of 

Investment Disputes (ICSID).

Over the last decade, American companies have received over 2,500 contracts for 

projects supported by World Bank lending around the world, totaling more than 

$1.6 billion. In addition, U.S. firms win an additional $390 million a year on average 

in direct contracts with the World Bank. If confirmed, I would seek to continue and 

grow this strong record. 

The Departments of Commerce and Treasury have already taken steps to help 

U.S. firms pursue MDB-funded procurement opportunities and to increase the 

transparency of MDB procurement data and if confirmed, I will work with both 

agencies to continue this progress. 

Outreach to the U.S. private sector is a key part of this effort to engage more U.S. 

firms in MDB activities. For example, the U.S. Executive Director for the World 

Bank has traveled around the country to discuss World Bank procurement opportunities with business and trade organizations, including a trip earlier this month to 

Boston where he met with the New England Council and the Massachusetts Office 

of International Trade and Investment. 

In response to the Departments of Treasury and Commerce, the World Bank has 

increased its own outreach to the U.S. private sector this year by adding seven more 

business organizations to its Private Sector Liaison Officer (PSLO) network. These 

PSLOs provide local-based guidance and engagement for U.S. firms seeking World 

Bank and other MDB opportunities. This brings the total of PSLOs in the U.S. to 

10, more than tripling the number since the beginning of 2011. 

U.S. Executive Director Solomon has been actively engaging with these PSLOs, 

and has already visited the new PSLOs in Alabama, Chicago, New York, and Utah. 

As one example of the fruits of this effort, the officer based in Chicago contributed 

to an 83 percent increase in World Bank contracts won by Midwest firms. If confirmed, I will work to assist in this outreach effort with the Commerce Department 

by taking advantage of both the PSLO network and the Commerce Department’s 

network of Export Assistance Centers around the country. 

The Departments of Treasury and Commerce have already made progress to improve transparency of the World Bank’s procurement information. At the DepartFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

91

ments’ request, the World Bank began to publish procurement notices for free on 

its own Web site, www.worldbank.org, at the beginning of 2011. This important step 

allows small and medium enterprises to access these contract opportunities without 

having to subscribe to a database service. In addition, if confirmed, I would work 

with the Departments of Treasury and Commerce to continue pressing the World 

Bank to improve its data on contract awards under World Bank-financed projects, 

so that we can better track the benefits accruing to U.S. firms. 

I understand the World Bank will soon be launching a review of its procurement 

policy. If confirmed, I will consult closely with relevant stakeholders including Congress and organizations representing the private sector to identify potential areas 

of improvement. I will work closely with the U.S. Executive Director, other Executive Directors, the Treasury Department, and World Bank management to incorporate these suggestions and further strengthen the World Bank’s already strong 

procurement policies. 

RESPONSES OF FREDERICK D. BARTON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. The CSO Bureau was established as an outcome of the QDDR and in 

response to continued requirement for a fundamentally organized civilian capacity 

in our lead foreign policy institution to respond to incipient conflict, conflict and 

post-conflict situations.

Answer. The Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) was established to address the need for greater cohesion and coherence to conflict prevention 

and conflict response.

• What role is foreseen for the State Department Bureau of Stabilization Operations relative to the parallel and redundant efforts at USAID and DOD?

Answer. The space in which CSO operates is not overcrowded in light of the 

dynamic challenges the United States faces in providing conflict prevention and conflict response in some of the toughest places of the world. CSO will be at the center 

of complex conflict-related situations, whether through integrated strategies, joint 

analysis, or suggesting direction of foreign assistance to priority needs. In doing so 

CSO will ensure USAID and DOD are brought into the discussions in the earliest 

stages.

• Where do those two agencies fit into the new construct at State and how will 

they interact?

Answer. The partnership that CSO is building with USAID and DOD is focused 

on collaboration. An example of this collaboration is demonstrated through the current review of the 1207 (Conflict Prevention) program which CSO, F, DOD, and 

USAID manage. We have agreed that the funds must be used with more of a strategic focus, moved faster, and evaluated in-country. We are now moving forward 

with these critical partners to capture unobligated 1207 funds to ensure these 

shared principles.

• What resources will be drawn and what additional resources and authorities 

can be drawn upon for the purposes of responding to CSO requirements?

Answer. CSO expects to influence the focused use of several funds to address 

early onset crisis, including Complex Crisis Fund (CCF), Global Security Contingency Fund (GSCF), Transition Initiative (TI) and 1207 along with other resources. 

In addition we are in the process of increasing the percentage of CSO’s budget dedicated to deployment.

• What additional responsibilities will CSO have should the President or Secretary deem necessary?

Answer. As CSO proves itself through impact driven-responses we envision being 

called upon more frequently by the President, National Security Staff, and the Secretary of State to drive conflict prevention, crisis response and stabilization in priority states.

• Why does a broader interagency cooperative effort appear to have been abandoned or scaled back from former recommended levels as originally intended in 

the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization?

Answer. To be more innovative and agile, CSO is developing a new model for the 

Civilian Response Corps (CRC) that will seek to include the widest possible range 

of partners, including the interagency, from the beginning of its engagements. The 

result should be an expeditionary team made up of leaders and experts from all 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

92

parts of the United States, interagency, state and local governments, and other 

sources of talent. 

We believe that this will be more effective and responsive to the needs of each 

case and more economical than the current model.

• Where and how will a lessons-learned and planning capacity be incorporated?

Answer. The Office of Learning and Training will serve as CSO’s center of excellence in an organization that is dedicated to constant learning. The Bureau will also 

continue to develop new tools and approaches. Planning, as with conflict prevention, 

will be integrated throughout the organization where, in S/CRS, these were separate 

offices.

Question. The transition of the United States mission in Iraq and Afghanistan 

from a military heavy civil-military operation is complete in the former and just 

beginning in the latter. This winding down has long been perceived as requiring a 

considerable civilian follow-on component, which while evidently less robust than 

originally expected, is still advisable.

• Why would the CSO Bureau reduce the size of the Conflict Response Corps precisely when the necessity of complex skills in the civilian sector is so important 

to sustaining gains made in both these countries given the drawdown of DOD 

resources and personnel that had primary responsibility for programs to be 

maintained by the mission?

Answer. The nature of places where CSO is operating is changing. Rather than 

the heavy footprint of Afghanistan and Iraq, we see a range of cases where the 

United States role is pivotal but not dominant. In turn, we are focusing on a smaller 

CRC-Active component which emphasizes leaders, and a broader approach which expands potential partners and has a ‘‘pay as we use’’ business model like the CRCStandby. This will allow us to use our funds more responsibly and respond with 

someone who can work independently, such as supporting a Presidential inquiry in 

Liberia, or who can lead a small team that draws on both USG and local resources. 

To succeed, country cases must accelerate local ownership and that too will be at 

the heart of CSO’s emphasis.

• What if any skill sets are being reduced or eliminated?

Answer. Over the past few years, the Interagency CRC-Active component was deployed 39 percent of their time for conflict prevention work, with the remainder of 

their time focusing on work not directed by CSO. CSO is dedicated to building a 

CRC-Active component based on a leadership cadre made up of those with proven 

effectiveness in the field and conflict-focused skills, such as conflict analysis, prevention tools, contingency planning, and expeditionary operations. We will continue to 

call upon subject matter experts who can help to bring tangible progress to the early 

days (0–12 months) of a crisis.

• Will the CRC and the Standby be reformulated at lower levels or is this a shortterm retrenchment given the growing pains of the recent past?

Answer. To tap more specific areas of expertise such as rule of law or food security, CSO plans to rely more upon its CRC-Standby capacity and other talent in the 

United States. The model will allow CSO to reach more broadly across our country 

to find the right people at the right time.

• What tools have been sustained from the S/CRS office and which have been 

discarded?

Answer. CSO is aggressively working to improve upon what we do best. We have 

retained the conflict-related response tools (i.e., analysis and integrated strategies 

to focus resources and programming) developed by S/CRS and its interagency partners, and continue to build on that body of knowledge through regular interaction 

with international partners, NGOs, academic institutions, etc. One of the signature 

analysis pieces, the Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework (ICAF), is now 

being rethought and redesigned—and that is illustrative of the approach we will 

take.

Question. Administration and Department cooperation has proven essential to 

productive efforts in stabilization and reconstruction.

• Is the Obama administration fully supportive of the CSO mission and mandate 

and how have they demonstrated such support at the NSC level or in any government agencies?

Answer. The administration, National Security Staff, and Secretary of State have 

all signaled the highest levels of support for CSO. In a ‘‘townhall’’ speech Secretary 

Clinton held 2 weeks ago at the Department, she highlighted CSO’s creation and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

93

its work as one of the most important QDDR elements. Secretary Clinton and Under 

Secretary Otero have encouraged geographic and functional bureaus to partner with 

us to address conflict situations in every part of the world. The NSS has included 

CSO in a wide variety of conflict-related policy and country-specific working groups, 

ranging from Presidential Study Directive-10 on prevention of Mass Atrocities to 

Syria, Libya and other priority countries. 

The newly arrived CSO leadership is building strong relationships among senior 

directors at the National Security Staff, USAID, DOD, along with numerous Assistant Secretaries at the Department of State.

• What practical resistance remains to the concept of a bureau that is a priority 

but requires the acquiescence and participation of other bureaus and agencies?

Answer. As CSO begins to prove itself with its impact driven actions we envision 

the Bureau will be called upon more frequently to drive conflict prevention and 

response efforts around the globe. While some senior leaders have taken a wait-andsee approach, in general the response has been welcoming. 

In each use, CSO seeks a clear understanding of who is leading the U.S. effort 

as conflicts emerge. This initial clarity provides us all with a center of gravity: 

someone with cross-cutting authority for the sprawling network of offices and people 

involved, who welcomes help and encourages innovation. With this understanding, 

CSO then develops a strategy and drives urgent and practical actions.

• What role would you foresee/will CSO have in the case of another Haiti earthquake that devastates a country of interest to the United States?

Answer. As a Department of State entity, our focus will be on political or other 

‘‘human’’ conflicts. CSO defers to how the Secretary of State frames a crisis as either 

humanitarian or political in nature. It is entirely conceivable that a natural disaster 

could be the catalyst for a human/political conflict or a ‘‘hyper complex emergency’’ 

in which case we would partner closely with USAID, DOD, and others in developing 

a coordinated response that addresses both the humanitarian and conflict dimensions of the situation.

• What role, would you envision, will CSO have in the case of a new political freedom movement in Algeria or Sudan or Cuba?

Answer. CSO would likely play a significant role in the first 12 months. CSO has 

provided analytical, contingency planning, and project development support to several geographic bureaus, embassies, or special envoys in this area. It is imperative 

to understand the underlying sources of conflict in a complex crisis—and to plan 

systematically for likely scenarios. For example, S/CRS—and currently CSO—has 

been a strong supporter of the smooth transition of South Sudan into an independent country. Our staff has covered literally every corner of the country beginning before the referendum through independence. Our Stabilization Teams deployed to extend the diplomatic reach of the USG at the state and county levels, 

engaging in ‘‘operational diplomacy,’’ to include conflict assessment and reporting, 

facilitation of peacebuilding initiatives and engagements with key local actors to advance conflict mitigation and stabilization objectives. A key function was to provide 

early warning of growing conflict trends at the local, tribal, or provincial level, permitting the USG and the Government of South Sudan to respond before the outbreak of violence. As another example, we are currently providing support to the 

Bureau for Near Eastern Affairs on expanding the abilities of the Syrian opposition.

• What role, would you foresee, will CSO play in Afghanistan now and post-2014?

Answer. CSO is focused on transition planning with the host government, within 

the Embassy, and with the military command.

• What role, would you foresee, will CSO play in an emergent mass atrocity in 

Sudan?

Answer. CSO plays an active role in the interagency work on mass atrocity and 

genocide prevention, including direct support to the Office of the Under Secretary 

for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights (J) and the broader J family, 

CSO’s greatest value is likeliest to be at the earliest possible stage—in anticipating 

possible threats or atrocities and helping to provide the tools and training to better 

address them. 

The presence of CSO Stabilization Teams in the most conflict-prone areas of 

South Sudan continues to serve as an important tripwire in providing early warning 

on emerging violence and, potentially, mass atrocities. Beyond simply raising the 

profile of subnational political and security threats, CSO staff in the field engage 

with state and county officials, tribal leaders, youth, UNMISS and other stakeholders and have used these relationships to influence behavior, including dampFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

94

ening tensions, encouraging reconciliation and helping to set conditions that could 

prevent violence. 

RESPONSES OF WILLIAM E. TODD TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Given the widespread concerns about official corruption in Cambodia, 

I and many others believe it is imperative that Cambodia join the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative before oil revenues begin to flow from its offshore 

fields, which may be as soon as next year. Does the State Department share this 

view, and if so, what is the U.S. Government doing to encourage Cambodia’s participation in EITI? Is the U.S. providing any other assistance to help Cambodia productively manage its future oil revenues?

Answer. The U.S. Government continues to encourage Cambodia and others to 

join the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). Although Cambodia 

has yet to join, it has participated in regional EITI workshops and taken steps to 

make public disclosures of its oil revenue. In 2010, the Cambodian Government announced it had received a total of $26 million in signature bonuses and social funds 

from PetroVietnam and Total associated with contracts for offshore oil exploration. 

Most significantly, Cambodia has established an interministerial working group that 

will publish extractive industry taxes and revenue, according to the local NGO 

‘‘Cambodians for Resource Revenue Transparency’’ (CRRT). 

EITI is emerging as a global standard for revenue transparency, an important 

component of good governance in the extractives sector. The United States demonstrated its commitment to this principle in September 2011, when President 

Obama announced that the United States would join EITI. Leading by example 

strengthens the U.S. position as we continue to encourage Cambodia and others to 

join the initiative. Industry, government, and civil society must work together to 

promote greater transparency and fight corruption. 

Through our civil society partners, the United States has supported workshops to 

assist Cambodian Government officials to better understand the oil and gas industry. Additionally, we have promoted international best practices for resource management in our interactions with relevant government officials. 

The United States provides technical assistance to the Cambodian Government, 

in the form of financial advisory services from the U.S. Department of the Treasury, 

to develop sound financial management practices. Related to the extractives sector, 

the team has assisted in the development and implementation of laws and regulations related to taxation of the oil and gas and mining industries. Additionally, a 

full-time U.S. advisor works with the Ministry of Economy and Finance to support 

overall budget reform and increase financial accountability in Cambodia.

Question. American democracy advocate Ron Abney passed away on December 31, 

2011, without seeing justice for the grenade attack in Cambodia on March 30, 1997, 

in which 16 Cambodians were killed, and scores injured—including Abney himself. 

Elements of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) were reportedly suspected 

of complicity in the attack, particularly Prime Minister Hun Sen’s bodyguard unit 

Brigade 70. What actions will you take to secure justice for the victims of the 1997 

grenade attack, and what impact does impunity for such crimes have on Cambodia’s 

democratic and legal development?

Answer. The lack of accountability for past crimes, and a culture of impunity 

among many of Cambodia’s elite, is an ongoing concern for the United States, and 

one which, if confirmed, would be a top priority for me during my tenure as Ambassador. These actions erode confidence in the legal and political systems. Cambodia’s 

democratic and legal development is retarded when there is no accountability for 

past crimes. If confirmed, I will make the issue of equality before the law, judicial 

independence, and accountability for past crimes a major theme of my engagement 

with the Royal Government of Cambodia, and I will do everything I can to assist 

the victims of the 1997 grenade attack find justice.

Question. Please describe the process by which U.S. foreign assistance to Cambodia is evaluated in terms of effectiveness. Identify every program and project 

funded in Cambodia for the last 5 years by the U.S. Government. For each program 

and project funded by the U.S. Government during that time period, please state 

the type of evaluation(s) which occurred on an annual basis and the findings of each 

evaluation.

Answer. U.S. foreign assistance to Cambodia is evaluated in accordance with performance management best practices, including where feasible and useful, program 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

95

evaluation, to achieve the most effective U.S. foreign policy outcomes and greatest 

accountability to our primary stakeholders, the American people. The U.S. Department of State has recently launched an Evaluation Policy that requires that all 

large programs, projects, and activities be evaluated at least once in their lifetime 

or every 5 years, whichever is less. Each Bureau in the State Department identifies 

the programs, projects, or activities to evaluate, and is required to evaluate two to 

four projects/programs/activities over a 24-month period beginning with FY 2012, 

depending on the size, scope, and complexity of the programs/projects being evaluated. USAID has implemented a similar policy. 

The attached annexes represent the past 5 years of summaries of USAID, CDC, 

security assistance, and weapons removal and abatement projects funded by the 

United States in Cambodia. The State Department would be pleased to provide a 

briefing for you or your staff on these programs and the evaluation mechanisms, if 

you would like further information.

[EDITOR’S NOTE.—The annexes mentioned above (Annex 1: ‘‘Evaluation Findings, USAID/Cambodia’’; Annex 2: ‘‘Security Assistance, 

Evaluation of Effectiveness’’; Annex 3: ‘‘Weapons Removal and 

Abatement Summary’’) were too voluminous to include in the printed hearing. They will be retained in the permanent record of the 

committee.]

Question. Will you meet with opposition leader Sam Rainsy, whether that be in 

Cambodia, if he returns or elsewhere?

Answer. If confirmed, I would welcome any opportunity to meet both ruling party 

and opposition party figures in Cambodia, including Mr. Sam Rainsy, regardless of 

venue.

Question. Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra serves as a key advisor to Cambodia Prime Minister Hun Sen on an intermittent basis. How does this 

relationship effect bilateral relations between Thailand and Cambodia?

Answer. Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra served as an economic 

advisor to Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen from 2009 to 2010, and the two figures are widely believed to remain in close contact. Relations between Cambodia 

and Thailand have warmed significantly since a Puea Thai party coalition came to 

power in Thailand 2011, led by Thaksin’s youngest sister, Prime Minister Yingluck 

Shinawatra. 

The United States strongly encourages Cambodia and Thailand to continue to improve their bilateral relationship, which would also help bolster regional stability.

Question. Please quantify the success of the U.S. Government or U.S. fundedprojects and programs in Cambodia attempting to address human trafficking.

Answer. Cambodia, once a Tier 3 country, was classified as a Tier 2 country in 

the State Department’s June 2011 report. 

The United States has implemented an array of programs to address human trafficking through USAID, the Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, 

and Migration, and the Department’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in 

Persons. 

USAID/Cambodia programs to counter trafficking in persons (TIP) have reached 

over 7,600 Cambodians in key priority provinces through information campaigns 

and training events on safe migration and TIP-related issues. Participants included 

local officials, community change-makers (such as Village Development Committee 

members), and students. 

In the interest of TIP prevention, USAID assistance has strengthened employment options and reduced vulnerability to trafficking of over 920 youth through 

support for educational scholarships and vocational training. USAID assistance has 

also reduced the vulnerability of nearly 300 families by mitigating pressures for 

family members to fall into situations involving unsafe migration, trafficking, or 

exploitation. 

The program has provided training to 776 government officials and social workers 

on victim protection. USAID programs have also supported over 1,800 trafficking 

victims through short- and long-term services provided by shelters, including residential care, educational support, livelihoods skills training, psychosocial support, 

and reintegration assistance. 

In the interest of prosecution, USAID supported training for over 500 police officers on TIP, criminal investigation, evidence collection techniques for trafficking 

cases and institutionalized trainings within the Cambodian National Police. We 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

96

have also trained over 180 judicial officials on the TIP law and regional and international legal frameworks to address TIP. 

In FY 2011, the Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and 

Migration programmed $300,000 in INCLE funds for antitrafficking activities in 

Cambodia, Laos, and Malaysia under its Southeast Asia regional migration program, implemented by the International Organization for Migration (IOM). Activities focused on improving the quality of assistance provided in shelters for trafficking victims in Malaysia and building the capacity of the Lao and Cambodian 

Governments to provide reintegration assistance to returning trafficking victims. In 

FY11 in Cambodia, IOM trained 20 central-level Ministry of Women’s Affairs 

(MoWA) officials, 40 provincial-level MoWA officials, and 154 key local leaders, including village and commune chiefs, on methods to conduct awareness-raising activities on the risks of irregular migration and the rights and responsibilities of migrants in Thailand, a major destination for Cambodian labor migrants. The project 

also supported two awareness-raising campaigns in Cambodia’s Prey Veng and 

Kampong Cham provinces that reached a total of 1,674 people. 

The Department of State Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (J/

TIP) has supported both the U.N. and nongovernmental organizations to address 

trafficking in Cambodia. 

The United Nations Inter-Agency Project on Human Trafficking (UNIAP) is 

partnering with local NGOs to provide psychosocial support and other services to 

address trauma and other mental health needs of victims of sex and labor trafficking. The project is also providing economic support through training and job 

placement for victims, as well as training for staff and raising awareness of the 

issue. In the area of prevention, UNIAP successfully integrated an antitrafficking 

message into a publication on financial literacy produced by a microfinance institution. Over 50,000 copies of this publication were distributed through the microfinance institution’s branch offices. In the area of protection, UNIAP has provided 

medical services to 20 trafficking victims, legal assistance and advice to 105 victims, 

counseling services to 75, and vocational training to more than 20 others. Of particular note is the repatriation assistance to Cambodia of 65 male Cambodian labor 

trafficking victims from Indonesia, 18 victims from Malaysia, and 21 victims from 

Thailand. In terms of prosecution, UNIAP has assisted with the investigation of 20 

TIP cases, the arrest of eight perpetrators, six of whom have been criminally 

charged, and two of whom have been convicted. The traffickers were each sentenced 

8 years in prison and ordered to pay compensation to their victims. 

World Hope International (WHI) provides comprehensive services for girl survivors of trafficking and rape through an aftercare center in Siem Reap modeled 

after a successful aftercare program in Phnom Penh. Services include short-term 

shelter, medical and mental health assessments, art therapy, and assistance with 

preparing for court proceedings, with the goal of recovery and reintegration. WHI 

has partnered with Cambodia’s Ministry of Social Affairs, Veterans, and Youth 

Rehabilitation (MoSAVY) to assist approximately 60 girls through the center, and 

conducts periodic followup visits to ensure successful reintegration into their communities. 

Additionally, the J/TIP office recently funded Agir por les Femmes en Situation 

Precaire (AFESIP) to develop three service centers in Cambodia. These centers provide trafficking survivors with residential living space that meets their immediate 

needs, including medical evaluations and treatment; psychological counseling to 

establish and restore self-confidence and self-esteem; support to family members; 

and childcare and parenting skills to residents in order to allow them to focus on 

their own rehabilitation. Nearly 550 women and girls received care across AFESIP’s 

three residential shelters throughout the project period.

Question. What is the status of relations between the U.S. Department of Defense 

and the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces? How is the human rights record of the 

Royal Cambodian Armed Forces factored into decisions by the United States to engage with the Cambodian military?

Answer. U.S. security engagement is a positive driver in deepening United StatesCambodia relations, and reinforces our efforts to promote a democratic Cambodia 

respectful of human rights, dedicated to the rule of law and transparent governance, 

at peace with its neighbors, and a contributor to regional stability. 

The United States assists and engages with the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces 

(RCAF) in an effort to develop a modern, transparent, accountable, and professional 

Cambodian partner that supports U.S. efforts to maintain regional and global stability, adheres to international human rights norms, and is integrated into the 

international community. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

97

The military-to-military relationship focuses on building capacity in peacekeeping 

(with recent deployments to Sudan and Lebanon as examples), counterterrorism, 

civil-military operations (including military medicine and engineering), humanitarian assistance and disaster relief response, and maritime security. The United 

States will also continue to enhance the RCAF’s capabilities to meet reform, force 

restructuring, and professionalization objectives. 

Every individual and unit that participates in U.S.-funded training is thoroughly 

vetted, both in Phnom Penh and Washington, in strict accordance with U.S. law and 

State Department regulations. For example, in addition to the various internal 

background checks conducted at the U.S. Embassy, using information the Embassy 

has amassed from contacts and open sources, Embassy personnel also check names 

against a database maintained by a prominent human rights NGO. This database 

tracks human rights violations throughout the country and includes cases submitted 

by NGO monitors and contacts in the provinces. In Washington, the Department of 

State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor implements the Leahy 

amendment by reviewing information from multiple resources to ensure that U.S. 

funding is not used to training individuals or units implicated in human rights 

abuses. 

Senior Department of Defense visitors to Cambodia discuss human rights issues 

in their meetings with senior RCAF and Ministry of National Defense (MoND) officials. The RCAF and MoND are fully aware of our position on gross human rights 

violations as it pertains to security training, and all units and individuals receiving 

training are required to receive human rights awareness training prior to the start 

of the program.

Question. Please cite specific examples during the past 3 years when the United 

States protested the illegal eviction and ‘‘land grabbing’’ of private citizens, which 

has occurred at the direction of Cambodian officials and in violation of Cambodian 

law.

Answer. The United States has consistently expressed its concerns about the increasing number of land disputes in Cambodia and the potential they have to escalate into violent confrontations. These disputes underscore the importance of clearly 

delineated property rights and the need for a dispute resolution system that is independent and treats all Cambodians equally and according to the law. 

The United States has previously joined others in the international community to 

urge the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) to ensure that property rights are 

respected. For example, in 2009, the United States coordinated and publicized a 

joint statement that urged the RGC to end its development of Boeung Kak Lake 

until and unless Cambodian authorities and the affected citizens reached a lawful 

resolution. In 2011, the World Bank suspended new lending to Cambodia until and 

unless the RGC satisfactorily resolved the Boeung Kak Lake situation. The United 

States, as a shareholder, strongly supported the World Bank’s decision. 

In 2012, the United States publicly raised our concerns regarding land disputes 

during the eviction of land claimants from the Borei Keila settlement and continues 

to call on protestors to refrain from violence and for security forces to exercise maximum restraint. 

The United States, through our USAID mission in Phnom Penh, provides funding 

and training to civil society groups that work in the areas of land and livelihood 

rights, judicial reform, and legal awareness.

Question. How do you recommend approaching the plethora of rule of law challenges and issues within Cambodia? Please assess the success or failure of the 

United States on this front in recent years in Cambodia. What other countries are 

actively concerned about the rule of law challenges in Cambodia?

Answer. The United States is concerned about Cambodia’s weak and vulnerable 

judiciary. Weak rule of law hinders political reform, encourages an environment of 

impunity, hinders economic and social development, and cripples the public’s confidence in the political process. Land rights issues are a tangible example of a larger 

need for rule of law for many Cambodians. 

Though recent arrests may indicate greater political will in Cambodia to tackle 

corruption, the United States continues to encourage Cambodia to comprehensively 

enforce its Anti-Corruption Law. We also encourage Cambodia to write effective, applicable laws and have offered technical assistance and critical feedback to support 

those efforts. 

If confirmed, I will not only recognize and praise positive developments, but also 

make clear our strong position on issues related to the rule of law and corruption. 

I will persistently engage with Cambodian officials and political leaders to stress the 

vital importance of the rule of law and the need to create the political will to build 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

98

and protect it. At the same time, I believe the United States needs to continue its 

robust support for civil society organizations that actively monitor and promote the 

rule of law in Cambodia. 

Various USAID programs support justice sector reform, including a project with 

the Ministry of Justice to improve collection and use of justice-system data. USAID 

supports legal education, which is critical for building the next generation of legal 

professionals who can promote rule of law, a key element in democratic transformation. Through a robust subgrant program, USAID supports civil-society organizations that engage in human rights advocacy and provide legal aid to indigent 

persons. 

The United States $11.8 million contribution to the Khmer Rouge Tribunal 

(pledged and delivered contributions since 2008) is assisting the Cambodian people 

in achieving a measure of justice and accountability for the atrocities of the Khmer 

Rouge era. If confirmed, I will continue to call on the Cambodian Government to 

respect and protect the Tribunal’s independence with regards to all cases before the 

Court. 

The U.S. Government is also engaging with Cambodia’s military and law enforcement forces to develop their professionalization and accountability, thus advancing 

their respect for the rule of law. Professional and competent security forces will not 

only be better equipped to address transnational threats and domestic criminal activities, but also be better prepared to support and sustain democratic institutions. 

The United States coordinates closely with other donors supporting rule-of-law 

programs and assesses that many of Cambodia’s international partners are concerned about rule of law, given its impact on a broad spectrum of issues, from the 

inviolability of contracts for foreign investors to human rights for Cambodians and 

myriad other issues. Many countries are actively concerned about the rule of law 

in Cambodia, including Australia, members of the European Union, Japan, Canada, 

and South Korea.

Question. In what ways does the United States consult and coordinate with other 

major international donors of assistance to Cambodia?

Answer. The United States consults and coordinates with other major international donors on a regular basis, through formal and informal means, and 

through the strategy, design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation cycle of 

assistance programs. Mechanisms include a monthly meeting in Phnom Penh attended by heads of development partner agencies, consultations at the program design and implementation level, consultative workshops with other development partners, and even the contributions of resources from other donors to USAID programs. 

Formal coordination between development partners and the Cambodian Government occurs at three levels. First, a consortium of 19 technical working groups addresses a range of development issues at the working level. Second, the ‘‘Government Donor Coordination Council’’ serves as a higher level forum for coordination 

and dialogue between the Cambodian Government and development partners, with 

the most recent such meeting occurring in April 2011. Third, the Country Development Cooperation Forum (CDCF) is the highest level forum for policy dialogue 

among the development partners and the Cambodian Government, is typically 

chaired by the Prime Minister, and includes the participation of Ambassadors and 

heads of development agencies. The most recent CDCF was held in June 2010.

Question. Please identify U.S. ‘‘partners’’ in Cambodia, receiving U.S. funds, whom 

have direct or indirect relations with one or more key Cambodian official or their 

family.

Answer. CDC: The implementing partners for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Global AIDS Program and Influenza Program include the Ministry of 

Health; the National Center for HIV, AIDS, Dermatology and Sexually Transmitted 

Infections; the National Tuberculosis Control Program; the National Institute of 

Public Health; the Communicable Disease Control Division; and the World Health 

Organization (WHO). Each of these partners is led by a key Cambodian official (for 

the Cambodian Government agencies) or has direct professional ties to such officials 

(WHO). 

USAID/Cambodia: The Cambodia mission of the U.S. Agency for International 

Development (USAID/Cambodia) works with local and international NGO partners 

to implement programs in democracy, human rights, elections and political processes, health, education, agriculture, food security and environment. These partners 

necessarily have direct professional relationships with key Cambodian Government 

officials. 

USAID/Cambodia is aware of only one direct partner receiving U.S. funds that 

has a family relationship with a key Cambodian official. The Chief of Party of the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

99

Sustainable Action Against HIV/AIDS in Communities project, implemented by the 

Khmer HIV/AIDS NGO Alliance, is the spouse of an Under Secretary of State with 

the Ministry of Commerce. 

Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation (AFCP): The United States is providing AFCP funds to two nongovernmental organization (NGO) implementing partners that have direct professional relationships with key Cambodian officials at the 

Ministry of Culture and/or the APSARA Authority. The NGOs are the World Monuments Fund (conservation work at Phnom Bakheng Temple) and Cambodian Living 

Arts (documentation of three Khmer music traditions). These grants were awarded 

through a standard competitive process that complied with all relevant U.S. laws 

and regulations. 

English Access Microscholarship Program (Access): The following NGO implementing partners, which receive Access funding to conduct English-language education for disadvantaged students, are led by a key Cambodian official. Grants to 

these organizations were awarded through a standard competitive process that complied with all relevant U.S. laws and regulations.

• Cambodian Islamic Youth Association—The director is an Under Secretary of 

State with the Ministry of Social Affairs, Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation, 

and the deputy is an Under Secretary of State with the Ministry of Rural Development. 

• Islamic Local Development Organization—The founder, who is still a member 

of the group’s Board of Directors, is a Secretary of State with the Ministry of 

Social Affairs, Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation. 

• Cambodian Islamic Women Development Association—The project director is an 

Under Secretary of State with the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. 

• Cambodian Muslim Development Foundation—The project director is an Under 

Secretary of State with the Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports.

Other Public Diplomacy Programs: The United States funds American Corners at 

Panasasstra University of Cambodia (PUC) in Phnom Penh and the University of 

Management and Economics in Kampong Cham and Battambang, all of which have 

professional relationships with key Cambodian officials, mainly with the Ministry 

of Education, Youth and Sports. Additionally, the President of PUC is a former 

Minister of Education and continues to serve as an advisor to the Cambodian Government. The United States also provides support for the annual CamTESOL conference, organized by the private company, IDP, which works closely with the Ministry of Education on the event. 

NADR: Though Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related Programs 

(NADR) funding, the United States provides grants to humanitarian demining organizations in Cambodia to remove mines and other explosive remnants of war (EWR). 

In addition to mine and EWR clearance activities, U.S. assistance supports technical 

training and public education programs. Implementing partners for these programs 

include DynCorp International, the Mines Advisory Group (MAG), the HALO Trust, 

and Golden West Humanitarian Foundation. These organizations necessarily have 

direct professional relationships with key Cambodian officials. 

IMET/FMF: International Military Education and Training (IMET) and Foreign 

Military Financing (FMF) funds are not provided directly to any Cambodian partner, but government elements led by key Cambodian officials, including the Royal 

Cambodian Armed Forces and the Ministry of National Defense, do benefit from 

IMET/FMF-funded programs and projects. All programs and activities are contracted and disbursed in strict accordance with applicable U.S. laws on competitive 

bidding.

Question. What are ‘‘best prospects’’ for U.S. companies exporting to Cambodia in 

the next 3 to 5 years?

Answer. While Cambodia has enjoyed considerable economic growth over the past 

decade, it is still among the poorest countries in the world. Most Cambodian consumers are extremely price sensitive. While products from China, Vietnam, or Thailand tend to dominate the market because of their relatively cheaper prices, there 

are some key areas in which American products and services are positioned to increase their market share. If confirmed, I will do everything I can to increase U.S. 

exports to Cambodia, including working with the Cambodian Government to improve the business and investment climate in Cambodia.

• Agribusiness and Food Processing: Roughly 80 percent of Cambodia’s population 

is engaged in the agriculture sector. As a matter of policy, the Cambodian Government encourages investment in agriculture, diversification of agricultural 

products, and investment in improved irrigation and water control. The agriculture sector currently relies on outdated methods of farming and opportuniFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

100

ties exist for American companies to promote higher quality seeds, fertilizers, 

and other agricultural inputs in Cambodia. Agricultural equipment, irrigation 

systems, and food processing equipment are other areas with potential for increased U.S. exports. 

• Construction Equipment and Engineering Services: Cambodia is rehabilitating 

its hard infrastructure, including its road network, and has experienced a boom 

in residential and commercial construction over the last few years. Construction 

equipment and engineering services will be in great demand for the foreseeable 

future. Public works and transportation are a high priority for the Cambodian 

Government, which receives support from international donors. 

• Tourism Infrastructure and Resorts: Political and economic stability has enabled 

Cambodia’s tourist sector to mature steadily over the past few years. Nearly 3 

million foreign tourists visited Cambodia in 2011. Main attractions include the 

historical Angkor Wat temple complex in Siem Reap and the relatively undeveloped beaches along Cambodia’s southern coast. Estimated annual earnings from 

the sector are more than $1.5 billion, or about 10 percent of total GDP. Collectively, these conditions present good market opportunities for American companies to develop hotels and resorts and to supply other hospitality-related products or infrastructure. 

• Education: Demand for private or supplementary education services is high. 

The majority of Cambodia’s population is school age, and the overall quality of 

public education is very poor. Many Cambodians, particularly in the growing 

middle class but even for those without much disposable income, are willing to 

spend money on education for their children to secure better opportunities in 

life. Commercial opportunities exist for American firms in vocational, specialized, preschool, elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education resources. 

English-language training is also an increasingly attractive prospect. 

• Used Cars and Automotive Parts: Cambodia has no public transportation network, and the majority of people travel by motorbike or car. Automobile ownership is rapidly increasing, and the vast majority of cars are imported secondhand vehicles. The United States is currently the largest supplier of used 

vehicles in Cambodia, with the most popular models being four-wheel drive 

vehicles and mid-sized Japanese-brand sedans. Additional export opportunities 

exist in car accessories and spare parts.

Question. What level of U.S. funding has been dedicated to electoral reform in 

Cambodia over the last 10 years? Do you view this priority as being a success or 

failure on the part of the U.S. given concerns about 2013 elections being ‘‘free and 

fair’’?

Answer. The total value of U.S. Government assistance supporting civil society 

and political parties in elections over the past 10 years is $37,589,997. This assistance has promoted programs critical to supporting free and fair elections in Cambodia, including political party training/development, voter education, youth political 

empowerment, polling, women’s caucuses, candidate debates, and civil society observation of elections. For over 10 years, the United States has not provided assistance 

to electoral management bodies that administer elections or legal/policy reform 

issues. 

I believe that Cambodia’s transition and democratic reform remains a work in 

progress and considerable challenges remain. Most observers assessed that Cambodia’s 2008 elections took place in an overall peaceful atmosphere with an improved process over past elections. However, observers noted the elections did not 

fully meet international standards. Restrictions on the transparency of the electoral 

environment include harassment of opposition political parties and limited space for 

political debate. The United States believes that Cambodia’s commune elections in 

2012 and national elections in 2013 provide opportunities for the Royal Government 

of Cambodia to demonstrate to its people and the world that it is dedicated to 

multiparty democracy and that it can be a durable and healthy democracy. 

Looking to the 2012 and 2013 elections, if confirmed, I will continue support for 

the role of civil society and political parties in elections. I will also deploy Embassy 

personnel as election observers throughout the country and coordinate our efforts 

with others in Cambodia and with the international community. 

RESPONSES OF SARA MARGALIT AVIEL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Your biography indicates that you have never worked in the World 

Bank system. How do you think this will impact your ability to function as a part 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

101

of the U.S. leadership? What will your priorities be at the World Bank? What new 

initiatives would you propose to promote U.S. priorities at the Bank?

Answer. My experiences at the Treasury Department, National Security Council, 

National Economic Council, and in private international development organizations 

provide me with a unique perspective on policymaking at the highest levels of the 

U.S. Government and on development issues in the poorest communities in the 

world. 

To give just a few examples of my experience:

• I have been a part of the important community development projects the World 

Bank supported in Afghanistan, where CARE served as an implementing partner for the World Bank’s landmark National Solidarity Program. • As a Senior Advisor to Secretary Geithner, I participated in and helped manage 

Secretary Geithner’s engagements in six World Bank spring and fall annual 

meetings. • As a Director of International Economic Affairs at the National Security Council 

and National Economic Council, I have coordinated with World Bank officials 

on a range of issues, from cosponsorship of the South Sudan International 

Engagement Conference to projections of Afghanistan’s fiscal gap.

These experiences have made me well-versed in the range of development and 

policy issues facing the World Bank. If confirmed, I will arrive at the Bank as a 

newcomer to the World Bank system like most of my predecessors. However, I can 

assure you that I will bring the relevant experience to the position, as well as the 

ability to approach the institution with a fresh perspective and a critical eye rather 

than being encumbered by the status quo. 

If confirmed, my priority, first and foremost, would be to serve as a strong fiduciary steward of American taxpayer resources. The United States is the largest 

shareholder of the institution, and if confirmed, it would be my primary responsibility to provide effective oversight. 

Second, my focus would be on execution. The World Bank has already agreed to 

a number of significant reforms as part of the recent capital increases and I would 

work to make sure that these reforms are implemented quickly and effectively. 

These include efforts to:

• Strengthen financial discipline; • Improve governance and accountability, including promoting transparency and 

anticorruption efforts; • Enhance development impact and effectiveness.

Beyond focusing on a comprehensive and careful implementation of these critical 

reforms, I would work with the Executive Director to promote U.S. priorities at the 

World Bank by:

• Encouraging a culture of innovation and learning so that effective approaches 

can be brought to scale for greater impact; • Conducting outreach to the private sector to highlight procurement and financing opportunities for American companies; • Engaging civil society organizations and other stakeholders to solicit different 

perspectives on the impact of the World Bank and potential areas for improvement.

Question. Your testimony at the hearing overall highlighted and discussed the 

stated mission of the World Bank and cast the institution in a positive light. Your 

testimony did not address the issue of much-needed reform in the Bank system. I 

have been conducting investigations and holding hearings for 10 years now on serious corruption and lack of transparency at the Bank. After onsite visits by my staff, 

I put forward a report detailing findings and suggesting corrective measures going 

forward. Have you reviewed this report and evaluated the suggested reforms? What 

measures, in addition to those I suggest, would you propose to promote transparency 

and anticorruption? What can the Treasury Department do to focus more on reform?

Answer. I have carefully reviewed your report and support its approach. Indeed, 

I believe my testimony was very much aligned with the general conclusions in the 

report—namely that ‘‘the IFIs still serve U.S. policy interests and leverage American taxpayer dollars’’ but that we must work to improve their accountability, transparency, and effectiveness. 

After reading the report, I actively consulted with colleagues at the Treasury 

Department and in the office of the U.S. Executive Director about its contents and 

recommendations. I was pleased to hear that the report significantly helped guide 

their negotiations regarding the general capital increases, replenishments, and the 

corresponding reforms. For instance, the International Bank for Reconstruction and 

Development (IBRD) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) have both 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

102

agreed to increased transfers of their net income to the International Development 

Association (IDA) during the IDA–16 replenishment period—a key recommendation 

in your report. Furthermore, in the context of the IBRD’s general capital increase, 

shareholders agreed to greater formalization of these transfers going forward. The 

United States also successfully pushed to increase IFC’s lending in IDA countries, 

as you had recommended. 

Also consistent with the recommendation of your report, the United States, other 

key shareholders, and the management of the MDBs have all placed a special emphasis on harmonizing results in recent years. Much of the agenda has been centered on results measurement systems, such as that of the International Development Association (IDA). For example, in the latest replenishment round for IDA 

completed in May, 2010 (IDA16), reforms to results monitoring and measurement 

at the country, program and project levels have helped set a model for other development partners. I understand that in each of the recent concessional window replenishments (IDA, the Asian Development Fund, and the African Development 

Fund), the United States has pressed for greater efforts toward harmonization of results frameworks across the institutions and that the MDBs are responding favorably and actively engaging with each other on this important objective. If confirmed, 

I look forward to engaging with World Bank management on this agenda as I believe it is central to promoting greater accountability. 

Your report also appropriately emphasizes the anticorruption and transparency 

agenda. The World Bank has some notable recent successes to point to, such as the 

landmark Cross Debarment Agreement that brought the World Bank and regional 

development banks together in linking their actions in response to incidences of corruption in procurement. Another notable success is the Bank’s new access to information policy, which sets an appropriate new norm of transparency, with a presumption that all documents are released and a very narrow exception for sensitive 

materials. 

However, given the amount of money disbursed from the Bank, and the often 

challenging environments in which the Bank operates, guarding against corruption 

requires constant vigilance. Therefore, if confirmed, I look forward to working 

closely with the Treasury Department and this committee in advancing a robust 

agenda on transparency and anticorruption at the World Bank. This includes supporting a strong Integrity Vice-Presidency with sufficient resources to carry out its 

investigations, pressing for better data collection and reporting on procurement 

awards under Bank-financed projects, and greater use of independent, third-party 

organizations to verify the results of Bank projects, where appropriate (such as in 

the Bank’s new Program-for-Results instrument). The World Bank and the Treasury 

Department should also continue using their leverage to promote greater transparency and anticorruption policies across borrowing country governments by working with them to strengthen their public financial management systems, publish 

their budgets, investigate and prosecute wrongdoing, and where applicable, incorporate the principles of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.

Question. One of the goals of the World Bank system should be to ‘‘put itself out 

of business.’’ There should be more focus on enabling governments to generate their 

own revenue and access to capital markets. What sorts of guidelines would you propose for moving countries from being borrowers to becoming donors, particularly the 

middle-income countries?

Answer. I agree that the World Bank Group should aim to reduce the need for 

its involvement by supporting poverty reduction around the world including by 

working with governments to generate their own revenue for this purpose. The 

World Bank system has succeeded in meeting this goal in many countries throughout its history. Since the founding of the World Bank in 1944, thirty-three countries 

have graduated from IBRD borrowing. The list of IBRD graduates highlights the 

success of the World Bank in supporting the postwar reconstruction of Europe (e.g., 

France, which graduated in 1947); fostering the rapid post-war development of East 

Asia (e.g., Japan, 1967; Taiwan 1971; Singapore, 1975; and South Korea, 1995); and 

facilitating Eastern Europe’s transition to capitalism (e.g., Czech Republic, 2005 and 

Hungary, 2007). Since its founding in 1960, IDA has seen 35 countries graduate 

from its assistance including: Botswana, China, Costa Rica, Jordan, and Turkey. 

While graduation rates are roughly the same from IDA and IBRD, it is also the 

case that the guidelines for graduation from IDA—per capita income above an 

established threshold ($1,175 in FY 2012) and/or creditworthiness to borrow on market terms—are clearer and more binding. On balance, I understand the IDA graduation model works reasonably well. As to IBRD, I believe there are advantages to 

defining a clearer graduation policy and principles for Bank engagement in middleincome countries. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

103

While I do think it is important to encourage graduation, the United States does 

have an interest in continued IBRD engagement in many middle-income countries. 

Middle-income countries, such as Brazil and China, have made tremendous strides 

in development in recent decades. However, they still account for just under half 

of the world’s population and are home to two-thirds of people across the globe 

living on less than $2 per day. So the World Bank still plays a valuable role in supporting these countries’ efforts to eradicate poverty. World Bank lending also advances other U.S. policy interests in these countries including environmental sustainability, sound fiscal management, and orienting their economies toward greater 

domestic consumption, which generates export markets for our firms and contributes to larger global rebalancing efforts. The high standards for environmental and 

social safeguards and procurement policies that the World Bank requires serves as 

a model that we would like to see adopted more broadly in these countries. Moreover, although middle-income countries can often borrow on international capital 

markets at favorable rates, they value the World Bank’s unique expertise in longterm development interventions. 

Further, even as many of these countries make considerable economic strides 

globally, they often remain vulnerable to economic shocks, which can force them to 

turn to the World Bank to cushion the blow on their most vulnerable citizens. For 

example, South Korea, a country that had formally graduated from IBRD assistance 

nearly 20 years ago, and by virtually any measure, is a success story today, nonetheless was forced to return to the Bank for assistance during the Asian Financial 

Crisis in the late 1990s. 

The World Bank and the United States have been successful in encouraging 

greater participation of emerging market donors, and if confirmed, I would continue 

to press this case. In the last replenishment of IDA, for example, several middleincome countries such as China, Brazil, Russia, and Mexico made pledges. To date, 

traditional donor contributions from these countries have been very modest. At the 

same time, through the IBRD and IFC net-income transfers, as well as measures 

such as ‘‘prepayment’’ of outstanding IDA loans by countries like China, middle-income countries played a strong, if indirect, role in driving the overall increase in 

the IDA 16 replenishment. 

That said, I think these countries should do more in exchange for the benefits 

they receive from World Bank assistance. The United States has long been at odds 

with many of the middle-income countries on the issue of loan pricing. If confirmed, 

I will continue to press for loan pricing that meets the broader needs of the Bank, 

both in terms of protecting the Bank’s capital base but also in making important 

goals like IDA transfers possible. I also think it is worth exploring the recommendation in your report to consider charging for advisory services. 

If confirmed, I would consult actively with Congress and other stakeholders about 

the appropriate role for the World Bank in middle-income countries.

Question. The global financial crisis has impacted the world’s poorest regions most 

severely. The response of the Bank was to seek greater resources from donor countries, which have also been affected drastically by the crisis. Could the international 

financial institutions have done anything to mitigate the effects of the crisis? What 

sorts of studies or reviews would you conduct to make sure that lessons learned 

from the crisis of the last few years are used to better prepare the institutions for 

any such future occurrences?

Answer. The global economic crisis that began in 2008 threatened to erase years 

of progress in developing countries. In response to the crisis and calls from the G20, 

the World Bank Group (World Bank, International Finance Corporation, Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency) increased lending to unprecedented levels. Since 

2008, the World Bank Group has committed $196.3 billion to developing countries, 

including record commitments in education, health, nutrition, population, and infrastructure, providing much-needed investments in crisis-hit economies. These investments also helped restore liquidity to trade flows, which helped cushion the blow 

for American exporters as well. 

I strongly support the Bank’s robust response to the crisis and I believe the Bank 

delivered consistent with its resource constraints—both in terms of timeliness of its 

response and the quality of its interventions. I continue to believe the Bank played 

a critical role in mitigating the extent of the crisis, and that the impact would have 

been far worse in many countries without the Bank’s interventions. 

That said, the Bank should and is taking a hard look at its crisis response efforts 

to determine where new approaches or instruments might make sense. In this context, the Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) recently completed an extensive review of the Bank’s response to the crisis. The review found that the Bank’s 

lending provided an important source of stimulus in many countries at a time when 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

104

many feared the onset of a global depression. However, the review also found that 

the Bank’s lending was not always adequately targeted or quickly disbursing, reducing its overall effectiveness. The GAO also recently completed its own review of the 

Bank (and other international financial institutions) lending during the crisis that 

drew similar conclusions. 

Recognizing the challenges to intervening effectively during a crisis and as an 

IDA 16 outcome, the Bank established an IDA crisis response window (CRW), which 

should enable IDA to respond more quickly to economic shocks and natural disasters. If confirmed, I would be eager to assess the experience with the CRW to determine if it is a model worth committing to on a permanent basis.

Question. The U.S Government just approved the general capital increase for the 

banks. The GCI was conditioned upon certain reforms. How will you ensure that 

substantial efforts are devoted to achieving these reforms? Specifically, how can the 

Bank better implement guidelines to maximize international competitive bidding in 

accordance sound procurement practices? How can the Bank better ensure protection for whistleblowers? Will you press the Bank to make available internal and 

external performance and financial audits?

Answer. Implementation of the reforms specified in the World Bank general capital increase legislation is a high priority for the administration, the Department of 

the Treasury, and for me personally. If confirmed, I will work closely with the U.S. 

Executive Director, other World Bank Executive Directors, and with Bank management to achieve these reforms. I will work to make sure that progress is carefully 

monitored and tracked under the operating framework that Treasury lays out in its 

reporting. If progress falls short, I will work diligently to press our case with the 

World Bank and elevate our concerns within the administration as necessary. 

Creating a level playing field, promulgating sound procurement practices, and 

maximizing competition is an important part of the World Bank’s approach both for 

its own sake and because it helps model the kind of practices countries need to 

adopt in order to create sound investment climates and open, growing economies. 

The World Bank’s Procurement Guidelines and standard documents have been recognized as international best practice by organizations representing the private sector. The World Bank’s Procurement Guidelines support transparency, competition, 

and cost-effective results by requiring measures such as:

• Strong international advertising requirements; 

• Open competition in the contracting process; 

• Publicly available standard bidding documents for international competitive 

bidding.

In January 2011, the World Bank Board approved modifications to its guidelines 

designed to further enhance the transparency and efficiency of the procurement 

process under World Bank-financed investment projects. This included, for example, 

requirements for strengthened advertising of project bid opportunities and for posting of project procurement plans. I understand the World Bank will soon be launching a review of its procurement policy. If confirmed, I will consult closely with relevant stakeholders including Congress and organizations representing the private 

sector to identify potential areas of improvement. I will work closely with the U.S. 

Executive Director, other Executive Directors, the Treasury Department, and World 

Bank management to incorporate these suggestions and further strengthen the 

World Bank’s already strong procurement policies. 

With respect to whistleblowers, I believe that a strong whistleblower protection 

policy is essential so that employees feel safe reporting any waste, fraud, or corruption they encounter. In partnership with Congress, the United States has been a 

consistent advocate of strong whistleblower protections at the Bank. As a result, the 

World Bank has made substantial progress in adopting and implementing policies 

in the area of a whistleblower protection that substantially embody the best practices applicable to international organizations including:

• Requirements to report suspected misconduct; 

• Protections against retaliation including provisions for discipline of any employee who engages in retaliation; 

• Legal burdens of proof on management, so that if an employee can show that 

he or she was subject to adverse action after reporting wrongdoing at a Bank, 

management must show by clear and convincing evidence that it would have 

taken the same action absent the reporting of wrongdoing; 

• Access to independent Administrative Tribunals; 

• A presumption of reinstatement for dismissed employees; 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

105

• Provisions for remedies, such as compensatory damages, for financial losses 

linked to retaliatory action, legal costs, and interim relief for whistleblowers in 

the midst of a review or investigation.

If confirmed, I would be committed to maintaining these strong whistleblower protection policies and strengthening them if needed. I understand the Treasury 

Department is currently working with the Bank to see if it can provide relevant 

data to show how its policy is being implemented. If confirmed, I would use this 

information, along with information gleaned from consultations with employees, 

Congress, and other stakeholders, to determine if additional measures are necessary. 

Finally, the World Bank now makes available its internal and external performance and financial audits. In 2009, the Bank revised and improved its Access to 

Information Policy, which governs issues related to the availability of external and 

internal performance audits. Previously the Bank had only released certain documents, but the new policy makes transparency the norm. Documents are presumed 

to be released other than in exceptional circumstances, and there is a new, formal, 

independent appeals process where members of the public can seek disclosure if 

they believe it was wrongfully denied. The World Bank now makes publicly available a wide range of critical documents including:

• The annual assessment of the Results and Performance of the World Bank 

Group; 

• A yearly update of the Status of Projects in Execution, which assesses each 

project’s progress; 

• All internal and external performance and financial audits.

In addition, under the new disclosure policy, borrowers are required to disclose 

the audited annual financial statements of projects as a precondition for doing business with the Bank. The World Bank discloses the statements upon receiving them. 

Strong standards for transparency, protection of whistleblowers, and procurement 

processes are all an essential part of making the World Bank a more accountable 

organization. If confirmed, I will work to protect these strong standards and look 

for additional ways to make the World Bank more accountable.

Question. The Board of Directors recently approved the ‘‘Program for Results’’ or 

P4R. This program has met with mixed reviews from civil society. How will you ensure that this program is implemented effectively and transparently? How will you 

monitor for the inclusion of programs with adverse environmental impacts or adverse impacts on indigenous people? Will P4R work in conjunction with a country’s 

own system of transparency? Are there any downsides to this? How can the Bank 

make the principles of Integrity Vice Presidency an integral part of all operations 

in all units of the Bank?

Answer. The concept of P4R—formally linking World Bank disbursements to the 

achievement of development results that are tangible, transparent, and verifiable—

has merits, but I also understand and share some of the concerns raised by civil 

society. Therefore, I strongly support World Bank management’s decision to roll out 

P4R slowly and with the incorporation of appropriate limits, evaluations, and oversight. 

Specifically, I support the limit of commitments under P4R in the first 2 years 

of the program. The limit of 5 percent of annual IDA/IBRD commitments—which 

still equates to approximately $2 billion annually—is sufficient to allow the World 

Bank and its shareholders to test the implementation of the instrument and identify 

and correct any problems that arise. Any expansion of the program would have to 

be brought before the Board. 

Countries that participate in the P4R program must first meet certain social and 

environmental standards. Civil society groups are understandably concerned these 

standards will not be as strong as the World Bank’s environmental and social safeguards—safeguards they have worked hard to advance at the World Bank and that, 

if confirmed, I will work to uphold and strengthen. However, the P4R program has 

the potential to provide an incentive for countries to lift their standards across their 

entire government as opposed to just projects where the World Bank is involved, 

and this could have a significant impact on advancing environmental and social 

issues. 

I also agree that the exclusion of Category A activities—those deemed likely to 

have a significant environmental impact—from P4R financing is appropriate and 

welcome the World Bank’s unequivocal, public statements in this regard. The significant risks that such activities present are best handled through Investment 

Lending operations and under the World Bank’s well-established social and environmental safeguard policies. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

106

If confirmed, I look forward to engaging closely with the World Bank as the initial 

P4R operations are brought to the Board. Specifically, I will work with the U.S. 

Executive Director and World Bank management to be particularly attentive to the 

potential for any adverse impacts of P4R activities on the environment, Indigenous 

Peoples and other vulnerable groups. In these circumstances, I would seek to make 

sure the World Bank mitigates potential risks adequately or determines not to move 

forward with the P4R investment. 

I believe that transparency and accountability are key to the success of P4R, and 

all the work the World Bank is engaged in. If confirmed, I will work with the Bank 

to provide affected communities, the private sector, and other stakeholders the ability to review and provide input on the individual program risk assessments, proposed capacity-building measures, and proposed activities. Upon the project’s completion, these stakeholders should also be informed of the results at the activity 

level. 

The World Bank’s Integrity Vice Presidency’s (INT) mandate covers the entire 

World Bank Group and is an essential accountability mechanism of the World Bank. 

I strongly support the work of the INT and welcome its continued oversight of World 

Bank lending under P4R. I also strongly support the efforts of the United States 

to incorporate language into P4R’s operational policy stating that INT would have 

the right to investigate allegations of fraud and corruption in the program supported 

by P4R, including projects financed under the program, not only those allegations 

related to Bank financing (i.e., the use of government funds would be included as 

well). If confirmed, I will work in coordination with the Treasury Department to see 

that this policy is carefully followed.

Question. In these tough economic times, governments and institutions generally 

must be able to accomplish more with the same resources. What sort of efficiency 

or cost saving measures would you recommend to the Bank? What specifically would 

you suggest for effective budget discipline in order to ensure that the largest percentages possible of the Bank’s resources are actually going to fight poverty?

Answer. Budget discipline and efficiency at the World Bank are high priorities for 

the U.S. Government and if confirmed, they would be high priorities for me as well. 

The United States has supported a flat real budget for the past 7 years. I believe 

the Bank should pursue cost saving wherever possible. I understand that the United 

States has consistently pressed for more restraint on issues of compensation, travel 

budgets, and general overhead at Bank Headquarters, and if confirmed, I fully intend to carry forward these positions. 

In addition to pushing for specific cost measures, I am very supportive of the recent structural changes that will enable greater efficiencies in the future. In 2010, 

the World Bank adopted a new financial framework that strengthens budget discipline. Specifically, for the first time in 2011, the World Bank made major financial 

decisions on budget, pricing, and net income transfers at one time (i.e., in June, 

which is the end of the Bank’s fiscal year), compelling management and shareholders to consider important budgetary tradeoffs. For example, if middle-income 

countries have an interest in an expanded Bank budget for their country, they 

should be prepared to make that case in the context of a discussion that also addresses the role loan pricing plays in supporting the budget. This is a significant 

improvement over previous practice, which was to consider these matters separately. In addition, the World Bank did, in fact, increase rates on loans with longer 

term maturities. As a result, loan prices now cover a larger share of the World 

Bank’s administrative budget, a practice that will strengthen the Bank’s accountability. 

In 2010, World Bank shareholders also agreed to a rules-based approach to netincome transfers from the hard-loan window (the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, or IBRD), to the concessional window (the International 

Development Association, or IDA), a measure that will help make support to IDA 

more predictable and sustainable while maintaining prudent reserve levels. IFC’s 

financial framework also includes a new rules-based approach to help guide the determination of the size of IFC’s pledge to the IDA replenishment in a manner consistent with IFC’s needs and donors’ prioritization of IDA transfers. These agreements further strengthen IDA’s financial model and reduce its dependence on donor 

contributions. 

Although not seemingly directly related to budget discipline, I believe the concerted focus on results will yield significant efficiencies over time. If confirmed, I 

would push to include a cost-benefit analysis in project evaluations so that we can 

focus resources where we get the biggest social return on our investment and eliminate approaches that do not work. As you rightly state in your report, funding 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

107

project evaluations is much more cost effective than continuing to fund ineffective 

projects. 

If confirmed, I expect I will find additional cost-savings measures once I am working within the institution. I take my responsibility to serve as a careful steward of 

taxpayer resources very seriously and will work hard to enforce budget discipline 

at the World Bank.

Question. U.S. leadership at the Bank is required to some degree to share its positions and voting with the U.S. Congress. Will you commit to transparency with Congress in the votes taken at the international financial institutions? What will be 

your manner and timeframe for consulting with the U.S. Congress? Will you commit 

to providing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with outdated legislative mandates?

Answer. I know that the Treasury Department is committed to transparency with 

Congress and the public, and specifically posts the votes taken at international 

financial institutions on its Web site. I also personally commit to transparency with 

regards to votes, legislative mandates, and any other issues of concern to Congress. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with Congress. I believe congressional oversight is critical, and as I said in my testimony, I have seen firsthand how 

congressional involvement can provide leverage to U.S. negotiators. I will work with 

the Treasury Department to proactively consult with Congress in a timely manner 

on significant issues facing the World Bank and I will seek ways we can partner 

together to advance our shared goals at the institutions. In addition, I will of course 

be responsive to congressional requests for my input. 

I take legislative mandates very seriously and if confirmed commit to applying 

them fully and faithfully. I also commit to providing input to the Senate Foreign 

Relations Committee with regards to the impact of the legislative mandates on U.S. 

leadership at the World Bank.

Question. Debt relief is provided to countries that claim they cannot afford to pay 

back the borrowed sums without extreme hardship. It should not be taken advantage of by corrupt governments attempting to escape repayment of sums due. How 

will you ensure that the debt relief procedure is not abused? What frameworks currently exist within the Bank to prevent this?

Answer. The international community came together to support debt relief as a 

way of freeing up resources to enable poor and heavily indebted countries to focus 

on poverty reduction. In order to make sure that it is not taken advantage of by 

corrupt governments trying to escape their obligations, the World Bank and IMF 

have established a robust process with critical safeguards under what is called the 

Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC). 

Specifically, in order for a country to receive full and irrevocable reduction in debt 

from the World Bank, a country must: 

1. Establish a track record of good performance under programs supported by 

loans from the IMF and the World Bank; 

2. Implement satisfactorily key economic and social reforms, and 

3. Adopt and implement a poverty reduction strategy paper. 

The Board provides key oversight at every stage in this process. Before a country 

receives any debt relief, the Board must agree that the country has established a 

solid track record of performance on IMF and World Bank programs, committed to 

key economic and social reforms, and put in place a poverty reduction strategy. 

Before full and irrevocable debt relief is provided, the Board must agree that the 

country remains on track with IMF and World Bank programs and that the country 

implemented the agreed economic and social reforms aimed at poverty reduction. 

If confirmed, I would work closely with the U.S. Executive Director, the other 

Executive Directors, and the World Bank management to provide careful oversight 

of this process and encourage putting in place a strong set of reforms for countries 

to meet. For example, I understand that the principles of the Extractive Industries 

Transparency Initiative are sometimes incorporated as part of these reforms and I 

would strongly advocate this continue for resource rich countries undergoing this 

process. 

These rigorous measures advance sound public financial management and the use 

of proceeds of debt relief for poverty reduction purposes. Before the HIPC Initiative, 

eligible countries were, on average, spending slightly more on debt service than on 

health and education combined. Now, they have increased markedly their expenditures on health, education, and other social services. On average, such spending is 

about five times the amount of debt-service payments.

Question. Some of the inefficiencies in the international financial institutions 

could be solved if the various institutions worked more effectively with each other. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

108

How would you encourage the banks to collaborate and cross-utilize resources with 

each other and with the IMF?

Answer. I strongly agree that better coordination between international financial 

institutions would strengthen their effectiveness, save costs, and lead to better outcomes for their client countries. 

There is already coordination on some issues—for instance, the World Bank has 

a policy that requires coordination with the IMF prior to the provision of budget 

support loans and the Bank and Fund work closely on public financial management 

reform. 

IDA 16’s Crisis Response Window is a good example of an opportunity that Treasury used to strengthen coordination between the World Bank and IMF. As a result 

of leadership from the United States, the Bank agreed to clear standards for cooperation with the Fund in any use of the crisis window. If confirmed, I will look 

to uses of the CRW for signs of positive cooperation or evidence of problems that 

need to be addressed. 

Nonetheless, coordination could be strengthened in a number of ways. First, if 

confirmed, I would work with Treasury and the Executive Director to press the 

Bank to strengthen its coordination with other IFIs—and other development partners—at the country level. The Bank strongly endorses the principles of aid effectiveness and has worked in recent years to improve its dialogue with other donors. 

However, there is room for improvement, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected 

states that have little or no institutional capacity to work with donors to harmonize 

their assistance. In these cases, the Bank needs to be particularly careful to stick 

to its areas of comparative advantage, undertake joint diagnostic and analytical 

work, and seek to minimize administrative burdens on fragile states by pooling 

funding with other donors. 

The United States has successfully encouraged closer collaboration between IFIs 

in Arab Spring countries including Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. This coordination has 

been useful for strengthening programs, including governance reform efforts across 

the IMF, World Bank Group, and African Development Bank. If confirmed, I would 

press for this coordination to continue over the long term as supporting successful 

transitions require sustained efforts. 

If confirmed, I would also work to enhance cooperation between the IFIs at the 

corporate level. Again, there has been progress in recent years—strong coordination 

between the IFC and the private sector lending arms of the other MDBs on trade 

finance facilities during the height of the global financial crisis—but also room for 

further improvement. For example, if confirmed, I would urge the Bank to assist 

other MDBs in fully and quickly operationalizing the April 2010 cross-debarment 

agreement, which would bar firms and individuals found guilty of wrongdoing at one 

institution from working with any of the institutions. The cross-debarment agreement itself was a powerful example of the IFIs sending a unified message that there 

is zero tolerance for corruption and fraud. If confirmed, I would encourage the World 

Bank to build on this agreement and work with the other IFIs to further advance 

a common anticorruption and accountability agenda. 

As mentioned in your report, the World Bank is often expected to set the standard 

of practice across the MDBs. If confirmed, I would encourage the Bank to consult 

closely with the other MDBs during its upcoming reviews of procurement policy and 

environmental and social safeguards, so that the MDBs feel invested in the World 

Bank process and can incorporate the lessons from those reviews in their own review processes. 

If confirmed, I would continue to look for other ways to encourage coordination 

and collaboration across all of the international financial institutions.

Question. It is inevitable that the Bank will have projects in conflict zones. For 

some countries, the World Bank has set forth various conflict guidelines. Would you 

advise the Bank to institutionalize such conflict guidelines and if so, how should 

they be categorized? What about Iraq and Afghanistan specifically?

Answer. I agree that the Bank needs to have a strong and coherent strategy with 

regard to fragile and conflict-affected states. There are risks to the Bank working 

in these countries, but the potential reward of helping these countries stabilize and 

move away from conflict and violence is significant. 

Therefore, I am pleased that the Bank’s engagement with fragile and conflictedaffected states (FCS) is a priority for the institution. The selection of FCS as a special theme for the IDA–16 replenishment, the Bank’s World Development Report 

2011 on Conflict, Security and Development, and the Bank’s recent establishment 

of a Global Center on Conflict, Justice and Development in Nairobi all underscore 

the Bank’s commitment in this area. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

109

As part of operationalizing the lessons from the WDR 2011, the Bank will adopt 

a different approach to the development of Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) in 

FCS. Consistent with the lessons that the Bank has learned in conflicted-affected 

states across the world, like the use of its conflict filter in Sri Lanka, CASs for these 

countries will identify the stresses that lead to conflict and violence, assess deficits 

in key national institutions, and identify key transitional opportunities that have 

the potential for breaking cycles of violence. This is an important way of systematically factoring the role of conflict into the World Bank’s programming, as was recommended in your report. Afghanistan and Iraq are both appropriately included in 

the Bank’s list of fragile countries and thus would be subject to this approach. Given 

the multifaceted nature of the conflicts in both countries, I would expect the analysis to be particularly robust. 

Having worked in a number of fragile and conflict-affected states, including 

Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, and Uganda, I know how critical this is. Simple misunderstandings can escalate quickly, but small positive gestures can also start to 

rebuild trust. Institutionalizing conflict guidelines will help guide the Bank in everything from project design to staffing and will help the Bank become a more effective 

actor in some of the world’s most difficult countries.

Question. Some country governments are required to seek parliamentary approval 

of Bank loans and grants. There have been indications that this may aid in the fight 

against corruption and promote transparency. Do you think that parliamentary 

approval is a policy that the United States should promote?

Answer. I certainly believe that the World Bank should take an expansive view 

of its stakeholders when it comes to consultation and engagement in its countries 

of operation. As a matter of accountability, the Bank should be engaged with parliaments, as well as members of civil society and the private sector in these countries. This is why I believe mechanisms like the inspection panel play such a critical 

role in promoting accountability, separate from the accountability the Bank requires 

from its direct counterparties, typically in the finance ministry. 

As you suggest, in some cases, a country’s laws and practices define a formal role 

for parliament in the approval of Bank loans and projects. In these cases, the Bank 

has a strong interest in supporting this process by being responsive to parliamentary inquiries and generally helping to facilitate parliament’s consideration of 

projects. If confirmed, where I see signs that Bank management is not playing a 

constructive role in these situations, I will be aggressive in holding them to account. 

At the same time, my understanding is that the Bank is limited in its ability to 

define the role that parliament should play. The Bank’s Articles of Agreement 

require a neutral stance on issues related to the political systems of its countries 

of operation. My understanding is that it would be a direct challenge to this requirement for Bank management, or the United States as a shareholder, to take an 

active stance on a separation of powers issued within a country. As a result, I think 

the more promising route is to continue to press Bank management to broadly 

define informal engagement so that all interested and affected parties in a country 

are engaged in the Bank’s important work. If confirmed, I am certainly committed 

to holding the Bank to account on this issue.

Question. Do you think there is sufficient coordination between the banks and 

U.S. Government development agencies such as AID and MCC? As a part of the 

U.S. leadership team for the Bank, how would you engage to promote better coordination?

Answer. I believe that coordination between the banks and U.S. Government 

development agencies is critical for a variety of reasons including preventing duplication of efforts, sharing lessons learned and best practices, and maximizing the effectiveness of donor resources. Coordination is important both in Washington, DC, 

and in each of the countries where these institutions work. There is a significant 

amount of coordination between the banks and U.S. Government development agencies on an ongoing basis, including:

• A multilateral interagency working group that meets regularly to review issues 

of concern at the development banks; 

• Country-level donor coordination mechanisms; 

• A variety of working groups and meetings that are organized around specific 

topics, such as food security and the Arab Spring.

A more specific example of how the MDBs work closely to support our U.S. development agencies is the U.S. Partnership for Growth (PfG) program. Under the PfG 

program, the Obama administration pledged to elevate its relationship with four developing economies that were exceptionally well posed to do their part to grow their 

economies, including El Salvador, Ghana, the Philippines, and Tanzania. In a new 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

110

approach to U.S. engagement with these countries, bilateral agencies worked closely 

with the MDBs to identify the most important constraints to growth, and to develop 

coordinated strategies for tackling these constraints. 

The World Bank also works closely with U.S. bilateral aid agencies in many countries. Often the World Bank develops the overall project design and coordinates with 

other donors who invest in subcomponents of the master plan. Specific examples 

include:

• The proposed $354.8 million Millennium Challenge Corporation’s (MCC) compact for Zambia, which will be considered by the MCC Board on March 22, 

2012. The project will help develop water supply, sanitation, and drainage systems in Zambia. The MCC worked closely with the World Bank, which helped 

the Zambian Government develop the sector policy and institutional reform 

groundwork. Each component of the MCC project was developed according to a 

comprehensive investment master plan developed with the assistance of the 

World Bank. 

• The MCC $434 million compact for the Philippines approved in August 2010. 

A key component of the compact was rural community development, including 

provision of infrastructure and services, such as rural roads, schools, and water 

and sanitation. The MCC project builds upon the participatory planning, implementation, and evaluation methodology developed by the World Bank and the 

Philippine Government.

A good example of cooperation between the Bank and USAID is evident in their 

joint work in support of food security and agricultural development in sub-Saharan 

Africa. Over the last 3 years, USAID and the Bank have collaborated to support a 

number of African countries in implementing food security strategies under the 

Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program (CAADP). Specific examples of collaboration between USAID and the Bank include complementary support 

for agriculture development and social safety nets programs in Ethiopia, agricultural infrastructure in Ghana, and agricultural productivity programs in Rwanda. 

In addition to these specific examples, the USED’s office, in and of itself, serves 

as a coordination hub, helping to connect not only employees from across the U.S. 

Government, but also representatives from the private sector and civil society with 

World Bank officials. In support of this effort, the U.S. Executive Director has built 

a strong interagency team that includes representatives from the State Department, 

Commerce Department, USAID, and Treasury Department. 

Even though there is a significant amount of coordination, I would expect that 

there is always room for improvement. I believe the strong relationships I have 

throughout the interagency will enable me, if confirmed, to meaningfully engage to 

promote better coordination. Additionally, if confirmed, I will actively support coordination efforts through formal mechanisms, as well as by regularly sharing information, seeking input, and continuing to build strong relationships with interagency 

colleagues.

Question. As current President Robert Zoellick indicated he is stepping down, debate has yet again arisen as to whether non-Americans should be considered for the 

presidency. What is your opinion on this? If there were a non-American in the presidency, what issues does this raise for the U.S.?

Answer. I believe that the World Bank has benefited tremendously from American 

leadership over the past several decades. President Zoellick has been a very 

impactful leader of the World Bank, helping to advance critical reforms to make the 

institution more accountable, transparent, and effective. The administration has 

stated that for all of the international financial institutions it supports an open and 

transparent and merit-based process. The United States will put forward a candidate to lead the World Bank, and I look forward to supporting that individual’s 

candidacy.

Question. Currently, there is great focus on the size and scope of the Bank 

projects in countries deemed significant and far less evaluation focused on results. 

Leadership approval is given at the design stage, but final conclusive results are 

not presented similarly. How can we shift greater emphasis to results and therefore 

greater accountability?

Answer. It is critical to have a concerted emphasis on impact and results in order 

to counteract the natural tendency of organizations to focus on dollars spent as a 

measure of success. In my professional life, I have succeeded in bringing a greater 

focus on development results through rigorous monitoring and evaluation of projects 

around the world. I look forward, if confirmed, to leveraging my experience and passion to advance this issue at the World Bank. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

111

A greater focus on results composed a major part of the reforms that Treasury 

negotiated as part of the replenishment of IDA. Accordingly, the World Bank has 

made a commitment to include results frameworks with measurable indicators in 

all projects, all country assistance strategies, and all new sector strategies. Moreover, the World Bank committed to report on development results across the institution using indicators that aggregate standardized data from projects supported by 

IDA in seven sectors—education, health, roads, water supply, micro and small and 

medium enterprise, urban development, and information and communication technology. These indicators will be featured in the IDA Annual Report, as well as reported more regularly through the Corporate Scorecard. 

If confirmed, I will work to further advance this results agenda wherever possible. 

I understand that some evaluations are presented to the Board and I would encourage this practice more regularly. The design stage of a project is not only the point 

at which members of the Board may have the greatest leverage, but it is also where 

the focus on results needs to begin. When reviewing projects, if confirmed, I would 

seek to ensure that results frameworks and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms 

are incorporated into the design of a project. I understand that the World Bank will 

soon be undertaking a process to reform its human resource policies. Part of this 

will include strengthening performance evaluation processes and aligning pay with 

performance. As was recommended in your report, if confirmed, I would work to advance reforms that would reward employees for the results they achieve not the 

amounts of money they disburse or oversee. Moreover, reforms should incentivize 

the achievement of results in challenging environments such as fragile and conflictaffected countries even if the scale of the results achieved may be less than what 

is possible in a large, stable middle-income country. 

I have a deep commitment to promoting greater accountability and, if confirmed, 

I would work to find additional opportunities to advance a results-driven approach 

at the Bank. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(113)

NOMINATIONS OF PAMELA A. WHITE, LINDA 

THOMAS-GREENFIELD, AND GINA K. ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Pamela A. White, of Maine, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Haiti 

Hon. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, of Louisiana, to be Director General of the Foreign Service 

Gina K. Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Malta 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:05 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert Menendez, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Menendez, Durbin, Rubio, and Risch. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS 

Senator DURBIN [presiding]. Good afternoon. This hearing of the 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee will come to order. 

Today the committee will consider three nominations: the Honorable Pamela White to be Ambassador to the Republic of Haiti; the 

Honorable Linda Thomas-Greenfield to be Director General of the 

Foreign Service; and Ms. Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley to be 

Ambassador to the Republic of Malta. 

Welcome to the nominees, their friends, and family. 

I am pleased to stand in for Senator Menendez, my colleague, for 

a moment. He will be joining us very shortly. I will be brief with 

my introductory remarks, then turn to my friend and colleague, 

Senator Rubio, before we give each of you an opportunity for a brief 

opening statement. Please feel free at that time to introduce any 

family members or others that are with you today. 

I want to congratulate each of you for your nominations. I am 

pleased the President has nominated three individuals with many 

years of experience who, if confirmed, will serve as the United 

States representatives and will be called upon to implement the 

policies of our Government, protect and advance our interests, and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

114

help guide our Nation through the challenges we face around the 

world. 

Before we take your testimony, I would like to start with the 

introductions of each of our nominees. 

Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio was planning on being here this 

afternoon to introduce Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley but was not 

able to attend because of another committee assignment. I would 

ask unanimous consent that his very strong statement in support 

of her nomination be included in the record today. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Brown follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. SHERROD BROWN, U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO, IN SUPPORT OF THE NOMINATION OF HON. GINA ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY OF OHIO TO

BE THE UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MALTA

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of the nomination of the Honorable Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, of the great State of Ohio, to 

be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Malta. 

Located in the Mediterranean Sea, the Republic of Malta has been a gateway between Europe and North Africa. And it has long been a partner to the United States 

in promoting and preserving peace and security around the world. 

The relationship between our nations spans from the days of World War II, when 

President Franklin D. Roosevelt called Malta, the ‘‘only tiny bright flame in the 

darkness—a beacon of hope for clearer days which have come.’’ 

Today, our relationship has developed as the challenges and opportunities within 

the international community have evolved. We share interests in maritime law 

enforcement, search and rescue operations, combating pollution at sea, and enhancing air-space management. And with turmoil in the Middle East and challenges 

arising from the Arab Spring, Malta will once again be a critical partner in preserving global peace and security. 

There are few Americans who are more qualified than the Honorable Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, to represent the United States in this critical country 

at this critical time. 

Born in Cleveland, she attended Cleveland Heights High School, where she studied Hebrew, an education reinforced by the culture of Orthodox Judaism that 

shaped the neighborhood of Cleveland Heights where she was raised. During high 

school, she first traveled to the Middle East on a student exchange trip from 1978–

79, coinciding with Egyptian President Anwar Sadat’s historic visit to Jerusalem. 

After graduating, she earned a B.A. from George Washington University. She then 

became a Peace Corps volunteer in Oman and continued her public service as a 

Presidential Management Fellow at the United States Information Agency. After 

earning her M.A. in International Relations at the School of Advanced International 

Studies at Johns Hopkins in 1985, Abercrombie-Winstanley joined the U.S. Foreign 

Service. 

Her Foreign Service career has taken her from Baghdad during the Iran-Iraq war, 

to Indonesia to Cairo, Tunisia to Tel Aviv. In 2002, during her service in Saudi Arabia, she was the first female Consul General and during the December 6, 2004, 

deadly al-Qaeda terrorist attack on the consulate, she was cited for acts of courage. 

Her service abroad representing our country has been exceptional, as has her 

service here at home. She has served many vital posts across our national security 

apparatus—from the National Security Council to the United Nations to the State 

Department, working on challenging portfolios that include Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, 

and Jordan. From 1991–1993 she served as Special Assistant for Middle Eastern 

and African Affairs to Deputy and then later, Secretary of State Lawrence 

Eagleberger. And from 2008 to 2011 she served as Deputy Coordinator for Programs 

and Policy in the Secretary of State’s Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism. 

Any career as a senior Foreign Service officer is difficult and demanding, and at 

the center of the challenging business of diplomacy. The Honorable Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, of Ohio, has had a distinguished and decorated career mastering the delicate craft of that business. Her extensive knowledge and experience—

from her high school days in Cleveland Heights to a diplomatic career in Washington and around the world—makes her uniquely qualified to be next United 

States Ambassador to the Republic Malta.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

115

Senator DURBIN. And I understand that Senator Bill Nelson of 

Florida, our colleague, may wish to introduce Ambassador White. 

Senator Nelson, please proceed. Welcome to your lovely wife. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to my colleague from Florida, Senator Rubio, not only I wanted to be here, 

but my better half, Grace Nelson, who is seated right here in the 

front row, wanted to be here to say a word about Pam White and 

also Linda Thomas-Greenfield, two real professionals. 

We have known Pam longer because we first got to know her 

when she headed up USAID in Tanzania and then went to head 

up USAID in Liberia where Linda was the Ambassador. And Linda 

has just returned to the States for this new appointment just a couple weeks ago. Pam in the meantime—very unusual that a USAID 

top official then goes on and becomes Ambassador. And Pam has 

been the Ambassador to The Gambia for the last couple of years. 

Now, why we wanted to be here is that in the good fortune that 

we have had—Grace and I—to travel over a good part of the world, 

especially the third-world countries. We have seen extraordinary 

public service particularly in third-world countries where a heart 

for service is so important. And indeed, that is what we first noticed in Pam. And we saw that and it was obviously recognized, 

and then she was sent to Liberia as the head of USAID and had 

stellar results in both of those countries that we had seen her work 

product. And for that to be recognized by the State Department 

and then for her to ascend to the position of ambassador in another 

third-world nation and now for her to be nominated to come to the 

Western Hemisphere in the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, Haiti, of which Senator Rubio and I particularly have considerable interest because of such a connection between Haitian 

Americans, of which we have a substantial community in Florida, 

and the people of Haiti. 

Haiti continues to need a lot of help. They are still coming 

through the ravages of the earthquake, and Haiti still needs a lot 

of help as they try to modernize into a functioning government. 

And I think that this present President Martelly is really trying. 

We have got to have a strong presence there representing the 

United States as he continues to try to reform that country. And 

so I could not give you a higher recommendation for someone to be 

one of our ambassadors, particularly to a country that is so important to the United States as Haiti is in the Western Hemisphere. 

I would just say, in passing, about Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield that her record is stellar. The fact that she has been there in 

Liberia, this little struggling country headed by a woman, Mrs. 

Sirleaf, Helen Johnson Sirleaf, and how she has tried to take that 

country that was so, so accustomed to corruption and start turning 

it and how she has been successful and even so in the point of just 

being reelected. 

So I come here as your colleague to share with you my personal 

comments, and I thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you very much, Senator Nelson. You are 

obviously invited to stay as long as you can, but I know your schedFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

116

ule may call you off to another place. But we thank you for your 

introductions and testimony today. 

I am going to say a few words about each nominee, then give my 

colleague, Senator Rubio, a chance, then turn this gavel over to 

Senator Menendez. Statements will be made, questions asked, and 

we will proceed with the hearing. 

I visited Haiti earlier this year. It was not my first visit. It is 

sadly the poorest nation in our hemisphere. The international community showed an amazing outpouring of generosity after the terrible earthquake, but there is a lot of work that remains to be 

done. 

I saw a sprawling displaced persons camp in Port-au-Prince, and 

I saw what just a small amount of money well spent might do. An 

organization, an NGO, known as GHESKIO, invited us to come 

over for a tour. We met Dr. Marie Deschamps, and as she walked 

me through, she showed me a well that had been drilled right on 

her property 600 feet down and was now providing clean drinking 

water, which they treated with chemicals to make sure it was even 

safer, clean drinking water for 120,000 people. And she said thank 

you because America built that well. And I said, where did it come 

from? And she explained and I finally realized it was a program 

that I had created in the name of Paul Simon, my predecessor, who 

wrote a book over 25 years ago about the shortage of water in the 

world. And we created the Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act. We 

funded it with an amount which by Federal standards is small 

change, about $25 million or $30 million. And I asked her how 

much did it cost to build your well, and she said about $28,000 to 

supply clean drinking water for 120,000 people in a country that 

is plagued with cholera. It is an indication where money well spent 

can make a difference, but it is an indication of the dramatic need 

in a poor country like Haiti. 

Amid these challenges, I have no doubt Ambassador White will 

display the commitment and versatility necessary to help move 

Haiti forward. She follows a great individual who represented the 

United States several times as Ambassador, Ken Merton. He is 

really one of the extraordinary public servants I have met, a hard 

act to follow, but I know you will do well. 

Let me say a final word about your service in Gambia. I have 

been trying for years—literally for years—to secure the release of 

a Gambian journalist, Ebrima Manneh, who was taken into custody in 2006 by Gambian security personnel. Shamefully he was 

held incommunicado and has not been heard of since. I fear he may 

have died in custody. 

His disappearance was symbolic of the troubling record of press 

freedom in Gambia, and despite request of human rights organizations and several Senators, the Gambian Government refused to 

account for him. 

And then early last year, there as a breakthrough when Gambian President Jammeh formally requested a U.N. investigation 

into his disappearance and death. Ambassador White has been a 

tireless partner in this effort, and I thank you so much for standing 

up for American values in this request. 

Linda Thomas-Greenfield served as U.S. Ambassador to Liberia, 

as has been mentioned, since 2008; before that, worked at the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

117

Department of State and the Secretary for the Bureau of African 

Affairs, Refugee Counselor. She holds a B.A. from Louisiana State 

University and an M.A. from the University of Wisconsin. 

If confirmed Director General of the Foreign Service, Ambassador 

Thomas-Greenfield will be responsible for recruitment, assignment, 

evaluation, promotion, discipline, career development, and retirement policies for the State Department’s Foreign Service and Civil 

Service employees. It is a big responsibility. Foreign Service officers 

constantly embrace new challenges and hardships, including family 

separation, and it is important that the Director General is able to 

address those needs from personal experience. 

Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley has served as Deputy Coordinator 

Counterterrorism at the Department of State since 2008. Prior to 

that, she served as the Director of the Office of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan at the State Department. She has also served as 

Policy Advisor at the Department of Defense and Director at the 

National Security Council. Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley attained 

her B.A. from George Washington University and M.A. from Johns 

Hopkins. 

A seasoned diplomat, her nomination to serve as Ambassador to 

Malta is a fitting followup to her work on counterterrorism efforts 

and leadership in the Middle East. Malta’s role and counsel during 

the courageous uprising in Libya was representative of this tiny 

nation’s large impact on the world. If confirmed, Ms. AbercrombieWinstanley will be vital in reaffirming the strong friendship and 

partnership between Malta and the United States. 

And before inviting your opening statements, I will turn to my 

colleague, Senator Rubio. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, Senator Durbin. I appreciate the opportunity to be here as well on three important nominations. 

The first, of course, is to Haiti which I visited for the first time 

in January of this year. I am impressed by the resilience of a people that have faced extraordinary struggles even before an earthquake, but yet have optimism about the promise of the future and 

the opportunity we have working together with the people of Haiti 

to help them build that future for themselves. 

There are tremendous opportunities there for the hemisphere if, 

in fact, Haiti can turn the corner and build for themselves a more 

prosperous society and a more functional government. And the 

United States can provide invaluable assistance in that regard. I 

think Senator Durbin outlined just one program that we would like 

to be involved in, and there are others that are out there that we 

are already involved in that have proven to be a great success. We 

look forward to hearing from you about some of your ideas in that 

regard. 

Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield comes very highly recommended, 

and from everything I have read in her record, you have a lot of 

people speaking very highly of you. And you have a very important 

job. In the next few months, you will have the responsibility of 

recruiting and assigning, evaluating, promoting, disciplining, being 

involved in the career development and retirement policies. It 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

118

sounds like a lot of work. So we look forward to hearing about your 

plans as well. 

And last, but not least, Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley of Ohio. I 

have a letter here if I could have unanimous consent to submit on 

behalf of Senator Lugar in support of your nomination. 

Senator MENENDEZ [presiding]. Without objection. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I had the opportunity to visit Malta I think in September of last 

year. We had gone to Libya. They did not want us to stay overnight 

in Tripoli, so we stayed overnight in Malta, got to meet the leaders 

there and got to spend some time in the nation, and grew to really 

understand its strategic importance in the region as a gateway 

between North Africa and the Middle East and Europe, but also an 

important ally. Though they are not a member of NATO, they have 

been such an important partner in so many of the operations that 

NATO has undertaken and I think will play a critical role in the 

months to come as the Libyan people struggle to reach, for example, their own democratic aspirations. So it is an important relationship. It is not often talked about. 

And by the way, I was also very impressed with their economic 

development and their economic prosperity which I think serves as 

an example to the region as well. 

So, again, it is not a station that people talk about. It does not 

wind up in the newspapers a lot. That does not mean it is not of 

value and strategic importance to the United States and to our 

allies in Europe and in North Africa and in the region. And so we 

look forward to hearing your testimony as well about your plans in 

regard to that assignment. 

So thank you very much, all three of you, for your service to our 

country and for being here today. 

[The letter to Senator Lugar from retired U.S. Ambassador Douglas W. Kmiec in support of Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley follows:]

PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY, 

SCHOOL OF LAW, 

Malibu, CA, March 14, 2012. 

Hon. RICHARD LUGAR, 

Ranking Minority Member, 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR: I understand that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will 

today take up the nomination of Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, as my successor for 

the post of U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Malta. 

I wish to formally encourage the committee to act favorably on Ms. AbercrombieWinstanley’s nomination. 

While the nominee’s schedule in preparation did not allow her to accept my offer 

of assistance or briefing, and thus, I cannot say that I know Ms. AbercrombieWinstanley personally, she is well thought of by my former DCM, Richard Mills, 

who is an excellent judge of diplomatic talent, and it is patent that she has strong 

credentials as a career Foreign Service officer. 

Of course, I stand ready to be of assistance to the Ambassador-designate or the 

Department of State at any time. With the nature of the entire region being in political transition, it is important for our new Embassy compound there to be alert and 

fully functioning. 

Senator, I would take it as a kindness if you would submit this letter of positive 

endorsement for the record. It is a matter of completeness and fairness since the 

committee should draw no adverse inferences with respect to this dedicated public 

servant by virtue of the unfortunate White House silence that both your inquiry, 

and my own, received inquiring as to why efforts devoted to interfaith diplomacy 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

119

were allowed to be mischaracterized as ‘‘outside the scope of U.S. interests.’’ As you 

remember, having thoughtfully attended my swearing in, the President’s director of 

the Office of Faith-based Initiatives highlighted the significance of interfaith efforts 

in this pivotal part of the world as part of the ‘‘special Presidential logic’’ behind 

my appointment. Given the interest expressed by the ‘‘Arab Spring nations’’ in fashioning new governmental structures of a nature that will honor democracy and religious freedom, the need for sensitive, interfaith efforts to promote understanding 

and respect across the Abrahamic traditions is greater today than it was 2 or so 

years ago at the beginning of my service. 

Parenthetically, I am pleased to report that in discussions even today my dedication to meeting this need did not end with the conclusion of my own service. While 

announcement would be premature, agreement will likely soon be reached establishing a joint program between several fine U.S. universities (including my home 

institution of Pepperdine University which for the 8th consecutive year was ranked 

as the number 1 dispute resolution program in the country by U.S. News and World 

Report) and the University of Malta. This joint venture will be devoted to Graduate 

study in an understanding of Hebraic, Christian and Islamic traditions as well as 

dispute resolution methodologies that can be employed both by State Department 

personnel and NGOs. 

At this positive moment of transition, it is also appropriate for me to bring to the 

committee’s attention the fine work of the American and locally engaged staff in the 

Embassy over the last several years. As the IG found in the overall high evaluation 

given Embassy-Valletta, there were, as I recall, fewer areas needing improvement 

than there were inspectors. While it is invidious to single people out by name, some 

service was of such impressive dimension, I ask that special note be made of the 

work of Lenese Walls, my office administrator, DCMs Rick Mills, Jason Davis, and 

Arnie Campbell; our effective and highly respected Defense Attache ́ (Commander 

Jane Moraski; Lt. Commanders J. Phillip Webb, Sean Schenk, and Greg Tozzi); 

NCIS detailee, Matt Cummings, and Consular officer Tracy Brown. The work of the 

Bert Hernandez and his staff on matters of regional security is most noteworthy as 

well and in an appropriate forum deserves commendation. 

All of these personnel assisted in maintaining our maritime safety and security 

center, and associated search and rescue training, undertaken in partnership with 

the Armed Forces of the Republic of Malta. These preparations, ever observant of 

the value deeply held by Malta of constitutional neutrality, became invaluable when 

it was necessary to act with dispatch to rescue American personnel from EmbassyTripoli along with several hundred citizens of other nations in the face of the violence that erupted there in February 2011. The rescue which depended in part upon 

the diplomatic negotiation of the use of a private catamaran, was a success noted 

by Secretary Clinton personally when she visited Malta this past October. Our rescue capability was unquestionably enhanced by the generous humanitarian assistance supplied by Malta to all concerned, and in particular to those few evacuees 

who suffered injury in the face of the gale-force-5 storm experienced en route away 

from the unpredictable shooting environment on shore. 

Finally, I wish to give recognition to the Embassy staff before your committee for 

the following matters of some importance as a result of U.S. initiative between 2009 

and 2011:

• Completion of a $125.5 million new Embassy compound. 

• Signing of an enhanced security agreement, training and equipment with the 

Malta International Airport. 

• Signing of enhanced security agreement with Malta Customs, as well as accompanying training and equipment. 

• Ratification of the Avoidance of Double Taxation Treaty. 

• Organized fundraisers for the needs of refugees who landed in Malta because 

of the violence in North Africa, including one memorable event with Actor Martin Sheen who premiered the movie, ‘‘The Way’’ for the humanitarian effort. 

• Hosted the U.S. Secretary of the Navy and Leadership of the Sixth Fleet. 

• Conference on Protection of Intellectual Property. 

• Drafting of the first strategic plan for north-south engagement in the Mediterranean. 

• Planning and instruction associated with U.S.-EU-Mediterranean Maritime 

Training Conference. 

• Support for the resettlement of several hundred migrant families. 

• Multiple efforts to advance a fuller understanding of the usefulness and advantages of SOFA. 

• Day-to-day meetings and cables with diplomatic counterparts and the Foreign 

Minister, as needed. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

120

• Welcomed congressional delegation as well as numerous foreign visitors, including His Holiness Benedict XVI. 

• Renewal of the visa waiver program. 

• Secured funding for alternative energy photo voltaic project at NEC. 

• Helped institute skills training and English language courses for the migrant 

populations, especially those preparing for U.S. resettlement. 

• Arranged for White House Chief of Staff Sununu (on site) and Secretary of 

State James Baker (via video) participation in the Mediterranean school of 

diplomacy conference marking the 20th anniversary of the end of the cold war 

and the Bush-Gorbachev meetings related thereto in 1989. 

• Made efforts to promote interfaith dialogue and diplomacy surveys and conference planning. 

• Promoted with conference presentation and public diplomacy: gender opportunity and equality. 

• Successfully arranged with the Prime Minister for a high-level task force to address human trafficking; negotiated a new arrest protocol, with the expert assistance of Thomas Yeager, the Embassy political, economic, and cultural officer, focusing on identifying the slave trader, rather than prosecution of coerced 

victims; Mr. Yeager, by the way, came to the Department of State after 30 years 

of service in the U.S. Navy and his energy, preparation, and judgment reflected 

both his patriotic spirit and thorough nature. 

• Arranged for U.S. educational/public diplomacy visits of members of the Maltese 

judiciary as well as leaders of the major political parties in Malta. 

• Continued the full utilization of Fulbright scholars in the life of the Embassy 

and public diplomacy.

Senator, it was an honor to serve our Nation in the Republic of Malta. I count 

many Maltese citizens today as life-long friends, from President George Abela to

the many who worshipped with me in morning Mass as I sought to visit the 365 

Catholic churches on the main island as well as Gozo. I am pleased to report that 

relations between our two nations remain especially strong. Friendship and cooperation in virtually all matters, including the serious application of trade sanctions as 

needed to address the unfortunate actions in Iran, has been readily offered and 

accepted. 

I wish Ambassador-designate Abercrombie-Winstanley complete success, and I 

know the people of Malta will welcome her, as they did me, with ‘‘uncommon kindness.’’

Respectfully submitted, 

DOUGLAS W. KMIEC, 

U.S. Ambassador (ret.), 

Caruso Family Chair in Constitutional Law & Human Rights, Pepperdine University.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator Rubio. 

Let me start off by thanking Senator Durbin for filling in for me. 

I regret that I could not be here at the very start of the hearing 

but I had two nominees of President Obama to be judges for the 

Federal District Court to present before the Judiciary Committee. 

And I will truncate my opening statement. I appreciate that he 

has already introduced the nominees. 

I remain concerned about the slow progress in Haiti. I am concerned about the lack of job opportunities for Hispanics and other 

minorities in the State Department and about Malta’s facilitation 

by the use of its flag and its ports of Iran’s cargo shipping line, 

IRISL. 

You have all been nominated to positions that will allow you to 

influence these matters. So I look forward to hearing your assessments, goals, and objectives and to enter into a dialogue with you. 

We have your testimony. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

121

I would ask each of you to summarize your statement in about 

5 minutes or so. Your full statements will be included in the record. 

And with that, Ambassador White, we can start with you and 

then move down the line. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PAMELA A. WHITE, OF MAINE, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF HAITI 

Ambassador WHITE. Thank you very much. It is a great pleasure 

to be here today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am honored to 

appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as 

the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Haiti. I am grateful 

for the trust and the confidence President Obama and Secretary 

Clinton have placed in me by nominating me to this crucial post. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with you on Haiti, a country with which the United States shares broad and deep and longstanding ties and one that many Americans, including me, care 

deeply about. 

Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like to submit my 

written testimony for the record and make a few remarks. 

I first want to thank Senator Bill Nelson for the honor of introducing me to the committee. I am grateful for his support. Senator 

Nelson has been to Haiti and he knows its issues well. That he 

supports my nomination as Ambassador to that country is a vote 

of confidence that I deeply appreciate. Thank you so much, Senator 

and Grace. 

I understand that some here were at Congressman Donald 

Payne’s funeral today, and I just want to add he was a hero of 

mine and I will miss him and I grieve for him. 

I would like to thank my friends and family for attending this 

hearing. Some have my front, meaning that they are watching me 

this way from afar in Senegal and my parents in Maine and friends 

there, and some have my back. That is to say, they are in this 

room. My son Patrick, USAID, State friends, Director Williams of 

the Peace Corps, and the Spences from Chicago. And thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, for 35 years, maybe even a tiny bit more, it has 

been my privilege and my pride to serve the United States. I began 

in a tiny village in Cameroon as a Peace Corps Volunteer. As an 

officer at USAID, I have served in numerous countries in Africa. 

As Mission Director for USAID in Mali, in Tanzania, and in Liberia, and as Ambassador to The Gambia, I have worked hard to 

ensure that diplomacy and development take their rightful place 

alongside defense as the core instruments for promoting United 

States interests. 

And my USAID service took me to Haiti from 1985 to 1990. It 

was a troubled period with lots of coups and lots of violence. But 

my posting there left me with a deep and abiding admiration for 

the people of Haiti. I have seen how courageous they are. I have 

seen how hard they work. I have seen the fortitude they have displayed in bouncing back from political or natural disasters one 

after another. The resilience and the dynamism of its people are 

among the most valuable resources that Haiti possesses. 

Secretary Clinton has called Haiti ‘‘a test of resolve and commitment,’’ and that challenge extends to the country’s leaders, to its 

people, to its donors, including the United States of America. We 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

122

must never lose sight of the fact that the success of that country 

is ultimately in the hands of Haitians themselves. We must recognize there are no quick fixes in building capacity in Haiti. It is 

going to take time. 

It is of critical importance that we help strengthen, expand, and 

diversify Haiti’s private sector. Without a healthy economy, Haiti 

will remain poor. It will remain dependent. And this truth has to 

drive our collaboration with the private sector, and our investment 

in initiatives that are truly sustainable. It is Haiti’s leaders who 

must foster an environment conducive to economic development 

and prosperity because without responsive, accountable, and transparent governance, without the rule of law, without the proper 

laws to attract investment, without a fully functioning government, 

sustained development will not be possible. 

If confirmed, I will press Haiti’s leaders and its people on these 

key matters. 

In our efforts to help Haitians build a better future, attention 

and support from Congress has been invaluable, and I thank you 

for that. If confirmed Ambassador to Haiti, I will look forward to 

working with you in addressing the country’s crucial issues. 

Haiti is often described as the poorest nation in the Western 

Hemisphere, and perhaps in terms of money, it is. But it is among 

the richest countries in terms of culture and history and courage. 

The great pride the Haitians feel for their remarkable country 

makes success not only achievable but believable. If confirmed, I 

will work hard with Haitians to make sure their endless sacrifices 

and the bravery of the people who suffered through that horrific 

earthquake are rewarded with a better quality of life and with 

renewed spirit. 

I thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador White follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR PAMELA A. WHITE

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am honored to appear before you today as President 

Obama’s nominee to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Haiti. I am grateful for the trust and confidence President Obama and Secretary Clinton have placed 

in me by nominating me to this crucial post. If confirmed, I look forward to working 

with you on Haiti, a country with which the United States shares broad, deep, and 

longstanding ties, and one that, as we have seen in the past few years in particular, 

many Americans care about very deeply. 

Mr. Chairman, for 35 years it has been my privilege and my pride to serve the 

United States. I began my government service in a tiny village in Cameroon as a 

Peace Corps Volunteer. As an officer for the U.S. Agency for International Development, I have worked and raised a family in numerous countries, including Ivory 

Coast, Niger, Burkina Faso, Senegal and South Africa. As Mission Director for 

USAID in Mali, in Tanzania and in Liberia, and as Ambassador to The Gambia, 

I have worked hard to ensure that diplomacy and development take their rightful 

place alongside defense as the core instruments for promoting United States interests abroad. 

My USAID service also took me to Haiti, where I lived and worked from 1985 to 

1990. It was a troubled period, with coups and violence, and a legacy of misrule the 

effects of which are felt to this day. But my posting also left me with a deep and 

abiding admiration for the people of Haiti. I have seen how courageous they are. 

I have seen how hard they work. I have seen the fortitude they have displayed in 

bouncing back again and again from political or natural disasters. The resilience 

and dynamism of its people are among the most valuable resources that Haiti possesses, and are key factors in United States involvement with that country. 

Those strengths have repeatedly been put to the test in Haiti’s often turbulent 

history, and seldom more severely than in the 2-plus years since the devastating 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

123

earthquake of January 12, 2010. Even before that catastrophe, in February 2009, 

Secretary Clinton identified Haiti as a foreign policy priority and initiated a comprehensive, whole of government review of the U.S. Government’s engagement with 

that country. The earthquake, with its staggering human and material losses, gave 

added urgency to our efforts. 

Secretary Clinton has called Haiti ‘‘a test of resolve and commitment,’’ and that 

challenge extends to the country’s leaders, to its people, and to donors, including the 

United States. We must never lose sight of the overriding fact that, as committed 

as we are to Haiti, the success of that country is ultimately in the hands of the Haitians themselves. We can help plan, encourage, and support, but goals must reflect 

the priorities that the government and people of Haiti have identified, and on which 

they are leading the way. 

In order for Haiti to be able to take the lead, the United States and other donors 

must equip key Haitian ministerial and government institutions with the capacity 

they need to manage funds, people, projects, and procurement. If the Haitian Government cannot deliver basic services to its people, there will continue to be the inefficiencies and crisis of confidence that have hampered development for decades. 

We must recognize that there are no quick fixes or shortcuts in building capacity 

in Haiti’s governmental and nongovernmental sectors; the process requires a longterm commitment on our part. 

We must also recognize the risk of spreading our engagement too thin to have 

lasting impact. The United States has focused additional attention on specific sectors and areas, with other donor partners concentrating on other areas in which 

they are more specialized. Today, we are supporting Haiti as partners in four sectors and working in three defined geographic regions. Together with Haitian and 

international partners, we seek to diminish and remove the most significant impediments that have limited Haiti’s economic growth and development. 

Some ask what the United States assistance has achieved, especially since the 

earthquake. While progress has been slower than we or the Haitian people would 

like, there have been tangible accomplishments. First, we helped saved lives and 

ameliorated the worst effects of the earthquake and the cholera epidemic. As of 

March 1, the U.S. Government had built 28,653 transitional shelters in Haiti, repaired 6,002 damaged houses to shelter 8,102 households, provided hosting support 

to 26,523 households, and provided rental vouchers to roughly 1,200 households, 

thereby housing over 322,000 individuals. These efforts, along with support from the 

international community, have reduced the number of internally displaced people 

living in camps from roughly 1.5 million to 490,545 since the summer of 2010. In 

addition, our efforts have removed 2.31 million cubic meters of rubble—almost half 

of all the rubble that has been removed. 

With Haiti’s most pressing humanitarian needs being addressed, the United 

States has increasingly shifted its assistance toward the country’s longer term 

development. Gaps and shortfalls must be filled in order to foster stability and economic growth in Haiti. The country requires critical infrastructure, an efficient and 

reliable energy sector, a modernized agricultural sector capable of serving both 

domestic and export markets, internationally competitive ports, an accessible system of health care and facilities that goes beyond meeting emergency needs, and a 

policing and justice system that serves the needs of its people. We are working with 

Haitian and international partners in a Haitian-designed and -led process to meet 

those needs. 

The United States is responding to Haiti’s desire for regional investments that 

support the development of economic corridors outside of Port-au-Prince. In particular, we have targeted some of our most significant investments in one of Haiti’s 

poorest regions in the North. Working with partners from the private sector, bilateral and multilateral stakeholders, nongovernmental organizations, and Haiti’s national government and local governments, we have broken ground on what will be 

one of the largest industrial parks in the Caribbean, at Caracol on the country’s 

north coast. The initiative will transform one of Haiti’s poorest regions, creating 

15,000 new jobs that should grow to 20,000 jobs by 2016. The project also includes 

new housing settlements for 25,000 people complete with electricity, water, social 

services, and job opportunities nearby. The plans also encompass a state-of-the-art 

container port, an upgraded energy system to provide reliable electricity for 100,000 

people and businesses; and rehabilitated health clinics and reference hospitals in 

the region. At the same time as we seek to create opportunities in industry, we are 

also working to support the agricultural sector, from which more than 60 percent 

of Haitians derive income, by increasing farmers’ access to credit and linking 

smallholder farmers to viable markets and improving farm incomes and productivity. Our work in the agricultural sector will also serve to address some Haiti’s 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

124

environmental problems and induce farmers to remain in rural areas, instead of 

flocking to Port-au-Prince. 

The examples I have just cited reflect the critical importance the United States 

attache ́s to helping Haiti strengthen, expand, and diversify its economy. It is indisputable that no long-term development goals in Haiti can be sustainable without the 

growth of the private sector. The people of Haiti need that if they are to see improvement in their quality of life; the Government of Haiti needs that if it is to 

develop a tax base that will allow Haiti and not donors to fund essential social services. Regardless of our efforts in other areas, without a healthy economy Haiti will 

remain poor and dependent, and this truth has to drive our collaboration with the 

private sector and our investment in initiatives that are truly sustainable. 

The United States is addressing assistance obstacles from our end, such as bringing our staffing up to needed levels and providing additional procurement resources. 

Our pace of programming is accelerating. We are working to ensure that requirements such as environmental assessments and seismic data are met in order to 

carry out our projects successfully. We are taking steps to increase local contracting 

as more of our reconstruction programs are designed and awarded, and are making 

headway in putting solicitations out for competitive bidding as quickly as possible. 

This brings us back to the indispensible ingredient of Haitian ownership of its recovery. It is Haiti’s leaders who must foster a political, societal, and economic environment conducive to economic development and prosperity, because regardless of 

how much stakeholders invest in Haiti, without responsive, accountable, and transparent governance; without just application of the rule of law; without new laws and 

changes in existing ones to attract investment; and without a fully staffed and functioning government in every branch, sustained development will not be possible. 

High expectations lifted President Michel Martelly into office. It will now take 

hard work and dedicated people on all sides to translate those hopes into results 

and help Haiti fulfill its ambitions. The Parliament’s recommendation and President 

Martelly’s recent appointment of justices to Haiti’s Supreme Court provide meaningful leadership to the judiciary and are cause for hope. We are also encouraged by 

the Martelly administration’s steps to tackle corruption in the crucial energy sector. 

The respected U.S. Government-financed turnaround management team that his administration appointed to the serve at the state-owned electric company has already 

identified $1.6 million a month in savings by rooting out waste, fraud, and corruption. Last week the Government of Haiti signed a far-reaching agreement with the 

management team to achieve ambitious targets in improving the utility’s financial 

viability and expand the number of customers served. 

The resignation of Prime Minister Garry Conille on February 24 comes as a setback to development, as Haiti once again risks being left without a fully functioning 

government able to tackle the many development challenges it faces. Haiti needs a 

government fully engaged in development decisions with the will to make choices 

and speed up the formal approval process. Haiti also needs a government that can 

reassure donors that it is on the path to strengthening the rule of law, ending a 

culture of impunity, showing no tolerance for corruption, and reaffirming its commitment to democracy by ending the inexcusable delays in holding elections. This 

is the moment that requires making tough choices and putting policy before politics. 

If confirmed, I will press Haiti’s leaders and its people to show through actions their 

commitment to democratic values and a genuine openness to business. 

In our efforts to help Haitians build a better future, the sustained attention and 

concrete support we have received from Congress have been invaluable, and I thank 

you for them. There is widespread understanding on Capitol Hill of why Haiti is 

important to the United States: its proximity to our country, the extensive personal 

and historical ties between the two nations, the value of a more stable and prosperous partner in the Caribbean, the risks posed by potential trafficking or refugee 

flows. If confirmed as Ambassador to Haiti, I look forward to working with you in 

addressing these crucial issues. 

It would be a mistake to understate the scale of the challenges facing Haiti, or 

the need for a long-term commitment in order to achieve lasting progress. But the 

news from Haiti is by no means all negative. According to a recent Gallup poll, Haitians rate their lives better now than they did before the earthquake. Haitians’ optimism is evident in a number of other areas as well, including the highest confidence 

in government institutions on record. 

Haiti is often described as the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere. But it 

is not when it comes to the resilience and creativity of its people and its natural 

economic potential. It is among the richest in terms of history and culture and courage. The great pride the Haitians feel for their remarkable country makes success 

achievable and believable. If confirmed by the Senate, I will do my utmost to give 

Haitians and Americans both further cause for hope and optimism about Haiti.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

125

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Ambassador. 

Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LINDA THOMAS–GREENFIELD, OF LOUISIANA, TO BE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE FOREIGN 

SERVICE 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I am 

honored to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee 

to be the next Director General of the Foreign Service and Director 

of Human Resources at the Department of State. 

If confirmed as Director General, I would be responsible for managing the recruitment, assignment, welfare, professional development, promotion, and retirement of the Department’s Civil Service, 

Foreign Service, locally employed staff, and others who work at the 

State Department. 

Since my return from Liberia as chief of mission just 2 weeks ago 

and reengagement within the Department, I have been reminded 

of the huge breadth of the Bureau’s activities. I am excited by the 

opportunity to strengthen the security and prosperity of our Nation 

by leading and building an effective civilian workforce. 

For 30 years, I have had the pleasure and the honor of working 

alongside talented State Department employees serving at our 

overseas missions and in the Department here in Washington and 

around the United States. I am proud to count many of them as 

my friends and all of them as my colleagues. They, like me, are 

pleased that the Department of State in 2011 once again ranked 

in the top 10 among large Federal agencies in the Best Places to 

Work in the Federal Government. It really is a great place to work. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take the opportunity to introduce 

my family: my husband, Lafayette Greenfield, a retired Foreign 

Service specialist; our daughter, Lindsay, who recently joined the 

123d Foreign Service Specialist class; and our son, Deuce, who also 

grew up in the Foreign Service and now is in law school. And we 

are very much a Foreign Service family. 

Of course, the nature of the service has changed dramatically 

since I joined 30 years ago, with those changes accelerated by the 

events of 9/11. Sixty-five percent of all State overseas positions are 

now at hardship posts, and two-thirds of our diplomats abroad are 

serving in those difficult posts. They willingly face hardship and 

risk for the honor of serving their country and the opportunity to 

make a difference. 

Like the Secretary, I believe these men and women are some of 

the most courageous, hard-working, and capable people I have ever 

met. They and their families deserve our support and, if confirmed, 

I will work hard to ensure that they have what they need to do 

their jobs well. 

One of the Secretary’s highest priorities is increasing the size of 

the State Department’s staffing by 25 percent. This is a hiring initiative known as Diplomacy 3.0, for Diplomacy, Development, and 

Defense, representing the three pillars of our foreign policy. 

With 3.0, the Department has been able to fill some of its vacant 

positions as well as to fund new positions in support of our highest 

foreign policy priorities. It has also enabled us to double the size 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

126

of our training complement. In 2011, we were able to increase the 

number of positions filled by language-qualified employees from 62 

percent to 70 percent. 

Recruiting a talented workforce that is truly reflective of the diversity of America is also critical to our staffing and I know important to you, Mr. Chairman. I am eager and I am energized to lead 

this effort, and if confirmed, ensure that we have the skills, the innovation, and diversity necessary to advance our Nation’s interests. 

The Department has made a great deal of progress, but more 

needs to be done to ensure that the Foreign Service reflects the 

face of America. We must continue to work wholeheartedly toward 

this goal. 

We must also focus on assigning our men and women to posts 

and positions where they can best achieve our highest foreign policy goals. I would note this year that the Department is on track 

to fill over 800 positions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. I have 

no doubt that Foreign Service employees will continue to step forward and volunteer for these tough assignments as they have done 

in the past. If confirmed, I will work with others in the Department 

to help these dedicated public servants and their families manage 

these high-stress assignments. 

Over 10,000 Civil Service colleagues provide the critical Washington base of support, along with 56,000 locally employed staff 

worldwide, to keep our embassies and consulates functioning effectively. If confirmed, I will continue to develop and manage programs to fully utilize all of our staff, and I will also work to ensure 

that they are compensated fairly for their contributions to our 

mission. 

Foreign Service overseas comparability pay remains a management priority. This is a basic fairness issue. Foreign Service employees’ base pay should not be reduced when they serve overseas. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have the opportunity 

to address you and members of the committee, and if confirmed, I 

ask for help in ensuring that we are able to strengthen American 

diplomacy through our greatest resource, its people. 

I will provide a more detailed written statement for the record. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR LINDA THOMAS-GREENFIELD

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to 

appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the next Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of 

State. I am gratified and humbled that President Obama and Secretary Clinton 

have chosen me for this key position. 

If confirmed, I look forward to rejoining the HR Bureau where I once served as 

Staff Assistant 20 years ago. As Director General, I would be responsible for managing the recruitment, assignment, welfare, professional development, promotion, 

and retirement of the Department’s Civil Service, Foreign Service, Locally Employed 

staff, and others who work at the State Department. Since my return from Liberia 

as chief of mission just 10 days ago and reengagement within the Department, I 

have been reminded of the huge breadth of the Bureau’s activities. I am excited by 

the opportunity to strengthen the security and prosperity of our Nation by leading 

and building an effective civilian workforce. 

For 30 years, I have had the pleasure and the honor of working alongside talented, dedicated Foreign Service and Civil Service employees, Locally Employed 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

127

staff, Family Members, and contractors serving at our overseas missions and in the 

Department here in Washington and around the United States. I am proud to count 

many of them as my friends—and all of them as my colleagues. They, like me, are 

pleased that the State Department in 2011 once again ranked in the top 10 among 

large Federal agencies in the ‘‘Best Places to Work in the Federal Government’’ 

ranking. It is a great place to work. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take the opportunity to introduce my husband, 

Lafayette Greenfield, a retired Foreign Service Specialist; our daughter, Lindsay 

Greenfield, who recently joined the 123rd Foreign Service Specialist class; and our 

son, Deuce Greenfield, who also grew up in the Foreign Service and is now in law 

school. I guess you could say that the Foreign Service is in our blood. 

Of course, the nature of the Service has changed dramatically since I joined 30 

years ago, with those changes accelerated by the events of 9/11. For instance, the 

number of positions deemed too dangerous for family members to accompany has 

grown from approximately 200 in 2001 to over 1,300 today. In addition, 65 percent 

of all State overseas positions are now at hardship posts, facing crime, pollution, 

and other challenging living conditions. Two-thirds of our diplomats abroad are 

serving in those difficult posts. They willingly face hardship and risk for the honor 

of serving their country and the opportunity to make a difference. This puts a tremendous burden on our families. 

Like the Secretary, I believe these men and women are some of the most courageous, hard-working, and capable people I have ever met. They and their families 

deserve our support and, if confirmed, I will work hard to ensure they have what 

they need to do their jobs well. 

One of the Secretary’s highest priorities is increasing the size of State’s diplomatic 

staffing by 25 percent. This is the hiring initiative known as ‘‘Diplomacy 3.0’’ (D 

3.0)—for Diplomacy, Development, and Defense—representing the three ‘‘pillars’’ of 

our foreign policy strategy. 

With D 3.0 hiring, the Department has been able to fill some of its vacant positions as well as to fund new positions in support of our highest foreign priority 

goals. It has also enabled us to double the size of our training complement, which 

enabled more overseas positions to remain filled while replacements received 

required language and functional training. Because of this much needed influx in 

resources that allows us to train, in 2011 we were able to increase the number of 

positions filled by language-qualified employees from 62 percent to over 70 percent. 

Recruiting a talented workforce that truly reflects the diversity of America is critical to our staffing efforts. I am eager and energized to lead this effort, if confirmed, 

and ensure that we have the skills, innovation, and diversity necessary to advance 

our Nation’s interests. 

Aggressive recruitment outreach including through social media, has contributed 

to diversity recruitment gains. For instance, from 2005 to present African-American 

takers of the Foreign Service Officer Test increased 61 percent, Hispanics 82 percent; and women 131 percent. Pass rates for these groups increased 112 percent, 

172 percent, and 131 percent respectively. And, hiring of African-Americans increased 36 percent and hiring of Hispanics increased 43 percent. The Department 

has made a great deal of progress, but we must continue to work wholeheartedly 

toward this goal. 

We must also focus on assigning our men and women to posts and positions where 

they can best achieve our highest foreign policy goals. This year, the Department 

is on track to fill over 800 positions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. 

I have no doubt that dedicated Foreign Service employees will continue to step 

forward and volunteer for these tough assignments, as they have done in the past. 

If confirmed, I will work with others in the Department to help these dedicated public servants and their families manage these high-stress assignments. 

Over 10,000 Civil Service colleagues provide the critical Washington base without 

which our embassies and consulates could not function effectively. Many of them 

volunteer to go overseas to difficult posts. They contribute to almost every aspect 

of the Department’s operations from human rights to narcotics control to trade to 

environmental issues. They are also the domestic counterparts to consular officers 

abroad, issuing passports and assisting U.S. citizens in trouble overseas. To maximize our effectiveness, we must increase our flexibility to deploy employees where 

most needed. Therefore, we are creating more opportunities for Civil Service employees to work overseas. 

Of the approximately 56,000 Locally Employed (LE) staff employed worldwide by 

all U.S. agencies overseas under chief of mission authority, nearly 45,000 work for 

the Department of State. These loyal colleagues are a key component of our mission. 

They have been at our embassies the longest, and they perform dozens of essential 

functions that keep our missions open even under the most difficult circumstances. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

128

If confirmed, I will ensure that we continue to develop and manage programs to 

fully utilize our local staff. I will also work to ensure they are compensated fairly 

for their contributions to our mission. 

Foreign Service Overseas Comparability Pay (OCP) remains a management priority. This is a basic fairness issue; Foreign Service employees’ base pay should not 

be reduced when they serve overseas. If OCP is taken away in the future, we know 

it will not only impact our employees’ morale and salaries, but also their retirement. 

I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and other members of the committee to ensure that does not happen. 

I am pleased that the Department of State ranks high as an ideal employer. If 

confirmed, I will do all that I can to make it an even better, more ‘‘family friendly’’ 

employer, and more representative of the face of America. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have the opportunity to address you 

and the members of the committee. If confirmed, I ask for your help in ensuring 

that we are able to strengthen American Diplomacy through our greatest resource—

our people. I look forward to helping the Secretary ensure that the Department and 

its people are ready to meet our foreign policy challenges and objectives.

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Ambassador. 

Ms. Winstanley. 

STATEMENT OF GINA K. ABERCROMBIE–WINSTANLEY, OF 

OHIO, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MALTA 

Ms. ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY. Mr. Chairman and members of 

the committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador 

to the Republic of Malta. I am honored by the confidence placed in 

me by President Obama and Secretary Clinton. 

I would also like to thank Senator Brown for his introductory 

statement. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and 

the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Malta. 

I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by members 

of my family: my husband, Gerard, and my daughter, Kara. I am 

also joined by my brother, John; my sister, Navy captain retired, 

Lynne Hicks; and my brother-in-law, colonel retired, Larry Hicks. 

I am also supported today by many friends and loved ones. 

My family has personal connections to Malta. My father-in-law 

made many stops there as a naval officer during World War II and 

my niece studied nursing in Malta at St. Luke’s Hospital for 

Nursing. 

After 27 years in the Foreign Service, I believe my experience 

developing and implementing policy on counterterrorism issues 

with European, African, and Middle Eastern partners, as well as 

advancing U.S. interests on a bilateral basis in the Middle East, 

will enhance my effectiveness as chief of mission, should you decide 

to confirm me. 

Malta is a valued European partner, often serving as a bridge 

between the West and the Middle East. I have a unique background to strengthen the relationship between the United States 

and Malta. This includes my service in the Middle East as Consul 

General in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and tours in Iraq, Israel, and 

Egypt, as well as my tenure as Director of Near East, South Asian 

Affairs at the National Security Council at the White House, and 

as a professional staff member, a proud one, working for this committee under then Ranking Member Biden. 

Over 50 years ago, Malta’s courageous resistance during World 

War II prompted Franklin Delano Roosevelt to refer to Malta as a 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

129

nation that stood alone but unafraid in the center of the sea, one 

tiny bright flame in the darkness. Malta is small in size but has 

never backed away from occupying a large role when history has 

called upon it. We have seen this recently in its commendable 

actions in support of the aspirations of the people of Libya. 

As we recently witnessed, Malta’s strategic location in the Mediterranean Sea is important to both global security and international commerce. Last February when U.S. citizens and others 

were evacuated from Libya to Malta, the Maltese Government 

assisted 20,000 evacuees from 90 countries, including more than 

200 American citizens. Maltese officials and the U.S. Embassy in 

Valletta worked side by side to arrange emergency and humanitarian services to meet evacuees as they arrived in Malta and 

assist in their onward travel. 

Though not a member of NATO, Malta provided emergency landing services for NATO planes and cooperated closely with NATO on 

its maritime embargo. Malta authorized thousands of overflight 

requests in support of Operation Unified Protector, free of charge 

and at a substantial cost to its ability to route lucrative commercial 

traffic. 

Malta has offered to be a hub for all humanitarian assistance to 

Libya. 

On the trade and investment front, the recently ratified double 

taxation agreement bolsters the already strong economic relationship between the United States and Malta by fostering greater 

investment in trade. The United States is Malta’s second-largest 

trading partner outside of the EU. American firms directly employ 

over 2,000 people in Malta, not counting the several thousands who 

work for U.S. franchises. In the small nation, that means 1 out of 

every 50 Maltese workers is employed by an American company. 

Malta shines as a beacon of peace and economic success in the 

southern Mediterranean and is ready to provide essential assistance and know-how to its transitioning North African neighbors. 

As a career Foreign Service officer, my life’s work has been to 

strengthen our great country’s political and economic ties with 

other nations and to achieve results through mutual understanding, communication, and cooperation. If confirmed, I pledge to do 

everything I can to lead an Embassy that represents the finest values of the United States and to advance American interests by 

strengthening the bonds between the United States and Malta. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this 

opportunity to appear before you, and I would be pleased to answer 

any questions you have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Abercrombie-Winstanley follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GINA K. ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to appear before 

you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador 

to the Republic of Malta. I am honored by the confidence placed in me by President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this 

committee and the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Malta. 

I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by my family: my husband, 

Gerard, my son, Adam, and my daughter, Kara. I am also joined by my brother, 

John, my sister, Lynne Hicks, a retired Navy Captain, and my brother-in-law, Larry 

Hicks, a retired Colonel. I am also supported today by many friends and loved ones. 

My family has personal connections to Malta: my father-in-law made many stops 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

130

in Malta as a naval officer during World War II, and my niece studied nursing in 

Malta at St. Luke’s School of Nursing. 

After 27 years in the Foreign Service, I believe my previous experience developing 

and implementing policy on counterterrorism issues with European, African, and 

the Middle Eastern partners, as well as advancing U.S. interests on a bilateral basis 

in the Middle East, will enhance my effectiveness as chief of mission, should you 

decide to confirm me. Malta is a valued European partner, often serving as a bridge 

between the West and the Middle East. I have a unique background to strengthen 

the relationship between the United States and Malta. This includes my service in 

the Middle East as Consul General in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and tours in Iraq, 

Israel, and Egypt, as well as my tenure as Director for Near East South Asian 

Affairs at the National Security Council of the White House, and as a professional 

staff member working for this committee under then-Ranking Member Biden. 

Over 50 years ago, Malta’s courageous resistance during World War II prompted 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt to refer to Malta as the nation that ‘‘stood alone but 

unafraid in the center of the sea; one tiny bright flame in the darkness.’’ Malta is 

small in size but has never backed away from occupying a large role when history 

has called upon it. We have certainly seen this most recently in its commendable 

actions in support of the aspirations of the people of Libya. 

As we recently witnessed, Malta’s strategic location in the Mediterranean Sea is 

important to both global security and international commerce. Last February, when 

U.S. citizens and others were evacuated from Libya to Malta, the Maltese Government assisted 20,000 evacuees from 90 countries, including more than 200 U.S. citizens. Maltese officials and U.S. Embassy Valletta worked side by side to arrange 

emergency and humanitarian services to meet evacuees as they arrived in Malta 

and assisted in their onward travel. In addition, Maltese authorities waived passport and other entry requirements, easing the evacuees’ burdens. 

Though not a member of NATO, Malta provided emergency landing services for 

NATO planes and cooperated closely with NATO on its maritime embargo by providing manifests for Maltese-flagged ships. Malta authorized thousands of over 

flight requests in support of Operation Unified Protector free of charge, and at a 

substantial cost to its ability to route lucrative commercial traffic. Malta has offered 

to be a hub for all humanitarian assistance to Libya, and as such, the World Health 

Organization has asked it to serve as a base for its shipments. 

On the trade and investment front, the recently ratified Double Taxation Agreement (DTA) bolsters the already strong economic relationship between the United 

States and Malta by fostering greater investment and trade. The United States is 

Malta’s second-largest trading partner outside of the EU, accounting for approximately 5 percent of total trade, and American buyers account for approximately 9 

percent of Malta’s total exports. American firms directly employ over 2,000 people 

in Malta, not counting the several thousands who work for U.S. franchises. In this 

small nation, that means one out of every 50 Maltese workers is employed by an 

American company. These American businesses continue to grow stronger. For example, in the wake of the worldwide financial crisis, as a stimulus measure, Malta 

provided targeted government assistance of 0.7 percent of GDP to manufacturing 

firms in 2009. One of the companies which received assistance, U.S. parts manufacturer Methode Electronics, not only retained its American workforce in 2009, but 

increased employment in its Maltese subsidiary as well. American investment overseas is vital, and Malta works to the benefit of both countries. 

Malta shines as a beacon of peace and economic success in the southern Mediterranean, and is ready to provide essential assistance and know-how to its 

transitioning North African neighbors. As a career Foreign Service officer, my life’s 

work has been to strengthen our great country’s political and economic ties with 

other nations, and to achieve results through mutual understanding, communication, and cooperation. If confirmed, I pledge to do everything I can to lead an 

Embassy that represents the finest values of the United States, and to advance 

American interests by strengthening the bonds between the United States and 

Malta. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to 

appear before you. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, thank you all very much. 

Let us also welcome your family and friends because service, of 

course, is a demand upon families, and we appreciate them being 

here supporting you. 

I will start off the questioning. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

131

Ambassador White, let me ask you. There are many of us who 

are frustrated with the progress of reconstruction and of assistance 

to the Haitian people despite both our commitment as a country 

and the world’s commitment. And so as you approach this assignment, could you share with the committee what you think are the 

key obstacles to a more rapid reconstruction and development in 

Haiti? 

And as part of that, could you talk about political instability as 

part of the equation, if you believe that is part of the equation? I 

happen to believe it, but I would like to hear your views on it. 

And last, I am just going to lump this all together, but will 

repeat it if necessary. 

Some of the latest reports about the government appropriating 

land seemed to reveal it doing so at the expense of the most vulnerable populations, and that is upsetting. If there is going to be land 

reconfiguration, you would hope that vulnerable populations would 

be the beneficiaries. 

So could you speak with us a bit about reconstruction and how 

we can do this more successfully, what are the obstacles, how we 

address them, and go from there? 

Ambassador WHITE. Everyone, I do believe, is a bit frustrated 

with the slowness of the reconstruction. 

But could I just for one second say that Ambassador Merton and 

the accomplishments of his team has done in Haiti after living 

through that horrific earthquake. When they woke up one morning, 

250,000 bodies were in the street and 10 million cubic feet of rubble was everywhere in Haiti, and they put on their boots and they 

put on their gloves and their staffs did and many volunteers, many 

people went down there to help and they made a difference. I 

mean, they got 1.2 million people in temporary shelters. So they 

got them in shelters. They fed them. They took care of them. 

To this day, they removed half the rubble. And you know, half 

of 10 million cubic feet is something to talk about—10 million cubic 

feet. You can have dump trucks back to back from Key West to 

Bangor, ME. That is how many dump trucks that would take. And 

that they have taken almost half of that out with the USG efforts, 

another million cubic meters were taken out with wheelbarrows 

and who knows what by private citizens. 

The 1.5 million people were homeless, and today it is 490,000. So 

well over a million people have been moved from the tents into 

something at least better than tents, different things, but better 

than tents. And like I said, half the rubble is gone. 

So accomplishments in an incredibly difficult country even in the 

best of times, good for them and good for the U.S. Congress for giving them the money to move forward. 

Now, one of the problems, of course, with Haiti is it lacks capacity. They have not had a functioning government. It took a long 

time for Preval to go and for Martelly to get in and then name a 

Prime Minister who unfortunately did not last very long. They are 

now looking for a new one. So there has been—the key pieces of 

government that are needed—the Haitian Government that are 

needed—to get this recovery moving quicker have not been in place 

very long. And we have got to have that going or we are going to 

have trouble making reconstruction and recovery any faster. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

132

I also think that the humanitarian response drained every ounce 

of people’s strength for about a year, and then they started looking 

toward sort of a longer term recovery. To get those pieces in 

motion, especially to get the pieces in motion if you are going to 

use Haitian NGOs and Haitian diaspora and Haitian qualities, 

that just takes time. There is nothing you can do about it. 

And Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield and I served in Liberia 

together and we kind of picked Liberia up from this post-war disaster, and what do you do and how you do it? And I must say I 

think we did a really great thing. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So are you telling the committee that things 

are going as they should? 

Ambassador WHITE. I think that we have got the pieces in place 

if we can get the government to work, and that is a big ‘‘if.’’ I hope 

that we can make them do that. I think we can put some pressure 

on them to make them do that. I think they want to make that 

happen. They want Haiti to succeed. But, yes. 

Just in the last month, I keep getting updates on some of the 

activities that USAID is doing in Haiti, and I see that they are 

awarding contracts, bigger contracts, reconstruction contracts. A 

new factory is going to be built in the north. It is going to come 

up with 22,000 jobs. There is nothing like giving people a job that 

is going to allow them to move the country forward, but we need 

the government to move too. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So as I listened to your answer, the government is the biggest obstacle toward the type of further progress we 

would like. 

Ambassador WHITE. I actually do believe that is true; yes. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Ambassador Greenfield, you and I had a 

good conversation yesterday, and as I said to you then, Pastor 

Suarez called me again and said be nice. And what ensues is not 

about you but about the Department. And so I want to visit that 

with you on the record. 

I believe the State Department has the worst record of the hiring 

of minorities, particularly of Hispanics. This is something that I 

have been pursuing since my days in the House on the International Relations Committee. This is something I have pursued on 

this committee, and I do not seem to get anybody’s attention. 

Now, sometimes for a Senator the only way to get somebody’s 

attention is to hold up a nominee, and it is not my desire to do that 

here. 

But it also cannot continue this way. Your predecessor came before the committee not too long ago and answered a series of questions. It sounded really great until we went from percentage terms 

to actual numbers. And as I shared with you, in the State Department’s Civil Service over the last 31⁄2 years, we increased the number of Hispanics by four. In 2009 versus today on female Hispanics, 

we increased the number by 20, but of course, what we started 

from is incredibly low. Among the Foreign Service employees, we 

have similar numbers. So I will not gauge in percentages anymore 

because the percentages always paint a different picture. 

And when I listened to those who are in the Foreign Service from 

the Hispanic community, I often hear about the challenges those 

individuals face not only getting through the test, which is one 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

133

thing, but then the subjective element of not being able to orally 

communicate effectively, which is incredibly subjective. Now, with 

all due respect, if that is the standard of all ability, then I believe 

there are many people from our community who can meet that 

standard. 

So I am trying to get a sense of how you, in this position, are 

going to change the course of events because the current way of 

doing things is not acceptable. The last census makes that pretty 

clear. And so if you could share with me and the members of the 

committee how you will go about changing the course of events in 

a way that will give me some hope so that we can vote your nomination out of this committee and on the floor with the expectation 

that things will change. 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. Thank you, Senator. We did 

have a good conversation yesterday, and I can tell you that you did 

get my attention such that I was afraid to even give you those statistics that were in my official testimony, and I decided I would not 

give them. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I accepted that as what the Department told 

you to say. 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. Yes. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So I get it. 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. But you did get my attention. 

I had the opportunity to look at these charts on the board, and 

unfortunately those numbers in those charts reflect the reality. 

And what they reflect is the reality of the challenge that is going 

to be before me if I am confirmed by the Senate. And if I am confirmed as the next Director General, I can assure you that this will 

be one of my top priorities as Director General. And I said to you 

yesterday I am sure that all the other Director Generals have said 

the same thing. 

Senator MENENDEZ. They have. 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. And you said that to me yesterday as well. But I am also going to say to you that I do take 

this personally. I take it as a personal commitment that I am making to this committee that I will work diligently to improve those 

numbers, and I will not sleep unless those numbers are improved. 

I will personally put my own hand on all of the recruitment policies. I will review those policies to ensure that if there is anything 

in the implementation of our policies that is blocking increasing 

those numbers, that we will work to remove those. 

I am concerned that these numbers are so low. I am equally concerned that the African American numbers have gone down since 

I joined the Foreign Service 30 years ago. 

So we have a lot of work to do, and I will be working with the 

staff in the Director General’s office, if I am confirmed, to ensure 

that when I come before you the next time—in fact, you will not 

have to call me. I will be directly in touch with you to let you know 

what progress we are making on getting this done. And I will look 

forward to working with you and your staff to get your ideas on 

how we might move forward to improve these numbers not just for 

Hispanics but for all groups. 

The Foreign Service is not successful if it does not represent the 

face of America. I have had the experience of being in the Foreign 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

134

Service for 30 years, and I have seen this for 30 years. I am in the 

position now to make a difference, and I do intend to use my position to make a difference. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I appreciate your answer, and there 

are one or two things I want to follow up with you, but in deference 

to my colleagues, I am going to have them go and we will come 

back. But I do appreciate your answer. 

Senator Rubio. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Ambassador White, when I was in Haiti earlier this year, one of 

the major obstacles—and I think I mentioned that to you when we 

talked earlier today—one of the major obstacles that I found to private investment in the country is the absence of a credible land 

registry. And there are numerous competing claims for a plot of 

land, for example. And so investors, particularly in Florida, people 

that are interested in going to Haiti and doing some sort of investment and business venture, are worried that there is nowhere to 

register their property claims. And I think that is something that 

the Haitian Government shared with us as well during our visit. 

What ideas do we have? What could the U.S.’s role be in terms 

of creating capacity in that regard, both from your experience in 

serving there before and your experience around the world. Have 

you encountered that? And what is it that we can do from a capacity-building standpoint? What programs do we have in place or 

should we think about putting in place to help in that regard? 

Ambassador WHITE. It is a huge problem. It is a problem in 

every country I have ever served in. It was a problem in Liberia, 

God knows. It is always a problem because there has not been any 

formal system of getting deeds. It has been a worse system, worse 

in Haiti, because the little registry that there was before the earthquake was destroyed during the earthquakes, and now we are 

starting not only from zero but minus-zero. 

There has been a small start when they are trying to set up 

these communities of just kind of discussion with people in the 

communities and deciding, yes, we will on the basis of who lived 

there for what amount of time so we can just kind of get it rolling. 

But there are several stakeholders, including the U.S. Government, 

that are working with the Ministry of Justice, that are working 

with the Bureau of Lands that are trying to map out where these 

plots are and who owns them and what kind of paperwork is 

needed. And this is going to take a while. 

But I do think that it is not only the United States of America 

like I said, but it is other donors as well. There has been progress. 

There will be more progress. There is an enormous amount of 

attention from both the Haitian Government and donors on this 

issue, and I do see that we are moving forward. And you are right. 

It has got to be done. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

I guess a question for Ambassador Greenfield. I have been on the 

committee now for a year, so some of this is new to me. 

What are the challenges to recruiting people to be interested in 

the Foreign Service in the modern era? I mean, is it a challenge, 

when we go on college campuses or across the country? I read 

somewhere—maybe it was in your testimony—about the use of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

135

social media and other platforms to get people excited about it. We 

have a lot of talented young people around the world. I think this 

young generation of Americans are the greatest connectors and collaborators in world history in terms of working with other people 

on things through the use of social media. What are some of the 

challenges we face in getting people interested in Foreign Service 

other than the pay? 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. I was going to start with pay. 

Thank you for that question. That is an excellent question. 

I think some of the challenges are life in the Foreign Service. It 

is not just the job of the individual who is being hired. The whole 

family becomes part of this, and it is very hard sometimes for people to make the decision or for families to make the decision to sacrifice their own lives for a Foreign Service career of another family 

member. So I think that is one of the big challenges. 

The other, I think, is the fear of living overseas and leaving 

everything behind to go and live in a foreign country and try to 

learn the culture and the life of living in a foreign country. 

I think we can address those concerns of people, and we are 

attempting to address those concerns because once they come in 

the Foreign Service, they see that it is easy. But I think we have 

to look in a more strategic way at those life changes that people 

are required to make if they go into the Foreign Service. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

And, Ms. Winstanley, I have a question actually directly related 

to Malta. It is an issue we also encountered when we were over 

there. It has to do with the issue of human trafficking. And I have 

read some reports where there has been some—let me begin by 

saying that I think our relationship with the Government of Malta 

is excellent. We are very grateful for that partnership. We are very 

grateful for that alliance that we have and for all the cooperation 

they have given. By no means is this a criticism of the government 

or that alliance, but a recognition of a problem that by our own 

trafficking in persons report we know exists today. 

Malta received a tier 2. They are on the watch list status for a 

second year in a row. They are both a source and a destination 

country for European women that are being subjected to sex 

trafficking. 

Surprisingly enough—there are multiple sources that say this—

in 2010 the Government of Malta did not even identify a single victim of trafficking despite very many credible reports in that regard. 

What ideas—and I think from your service elsewhere as well, but 

what ideas do we have about helping to address that issue? Obviously, it is a complicated one. It is a global one. But given its strategic location as a gateway between the Middle East and North 

Africa and the rest of the West, I do not think that problem is 

going to get any better unless it is addressed honestly. So what can 

we do from the position you are going to occupy to be of assistance 

in that regard? 

Ms. ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY. Thank you, Senator. A wonderful question and certainly this would be, if confirmed, one of my 

priorities when I arrive in Malta. 

The Maltese have had trouble with identifying victims and we 

have been working with them to help them do so, as well as ensurFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

136

ing that they do not hold victims responsible or charge them for 

crimes that are directly related to them having been trafficked. We 

worked with them for a workshop this past July to help them identify victims to address that specifically. In the last couple of 

months, they also have had a case that they brought to successful 

prosecution giving someone a 10-year sentence for trafficking in 

persons. This is the first successful prosecution and shows that 

they are moving in the right direction. They have got a chairman 

of the board to counter trafficking in persons, and as I said, it will 

be my priority when I get there. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, thank you very much. 

Senator Durbin. 

Senator DURBIN. Thanks to all three of you. 

Ambassador White, I was recently in Port-au-Prince, as I mentioned, and I stayed at a nice place and there was a heavy rainstorm. And the woman who kind of the manager of the property—

we were looking out the window at the rain, and she said tomorrow 

morning in Port-au-Prince they will report how many people died. 

I said, died? She said, from the rain. I said, it is a heavy rainstorm 

but why would people die? She said, there will be drownings in 

Port-au-Prince as a result of rainfall. 

The story behind that has a lot to do with the fact that this country has very little, if any, infrastructure to move water or sewage 

for that matter. It is just open. It runs through the streets and 

overwhelms residences and drowns children, that sort of thing. 

But there is a second part to the story, and that is what has 

happened to Haiti as a country. Lift this up and show it. It is not 

difficult to see the border between Haiti and the Dominican 

Republic——

Ambassador WHITE. It surely is not. 

Senator DURBIN [continuing]. Because to the right on this island 

of Hispaniola is the Dominican Republic which has had a serious 

effort to plant trees. To the left is Haiti where the trees have just 

been removed. So when the rain falls, it comes rolling down these 

hills and mountains into these cities, drowning the poor people who 

live there. 

I have tried to put some money in, as I mentioned earlier, for 

various projects, and one of them is reforestation in Haiti. They 

cannot reclaim this land for agricultural purposes or any purpose 

until they deal with that issue. And it is hard because people chop 

down every tree they happen to grow because they need wood for 

heat when it gets chilly by their standards. 

When I brought this up with the previous President, he kind of 

laughed at me and said it will never work. I think it has to work. 

And when President Martelly weighs this as one of his concerns, 

I hope that you will make it one of yours when you are Ambassador, that we can join in this effort toward reforestation. 

I would like to have your comment. 

Ambassador WHITE. Yes. I could not agree with you more. It will 

be something that I will look at. 

Unfortunately, during the 5 years that I was in Haiti, I literally 

saw that happen right before my eyes. It kept coming lower and 

lower and lower. They kept chopping more and more trees. And 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

137

back in those days, AID tried desperately to stop it, too, by planting trees, planting trees. They would chop them down. We would 

plant. They would chop them down. We would plant. It was just 

an endless cycle of wasted money to tell you the honest-to-God 

truth. 

And so what we have decided to do now are kind of two things. 

Well, actually three things. 

One, we are going to tie planting of trees to fruit trees and trees 

that can actually give a profit, and they sell the mango or they sell 

the cocoa or they sell the coffee, whatever. So there will be less 

incentive to cut down a tree. That is one thing. 

The second thing is we are going to do some plantings high up 

and try to protect them so that they will take root. It takes maybe 

6 months to a year to get the root in there. We are going to have 

to use some protection of some fir trees, et cetera, to keep on the 

higher levels. The fruit trees will not grow up there. 

But I think the key that we did not use 25 years ago was that 

we have got to give a decent substitute for charcoal or they are just 

going to keep cutting down the trees because they need something 

to cook their food with. I mean, people have got to eat. So we have 

got to decide what is that alternate fuel and how can we use it, 

how can we introduce it. And we are starting some pilot programs 

and using gas, using some briquettes that are made out of things 

that are not wood, et cetera. So I think that is going to have to be 

the key, that we are going to find a substitute for the wood so the 

wood can do what it needs to do and save the banks from falling 

into the ocean and killing people. 

Senator DURBIN. The other thing that was very obvious—and you 

can see it when you catch a plane to go to Port-au-Prince—is how 

many Americans and others are literally volunteering their lives to 

help these people. It is a noble thing and a heartwarming thing. 

But it is frustrating too. There are so many NGOs stumbling over 

one another doing this and that thing. You often wonder if there 

is any coordination even among American NGOs about what they 

are trying to achieve. 

There is a second aspect of this. One NGO, in particular, was 

close to Senator Mike DeWine of Ohio, and Senator DeWine made 

more than 20 trips to Haiti. That NGO was called Hands Together. 

It was run by a Catholic priest. They have schools and orphanages 

and feeding places and the like. And I visited them again when I 

was just recently there. Father Tom does a great job. He has given 

his life to this. And he has so many volunteers and helpers. They 

do wonderful work with a limited amount of money. 

He sent me an e-mail 2 weeks ago, and his chief of staff was 

gunned down right out in front of his school. And he was heartbroken and ready to give up because security is just absent from 

many, many places, Cite Soleil in Port-au-Prince, for example. 

And now we hear from President Martelly, whom I admire and 

think has the potential of really adding something very positive to 

Haiti, that he wants to create an army. It would seem that a police 

force may be more important at this moment in terms of establishing at least basic law and order in this island. 

What are your thoughts about this notion of a Haitian army? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

138

Ambassador WHITE. Yes; that is an excellent question. Thank 

you, Senator. 

We struggled with this also in Liberia. Ambassador ThomasGreenfield and I, believe me, had many, many meetings with President Sirleaf on standing up an army, standing up a functional 

police force. 

I believe that we came to the conclusion then, and I have certainly come to the conclusion and the administration has come to 

the conclusion, that what we need in Haiti and what we are going 

to put our resources against is a strong police force. We need to 

stabilize the country. We have got to stop these killings. We have 

got to stop the rapes of the women. We have got to stop abuse. And 

that is not an army’s job. That is a strong police force job. So I feel 

very strongly about that, to tell you truth. 

And let me just mention that the discoordination, if you will, of 

a million NGOs—they want to do the right thing and their heart 

is in the right place. Again, we found the same thing in Liberia. 

They were pouring in there, especially lots of Liberian Americans 

who had spent years and years in the States and wanted to go 

back. They started a school here and a clinic there, and then, oh, 

they did not have books. They did not have medicine. You know, 

what were they doing and who were they coordinating with? 

The minister—the fabulous Minister of Plan there, was my best 

friend, now the Minister of Finance, a Harvard graduate—and I 

decided that we would in his ministry, in the Ministry of Plan, 

start a donor mapping using IT. So we used spatial technology. It 

was cutting-edge. We had a picture and we had a map and we had 

a little description who was it, what were they doing, how much 

were they putting, and were they having any real impact, success 

of any kind. It took us 2 years to put it together, but today he can 

bring the screen up and he knows where all these people are. And 

we are going to do that in Haiti too. 

Senator DURBIN. Good. 

The last point I will make is that I learned while I was there 

that what was once a thriving coffee industry has all but disappeared in Haiti. Some 10 percent of what was their top production remains. I have approached a company in Chicago that sells 

coffee that they import from all around the world and asked them 

if they would make this a special project. There is not any reason 

why others could not join them. So perhaps our insatiable appetite 

for coffee will lead to some more commerce coming out of Haiti. 

Thank you. 

Ambassador WHITE. Thank you. Just so you know, also—now I 

am sounding like I am 3 million years old instead of just a million 

years old. But in any case, in Tanzania we did a fabulous coffee 

project. Starbucks came over and they were putting coffee—that 

they used to pay 2 cents a kilo for and now it is up to like 30 cents. 

And it is selling like hotcakes. I do not know why we could not do 

the same thing in Haiti and have it that much closer to the United 

States of America. So I am with you on that one. 

Senator DURBIN. Thanks. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator Durbin. 

Ambassador Greenfield, let me just go back to you for a moment. 

For my friends at the State Department, the charts that are 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

139

displayed here show the demographics of America after the 2010 

census. And I look at the 2011 State Department figures, and Native Americans and Hispanic Americans are the only groups that 

are underrepresented by population as a percentage of the population. In the case of Hispanics, when comparing their representation in the State Department to the size of their U.S. population, 

the underrepresentation is pretty dramatic. 

And then I look at 2009—and this is why I am a little upset at 

the testimony that was given previously—2011 numbers are worse 

than 2009 numbers. So we are not only dramatically underrepresented, we are moving in the wrong direction. 

So with that again as the premise of why I have focused on this 

so much, I would like to ask, Will you commit to look at the recruitment efforts outside of traditional schools? I appreciate those 

schools from which we have drawn the Foreign Service. They are 

some of the greatest schools, but they are not where a lot of the 

pools of these diverse communities are necessarily at. And there 

are very good schools with very good, diverse pools that would be 

maybe helpful in the recruitment process. Is that something that 

you can tell me you will do? 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. Absolutely. 

Senator MENENDEZ. In terms of the oral exam, will you, as part 

of your overall review of this process, look at how the oral exam 

is being performed in a way that makes it somehow more objective 

and less subjective and therefore a filtering system by which the 

progress does not take place? 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. I have asked that question as 

a result of our meeting yesterday to talk to the folks who administer the oral exam to see how it is administered and to look at the 

issues that you have raised. They have assured me that that is not 

an issue, that in fact the pass rate of the oral exam for Hispanics 

is even with other populations. It is the written exam that is the 

issue. But I do assure you that I will look at both, and if there is 

a problem, we will work to fix it. 

There clearly is a problem, based on the chart that you have 

given me here, with our recruitment efforts. Trying to figure out 

where that is and how we address it will be one of my highest priorities. And I will be relentless. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I appreciate that answer. 

Something is wrong because your predecessor came in and told 

us how many people were recruited, took the test and passed the 

test, but then they do not get into the Foreign Service. So if the 

hardest part is getting people and then passing the written test 

and then they do not enter in the Foreign Service, there is disconnect there, and what that tells me is look at the oral exam. But 

I would be open to learning that there are other issues. 

I always believe that at an institution, it starts from the top and 

works its way through the entire process in a way that leads everyone to understand that there is shared responsibility to make 

progress in this effort. Is that something that you will seek to do 

within the Department? 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. Yes, sir. And we are looking 

at all of leadership in the Department because the recruitment part 

of it is a big part of it, but it is not all of it. We also have an issue 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

140

of mentoring so that we retain the people, the small numbers of 

people that we recruit, and that is the role of our leaders. And I 

will, as Director General, if I am confirmed, really drill that into 

all of our ambassadors, all of our senior leaders in the Department 

that they must take responsibility for mentoring staff who are coming in. One of the problems that I think that many Hispanics and 

African Americans and other minorities have when they come in 

the Foreign Service, there are not leaders that they have who mentor them, and we are going to make sure that that happens as well. 

But it is not just my problem. I will make it the entire Department’s problem. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you. 

I know that this precedes you, but do you know if the Department has submitted its diversity and inclusion strategic plan as 

required by the March 1 memo from the OPM Director, John 

Barry? 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. It is in final draft, and I

understand it is due on March 16 and it will be turned in by that 

date. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I know your confirmation has to take place, 

but I hope that internally there is a way in which they can allow 

for your input so that some of the things we have talked about 

might be incorporated in that ultimate memo. 

Finally, not on a minority hiring question, but do you believe 

that, as the Director General, you are going to have the authority 

and the flexibility with respect to the type of personnel policy that 

will allow the State Department to deal with the diplomatic challenges of the rapidly changing world we find ourselves in? 

Ambassador THOMAS-GREENFIELD. I think I will have that

authority and flexibility, but it is not only the role of the Director 

General again just with recruiting and retention. It is a Departmentwide responsibility and there are a number of entities within 

the State Department that have responsibility for some kind of hiring. I would give, for example, the new CSO Office. The director 

of that office was here for his hearing yesterday. They will be looking at how they can bring in people in a search type of way to deal 

with emergencies so that if we do not have people who are already 

employed, we can bring them in quickly so that they can address 

some of our emergent needs. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, thank you very much for your answers. 

Finally, Ms. Winstanley, I do not want you to think I left you out 

of the equation, though I am sure you would be happy to be left 

out. [Laughter.] 

Senator MENENDEZ. It is not that bad. Ambassador Greenfield 

took it all for you. She is going to be a great Director General. 

Let me ask you. I have heard many good things about Malta, but 

there is one that as the United States continues to pursue trying 

to deter Iran’s march to nuclear weapons, is of real concern to us. 

And I want to hear that you would make it one of your priorities 

if you are confirmed. It is with reference to Iran’s shell game with 

its cargo shipping line, IRISL. It is an entity which has been designated by the United States and the European Union because of 

its central role in evading sanctions designed to stop the movement 

of controlled weapons, missiles, and nuclear technology to and from 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

141

Iran. Some 57 ships designated by OFAC, the Office of Foreign 

Assets Control of the United States, the U.N., and the EU continue 

to fly the Maltese flag despite their clear connections to IRISL. 

Thirty-three of those ships are currently in Iranian ports or have 

been there this year. 

So I would hope, if you are confirmed, that you will raise this at 

the highest levels of the Maltese Government and urge them to cut 

business ties to ensure that IRISL is not using them as a shell 

process to evade the tremendous efforts that the Obama administration and this Congress pursued using peaceful diplomacy tools, 

which are sanctions, to deter the Iranians from their nuclear weapons program. Can you make that commitment to the committee? 

Ms. ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY. Senator, I absolutely can make 

the commitment that, if confirmed, this will be among my highest 

priorities. 

The Maltese have taken some steps in the recent past including 

agreeing not to reflag any additional Iranian ships. So they will not 

be reflagging new Iranian ships. They have also been supportive of 

enforcing U.N. sanctions with regard to Iranian cargo and they 

have interdicted ships and seized illegal cargo. So they have taken 

what we consider some important steps. They are small steps, what 

we consider small wins. We are going to be working for big wins. 

So this will be something I will take up at an early opportunity, 

if confirmed. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you. 

Senator Rubio. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. 

Ambassador White, we talked about this earlier today as well 

when the issue of the restavek, which is a concept I was not familiar with until very recently. For those who are watching or may be 

in the audience and do not know what it is, it is an unfortunate 

practice of very poor families in Haiti over the decades to place 

their children with better-off families who provide them employment, usually domestically, in exchange for providing for these children and sometimes even educating them. 

The problem, of course, has been that over the years there are 

now people that have taken advantage of that system or have 

taken advantage of that problem and make it much, much worse, 

as you are aware. A moment ago, Senator Durbin showed us a picture of the Haitian-Dominican border. In addition to a deforestation problem on that border, there is the reality that on that border you can buy a child, that there are children that are trafficked 

and sold as child prostitutes both into the Dominican Republic and 

in those border towns in that region. It is a very tragic situation. 

As we met with folks in Haiti, one of the solutions that has 

clearly been offered is the idea of providing every child—and it is 

one of the priorities of the President, President Martelly, is to provide children educational opportunities. One of the things that I 

was struck by during my visit was these very poor families but 

children walking to and from school in impeccable uniforms which 

is an indication of a real societal value for education. Families will 

do anything if they can get their kids into a school. In fact, we visited one of these schools. It was called the Institute for Human and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

142

Community Development. They specifically focused on victims of 

human trafficking, providing them an educational opportunity. 

But there are still challenges along the way. One of the challenges I found, unfortunately, is that there is the idea that this is 

more of a cultural problem than a human tragedy. And I am not 

saying that is widespread in the society, but there are some that 

view it that way. 

The other is as you said, that there is not the governmental 

capacity to deal with this. What I thought the most enlightening 

approach was the more children they can get into a school setting, 

which in my understanding is a very cost-effective measure, the 

likelier it will be for these parents not to put their kids in this 

environment. 

And by the way, not to put the blame completely on the parents. 

I mean, there are folks posing as NGO members who are going into 

camps and saying they have got jobs for these kids, and in fact, 

they are nothing but traffickers who are doing these horrible 

things. 

So what initiatives can we do in support of that ambition of providing—given our current set and as your background with USAID, 

you are probably even more insightful in this regard. What can we 

do in terms of helping the Haitian people build more capacity in 

their educational front particularly for children so that we are 

accomplishing the dual goals of, No. 1, creating intellectual and 

academic capacity, you know, workforce capacity, in the country, 

but at the same time giving these children an alternative and their 

families an alternative to the restavek situation? So what are our 

existing programs and platforms and what can we build on? 

Ambassador WHITE. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Yes. In my mind over the years, we have not put enough emphasis not only on primary education but secondary education. If a 

young girl graduates only from primary school, she does not have 

a longer life. She does not have a higher earning wage. She does 

not have fewer children. If she spends 2 years in secondary school, 

then we are starting to make a difference. So we need to not only 

concentrate on—not we, the United States Government, but the 

donors as a whole because education happens not to be one of our 

focus areas, although we are doing it around some of our development corridors, but we are paying attention to the national level 

in certain areas like curriculum. But we have got to concentrate on 

education. 

We have got to make sure that the police are trained in recognizing child abuse, and it is different from what the traditional 

restavek was supposed to be. It was supposed to be that someone 

cared for the children from the rural areas into the city areas that 

they could not take care of them in the rural areas. They could not 

provide any services. Instead it has become in many instances just 

a domestic service and often abusive. 

We just signed a huge contract with several organizations—three 

I believe—that are going to look into issues of youth employment, 

girl abuse, women abuse, and especially this restavek story that is 

going on down there because we all know that it is untenable from 

a human rights’ point of view. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Senator Rubio. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

143

Thank you all for your testimony. I want you to know that you 

must have a lot of friends because this room is almost—not quite—

but almost as filled as when George Clooney was here today. 

[Laughter.] 

There are not as many cameras, but there are a fair number of 

people here. 

Thank you for all of your responses to the questions. 

The record will remain open until this Friday. I would urge the 

nominees, if you receive a question from any member, that you 

answer it expeditiously. It will expedite the process of your nomination. 

And with the thanks of the committee to all the nominees, this 

hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF LINDA THOMAS-GREENFIELD TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Based on your most recent tour as Ambassador to Liberia, can you 

share your thoughts on how the State Department could better train its Foreign and 

civil service officers to prepare for working in those environments? What’s missing 

and what do you see as some critical steps the Department could take to strengthen 

its focus on prevention and mitigation?

Answer. One thing I learned is that, as the Secretary observed in her recent 

Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), it is vital that agencies 

learn to work better together in support of U.S. development and diplomacy goals. 

This is nowhere more important than in countries in which we are working to prevent, mitigate, or respond to conflict such as Liberia. In Liberia, I practiced the concept of ‘‘one team, one mission’’ that brought all the agencies together. With this 

objective in mind, the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) and USAID have created their 

first-ever joint courses: a distance learning course on Development in Diplomacy, 

and a new classroom course on Partnership in Development and Diplomacy. Both 

courses stress the importance of joint planning and execution of development and 

diplomacy goals across agencies, and offer simulated exercises to train Foreign Service and Civil Service employees how to do such cooperative work in the field. We 

also have Area Studies courses that prepare employees from different agencies for 

the social, political, cultural, economic, religious, and governmental dimensions of 

the countries where they will serve together. 

In addition, the State Department is taking steps to strengthen its focus on conflict prevention and mitigation. In November 2011 State announced the establishment of a new Bureau, the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO). 

The responsibilities of this new Bureau will be to anticipate major security challenges; provide timely, operational solutions; build integrated approaches to conflict 

prevention and stabilization; and to leverage partnerships with nongovernmental 

and international partners.

Question. According to the 2010 Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development 

Review, more than 25 percent of State and USAID’s personnel serve in the 30 countries classified as highest risk for conflict and instability. The QDDR recommended 

expanding training for all predeployment staff that are going to those countries. 

However, class schedules and deployments often do not line up and Foreign Service 

officers are unable to complete the trainings. Distance-learning courses could fill 

this gap until there are opportunities for in-depth and in-person study. What steps 

will you take to develop a more comprehensive course offering that includes distance-learning courses on crisis and conflict prevention and ensure they are 

offered—and taken by FSOs?

Answer. FSI is working to revamp its training offerings in this area with the new 

CSO Bureau, and can explore the creation of a distance learning course, which 

would require both time and resources, in that context. In recognition of the unique 

challenges posed by the growing number of countries with a high risk for conflict 

and instability, FSI created a Stability Operations Training Division focused on 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

144

predeployment training for employees assigned to Afghanistan, Iraq, or Pakistan 

and training in support of conflict prevention and reconstruction operations. The 

courses for Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan are offered on a monthly basis throughout the transfer cycle to provide every opportunity for employees to attend. 

FSI and the staff of Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, 

and Human Rights are discussing how the Department might expand training to 

employees headed to other countries at risk for conflict and/or instability. One idea 

is to use FSI’s current ‘‘Foundations in Conflict Prevention and Response’’ course, 

which is currently directed at members of the CSO Bureau’s Civilian Response 

Corps, as the basis for a course that would be targeted at any Foreign Service and 

Civil Service employees serving in posts where conflict and/or instability may be an 

issue.

Question. Within the State Department and USAID there seems to be virtually 

no mid- and senior-level career training made available on crisis prevention. This 

deficit is problematic for future leaders of the Foreign Service. How do you think 

the absence of such courses can be addressed and what role do you see for yourself 

in helping to ensure such training is available?

Answer. The Foreign Service Institute (FSI) and the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) are working together to expand the emphasis on conflict 

prevention in FSI’s ‘‘Foundations in Conflict Prevention and Response’’ course, 

which is directed at the Civilian Response Corps. FSI and CSO are discussing with 

the J family of bureaus ways to offer similar training to all officers deploying to preand post-conflict countries. FSI is also exploring how to integrate conflict prevention 

and response training into existing courses in our Political Tradecraft and Area 

Studies divisions. 

Working effectively in pre- and post-conflict countries requires strong leadership. 

As such FSI sends out trainers to conduct onsite Crisis Management Training at 

all our overseas missions, with exercises that include the Ambassador and other 

senior management. Every post receives this training at least every 21⁄2 years. FSI 

also offers a classroom course on its campus on ‘‘Leading in a High Threat Post.’’ 

If confirmed as DG, I will strongly support these efforts and will ensure that we 

continue to expand training as needed.

Question. What has been the impact of the U.S Government National Security 

Language Initiative in terms of recruitment to the Foreign Service? How many new 

FSOs received NSLI grants/training?

Answer. The State Department’s programs for high school and university students 

launched under the National Security Language Initiative in 2006 are having a significant impact in increasing the pool of Americans studying and mastering criticalneeded foreign languages. More than 1,500 American students are participating in 

these exchange programs each year. As more of these students finish their education and develop in their careers, we expect a growing number will pursue a 

career in the Foreign Service. In a recent survey of the 2006–2011 alumni of one 

of our programs, the Critical Language Scholarship Program, just over half of the 

respondents are still in school, while about a quarter are employed full-time. Of 

those employed full time, two-thirds say that their language skills have helped them 

obtain their current job. Nearly a quarter of those employed are working in government service (18 of them working for the State Department or USAID), while 

another half are working for nongovernmental organizations, international organizations, and educational institutions, furthering their skills and knowledge. 

RESPONSE OF PAMELA A. WHITE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Are you supportive of the establishment of a United States-Haiti enterprise fund?

Answer. The United States attache ́s critical importance to helping Haiti strengthen, expand, and diversify its economy. No long-term development goals in Haiti can 

be sustainable without the growth of the private sector. This is essential both to improve the quality of life of the people of Haiti and to develop a tax base that will 

allow the Government of Haiti and not donors to fund essential social services. An 

enterprise fund on the model of those that have succeeded in Central and Eastern 

Europe and funded with sufficient, additional resources is worth examining and 

could potentially add to our existing tools for promoting a healthy private sector in 

Haiti. These include an active Development Credit Authority program with local 

banks for small and medium enterprise lending; the current discussion for the proviFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

145

sion of assistance to help Haitian financial institutions provide loans to finance the 

construction and repair of homes and business; a mobile money operation with cell 

phone companies and the Gates Foundation; and assistance for investment in micro, 

small, and medium enterprise in Haiti especially by the Haitian-American diaspora. 

RESPONSES OF PAMELA A. WHITE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT MENENDEZ

Question. Can you explain what your role and objectives as Ambassador to Haiti 

would be, if you are confirmed?

Answer. The United States has a solid strategy for contributing to the reconstruction and development of Haiti, one that reflects Secretary Clinton’s vision of a more 

promising future for that country. If confirmed I will work with all my energy to 

translate the goals of a more prosperous and stable Haiti into reality. Because the 

success of Haiti’s recovery is ultimately up to the Haitians themselves, I will, if confirmed, work to establish the strong working relations with Haiti’s decisionmakers 

that will help us expedite that process.

Question. As the United States Government shifts from emergency aid to longer 

term development programming, what steps will you take to ensure this transition 

is carried out in a way that will not further marginalize vulnerable earthquake victims? How will you ensure there are no gaps in the provision of basic services for 

Haitians who remain displaced?

Answer. One of the important obligations of the Government of Haiti is ensuring 

that its plans for the country’s reconstruction work benefit the widest possible range 

of citizens. Providing basic services to Haitians displaced by the earthquake remains 

a crucial task of the Government of Haiti. These challenges underscore the importance of building capacity in Haitian institutions. The United States coordinates 

closely with other donors and with Haitian authorities to help the Government of 

Haiti take the lead in the country’s recovery and fulfill the key responsibilities of 

a sovereign government toward its citizens. USAID will continue to provide basic 

health services to over 40 percent of the population.

Question. What progress do you see on the Martelly government’s 16/6 initiative 

to rehouse 6 camps into 16 neighborhoods?

Answer. The United States fully supports the Martelly administration’s 6/16 initiative, whereby six priority camps located in public spaces will be closed and their 

residents reintegrated into the 16 neighborhoods from which they originate. 

Together with International Organization for Migration, USAID’s Office of Transitional Initiatives is supporting Mayor Parent’s initiative in Petionville, which has 

dismantled two camps in two public parks in the heart of the city and provided 

camp residents with options—which provided resettlement assistance to more than 

1,300 people. 

This initiative builds on lessons learned in Haiti over the last 19 months and 

works in phases: registration/census of camp residents, announcement of the program, options counseling with residents, relocation, and followup after reintegration.

Question. As Ambassador, would you increase diplomatic efforts to encourage the 

Haitian Government to adopt comprehensive housing solutions and ensure the protection needs of vulnerable communities are integrated into the Haitian Government’s 6/16 housing plan?

Answer. The U.S. Government is working with Haitian officials, at both the 

national and local levels, and the International Organization for Migration, which 

is the lead agency in the camp management cluster, to find long-term, sustainable 

solutions for the 490,545 people still living in precarious situations in displaced persons camps. USAID has successfully piloted a program to offer choices to camp residents including housing repairs to structurally sound, existing homes; installation 

of temporary shelters; or 1-year rental vouchers. The majority of IDPs accepted 

rental assistance and moved out of the camps voluntarily.

Question. Can you provide an assessment of the adequacy of information being 

provided publicly regarding the reconstruction efforts?

Answer. One of the greatest benefits of the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission 

(IHRC) was its public releases to Haitians regarding reconstruction progress, and 

the comprehensive report at www.cirh.ht on the progress of each individual reconstruction project. Now, the Government of Haiti is working with the Inter-American 

Development Bank (IDB) and United Nations Development Program (UNDP) to improve the government’s ability to use information technology to update these 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

146

progress reports and to get out information to Haitian citizens about progress in the 

reconstruction.

Question. Since the Interim Haiti Reconstruction Commission (IHRC) has been

allowed to lapse, how effectively are international donors able to coordinate foreign 

aid and reconstruction activities with each other and with the Haitian Government?

Answer. The October 2011 lapse of the mandate of the Interim Haiti Recovery 

Commission did present a coordination challenge. In response to this challenge, the 

resident representatives of the 12 major public sector donors (aka the G12), all of 

whom were members of the IHRC Board of Directors, have continued their coordination with each other on the ground and with the Office of the Prime Minister.

Question. How would you suggest improving coordination among donors and with 

the Haitian Government?

Answer. The greatest opportunity to improve donor coordination is through advancing the Government of Haiti’s efforts to make it easier, more routine, and more 

automated to collect information from donors using improved information technology. Both the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the United Nations 

Development Program (UNDP) are supporting Haitian Government efforts in this 

regard. I helped advance such initiatives and experienced their positive impact during my tenure in Liberia, and look forward to the success of these efforts in Haiti, 

if I am confirmed. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(147)

NOMINATIONS OF CARLOS PASCUAL, JOHN 

STEVENS, AND JACOB WALLES 

TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2012

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant 

Secretary of State (Energy Resources) 

John Christopher Stevens, of California, to be Ambassador to Libya 

Jacob Walles, of Delaware, to be Ambassador to the Tunisian 

Republic 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:50 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer presiding. 

Present: Senators Boxer, Menendez, Coons, Udall, Lugar, and 

Risch. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER,

U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. Good afternoon, everybody. 

Today, the full Senate Foreign Relations Committee meets to 

consider three nominees for important posts at the State Department: Carlos Pascual to be Assistant Secretary of State for Energy 

Resources; John Christopher Stevens to be Ambassador to Libya; 

and Jacob Walles to be Ambassador to the Republic of Tunisia. 

I am so pleased also to welcome Senator Christopher Coons. 

Where is he? Is he here? I will be so pleased—oh, there you are. 

[Laughter.] 

I am so pleased to see you here. I doubt you are going to speak 

from there, Senator. Going to say a few words about Mr. Walles in 

short order. 

Thank you so much, Senator. 

The first nominee we will consider is Ambassador Pascual, who 

currently serves as a special envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs at the Department of State. 

Prior to this position, he served as the United States Ambassador 

to Mexico and as the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization at the State Department. Ambassador Pascual also served as 

the vice president and director of the Foreign Policy Studies Program at the Brookings Institution from 2006 to 2009. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

148

Ambassador Pascual, you have been nominated to lead the newly 

established Bureau of Energy Resources at the Department of 

State. 

And when Hillary Clinton, our Secretary of State, announced the 

new Bureau, she aptly stated, ‘‘You can’t talk about our economy 

or foreign policy without talking about energy. With a growing 

global population and a finite supply of fossil fuels, the need to 

diversify our supply is urgent.’’

And I couldn’t agree with her more. So if you are confirmed, you 

will be responsible for heightening attention to urgent global energy needs and helping to formulate effective U.S. international 

policy in such fields as biofuels, natural gas, and renewable energy. 

And then our second nominee, John Christopher Stevens, 

recently served in Benghazi, Libya, as the special envoy to the 

Libyan Transitional National Council, or TNC. Prior to this post, 

Mr. Stevens served as the Director of the Office of Multilateral 

Nuclear and Security Affairs at Department of State. 

Mr. Stevens is a career member of the Foreign Service. 

He joined the State Department in 1991. And I am very proud 

to say he is a Californian. 

Mr. Stevens, you have been nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador to Libya. And like so many, I watched in awe as the Libyan 

people fought with tremendous courage to bring an end to the brutal regime of Col. Muammar Gaddafi. 

But now the Libyan people are facing another extraordinary 

challenge, building a functioning government, civil society from the 

ground up. If confirmed, we hope you will be able to help convince 

the Libyan people to lay down their arms, to put aside their differences, continue the hard work of building a new and better 

future for Libyan men, women, and children. 

And our final nominee is Jacob Walles, who currently serves as 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. Mr. 

Walles is also a career member of the Foreign Service, having 

joined the Department of State in 1981. 

Prior to this post, he was a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and he also served at the U.S. consul general—as 

the U.S. consul general and chief of mission in Jerusalem. 

Mr. Walles has been nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador to 

Tunisia. And as we all know, the Tunisian people recently elected 

the al-Nahda Party into power, which describes itself as a moderate Islamist party. While many al-Nahda leaders have made encouraging statements about their commitment to democracy and a 

separation of religion and state, we have seen troubling proposals 

from some government officials that could push the country in the 

opposite direction. 

If confirmed, we hope you will work to encourage the Tunisian 

Government to continue to build a strong representative and democratic government that respects the rights of all Tunisian people, 

in particular maintains the extraordinary rights that Tunisia has 

long offered to women. 

So that completes my opening remarks, and I would turn to Senator Lugar. And when he is completed, we will turn to Senator 

Coons. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

149

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

I join you in welcoming our distinguished panel. I would like to 

extend a personal welcome to Chris Stevens, who spent a year on 

the committee staff in the 2005–2006 timeframe. 

He then went to Tripoli as deputy chief of mission during reopening of diplomatic relations with Libya after 27 years. For much of 

that tour, Chris was the charge ́ d’affaires and lead interlocutor 

with the Gaddafi government. Chris was assigned again to Libya 

exactly a year ago, but this time his post was to be in Benghazi 

as the special envoy from our Government to the Transitional 

National Council. 

Chris has served his country for 22 years on issues related to 

North Africa and the Middle East. He served as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Morocco, and as a Foreign Service officer, he served tours 

in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Jerusalem, and Libya. 

I understand his family is here from Oakland, CA, as the chairman has pointed out. I hope he will introduce them to the committee. 

Madam Chairman, I valued Chris’s knowledge and insight while 

he was on my staff, and also have appreciated his willingness to 

offer counsel on the situation in Libya over the past year. I am 

very pleased the President has nominated a man whose substantive knowledge, experience, and respected leadership are so 

well suited to this posting. 

It is also a pleasure to welcome Ambassador Carlos Pascual, 

whose distinguished record is well known to the committee. In particular, I appreciate his efforts to promote the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program as Ambassador to Ukraine, and I 

had the privilege of visiting with him in the Embassy during that 

tenure. Through the Nunn-Lugar partnership, Ukraine is nuclear 

weapons free. 

Carlos also served as the first Coordinator for Reconstruction and 

Stabilization, a position I had long believed was needed to make 

our policies in post-conflict situations more effective. Currently, 

Ambassador Pascual serves as International Energy Coordinator, a 

position I prescribed and was signed into law by President Bush in 

2007 with the primary mission of putting energy at the top of our 

diplomatic agenda and better leveraging relevant activities and 

expertise across our Government. 

America’s dependence on foreign oil imports from volatile and 

unreliable regimes is one of our foremost national security 

vulnerabilities. Iran’s threat to shatter global economic recovery 

and splinter allied opposition to their nuclear weapons program by 

using their oil exports as leverage is just the most visible example 

today. 

The hundreds of billions of dollars we use to buy oil from autocratic regimes complicate our own national security policies by entrenching corruption, financing regional repression and war, and 

inflating Defense Department costs. Given the multiple crises in 

the Middle East, and the certainty that threats to oil supplies are 

not limited to the current Iran situation, President Obama did not 

act in our national interest, in my judgment, when he rejected 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

150

approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. Even his own Energy Department says that Keystone would help lower gasoline prices. 

Ambassador Pascual, I understand that you were not involved in 

the 1,217 days of Keystone XL analysis or the final decision. However, you will be responsible for any future applications and will 

need to restore confidence in the State Department’s independence 

from White House politics. I would like you to share with us today 

specific steps you will take to ensure an expeditious review of any 

new Keystone XL application. 

While broad energy security solutions will take time, I urge the 

administration to put in place, now, credible plans to manage an 

oil supply disruption. In particular, among the most significant 

challenges to enforcing strong sanctions on Iranian oil is concern 

over high gas prices. 

In addition to steps to increase domestic supply liquidity, international planning is needed. The administration should actively 

accelerate pipeline alternatives around the Strait of Hormuz and 

approve Keystone XL. It should work to improve data transparency 

and reporting in oil markets, such as prospects for new production 

to come online in Iraq, South Sudan, and Colombia. 

It needs to update international emergency response coordinating 

mechanisms and it needs to bring two of the fastest-growing oil 

consumers, China and India, into that system. And it should state 

clearly that restricting trade in energy is against U.S. interests. In 

other words, protecting Americans from oil price spikes takes more 

than talk of a release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

Ambassador, I would appreciate your assessment of where we 

stand on achieving each of these goals. 

Finally, Jake Walles has served with distinction over a 30-year 

career in the Foreign Service—much of that time focused on promoting peace and stability in the Middle East. Most recently he 

served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility 

for Egypt, The Levant, Israel, and Palestinian affairs. 

Given the importance to the United States of Tunisia’s continuing transition to democracy, I am pleased that someone with 

his wealth of regional experience and perspective has been nominated to this post. 

I thank you, Madam Chairman, for the opportunity to make this 

statement. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so very much. 

And now we have the Honorable Chris Coons is going to introduce Mr. Jacob Walles to be Ambassador to the Tunisian Republic. 

And we know that Mr. Walles is from Delaware, and therefore, this 

is very appropriate. 

Senator, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

It is rare that Delaware gets to contribute to the rank of Ambassador. So I appreciate both you and Ranking Member Lugar allowing me to make a brief statement of introduction. 

I am very proud of Jake Walles, who was not only born and 

raised in Delaware until he went off to college at Wesleyan UniverFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

151

sity, but also attended the same high school that I did. So there 

is a double source of pride for our home State. 

As you both mentioned, for more than 20 years, Mr. Walles has 

served with distinction in the State Department, where he has 

played critical roles in Middle East and North African affairs. He 

served at the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv at the Office of Special 

Assistant for the Middle East Process, as chief of mission in Jerusalem, and now Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern 

Affairs. 

In all these roles, he has demonstrated an adept understanding 

of developments in a very difficult region and a unique ability to 

manage a host of relationships and issues. 

In his current position as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for 

Near Eastern Affairs, he has overseen developments in a time of 

great regional transition and turmoil. He has a keen understanding 

of U.S. interests in the Middle East and has done a particularly 

good job briefing committee staff, I am told, on many regional 

developments and issues. These experiences will serve him well as 

U.S. Ambassador to Tunisia, a country at the heart of the Arab 

Spring, which has experienced significant political transition in the 

last year. 

As Secretary Clinton recently told our committee, the new 

Islamist government in Tunisia has demonstrated great promise, 

especially with regards to human rights, women’s rights, and economic reform. And it is my hope with your leadership, should you 

be confirmed for ambassadorship, that these positive trends and 

this emerging new chapter in our longstanding relationship with 

Tunisia will continue to mature. 

I first met Jake at a dinner more than a year ago now with 

Israeli President Shimon Peres. At that dinner, President Peres 

said the uniqueness of the United States is that this is the only 

great power in history that became great not by what it took, but 

by what it gave, by helping other people regain their independence 

and their future. 

This exemplifies, I think, what makes American diplomacy so 

great, helping others through tough transitions. This has been a 

real accomplishment of the Arab Spring that we have played a supportive role, and it is my hope that with your leadership, Tunisia 

will one of the best examples of a new government emerging from 

a very difficult transition. 

I am confident Jake Walles will make a great Ambassador and 

continue to make the people of Delaware proud. 

Thank you, and thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Well, with that, we might as well start with you, Mr. Walles. 

And I would ask each of you, if your family is here and you 

would like to acknowledge them, we would be thrilled to do that. 

They can stand, and we can give them the proper thanks. They 

deserve thanks because you are giving a lot of yourselves to your 

country. 

Go ahead, Mr. Walles. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

152

STATEMENT OF JACOB WALLES, OF DELAWARE, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE TUNISIAN REPUBLIC 

Mr. WALLES. Thank you, Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member 

Lugar, Senator Coons. 

It is an honor to appear before you today as President Obama’s 

nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tunisia. I 

am grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for the confidence and trust they have shown in me. 

I would also like to thank Senator Coons for coming to introduce 

me today. I am proud of my roots in Delaware and pleased, Senator, that you took the time out of your busy schedule to join us 

today. 

I have served our country as a Foreign Service officer over these 

past 30 years and spent much of my career working on the Middle 

East, pursuing our objectives of peace, regional stability, and economic cooperation. For 4 years, I served as consul general and chief 

of mission in Jerusalem. 

Most recently, I have overseen U.S. policy in the Near East, dealing with the changes that have swept the Arab world in the past 

year. If confirmed by the Senate, I hope to use this experience to 

enhance our bilateral relationship with Tunisia, where the Arab 

Spring began just over a year ago. 

The people of the United States and Tunisia share over 200 

years of history. Only 3 years after the United States declared our 

independence, we signed our first agreement of friendship, cooperation, and trade with Tunisia. In 1805, the Tunisian Ambassador to 

the United States had the first known Ramadan iftar dinner with 

an American President. Since then, we have fought together 

against common enemies and helped each other in times of need. 

This historic bilateral relationship now has a new touchstone, 

the momentous events of the Arab Spring that began in Tunisia in 

December 2010. The Tunisian revolution triggered the transformations now underway across the Middle East and North Africa. 

It also marked the beginning of a new phase of cooperation 

between Tunisia and the United States. 

Tunisia is now leading the region into an era of democratic transition and serving as a model for others to follow. Tunisia is wellplaced to do this, with its history of tolerance and respect for the 

rights of women and minorities. 

The United States has an interest in seeing that this new democratic model in the region succeeds. In the words of Secretary Clinton, ‘‘We should do all we can to assist Tunisia in realizing a future 

of peace, progress, and opportunity.’’

As we know from our own Nation’s history, building a democracy 

is difficult and time-consuming. Tunisia’s first steps deserve praise, 

particularly the constituent assembly elections held in October 

2011, which were the first truly democratic elections in that country in decades. 

I share President Obama’s view that we must support a people 

that have mustered the courage to stand up for their rights and 

who have taken courageous steps toward freedom and democracy. 

Just as we supported Tunisia after its independence in 1956, we 

have a chance now to support Tunisia’s transition to democracy. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

153

We have a range of tools at our disposal to support Tunisia’s 

transition. In the interest of time, however, I would refer you to my 

full statement, which we have submitted for the record. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions that you might have. 

And in closing, Madam Chairman and members of the committee, I just want to say thank you again for allowing me today 

to discuss our interests in Tunisia. I believe that we have the 

opportunity of a generation before us, and I am excited about this 

new chance to serve our country. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with you, with the other 

members of the committee, and with the Congress to continue to 

advance United States interests and promote our relationship with 

Tunisia. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Walles follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JACOB WALLES

Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member Lugar, distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to 

be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tunisia. I am grateful to President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence and trust they have shown in me. 

I have served our country as a Foreign Service officer over the past 30 years in 

advancing American interests abroad. I have spent much of my career working on, 

and living in, the Middle East, pursuing our objectives of peace, regional stability, 

and economic cooperation. For 4 years, I served as consul general and chief of mission in Jerusalem, where I successfully managed a growing post in a complex political environment. Most recently, I have overseen U.S. policy in the Near East, dealing with the policy ramifications for the United States of the changes that have 

swept the Arab world in the past year. If confirmed by the Senate, I hope to use 

this experience to enhance our bilateral relationship with Tunisia, where the Arab 

Spring began just over a year ago. 

The people of the United States and Tunisia share over 200 years of history, with 

rich cultural, economic, and security ties. Only 3 years after the United States declared our independence, we signed our first agreement of friendship and trade with 

Tunisia. In 1805, the Tunisian Ambassador to the United States became the first 

to have a Ramadan iftar celebration dinner with an American President. Since then, 

we have fought together against common enemies, pursued the goals of regional stability, and helped each other in times of need. The United States operated a robust 

economic assistance program in Tunisia from 1957 to 1994. And Tunisia has responded in our recent time of need, offering assistance to address the oil spill in 

the Gulf of Mexico in 2009. 

Our historic bilateral relationship now has a new touchstone—the momentous 

events of the Arab Spring that began in Tunisia in December 2010. The Tunisian 

revolution captivated the international community and triggered the transformations now underway across the Middle East and North Africa. It has also 

marked the beginning of a new phase of bilateral and people-to-people cooperation 

between the United States and Tunisia. Tunisia is now leading the region into a 

new era of democratic transition and serving as a model for others to follow. The 

United States has an interest in seeing that this new democratic model succeeds 

in the region. In the words of Secretary Clinton, ‘‘we should do all we can to assist 

Tunisia in realizing a future of peace, progress, and opportunity.’’ If confirmed, I 

will do all that I can to help Tunisia succeed on this path. 

As we know from our own Nation’s history, building a democracy is difficult and 

time-consuming. That process is rarely without controversy, setbacks, and sometimes disappointment. But Tunisia’s first steps deserve praise, particularly the Constituent Assembly elections in October 2011, which were the first truly democratic 

elections in that country in decades. In our engagement with the Tunisian Government we have seen their commitment to meeting the legitimate aspirations of the 

Tunisian people. 

I share President Obama’s assessment that it is incumbent upon us to support 

people and governments that have mustered the courage to stand up for their rights 

and take courageous steps toward democracy, despite the challenges and difficulties 

that lie ahead. Just as we supported Tunisia shortly after its independence in 1956, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

154

now we have a chance to support Tunisia’s efforts to achieve critical goals in its 

democratic transition, including accountable governance, economic growth, and 

security. 

We have a number of tools at our disposal that will allow us to support their 

efforts. Shortly after the revolution, the Department of State marshaled a strong 

package of assistance for elections and capacity-building for civil society to advance 

the rule of law and promote freedom of expression. With these forms of assistance, 

we sought to support the Tunisian people’s efforts to contribute to the national political debate and decisionmaking process and to play active, constructive roles in their 

country’s political transformation. If confirmed, I will continue the work that we 

have already begun in these areas, drawing on the resources of the Middle East 

Partnership Initiative (MEPI) and the U.S. Agency for International Development. 

The Tunisian revolution was not only about greater democratic freedoms, it was 

also about greater equality and opportunity in the economic life of the country. The 

people called for transparency, anticorruption, and the ability to improve their socioeconomic standing through merit and hard work, rather than through connections 

and secrecy. We are sensitive to Tunisia’s economic development needs, and we will 

do all we can to support them. 

If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to utilize the authorities and tools 

of the entire U.S. Government to help Tunisia address these needs. As an economic 

officer in my 30-year Foreign Service career, I have gained experience to draw on 

in enhancing our bilateral economic partnership with Tunisia. I will work with the 

Departments of Commerce and Treasury to promote responsible, market-oriented 

reforms that will increase Tunisia’s attractiveness as an investment destination and 

place the country on a solid macroeconomic foundation. I will work with the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to facilitate the entry of American businesses 

and products into the Tunisian market, and with the U.S. Trade Representative to 

maximize the utility of our bilateral Trade and Investment Framework Agreement 

and other trade facilitation tools. 

Programs are also needed to address the demands of young Tunisians eager for 

even more academic exchange and English language training. Our Fulbright program, previously underutilized in Tunisia, is now in heavy demand. We also have 

other tools at our disposal as well, and I would welcome the opportunity to expand 

recently developed university linkages and community college partnerships to build 

the capacity of Tunisia’s educational system to better prepare Tunisian students for 

the demands of the modern global economy. 

A prosperous, democratic Middle Eastern country, in which citizens are free to 

apply honest effort toward achieving a higher standard of living, is an important 

symbol that the age of autocratic and opaque control of the political and economic 

environment in the Arab world is a thing of the past. It is therefore in our interest 

to work toward sustainable, inclusive, and free-market economic growth in Tunisia 

through a range of mechanisms. 

If confirmed, I will also endeavor to promote Tunisia’s increasing engagement 

with the international community and greater cooperation on our regional security 

and foreign policy goals. Tunisia has demonstrated that it shares our interest in 

peaceful and cooperative relations across the Middle East and North Africa region 

and, if confirmed, I will continue our efforts to help build Tunisia’s capacity to continue to be a good neighbor. I will work with the Department of Defense to continue 

to support the Tunisian military’s efforts to secure the country’s borders, improve 

its strategic planning capacity, and develop whole-of-government approaches to the 

national security challenges that the Tunisians face. 

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, in closing I would like to thank 

you again for allowing me to discuss ways that we might advance U.S. interests in 

Tunisia. I believe that we have the opportunity of a generation before us, and I am 

excited about this new opportunity to serve our country in the critical period ahead. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with you, with the rest of the Senate Foreign 

Relations Committee, and with the Congress to continue to advance U.S. interests 

and promote our bilateral relationship with Tunisia. I would be pleased to answer 

any questions you may have.

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Mr. Stevens. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

155

STATEMENT OF JOHN CHRISTOPHER STEVENS, OF 

CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO LIBYA 

Mr. STEVENS. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, and 

Senator Coons, thank you for the honor of appearing before you 

today. 

I wish to thank the President for nominating me to serve as 

Ambassador to Libya and for the confidence that he and the Secretary have shown in me. 

At your invitation, Madam Chairman, I would also like to 

acknowledge my mother, Mary Commanday, and my stepfather, 

Robert Commanday, who are visiting from the Bay area this week. 

Senator BOXER. Oh, good. Will they stand for us, please? Welcome. 

Mrs. COMMANDAY. Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER. How is it back there? 

Mrs. COMMANDAY. We have been here all week. [Laughter.] 

Senator BOXER. You have been here all week. I heard it rained 

quite a lot, but we need the rain. 

Mrs. COMMANDAY. Chris grew up in Larkspur and San Anselmo. 

Senator BOXER. No kidding? That is where I raised my children. 

We’ll continue this over a cup of tea after. Please proceed. 

Mr. STEVENS. Thank you. 

It has been a great privilege to be involved in U.S. policy toward 

Libya at different points over the past several years, as Ranking 

Member Lugar has noted. I first served in Tripoli in 2007 in a 

country that was firmly in the hands of an oppressive dictator. 

Last March, I led a small team to Benghazi as the special envoy 

to the Transitional National Council. It was a time of great excitement as the Libyan people first experienced freedom. But it was 

also a time of significant trepidation for what might come next. 

Should I be confirmed, it will be an extraordinary honor to represent the United States during this historic period of transition in 

Libya. Libyans face a significant challenge as they make the transition from an oppressive dictatorship to a stable and prosperous 

democracy. 

Colonel Gaddafi deliberately weakened the country’s institutions, 

banned even the most rudimentary of civil society organizations, 

and outlawed all electoral activity. 

During his rule, corruption was rewarded, initiative discouraged, 

and independent thought suppressed. To change such a system will 

take some time and much effort. 

Libya’s new leaders must build democratic institutions from 

scratch, consolidate control over militias, ensure that all Libyans 

are represented and respected in the new government, and dispose 

of the country’s oil wealth fairly and transparently. 

Despite these difficult challenges, there are some signs of 

progress. The interim government is paying salaries and providing 

basic goods and services to the Libyan people. It is reconstituting 

government ministries, preparing for elections in June, and ensuring that Libyans throughout the country are represented by the 

new government. 

Libya’s oil production, which is important in stabilizing world oil 

prices, is expected to reach preconflict levels by the end of the year. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

156

It is clearly in the United States interests to see Libya succeed as 

a stable and prosperous democracy. 

Such an outcome would enhance our security and economic wellbeing. It would also serve as a powerful example to others in the 

region who are struggling to achieve their own democratic aspirations. 

There is tremendous goodwill for the United States in Libya now. 

Libyans recognize the key role the United States played in building 

international support for their uprising against Gaddafi. I saw this 

gratitude frequently over the months I served in Benghazi. 

If confirmed, I would hope to continue the excellent work of 

Ambassador Cretz and his team in assisting the Libyans with their 

transition and forging strong ties between United States and 

Libyan officials, business communities, students, and others. 

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Stevens follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN CHRISTOPHER STEVENS

Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, and members of the committee, 

thank you for the honor of appearing before you today. I wish to thank the President for nominating me to serve as Ambassador to Libya, and for the confidence 

that he and the Secretary have shown in me. 

It has been a great privilege to be involved in U.S. policy toward Libya at different points over the past several years. I first served in Tripoli in 2007, in a country firmly in the hands of an oppressive dictator. Last March I led a small team 

to Benghazi as the Special Envoy to the incipient Transitional National Council. It 

was a time of great excitement as the Libyan people first experienced freedom. But 

it was also a time of significant trepidation for what might come next. Should I be 

confirmed, it will be an extraordinary honor to represent the United States during 

this historic period of transition in Libya. 

Libyans face significant challenges as they make the transition from an oppressive dictatorship to a stable and prosperous democracy. Colonel Qadhafi deliberately 

weakened the country’s institutions, banned even the most rudimentary of civil society organizations, and outlawed all electoral activity. During his rule, corruption 

was rewarded, initiative discouraged, and independent thought suppressed. To 

change such a system will take some time and much effort. Libya’s new leaders 

must build democratic institutions from scratch, consolidate control over militias, 

ensure that all Libyans are represented and respected in the new government, and 

dispose of the country’s oil wealth fairly and transparently. 

Despite these difficult challenges, there are already signs of progress. The interim 

government is paying salaries and providing basic goods and services to the Libyan 

people. It is reconstituting government ministries, preparing for elections in June, 

and ensuring that Libyans throughout the country are represented by the new 

government. Libya’s oil production—which is important in stabilizing world oil 

prices—is expected to reach preconflict levels by the end of the year. Several polls 

have shown the interim leadership is still viewed favorably by the majority of the 

population. 

It is clearly in the U.S. interest to see Libya become a stable and prosperous

democracy. Such an outcome would enhance our security and economic well-being, 

through, for example, security cooperation in the region, steady oil and gas production, and opportunities for U.S. businesses as Libyans rebuild their country. It 

would also serve as a powerful example to others in the region who are struggling 

to achieve their own democratic aspirations. 

There is tremendous goodwill for the United States in Libya now. Libyans recognize the key role the United States played in building international support for their 

uprising against Qadhafi. I saw this gratitude frequently over the months I served 

in Benghazi—from our engagements with the revolution’s leadership to our early 

work with civil society and new media organizations. If confirmed, I would hope to 

continue the excellent work of Ambassdor Cretz and his team in assisting the Libyans with their transition, and forging strong ties between U.S. and Libyan officials, 

business communities, students, and others. 

As you know, the administration has proposed a modest package of technical 

assistance for Libya during the transition period. It is fair to ask why the United 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

157

States should provide any assistance at all to Libya, given the country’s wealth. 

Libya’s new leaders have often stated that the country intends to fund its own operations and reconstruction, and they are, in fact, already doing so, tapping their 

petroleum revenue and other assets of the previous regime. 

It is in the U.S. interest to fund a limited number of activities that address immediate security and transition challenges. These U.S.-funded programs are aimed at: 

preventing weapons proliferation; providing advice to the interim government on 

elections and other transitional governance issues of immediate concern; and promoting a vibrant civil society. A limited investment in the immediate transition 

needs of Libya now will pay dividends for a lasting U.S.-Libya partnership in the 

years to come, and will help ensure that Libya contributes to regional stability and 

security. 

Should I be confirmed, it would be a great honor to lead our Embassy in Tripoli 

in setting the foundations for a mutually beneficial relationship with a newly democratic Libya. 

Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

The Honorable Carlos Pascual. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS PASCUAL, OF THE DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA, TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, 

ENERGY RESOURCES 

Ambassador PASCUAL. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member 

Lugar, it is an honor to be here before you today as the President’s 

nominee to be the first Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau 

of Energy Resources. 

I thank President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary 

Rodham Clinton for their trust and confidence. I appreciate the 

opportunity to submit a longer version of this testimony for the 

record. 

My 12-year-old boy wishes that he was here. He has a math test. 

But he asked me to send you a high-five and a fist bump for listening to his daddy. 

Senator BOXER. That is cute. 

Ambassador PASCUAL. The fact that this position of Assistant 

Secretary for Energy Resources has been created is a testimony to 

the leadership of the members of this committee, starting with legislation, Senator Lugar, that you introduced in 2006 to create a 

Coordinator for International Energy Affairs. 

Senator Lugar, I remember well the opportunity I had to introduce you in December 2007 at the Brookings Institution, where you 

sketched a comprehensive global energy strategy, and through such 

bipartisan cooperation, our oil imports today are at their lowest 

levels since 1995. 

Secretary Clinton built on these foundations in proposing to 

President Obama to create the Bureau of Energy Resources. The 

State Department’s first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development 

Review concluded that the effective management of energy resources is fundamental; fundamental to our national security and 

economic prosperity. It underscored as well the importance of diplomatic leadership. 

The Department of Energy has unsurpassed technical capacity 

and deep relationships with energy ministries around the world. 

The Department of Commerce, together with OPIC, Ex-Im, and 

TDA, can help convert American energy expertise into business 

opportunities. USAID has the capacity to offer technical advice to 

bring energy services to deprived populations. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

158

But by working with these agencies to create a strategic platform 

for our government, an Energy Resources Bureau can make more 

effective use of our resources to safeguard America’s energy 

security. 

The opportunity to be considered for this position is a high point 

of my career. While working on the former Soviet states as Ambassador to Ukraine, as Ambassador to Mexico, and as vice president 

of the Brookings Institution, energy security reverberated in my 

work. Across these experiences, this lesson became clear. Governments must set strong, market-based incentives for the development of energy resources. But the success of those policies depends 

on private investment and strong commercial relationships. 

If confirmed in the position of Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Resources, I will make it my highest priority to draw on the expertise in government, the private sector, and the not-for-profit sector 

to inform an energy diplomacy strategy focused on America’s energy security. 

Hydrocarbons today make up 85 percent of the world’s fossil fuel 

sources. We must use our diplomacy to ensure that access to oil, 

natural gas, and coal, but also to renewable energy is adequate, 

reliable, sustainable, affordable for the future. 

Today’s markets are global. And in today’s world, energy producers and consumers are not adversaries. We both depend on stable markets to foster global economic growth. 

Today, we see the importance of our energy diplomacy as we implement under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, 

which was spearheaded by this committee, sanctions to deny revenue to Iran’s nuclear program. Iran has used every opportunity to 

threaten actions to disrupt oil markets. The best immediate 

counter to these threats is unrelented engagement with producers 

and consumers to help facilitate market relationships that keep 

supply and demand in balance. 

As the State Department’s Coordinator for International Energy 

Affairs, I have traveled since January to Saudi Arabia, the United 

Arab Emirates, Libya, Iraq, Turkey, China, Nigeria, Angola, and 

Colombia, and conferred with our European allies. And we have 

engaged the world’s main energy producers. They have reinforced 

to us that they will meet market demand as it arises. 

With those who import Iranian crude oil, we have left no doubt 

about our seriousness of purpose. Today, Secretary Clinton announced that 11 countries—10 that had imported Iranian crude oil 

in the European Union, plus Japan—have significantly reduced 

their volumes of imports of Iranian crude oil. Their actions underscore the success of our policy in strictly enforcing the provisions 

of the NDAA as passed by the Congress. 

If confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources, I 

pledge to make the pursuit of good governance and transparency 

in the energy sector a central theme of the work that I do. The 

Cardin-Lugar amendment to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform 

and Consumer Protection Act set a new standard for transparency 

in extractive industries, and I hope the regulations expected from 

the SEC reflect the clear intent of the law. 

As this committee knows, the purpose of American foreign policy 

is to make our Nation prosperous and strong. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

159

Energy diplomacy is one of our strongest tools to achieve the fundamental purpose of our foreign policy. I would welcome the opportunity to take on this challenge, if confirmed as Assistant Secretary 

for Energy Resources. 

I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Pascual follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR CARLOS E. PASCUAL

Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you today as the President’s nominee to be the first Assistant 

Secretary of State for the Bureau of Energy Resources or ‘‘ENR.’’ I thank President 

Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for their trust and 

confidence. If confirmed by the United States Senate, I will bring to this position 

more than 25 years of practical experience in government and as a leader in one 

of the world’s most respected think tanks—as well as an absolute dedication to my 

country. 

The fact that this position of Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources has been 

created is a testimony to the vision and leadership of members of this committee, 

starting with legislation Senator Lugar introduced in 2006 to create in the State 

Department a ‘‘Coordinator for International Energy Affairs.’’ Our Nation is indebted to Senator Lugar and this committee for keeping energy security at the forefront of American foreign policy. Senator Lugar, I remember well the opportunity 

I had to introduce you in December 2007 at a policy address at the Brookings Institution. There, you presented the Nation with a bold challenge to promote strong 

diplomacy, entrepreneurial innovation, and energy diversification as a platform for 

security. Through consistent bipartisan cooperation and the capabilities of the 

American private sector, today we see that U.S. oil imports have been falling since 

2005. We have more oil and gas rigs operating in the United States today than the 

rest of the world combined. Our oil imports as a share of total consumption have 

declined from 57 percent in 2008 to 45 percent in 2011—the lowest level since 1995. 

Secretary Clinton built on these foundations in proposing to President Obama to 

create the Bureau of Energy Resources. This Bureau emerged from the State 

Department’s first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR). The 

QDDR’s conclusions on energy were at the same time simple and profound: the 

effective management of global energy resources is fundamental to our national security and economic prosperity. Further, it became clear that diplomatic leadership 

in this area will strengthen American capacity to use our vast energy resources in 

government and the private sector to our national benefit. The Department of Energy has unsurpassed technical capacity in energy research and innovation and deep 

relationships with energy ministries around the world. The Department of Commerce, together with the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), ExportImport Bank of the United States (EXIM), and the U.S. Trade and Development 

Agency (TDA), have the capacity to help convert American energy expertise into 

trade and investment opportunities. USAID has the capacity to bring technical advice to developing nations seeking to bring energy services to deprived populations. 

By working with other agencies advancing America’s international energy interests 

to forge a coherent strategic platform that brings together these capabilities, the creation of an Energy Resources Bureau is a multiplying force. It can make our Nation 

stronger and more targeted in our ability to pursue our energy security goals. 

The opportunity to be considered for this position is a high point in my career, 

where I have consistently seen energy issues reverberate in importance. From 1997 

to 2004, I had the opportunity to work on the transition of the former Soviet states 

to economically independent and self-sufficient nations. The mismanagement of 

Soviet energy resources was one of the very factors that contributed to the collapse 

of the Soviet Union. Later, strong U.S. policies—particularly the development of 

multiple pipelines—reinforced the independence of the Caspian states. Internal reform of Ukraine’s electric power sector in 2000 created the basis for investments 

that allowed Ukraine to close the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Even in this decade, lack of transparency in commercial energy relationships has caused gas supply 

crises between Russia and Ukraine that have also shaken European markets. While 

serving as the Vice President of Brookings, I had the chance to learn of the dynamic 

interplay between energy markets and technological change from cochairing with 

Daniel Yergin a semiannual seminar on energy security. Across these experiences, 

this lesson became clear: governments must set strong market-based incentives for 

the development of energy resources, but the success of those policies will depend 

on private investment and strong commercial relationships. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

160

If confirmed in the position of Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources, I will 

make it my highest priority to draw on the expertise in government, the private sector, and the not-for-profit sector to inform an energy diplomacy strategy focused on 

America’s energy security. Hydrocarbons today make up 85 percent of the world’s 

fuel sources. We must use our diplomacy to insure that access to oil, natural gas, 

and coal are adequate, reliable, and affordable. We must use our diplomacy to forge 

policies that make our energy future sustainable—both commercially and environmentally. To do this we must have strong and consistent relationships with energy 

producers—producers of all forms of energy in all parts of the world. Today’s markets are global. And in today’s world, energy producers and consumers are not adversaries. We both must understand that stable markets foster the best climate for 

global economic growth. 

Today we see the importance of our energy diplomacy as we implement, under the 

National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, sanctions designed to deny Iran revenue from petroleum sales, which in turn fund Iran’s illicit conduct. Iran now faces 

unprecedented and damaging sanctions applied by the United States and our partners around the world. Iran has used every opportunity to undermine our efforts 

by threatening actions to disrupt oil markets. The best immediate counter to these 

threats is unrelenting engagement with producers and consumers to help facilitate 

market relationships that keep supply and demand in balance. Such engagement 

has been central to my role as the State Department’s Coordinator for International 

Energy Affairs. Since January, I have traveled to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab 

Emirates, Libya, Iraq, Turkey, China, Nigeria, Angola and Colombia—and conferred 

with European allies. 

As we have engaged, the world’s main energy producers have reacted in a similar 

and consistent way: they will meet market demand as it arises, because producers, 

like consumers, have an interest in economic growth that is linked to energy access. 

In Europe we have seen complete solidarity as they took action on January 23 to 

ban all new contracts for Iranian crude oil and phase out existing contracts by July 

1. With those who import Iranian crude oil, we have left no doubt about our seriousness of purpose. We have seen a rise in oil prices as countries work out transitions 

from Iran to other suppliers. At any given time we will see production declines in 

parts of the world, as have occurred recently in South Sudan and Yemen. But the 

global relationships we are forging place us in a position of strength, as a leader 

in our goals toward Iran, and as a partner with other key producers in promoting 

stable energy markets at price levels consistent with economic recovery in the global 

economy. 

We have also seen that improved stability and market incentives create opportunities. Libya has restored over 1 million barrels per day of production, a testimony 

to that country’s desire to forge a new future. Iraq in 2011 increased its production 

of oil by nearly 300,000 barrels per day, and could realistically see another 500,000 

barrels per day increase in 2012. Production prospects are strong from discoveries 

on the west coast of Africa, from the presalt fields in Brazil and of course here in 

the United States. In a global market of about 90 million barrels per day, there is 

not a magic bullet in achieving energy security. But the converse is also a 

strength—diversification in global production adds resiliency. And when diversification is combined with good business climates and market incentives for production, 

then we have a platform for efficient energy markets and sustainable economic 

growth. These goals will guide our energy diplomacy. 

Our challenge as well is to look ahead, foster innovation and investment, assess 

changing markets and politics, and create business opportunities. In the United 

States we have experienced a natural gas revolution, due to technology and private 

investment. U.S. natural gas production grew in 2011—the largest year-over-year 

volumetric increase in history—and easily eclipsed the previous all-time production 

record set in 1973. We have learned valuable lessons to share on environmental 

safeguards, transparency, and regulation. Australia, Indonesia, Russia, Argentina, 

and Qatar just to name a few—have vast additional gas capacity that will come into 

the market in the coming 5 years. Increasingly gas is being traded as LNG, potentially changing the very structure of that market. One can envisage gas trading 

relationships not exclusively dominated by point-to-point pipelines that make consumers beholden to single suppliers. As a resurgent gas supplier, understanding 

this market will help us shape the rules—to make them transparent, predictable, 

and thus to our commercial benefit. These changes in global gas markets are fundamental to both our geopolitical and commercial interests, and to the effective conduct of American foreign policy. 

Business opportunities abound as well in clean and renewable energy and energy 

efficiency. American companies are world leaders in wind, solar, hydro, power transmission, efficient generation, and smart grids. The scale of this market is huge. The 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

161

International Energy Agency estimates that from 2011 to 2035, the world will see 

$5.9 trillion in new investments in hydroelectric and other renewable power, $2.8 

trillion in coal, gas and oil-fired plants, and $1.1 trillion in nuclear power. This shift 

to renewable power is market driven, and unprecedented in the world’s economic 

history. It is big business. Fostering market environments to compete in these fields 

is good for energy security, and it will generate export markets and American jobs 

in a field where we are commercial leaders. 

This changing face of global electric power also requires us to change the lens 

through which we see energy and economic development. Access to energy is the 

strongest driver of economic growth. To achieve universal access to energy by 2030, 

developing nations need to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in power infrastructure, but that is just 2.5 percent of global private investments in power. The challenge will be making strategic use of limited public resources to attract private capital to the markets of developing economies. Already, many poor people pay more 

for diesel-generated power than we do. The key to change is to create viable business models that bring efficient and reliable power to the poor, to foster their 

growth, to make it possible to educate their children, and to bring greater stability 

to where they live. 

If confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources, I pledge to make the 

pursuit of good governance and transparency in the energy sector a central theme 

for the Energy Resources Bureau. The Cardin-Lugar amendment to the Dodd-Frank 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act set a new standard for transparency in extractive industries, and I hope the regulations expected from the SEC 

reflect the clear intent of the law. This effort compliments other efforts the State 

Department already undertakes, including strong engagement on the Extractive 

Industries Transparency Initiative, and a technical assistance program called the 

Energy Governance and Capacity Initiative, which provides advice and assistance 

to countries with emerging oil and gas industries, to help those countries manage 

their resources and revenues responsibly. Good governance and transparency will in 

the end help ensure that resources are used wisely, to the benefit of all citizens. 

That is good for economic growth, stability, and our foreign policy interests. 

As this committee well knows, the purpose of American foreign policy is to make 

our nation prosperous and secure. We have learned that in an interconnected world, 

we advance our security and prosperity when our friends and allies advance with 

us. Energy diplomacy is one of our strongest tools to achieve the fundamental purpose of our foreign policy. With the wise stewardship of resources, and by fostering 

private innovation and investment to expand energy access, we can ensure that the 

world’s energy resources become a sustained driver of growth and stability. I would 

welcome the opportunity to take on this challenge if confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources. 

I look forward to your questions.

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

I wanted us to talk about energy because I picked up on some 

of Senator Lugar’s comments. He and I agree on a lot, but we don’t 

agree on everything, and that is an area where I just see the world 

quite differently. And it makes your job, Mr. Pascual, very interesting. 

But Senator Lugar talked about protecting Americans from oil 

price spikes, and I couldn’t agree with him more. That is where we 

agree. We want to protect Americans from these spikes at the 

pump because it hurts, and it hurts us as we are getting on with 

our economic recovery. 

And my view is I look at the oil companies. They are the ones 

who are raising the prices. So I want to know why are they raising 

the prices? Are they doing badly? Do they need to make sure they 

can maintain? 

Well, you look at it. The five big oil companies’ profits went up 

75 percent last year. And instead of thanking America for it, they 

don’t. They push up the cost of a gallon of gas, week after week, 

week after week, week after week. 

And this is before any troubles were brewing in the Middle East, 

brewing worse troubles in Iran. And now, of course, you add that, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

162

and you have got a lot of speculators on Wall Street that are pushing up the futures. So I would just say in order to protect American 

consumers, we should press the oil companies to not punish the 

American public as they make record profits, No. 1. And No. 2, we 

should use the power that Congress gave the CFTC to protect, 

make sure we don’t see more of the speculating. 

Now I think the other problem is, as we have seen these prices 

go up, we have seen petroleum exports from America go up by 67 

percent over what period was that? Since 2009. We are exporting 

American-made petroleum, and we ought to keep it here. 

Now we are importing less. And Ambassador Pascual, you are 

right. We are importing less, and why? One reason is fuel-efficient 

cars. Thanks to President Obama and bipartisan leadership in Congress, we are using fuel-efficient cars. That is really helping us. 

And moving toward electric, hybrid, and all the rest. 

Less demand. That is good. So less demand for imports. But if 

we could keep some of the American-grown oil here, we would have 

even less, fewer imports. 

So I am not going to ask you anything about what I just said 

because it is way too political and it is not in your portfolio. But 

I do want to ask you a question that I think is in your portfolio, 

Mr. Ambassador. 

We are trying to move toward alternatives to imported oil. 

Advanced biofuels like cellulosic fuel, algae, I see a lot of it in our 

State, Mr. Stevens, and we are making progress. And I see us as 

an exporter of these technologies. 

Do you, as you look at your portfolio and how it looks at this, 

can you talk to us about the potential for America to be the leader 

on these alternative fuels? Because the whole world is thrown off 

kilter when there are these problems in the Middle East and so on. 

Mr. Ambassador. 

Ambassador PASCUAL. Madam Chairman, thank you for raising 

that issue, and it is absolutely essential that we have a balanced 

portfolio of energy resources that we look at when we look at the 

world economy. 

On biofuels, the United States is largest producer of biofuels. We 

are the largest exporter of biofuels right now. We are one of the 

leading researchers in new technologies in biofuels. 

Interestingly, today, we are exporting biofuels to Brazil, which is 

an interesting dynamic that has occurred in the relationship. We 

have a particularly strong relationship with Brazil on the development of biofuels. As a result of our work together with Brazil, we 

have been undertaking joint research projects in Central America 

and in parts of Africa. 

We have worked together in the context of the Global Biofuels 

Energy Partnership, which is a broader international organization 

that has created standards on the development of biofuels so that 

in the process of developing them, we can assure that they are 

done in a way that is economically sound, socially sound, and environmentally sound. And that many of the questions that have been 

raised in the past and the tradeoffs between biofuels and food production don’t have to become an argument for the future because 

we have clarity in the way that these issues are assessed and 

developed. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

163

The critical thing here is that a market in biofuels is developing 

internationally. We are a leader in this field. I would just only underscore as well the importance of the United States being a leader 

in other forms of renewable technologies—in wind and solar and 

transmission and smart grids. 

And in particular, in the area of smart grids and information 

technology, increasingly, the world is going to have to adopt these 

technologies to make the best possible use of the energy sources 

that are available to them. And this isn’t just a question of an environmental issue. The environmental part is important, but the export of American products and goods and services and the creation 

of jobs in this wide-open field is one where we have a competitive 

advantage. 

Senator BOXER. Well, Mr. Ambassador, I really thank you for 

your terrific response because I see this as a great growth sector 

for America, these clean energy alternatives. Because, again, the 

whole world suffers when there is instability in the Middle East, 

and this would be a great role for us. 

I want to talk about Tunisia for a minute. Well, I want to talk 

about the role of religion and politics not just in America, but in 

Tunisia. That is a joke. 

Anyway, on one side are the Salafists, who adhere to a strict interpretation of Islam, are calling for a much more significant role 

for religion in the country’s political system. On the other side are 

those who very much want to maintain Tunisia’s historically secular political system. 

According to the Agence France Presse, just today thousands of 

Tunisians marched in the capital city of Tunis, holding banners 

saying, ‘‘Leave my Tunisia free’’ and ‘‘Separation of religion and 

state.’’

Mr. Walles, do you expect to see these protests grow in size and 

scope? Are you concerned that both sides could pull further apart 

and present significant challenges for this emerging democracy? 

Mr. WALLES. Thank you, Senator Boxer, for the question. 

I think, as I look at what has happened in Tunisia, they were 

the first country to experience a revolution in the Arab Spring, and 

they have been going through a process, first of having elections. 

Now they are in the process of drafting a constitution. 

What happened in Tunisia is for 30 years, there was a repressive 

regime that pretty much suppressed any free political discourse, 

and that lid has now been lifted. And there is this discussion going 

on in Tunisia about these very issues. 

As they draft a constitution, they have to go through a process 

of deciding what form of government do they want? Do they want 

a parliamentary system or Presidential system, or a mixture of 

that? And what is the relationship between religion and the state? 

And as you said, there are extremes on both sides here, and we 

have seen some extremist statements from the Salafists in particular, but the fact of the matter is that most of the political discourse and the discussion has been within what is the proper 

bounds of a political discussion there. 

And the election that they had, the party that got the most votes 

was the al-Nahda Party, which is a moderate Islamist party, as you 

described them. But they decided to go into a coalition government 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

164

with two other parties, both secular parties, one from the center, 

one from the left. So there is a fairly broad range of views within 

the government. 

And each of the parties in the government have talked about the 

need to work together and to compromise and to look for ways to 

develop a consensus on how you would deal with these issues. So 

while there are extreme voices, the bulk of the Tunisian population 

is represented by these parties in the government that are looking 

for ways to work together. 

You mentioned also the rights of women, which is an area where 

Tunisia has led the Arab world. They have some of the strongest 

protections for the rights of women in their constitution and in 

their penal code. And there have been voices as well, calling for 

that to be rolled back, but we have also seen from within the government, and including in the Islamist al-Nahda Party, talking 

about the need to maintain those protections. 

So there is a lot of discussion going on, a lot of turmoil about the 

way forward. They are going to have to find Tunisian solutions to 

these problems. 

But as we have approached the Arab Spring, whether it is in 

Tunisia or elsewhere, we have always emphasized the importance 

of universal values—protection of the rights of minorities, protection of the rights of women, free speech, freedom of association, 

freedom of religion. That is a touchstone for our approach across 

the Arab Spring, and I think that also needs to be the focus of our 

approach in Tunisia as well. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much. 

I will hold my question for you, Mr. Stevens, until my second 

round and call on Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

Just to indicate our degree of accord, I would point out that I 

have been driving a Prius for the last 6 years. [Laughter.] 

Senator BOXER. Me, too. 

Senator LUGAR. There we go. So you can understand the bipartisan outlook we have on these things. 

I would say, beyond that, as a corn farmer, I have been promoting corn ethanol for the last 15 years, and this has become a 

very prominent part of the biofuels. I appreciate there are all sorts 

of debates about corn ethanol, but nevertheless, it has displaced 

maybe 9 percent of the oil usage that we have in this country, and 

I hope it will do more. 

Let me just say in the Ag Committee, we take up regularly the 

CFTC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and this deals 

with the question of so-called speculations. Others would just say 

price finding. But the dilemma illustrated by the oil price controlled by the CFTC and so forth is that there is great fear 

throughout the world, not just in our country, that the supplies 

transited through the Strait of Hormuz are likely to be affected by 

problems in Iran or elsewhere. Therefore, with both these possible 

severe disruptions of supply and the view of many that the Saudis 

alone have a reserve capable of addressing a significant supply 

decrease in mind, we are in a precarious predicament in which 

there could be a huge spike in price of gasoline in a short period 

of time, given the foreign policy questions we are discussing today. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

165

Which gets us back to, Ambassador Pascual, the fact that essentially these are questions of the security of our country, but they 

have a high content of diplomacy that we believe belongs in the 

State Department at the highest levels. And in testimony before 

this committee during the duration of time I have served, we have 

had one hearing after another in which it was recalled that Franklin Roosevelt and the Saudi monarchs came to some sort of implicit 

agreement that we in the United States needed oil. 

They needed also our friendship and, if not, protection. And attempting to maintain this over the years, of course, has brought us 

into the Middle East in many ways, and we have expended hundreds of billions of dollars over the course of the years even in 

times of relative peace in the region just to keep clearing the path 

and to making certain that our naval power was sufficient. 

So these are diplomatic considerations that are closely intertwined with our national defense, that I think these issues affect 

all of us. What I simply want to ask you, Ambassador Pascual, is 

that given the precarious nature of the oil situation, as we look at 

it presently and as reflected in prices at the pump or any other 

indicator, what are the provisions that our country can make? 

One of them, obviously, is to use less, conserve and, therefore, do 

those things which we can in our buildings, quite apart from our 

cars and transportation systems and every other way that we use 

fossil fuels or any other sort of fuel. 

We can, obviously, as the chairman has suggested, push very 

hard for biofuel substitution for almost anything else that might be 

there. And we have made great progress. 

Indeed, the 59 percent of the oil we were importing maybe a couple of years ago is down to 50 percent. That is significant. That is 

50 percent, and it gets to the guts of how our whole economy works 

at this point, given our international responsibilities. 

So can you outline for us, at least in the work you have been 

doing already, prior to assumption of this new position and confirmable situation, how the State Department looks at this overall 

picture now of the prices that are clearly rising because of fears 

and the reality that there is very little reserve left anywhere in the 

world we could call upon? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. Senator, thank you very much. 

This is an issue of great interest to the American people, and it 

is of great concern to Secretary Clinton, to the President, and certainly to members of this committee. 

One of the things that we have to recognize is in this period 

where there have been rising energy prices and some degree of 

speculation in the market, as you and Madam Chairman have both 

indicated, Iran has tried to use that opportunity in every possible 

way to talk up the potential risk and push prices up. We have to 

recognize that that is its intent. 

At the same time, the best way to counter that is to be able to 

look at all the possible energy sources that we have, as both of you 

have indicated, to have diversification in our energy strategy and 

policies. 

In the United States today, we now have more oil and gas rigs 

operating than the rest of the world combined. We have significantly increased our production of oil. We have significantly inFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

166

creased our production of natural gas as well, which is another 

very important issue to be able to get back into. 

If we look at the situation internationally, there is no magic bullet that one can use and say that this is going to resolve the world’s 

energy problems. But it underscores the importance of having a 

broad and diversified strategy, and that is one of the reasons why 

in my job over the past months, I have been so busily engaged, for 

example, in going to the Middle East and engaging with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. 

And in those discussions, it has been interesting to the extent to 

which those countries have been reinforcing that they will respond 

to market demand. And indeed, even yesterday, there was an extraordinary meeting of the Saudi cabinet of ministers at the end of 

which they said the kingdom will work individually and in cooperation and coordination with the GCC and other producers inside and 

outside OPEC to ensure adequate oil supply, stabilize oil markets, 

and bring down oil prices to reasonable levels. 

It is an indication of the changing environment that we have 

today where producers and consumers have to have shared interests. It is why in visits to Iraq, for example, we have been working 

with them not only over the past year to help them increase their 

production by 300,000 barrels a day, but looking ahead, developing 

a strategy and a framework and a relationship in which we can 

help them secure their plans of producing another 500,000. 

My colleague to my right already indicated in Libya the significant recovery that we have seen to 1.4 million barrels a day and 

the potential of reaching higher levels by the end of the year. There 

are a number of other countries that are critical to engage in. In 

our own hemisphere, Colombia, Brazil, Canada, I would just underscore as significant countries and contributors to world energy 

markets. 

And the point of this is, is that this issue is not simply resolved 

by talking to one country, but by dealing with many countries in 

a concerted and strategic way. But at the same time, undertaking 

the kinds of actions that you and Senator Boxer have indicated of 

reducing our own consumption, ensuring that we have energy efficiency and fuel efficiency measures to be able to reduce the demand 

in the United States. 

Senator LUGAR. I thank you very much. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Senator. 

Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ambassador Pascual, let me ask you—well, before I do, let me 

just say I spoke to Secretary Clinton earlier today when she informed me of the exemption of the sanctions to the 10 European 

Union countries and Japan because of those nations’ significant reductions in petroleum purchases from Iran. And as the author of 

the sanctions, I support the Secretary’s decision and applaud the 

action of our friends and allies in the European Union and Japan 

for their forthright and expedient action. 

And I think it sends a very clear message to others in the world 

about what they will need to do to offset their purchases of Iranian 

oil and, hopefully, create stability in the oil markets. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

167

That, plus the swift determination on Saturday, which is the 

financial messaging service provider cutting off services to the Central Bank of Iran and 30 designated Iranian banks that are on our 

list, is having a real impact. And that impact can be seen through 

Iran’s currency plummeting as well as Iran’s oil shipments in February falling to a 10-year low. This is exactly what we were trying 

to achieve. 

So that is the good news. The rest of what I want to get a sense 

of, since you will be in a key position based on how we wrote the 

law, is how do you define significant reduction and what level of 

reduction predicated your decision to recommend—I assume you 

were part of this process—to recommend the EU and Japan be 

exempted from sanctions today? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. Senator, thank you very much. Thank you 

for your leadership in passing the legislation. Thank you for your 

very encouraging statement. 

I think that you hit on the key word in your statement about 

how to think about the issue of significant reduction, which is encouragement, example to others. Japan was a model, a model in 

the sense of a country that went through the tragedy of Fukushima, and at the same time, it worked to build the national consensus within its political system to underscore the fact that the 

threat of Iran was so great that it was necessary to continue to reduce their imports of Iranian crude. 

If Japan was able to do what it did over a course of 4 years, but 

in particular in the second half of last year, drastically reducing its 

imports of Iranian crude oil, that should be an example to others 

that they could potentially do more. 

The European Union was another important example in which 

they have essentially ended new purchases, new contracts for Iranian crude oil, and are phasing out contracts, existing contracts by 

July 1. In other words, they are going to zero. The European Union 

did that for its own reasons, and we applaud the rationale. 

If we had been involved with a country in the negotiation and 

had preemptively or ahead of time taken a position on a specific 

percentage, we might have actually prescribed a percentage that 

was less than what that country was willing to do. And so, I think, 

going back to your words, example, encouragement, example to 

others. 

Here are two examples of what one country and a set of 10 countries, the European Union as a whole, have done. And what we are 

looking for is for countries to come to us and tell us if they believe 

that they should be in that category that deserves an exemption. 

What are the kinds of significant reductions that they are willing 

to pursue? 

And to engage in a dialogue on that basis in order to be able to 

exact what we want through this legislation and I believe was your 

intent, which was to deny export markets to Iran. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, let me explore this a little bit more 

with you. I appreciate your answer, but am not suggesting that you 

have a numerical number in mind. 

But obviously, from the European Union, which is going to be 

zero, to Japan, which is about, what, 30-percent reduction or a 25-

percent reduction? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

168

Ambassador PASCUAL. The Japanese reduction, the current 

reduction is one that is privileged commercial information. But 

what is publicly available is that over the last half of last year, depending on the data source, that seasonally adjusted, they reduced 

between 15 and 22 percent. 

Senator MENENDEZ. OK. So it seems to me that if the Japanese, 

with everything that they faced with the tsunami, the knocking out 

of their nuclear power, could in this time period do what they did 

that that would be, in my mind, the low mark for other nations 

who want to achieve the avoidance of sanctions. Would you agree 

with that? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. I think, Senator, that we want to continue 

to press for other countries to use these as examples and be able 

to present the best case that they can if they believe that they 

should be considered. 

I think that there are factors that we are going to have to take 

into account, including the percentage of their imports that come 

from Iran, the impact that they would have on their national economy, the kind of alternatives that they might have in the near 

term to seek other supplies. And on the basis of that, believe what 

is the best possible case that we can be able to work out with these 

individual countries. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Have you already made any determination 

about which countries’ sanctions will and won’t apply at this point? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. No, sir. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Beyond today’s announcement? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. The determinations—the only determinations that have been made are the two that were announced by the 

Secretary of State today, the 10 European countries and Japan. 

Senator MENENDEZ. What countries are you most concerned 

about in the context of reducing purchases of petroleum from Iran 

at this point? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. Sir, there are 23 countries that have imported crude oil from Iran. Eleven of them were covered today. Of 

the remaining 12, I think there is public information on the overall 

levels of how much those countries are importing. 

I would rather not go into the question of concern because what 

we would really like to see is those countries coming to us in a way 

that is open and engaging and shows a coincidence with the United 

States and our other partners that we all have a concern for reducing revenue to Iran and being able to negotiate and work out with 

them the best possible circumstance to reduce their imports. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, let me just say that as much as I was 

complimentary, I think that what was done today was probably the 

easy part, to some degree, in terms of determining these countries. 

And we applaud them. 

But the next tranche is going to be a lot more difficult. And so, 

the standards that are set as you move toward the next tranche of 

countries that on the list that are not in the universe that was exempted today is going to be incredibly important. We are going to 

be looking to engage with you to get a sense of the outline of what 

is an exemption at the end of the day because that is going to set 

the standard. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

169

And of course, and I will close on this and wait for the second 

round, as the Secretary herself said, when she was before the full 

committee, and I asked her if she expected that significant reduction was every 180 days? And her answer was ‘‘yes.’’

So, how we start off is incredibly important in that regard. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator. 

Just we have a vote at 4 p.m., do we not? OK. So we are going 

to try to complete this, but I think we will have time for a second 

round. 

Yes, Senator. 

Senator RISCH. Yes, Madam Chairman, I will yield back to you 

for the second round. 

Senator BOXER. Are you sure? 

Senator RISCH. Positive. 

Senator BOXER. OK. I want to ask a question about Libya. And 

thank you for taking on this challenge. This is not an easy time 

to go over there. I am just very proud that you have accepted this 

challenge. 

As one who backed the decision to engage in the U.N. no-fly 

zone, obviously, there is much to be proud of—the successful overthrow of Gaddafi and watching the Libyan people try to build a 

new government, a civil society from the ground up. 

But I want to ask you about something troubling—the militias 

that refuse to disarm. Today, there may be up to 200,000 fighters 

in Libya who are refusing to lay down their arms despite pleas 

from the highest levels of the transitional Libyan Government. 

What plans has the Libyan Government outlined to demobilize 

militia groups? What steps has it actively taken to implement those 

plans? What assistance has the U.S. Government offered? And just 

overall, are you concerned that armed militias could play an intimidating role in the runup to the planned elections in June? 

Mr. STEVENS. Thank you, Madam Chairman, for your kind remarks and for your question. 

This is probably the most serious question that Libyan authorities face right now, the issue of disarming and demobilizing and 

reintegrating the militias into Libyan civilian life. As you said, 

there are thousands and thousands of militia members scattered 

around the country and based in the capital and Benghazi as well. 

The Libyan authorities are grappling with this issue as we 

speak. In fact, they already began some months ago in the final 

days of the revolution. And the plans that they have put together 

have a goal of incorporating some of them into the security forces, 

be they the police or the military, and some of them into civilian 

life, hopefully, the private sector or perhaps other civilian government jobs. 

In terms of the steps they have taken, they have coalesced 

around more than one plan. I have to say it is not as organized as 

one might like it to be. But the steps that they are following involve, first of all, registering the names and personal data of the 

militia members, and they have made quite a bit of progress on 

this. Long lists of these people, who they are, where they are from, 

what skills they have, and where they would like to fit into Libyan 

society. So this is the first step. 

And then, beyond that——

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

170

Senator BOXER. So, if I can interrupt? So they want to reintegrate them? Because that is important. Remember in Iraq what 

happened? Said no more Baath Party members of the militia, and 

they just turned them all away, and that started a whole what I 

would say ‘‘civil war.’’

So that is very interesting. Thank you for that information. Continue. 

Mr. STEVENS. They are very mindful of the Iraq experience, and 

in fact, some of them use the phrase ‘‘debaathification’’ as something that they would want to avoid. So just to finish this thought, 

the next step would be to actually hire portions of them into the 

security services and the military and then direct others into the 

civilian areas of life, including training. 

Now what are we doing about this? Well, the U.N. is taking the 

lead role in organizing the international effort to help in many of 

these areas, and one of them is providing advice and assistance 

based on other experiences that countries like ourselves and the 

EU members have had around the world with similar situations. 

And so, we and the EU and other countries are working with the 

U.N. to provide assistance in this area, mainly in the form of 

advice. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

I am just going to give back the rest of my time and call on Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Mr. Walles, Tunisia essentially has not been overlooked by all 

the drama going on elsewhere, but there has been an assumption 

that democracy and democratic institutions have made substantial 

progress. In your opening statement, you illustrated ways that that 

is so. 

What I am curious about is what the benchmarks for knowing 

that, as a matter of fact, these institutions have taken hold? It was 

a surprise perhaps to many Americans to begin with that the Arab 

Spring began in Tunisia, as this would not have seemed to have 

been the logical focal point. But nevertheless, it did occur, and as 

the chairman has pointed out, some unusual people were elected in 

the legislative process. 

What I wonder is just as further observation, many of the people 

most celebrated in the Arab Spring were young people demonstrating in the squares, using Twitter and other forms of social 

media. But what seems to have followed is a reimposition of older 

people, whether they be religious leaders or elderly politicians who 

were not with the previous government. And the young people do 

not seem to be playing an increasingly significant role. 

Are we likely to see, therefore, a resumption again someday of 

people who feel that they are not getting the fulfillment in terms 

of jobs and their lives because even though there has been a 

change of regime and supposedly more democracy and human 

rights and so forth, somehow or other, they are still coming out on 

the short end of it? 

Mr. WALLES. Thank you, Senator Lugar, for the question. 

You know, I have been working the past year on Egypt and a 

number of other countries that have been going through this. Each 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

171

of these countries is a little bit different, and the circumstances in 

each country are different as they proceed. 

Tunisia went first, as we noted earlier. And they have had their 

election of a constituent assembly. They are now in the process of 

drafting a constitution. The constitution, I think, will be an important benchmark because they are going to have to grapple with a 

lot of difficult issues, including the relation between religion and 

the state, the role of women, things like that. 

So that is an important thing that we need to watch out for. 

Once they have a constitution, they will then elect a parliament, 

a permanent parliament. Right now, it is just a constituent assembly, and then they will also elect a President. And so, that is 

another benchmark as well. 

In Tunisia, as elsewhere in the Middle East, young people played 

an important role in the revolution. I think they will have to play 

an important role in the progress to democracy as well. 

There were a lot of reasons why the revolution took place in 

Tunisia, why this started in Tunisia, but economic pressure was an 

important thing. There is a very high unemployment rate in Tunisia now, particularly among young people. The unemployment rate 

for young people is about 30 percent. 

And particularly in the interior areas, which are much more disadvantaged, there is a very high rate of disaffection among youth. 

So that is an area that they are going to have to look at as well. 

So it is not just about building these institutions and the building 

blocks of the political process. It is also about building the economic 

underpinning for that so they can be a prosperous country as well. 

Those are areas that we are going to look to. We have been supporting. And if confirmed, those are things that I would be looking 

at as well. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much. 

I will yield my time to others. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

We are going to go Senator Menendez, Senator Risch, Senator 

Udall. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ambassador Pascual, just two final questions. There are energy 

analysts that are projecting that Iran’s oil exports will fall by as 

much as 50 percent in the coming months, meaning that Iran 

might lose the capacity to export between 800,000 to 1 million barrels per day of oil. Is that estimate one that you share, or do you 

have a different one? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. If one looks at the commitments made by 

the European Union to eliminate their imports of Iranian crude oil, 

if we look at reductions made by Japan, if we look at other statements that other countries have made, while it is difficult to predict an exact number, that is in the ballpark of what countries 

have been saying that they are going to reduce in Iranian crude 

imports. 

Senator MENENDEZ. On a slightly different topic, the Spanish 

company Repsol has begun to drill in Cuban waters, despite the 

fact that Cuba is clearly incapable of mitigating a leak that would 

harm U.S. interests in the Caribbean. Does your office have a role 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

172

in this project? Have you had conversations with Repsol on their 

drilling in Cuba? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. No, sir. My office does not have a role in 

this. I have not had conversations with Repsol about this issue. We 

have discussed issues with Repsol, particularly to their imports of 

Iranian crude oil, which they have actually now brought to zero. 

Senator MENENDEZ. OK. And finally, Mr. Stevens, I have the 

families of 32 of 189 Americans who died on Pan Am Flight 103. 

And as someone who has been supportive of our efforts in Libya, 

but I also believe it is very important, as I told the Prime Minister 

when he visited the committee, that in order for Libya to be able 

to move forward in its future, it must reconcile events of the past. 

And there are still many of these families who believe that justice has not been achieved for them. And while their loved ones can 

never be replaced, a sense of justice is desired and is ripe. 

So my question is have you met or will you meet with the 

Department of Justice about their open Pan Am case before departing for Tripoli? And is it your understanding of U.S. policy to continue to actively pursue information about the bombing and other 

terror attacks orchestrated by the Gaddafi regime against U.S. citizens? 

Mr. STEVENS. Thank you, Senator. 

The Pan Am 103 bombing was a horrific act and one that we 

cannot forget, and I certainly will keep on my mind when I go to 

Libya, if I am confirmed. 

I do plan to meet with the Justice Department officials in the 

coming days and weeks to discuss their case, which I understand 

is ongoing, and I am referring to the criminal case. And we have, 

as you know, raised this issue with the interim Libyan authorities, 

including during the visit of the Prime Minister of Libya a week 

or so ago when you met with him. 

So, Senator, absolutely, that would be on the top of my list of 

issues——

Senator MENENDEZ. So you will visit with Justice before going to 

Tripoli? 

Mr. STEVENS. Absolutely. 

Senator MENENDEZ I appreciate you say you will keep it on the 

top of your mind. I would like it to be one of your priority items 

in your agenda. 

Mr. STEVENS. It certainly would be, sir, if I am confirmed. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Briefly, we are going to vote in a minute. So I 

want Senator Udall to have a chance. But I just have one question 

on the import reductions. 

I understand that this information is I don’t know whether it is 

classified or what you call it. But when are we going to get numbers on this? How can we make a judgment on this without having 

actual numbers of what the cutback is going to be? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. Actual data on performance by countries 

usually is a couple of months in time lag. What we have seen 

already from the European Union is that they have taken legally 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

173

binding measures that they cannot execute new contracts. That is 

happening already right now. 

As a result of that, they are not putting in place any additional 

supplies in the supply lines. They have committed to completely 

phase out or end existing contracts by July 1. 

We have been in regular contact with the European Union to determine if that has been the case, and indeed, we have seen from 

the European Union continued phase-down of all of those contracts. 

We have also seen, anecdotally, that as a result of the measures 

that have been put in place on prohibitions on finance and on insurance, especially for ships and for tankers, that many countries 

have simply not been able to import Iranian crude because they 

can’t get ships. 

All of these things have actually accelerated the process of implementation. We are continually analyzing what the implications 

might be in terms of the numbers of volumes. But we, unfortunately, don’t actually see that reflected in the data coming out of 

countries for a 1-to-2-month time lag. 

Senator RISCH. How about the Japanese? You spoke of the European Union. 

Ambassador PASCUAL. The Japanese, as I mentioned, going forward, the information that they have provided us is commercially 

privileged because of the contracts that are involved. But what is 

public is what the import trends have been over the last 6 months 

of 2011. 

And from that, we have looked at different sources of data, including the International Energy Association, our own domestic 

data on actual ship movements, and depending on the data source, 

when you look at seasonally adjusted data, they have reduced imports in the range of 15 to 22 percent. 

Senator RISCH. What is your level of confidence in that estimate? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. It is extraordinarily high. It is recorroborated by every type of data source, both what is coming out of the 

country by their customs data as well as shipping data, which is 

based on commercially available information on ship movements, 

liftings, and unloadings. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

I want Senator Udall to have a chance. So I yield my time. 

Senator BOXER. Senator Risch, thank you. And thank you for 

pressing on that. I think that was very helpful. 

Senator Udall, welcome. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Chairman Boxer. 

Good to be with you all today. 

Mr. Stevens, one of the programs that Gaddafi left behind was 

a huge water project known as the Great Manmade River. The goal 

of this project was to bring water to arid regions of the country and 

improve the agricultural capabilities of the country. What is the 

current status of this project? 

I know issues have been raised in terms of sustainability and 

whether this was a good project or not. Is the United States supporting the project? What are you doing in terms of environmental 

review if you are going to work to move it forward? 

Mr. STEVENS. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

174

The Great Manmade River Project, of course, is one of Gaddafi’s 

legacies. It was actually begun before he came to power and got its 

start during oil exploration by an American company that stumbled 

on some water out in the desert in southern Libya. 

Since then, it has provided a good portion, if not the majority of 

Libya’s water supply. Critics say that it is expensive and that it is 

a waste, that they are trying to grow agriculture in areas which 

they shouldn’t. People on the other side say, well, it is a resource 

they have, and why shouldn’t they use it? 

During my time in Benghazi during the revolution, it largely continued to work unaffected. There was a brief interruption at one 

point, but they since made the repairs that were necessary, and 

now it continues to provide significant water to Libyans, both to 

cities and to farmers. 

We are not providing any sort of assistance at all to this project. 

It is strictly funded by the Libyan Government, and they are using 

foreign contractors from Korea and Turkey and other places to help 

them. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Ambassador Pascual, one of the issues, and I know you have 

heard about it some here from various questions that have come 

at you, but is the gas prices and how they are getting out of hand 

and how people back home in New Mexico and California and Indiana, all places across the country, people, you know, why at this 

particular time are they spiking? 

And I am wondering what, from your standpoint and what would 

you do as Assistant Secretary to improve the energy security of the 

United States, and what should be the short and long-term priorities to increase energy stability internationally? 

Ambassador PASCUAL. Senator, thank you very much. 

We had had an opportunity to discuss it, and I think you put it 

in exactly the right terms of energy security for the United States 

because that is, indeed, what the American people are looking for. 

One of the things that we have underscored throughout this discussion is that there is no single answer, but it needs a diversified 

strategy. That diversified strategy has to include what we are 

doing at home, including the measures and the steps that we have 

pursued to increase production, where we have had significant increases in our productions of both oil and gas over the past 5 years. 

It has been important to reduce our consumption and the kinds 

of fuel efficiency and other efficiency measures that we put in place 

in the United States that have cut consumption. 

On the international side, one of the things that we have done 

and in my position as Coordinator for International Energy Affairs 

that we have been seeking to do is to engage all major producers 

and partners to understand what the prospects are for their production, to understand where there are potential bottlenecks where 

we can work together, to engage with energy companies to understand where we might be able to resolve issues that allow them to 

increase their investment and increase their productive capabilities. 

We have spent time working with countries in the Middle East, 

and we have had consistent assurances that they will now respond 

to market demand. I mentioned yesterday an extraordinary meetFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

175

ing of the Saudi Cabinet that resulted in a conclusion that they 

will continue to produce supplies that will actually seek to balance 

out prices on the international market. 

And we have to recognize in the context of this that one of the 

things that Iran will do is do everything possible to talk up insecurity and risk and making statements such as cutting off the Strait 

of Hormuz. And when things like that happen, it creates speculation in the futures markets as well. 

And so, it is critical to continue on this all-out front to provide 

a sense and perception, but also the reality that supplies can be 

available and to do that—and by doing that to be able to counter 

the other factors related to the risk and speculation which could be 

in the marketplace. 

Senator UDALL. OK. Thank you. 

And one final question for Mr. Walles. The former President Ben 

Ali was known to use the domestic security services to repress dissent in the country. Furthermore, it is believed that the security 

services outnumbered the military considerably, with nearly 

200,000 members. 

How is the new government dealing with the remnants of the domestic security services, and what will the United States do to help 

improve the human rights situation in Tunisia to ensure a similar 

organization is not formed by future governments? 

Mr. WALLES. Thank you, Senator, for the question. 

You are correct that in the past under the Ben Ali regime, the 

internal security forces were an instrument of repression on the 

population. That is no longer the case, although these security 

forces continue to exist. And this is a priority issue for the new government in terms of how they would reform these security forces. 

Many of the members of the current government, including the 

ministers, were imprisoned under Ben Ali or they were exiled during that period. So they have firsthand experience with this repression. So they are not, by any means, prepared to continue that sort 

of thing. 

But in order to make sure it doesn’t happen again, they are going 

to have to reform the security forces so they are not an instrument 

of repression. They are an instrument to provide security for the 

people, which is what they should be doing. 

In terms of what the United States could do, this is an area that 

we have begun to look at a little bit. We have experience in other 

places in the Middle East where we have worked with security 

forces and helped them reform. I know from my time in Jerusalem, 

we began a program like that for the Palestinians, and that has 

been a success. 

Whether that would apply in the Tunisian case is something we 

are going to have to look at. I think the first step will be for the 

Tunisian Government to decide what they want to do with those 

security forces and how they want to reform them, and then we can 

look at whether it would be appropriate for us to assist in that. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much. 

And Chairman Boxer, thank you, and thank you for your testimony today. I look forward to moving these nominations forward 

expeditiously. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

176

Senator BOXER. Senator Udall, thank you so much for coming 

here and asking those questions. 

And Senator Lugar, thank you so much for chairing this hearing 

with me today and for your thoughtful questions. 

I want to thank our nominees. They are outstanding. I can’t 

imagine why we shouldn’t act on each and every one of you expeditiously. 

We will leave the record open for 24 hours to accommodate any 

of our colleagues who would like to submit written questions. 

And again, we are going to do everything we can to move forward 

quickly. 

Thank you for making the sacrifices for your country. 

And we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:05 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF JOHN CHRISTOPHER STEVENS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Please provide detail for the committee on the Libyan fiscal situation, 

particularly as it pertains to assets frozen and unfrozen around the world.

Answer. Libyan authorities recently released the 2012 budget, which totals 68.5 

billion LYD (or $55 billion). According to local press reports, it is a balanced budget 

which relies heavily on oil revenues. 

In December 2011 the U.N. delisted the assets of the Libyan Central Bank and 

the Libyan Arab Foreign Bank. The United States also removed sanctions on those 

two government entities, leaving very few assets frozen under U.S. jurisdiction. 

Those assets are now available to Libyan authorities. The Libyan Government has 

not requested that sanctions be lifted from the two remaining government entities 

listed at the U.N., Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) and the Libyan African 

Investment Portfolio (LAIP), pending its reorganization of their management 

structures.

Question. You are headed to an Embassy which was greatly damaged in the revolution. Please describe the Department’s plans for rebuilding your Embassy and 

facilities.

• Has the Government of Libya made any offers to assist in the reconstruction? 

• What money has been designated and what planning has been done by OBO? 

• What is the plan for consulates, if any?

Answer. Due to the level of destruction at the former Embassy compound, the 

Department has established an Interim Embassy until such time as a New Embassy 

Compound can be built. 

At this time, the Government of Libya has not specifically offered to assist in the 

reconstruction of the U.S. Embassy but is engaged with the Department of State 

on the issue of land acquisition as we conduct initial site searches for the New 

Embassy Compound. 

OBO is working closely with Department offices and other agencies that will be 

working in the Interim Embassy to ensure that the facility adequately meets security and operational needs of all tenants. Evaluation teams have traveled to Libya 

to review existing facilities to ensure proper planning and usage of the facilities. 

Funding for building the Interim Embassy will come from all agencies that will 

make use of the facility. Within the Department, the Bureau of Resource Management is fully aware of the financial needs associated with the Interim Embassy. 

Currently, the Department is staffing a small office in Benghazi, Libya, that is 

responsible for monitoring the pulse of political action in eastern Libya. However, 

once national elections have taken place, the Department will reassess its utility.

Question. Will assignments for Tripoli staff be conducted in a normal fashion, or 

are they being given shortened assignments and special incentive packages?

Answer. There is a temporary incentive package for personnel assigned to Tripoli 

now and in the 2012 summer and winter 2012/2013 cycles. The Department will 

return to a 2-year tour of duty when security and living conditions normalize. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

177

Embassy Tripoli is operating in extremely difficult conditions. U.S. Government 

employees are housed on a secure compound, two to four persons per bedroom and 

up to four people per bathroom depending on the number of personnel. All movements off-compound must be coordinated with a security package. Due to the limited living space, employees are not permitted to take unaccompanied baggage, 

household effects, consumables, or personal vehicles to post. 

The incentives package entails 1-year assignments, with 35 percent hardship pay, 

25 percent danger pay, and the provision of two Rest and Recuperation (R&R) trips 

or one R&R and two Regional Rest Breaks (RRB). 

This package is being reevaluated as the situation in Tripoli changes and will be 

adjusted based on the overall security, stability, and openness of the situation.

Question. Gas prices for many Americans currently top $4 per gallon and world- wide the price of a barrel of oil is $107. You stated in the hearing that Libya expected to be back to prewar levels of oil production by the end of the year, but would 

you provide more details on the status of the Libyan production and export capacity? Are American firms back fully, and if not, what reasons are they expressing 

to you?

Answer. Even though the United States imports little oil from Libya, restoring 

Libya’s participation in the global oil market will have the effect of stabilizing supplies, which is important for our ability to access supplies at an affordable price—

a key element of our energy security policy. Libya is making significant progress in 

restoring output to its precrisis oil production level of about 1.6 million barrels per 

day and is currently producing over 1.4 million barrels per day, according to the 

Libyan authorities. 

Most of the U.S. firms involved in production in Libya have reopened their offices 

in Tripoli and are taking steps to resume normal operations. U.S. firms have identified both security and logistical constraints in their meetings with us and we have 

engaged with the Libyan authorities on these issues.

Question. If you were addressing American businessmen, what would you want 

to tell them about opportunities in Libya? Do you expect to have a Senior Commercial Officer from the Department of Commerce as a member of your Country Team 

to assist American companies interested in investing in Libya?

Answer. As Ambassador Cretz has so often stated—and the Libyans have repeated publicly—Libya is now ‘‘open for business.’’ U.S. Embassy Tripoli, in coordination with the Department of State’s Bureau for Economic and Business Affairs, 

established a series of sector-specific teleconferences which provide a ‘‘direct line’’ 

for American companies to the U.S. Ambassador. The Embassy has completed six 

sector-specific teleconferences to assist the American private sector identify commercial opportunities in Libya. These teleconferences have focused on sectors including 

infrastructure, security and health care, and have had upward of 100 participants 

per call. This program has been such a success that Secretary Clinton has asked 

the Department of State to expand it worldwide. If confirmed, I will continue the 

program in Libya, in order to keep U.S. companies abreast of all commercial opportunities emerging with Libya’s political and economic transition. 

The demand by the U.S. private sector for commercial opportunities in Libya is 

big, and it’s only getting bigger. There is also tremendous demand in Libya for goods 

and services produced by U.S. companies. Broadly, there is great need for infrastructure, information and communications technology, oil and gas services, power 

generation, transportation products, and infrastructure, including rail. 

I refer you to the Department of Commerce for details on their staffing plans in 

Libya and elsewhere. If confirmed, I certainly would want Department of Commerce 

representation in the Country Team at Embassy Tripoli.

Question. What, if any, role will U.S. assistance play in the security sector reform 

elements you discussed in the hearing?

Answer. The United States will continue to play a supporting role to the transitional Government of Libya (GOL) in security sector reform. We will work with the 

U.N. Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) and international partners to coordinate 

our assistance, and if confirmed, I will assist in these efforts. 

Libya’s Ministry of Defense (MOD), Ministry of Interior (MOI), Ministry of Justice 

(MOJ), and intelligence services are being reconstituted in the wake of the revolution. Currently, there is minimal absorptive capacity within the GOL for robust 

security sector assistance. The greatest need is for technical expertise to help the 

GOL shape its security apparatus and to assist GOL efforts to disarm, demobilize, 

and reintegrate (DDR) revolutionary fighters. 

UNSMIL and our international partners have taken the lead in assisting the GOL 

to implement a DDR process. UNSMIL is diligently working to facilitate GOL secuFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

178

rity sector coordination through the creation of a Libyan national security staff. The 

U.K. has embedded a technical expert in the Libyan MOI to assist in standing up 

a GOL police force. Jordan has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with 

the MOI to train 10,000 new police cadets in basic police curriculum. The Libyan 

MOD has launched an assistance coordination mechanism to keep track of assistance to the armed forces, avoid duplication and identify gaps. The French have 

conducted joint maritime training with the Libyan Navy. Qatar and the UAE have 

committed to MOD assistance, but have not had any real engagement or response 

to date. 

UNSMIL is also working closely with the GOL to coordinate the DDR process. 

The GOL and UNSMIL report that Libya’s Warrior Affairs Committee has registered 148,000 fighters to date. Assisted by the international community, the GOL 

has announced a 3-year plan to integrate 25,000 revolutionaries into the regular 

military and 25,000 into the police forces. The remaining revolutionary forces will 

be reintegrated into civilian life through initiatives to develop small and medium 

business enterprises, or through new educational and training opportunities. 

We aim to support these efforts by deploying targeted security sector assistance 

that will focus on bolstering GOL capacity and leveraging international assistance. 

In April, the Department’s Export Control and Related Border Security (EXBS) program will fund the deployment of a team from the Bureau of International Security 

and Nonproliferation, Office of Export Control Cooperation, and the Department of 

Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, to conduct a 1-week consultation and basic enforcement training overview for Libyan MOI, MOD, and Customs 

Officials who will be leading the efforts to develop and integrate Libya’s border security forces. We introduced the Defense Institution Reform Initiative (DIRI) program 

to Libyan Prime Minister El-Keib during his March 2012 visit. If accepted by the 

GOL, DIRI will provide a team of experts to advise the MOD on rightsizing its security forces and integrate rebel fighters into the Libyan armed forces. 

Over the summer, the Anti-Terrorism Assistance (ATA) program will send an 

assessment team to evaluate the current capacity of Libyan law enforcement units 

that perform counterterrorism functions and to examine whether and how we can 

begin offering ATA training in the coming year. 

In late March, we will deploy a security sector transition coordinator to U.S.

Embassy Tripoli who will coordinate and report on these border security and MOI 

training efforts. We are also using the congressionally notified Presidential Drawdown authority to provide nonlethal personal equipment to the MOD as it forms a 

national military capable of providing protection to the civilians and civilian populated areas within Libya. 

Additionally, funding from the FY 2011 Middle East Response Fund (MERF) will 

be used to support a DDR advisor in Tripoli whose focus will be on reintegrating 

militias into civilian life through advising the GOL on creating employment and 

education opportunities for former militia fighters.

Question. Libya faces significant needs as it develops its civil society in this period 

of transition. The United States is prepared to assist with training and technical 

assistance. With oil production at 1.4 million barrels per day and expected to increase—to what degree is Libyan able to use its own national assets to bear the 

costs of this development.

Answer. We do not have detailed information on the exact expenditures of the 

Libyan Government in various sectors, including in civil society. We, however, do 

have evidence that the government has taken steps to ensure it has funds to meet 

the country’s needs including by working to get the production of oil back to prewar 

levels. The government has also passed a budget of $55 billion, helping to ensure 

that ministries can pursue reform, renovation, and capacity-building projects. 

The Libyans have repeatedly stated they want to pay for the reconstruction and 

reform of their country and promote civil society. In the near term, however, Libya 

is spending the majority of its resources on ensuring that salaries are being paid 

and that basic services are provided to the Libyan people. The United States and 

the international community are currently filling short-term gaps in priority sectors 

and funding actors that we believe should receive assistance independent of the government, including certain civil society groups and the media. 

RESPONSES OF JACOB WALLES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. What, if any, have been the concrete results of U.S. transition support 

programs in Tunisia to date? How should the U.S. Government shape its future forFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

179

eign aid programs in terms of balancing objectives related to security, democracy, 

the economy, and regional policy? How, if at all, can or should the United States 

assist with security sector reform?

Answer. The United States is committed to supporting Tunisia’s transition to 

democracy and helping to establish a foundation for political stability and economic 

prosperity. Since the revolution, we have committed approximately $197 million 

from FY 2010 and FY 2011 resources to support Tunisia’s transition. 

Securing a successful transition to democracy in Tunisia is a key policy priority 

for the United States, the importance of which cannot be overstated. A successful 

Tunisia will set a clear example for other democratic transitions underway in the 

Middle East and North Africa. Success will require progress in all four areas—security, democracy, economy, and regional policy. Following the revolution, U.S. efforts 

focused heavily on supporting Tunisia’s political transition, especially in the runup 

to the October 2011 Constituent Assembly elections. We are now seeking to provide 

critical support needed to stabilize the economy and promote broad-based economic 

growth. We are also bolstering our efforts to assist Tunisia by promoting regional 

stability, countering terrorism, preventing the proliferation of illicit items, building 

law enforcement investigative capabilities, and enhancing border security efforts. 

Moving forward, we will continue to work with the Tunisian Government to build 

its capacity, to support civil society as they participate constructively in national 

political debate, and to support the Tunisian military and civilian security forces’ 

efforts to improve the rule of law, promote regional security, and respect the rights 

of the Tunisian people. 

Following the revolution, initial U.S. Government assistance efforts focused heavily on supporting Tunisia’s political transition and election preparations. This included technical assistance to the Independent Elections Committee (IEC). We also 

supported voter education, facilitated political party outreach to women and youth, 

and helped to expand opportunities for women and youth to run for office and play 

leadership roles. The Tunisian elections were fair, credible, and transparent. 

Since then, we are developing a robust economic assistance package that includes 

programs designed to ease the fiscal strain on the Government of Tunisia while encouraging private sector investment and market-oriented reforms. In this regard:

• We are finalizing with the Government of Tunisia a loan guarantee program to 

support its economic stabilization and economic reform goals. 

• Tunisia will benefit from a Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Threshold 

Program, which will support policy reform that can lead to faster growth and 

generate employment. 

• We intend to capitalize a U.S.-Tunisian Enterprise Fund with an initial $20 

million to help Tunisians launch small and medium enterprises that will be the 

engines of long-term opportunity. 

• The Peace Corps will return to Tunisia this year to provide English language 

training and programs to help prepare Tunisian students and professionals for 

future employment, build local capacity, and foster citizenship awareness at the 

grassroots level. 

• USAID will implement an Internet Communication and Technology (ICT) sector 

development program. We are also supporting an OPIC franchising facility in 

Tunisia, as well as programs focused on developing entrepreneurship and employability skills.

Our security assistance for Tunisia includes $17.5m in FMF and $1.854m in 

IMET in FY12. Our bilateral military relationship, which has always been good, has 

grown stronger in the days since the revolution. We have a regular high-level bilateral dialogue with the Tunisian military, the Joint Military Commission, during 

which we share our respective regional security priorities, assess the Tunisian military’s needs as they support Tunisia’s territorial integrity, and discuss ways to support those needs to serve our mutual bilateral interests. 

Security sector reform is also an important priority for the Government of Tunisia. Prior to the revolution, the Ministry of Interior was a key player in the regime’s 

oppressive rule. The current government is aware of that legacy and wants to 

change it. Tunisia has a new Minister of Interior, a former political prisoner of the 

Ben Ali regime, who is untainted by collaboration with the former regime. He will 

lead Tunisia’s reform efforts in this critical sector. 

The United States stands ready to respond to Tunisian requests for support in 

this area. A ready and capable police force that respects human rights and adheres 

to the rule of law is critical to the success of a democratic country. 

If confirmed as Ambassador, I would work actively to maintain programs that 

address all of these objectives—security, democracy, economy, and regional policy—

in a balanced way.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

180

Question. How would you evaluate al-Nahda’s economic policy platform? To what 

extent does the coalition government share a common view of economic policy priorities and how to approach them? What steps are being taken to promote economic 

growth and job creation, and to address socio-economic grievances and regional economic disparities?

Answer. Even prior to the current government’s assumption of office, al-Nahda reiterated its commitment to market-oriented economic growth. 

Further, all political parties currently represented in government recognize 

Tunisia’s urgent need to attract investment and create jobs. These are Tunisia’s top 

two economic priorities today, and the parties are united in their pursuit of those 

goals. 

The coalition partners are working together to develop the details of a common 

approach to these challenges, and each party has affirmed the need for greater accountability, transparency and foundational reform to make Tunisia’s economy more 

vibrant, inclusive, and responsive to the global market. They are aggressively courting foreign direct investment. And they are working together to pass a new budget 

to facilitate development in previously marginalized regions of the country in order 

to close the developmental divide.

Question. The Peace Corps can be a powerful asset in promoting U.S. interests 

and values, particularly among Tunisia’s more vulnerable populations in the interior 

of the country. How do you intend to leverage the presence of Peace Corps Volunteers in Tunisia to good effect?

Answer. The Peace Corps represents an important opportunity to enhance peopleto-people ties between Tunisia and the United States. As it does in other countries, 

the Peace Corps will work with the Tunisian Government to determine programming, priorities, and volunteer site placement. 

If confirmed as Ambassador, I will support the Peace Corps in its discussions with 

its Tunisian partners to ensure that Peace Corps Volunteers reach the most vulnerable populations in the south and interior of the country, and are meeting the needs 

of the communities in which they serve. 

RESPONSES OF CHRISTOPHER STEVENS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BARBARA BOXER

Question. According to the United Nations, as many as 6,000 detainees—about 

three quarters of those arrested during Libya’s civil war—continue to be held in 

prison facilities run by individual militia groups operating outside the control of the 

government. 

International human rights groups including Amnesty International and Human 

Rights Watch have provided deeply disturbing evidence of what appears to be widespread abuse.

• If confirmed, how will you work to promote the humane treatment of prisoners 

in Libya?

Answer. I share your concern regarding continuing reports of arbitrary detention 

and prisoner abuse. I, too, find these reports deeply troubling and, if confirmed, I 

would continue to raise the issue at the highest levels of the interim Government 

of Libya, as I understand Ambassador Cretz and his team are currently doing. 

Ambassador Cretz and his team have stressed the importance that the United 

States places on protecting human rights and the specific need for the Government 

of Libya to get all detainees and detention facilities under central government control as soon as possible. Our Embassy has also joined with other like-minded embassies and multilateral organizations to press these points, a practice that I would 

continue if confirmed. 

The interim Libyan Government has made positive statements regarding its respect for human rights, condemnation of torture, and commitment to consolidating 

control over militias and detention centers, including informal sites where most allegations of mistreatment originate. We recognize that this will be an important step 

in ensuring humane treatment and in establishing registration and review processes 

in accordance with international standards, but the government needs to go further. 

If confirmed, I would continue the close contact with the Ministry of Justice that 

Ambassador Cretz and his team have maintained. I would continue to emphasize 

that the United States stands ready to assist Libya as it seeks to develop new 

Libyan judicial and corrections systems that meet international standards by ensuring due process and protecting basic human dignity. 

I would also continue to promote continued Libyan Government collaboration with 

the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Office of the U.N. High CommisFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

181

sioner for Refugees, and the International Organization for Migration which can 

provide technical assistance on protection of migrants and refugees as well as visit 

detainees, as our Embassy in Tripoli is already doing.

Question. In November 2011 I held a joint Foreign Relations subcommittee hearing with my colleague Senator Casey to examine the role of women in the Arab 

Spring with a specific focus on Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya.

• If confirmed, will you commit to working to help ensure that women play a 

strong, meaningful role in in the political process in Libya and that their rights 

are fully protected?

Answer. Libyan women played a vital role in the 2011 civil uprising and revolution that toppled Moammar Qadhafi. During my time as the Special Envoy to the 

Transitional National Council in Benghazi last year, I had the privilege to meet and 

work with many inspirational Libyan women supporting the cause of the people. If 

confirmed, I am committed to ensuring that women are encouraged and supported 

to play a strong, meaningful role in the political process in Libya and that their 

rights are fully protected in law and in practice. 

After 42 years of Qadhafi’s dictatorship, Libyans have very limited experience 

with democracy and an open political process. Most candidates, both men and 

women, have no experience in the democratic realm and the challenge for the Libyan people will be to create a national dialogue in which all of Libya’s diverse population can participate. A number of Libyan women activists are already urging 

strong women’s participation in decisionmaking bodies and speaking out about the 

importance of electing women in the June elections. Under the electoral law passed 

in February of this year, 80 of the 200 delegates to the interim National Congress 

will be elected from lists submitted by political parties. Party lists are required to 

alternate between male and female candidates, a process known as the ‘‘zipper 

quota.’’ Observers hope that the law will lead to increased participation by women 

in the government. A similar system was used in Tunisia and, based on that experience, some electoral experts expect that around 10–15 percent of the Parliament will 

be comprised of Libyan women. This is still far lower than women’s percentage of 

the population but is a start. 

Numerous women’s groups and women-led organizations have emerged in Tripoli, 

Benghazi, and outlying areas since the beginning of the revolution. A few of these 

organizations, most of which are led by women who have management experience 

working for international corporations or significant experience outside Libya, have 

successfully initiated or completed projects that include a women’s rights march to 

advocate at the Prime Minister’s office, national conferences for youth and women, 

a reconciliation campaign, the establishment of women’s centers and holding fundraising events. Many of the women’s organizations are loosely constituted groups 

with limited organizational capacity to plan or implement activities beyond charity 

functions but have expressed a desire to expand their activities. Both experienced 

and inexperienced organizations have begun approaching our Embassy in Tripoli for 

assistance with conferences to inform women about their rights and prospective 

roles in elections, constitutional development, civil society, and the economy. 

I believe that the United States can help to provide targeted amounts of technical 

assistance to help these organizations build up their capabilities in these nascent 

stages, as we are already doing through USAID’s Office of Transition Initiatives 

(OTI) and the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI). I understand that the 

United States is one of the only donors currently providing support to these local 

grassroots women’s organizations and, if confirmed, it’s a priority I will continue to 

emphasize. 

USAID/OTI has already been providing support to women-led organizations as 

well as others that have significant female participation. USAID/OTI is currently 

planning initiatives such as: holding a national workshop on women in elections 

that will train women to educate people in their home communities about the importance of having female representation in the constituent assembly and constitutional commission; developing a toolkit of materials to be used in multiple training 

opportunities; and replicating a successful women’s center that aims to facilitate engagement among women about how they can engage in political life. In addition to 

these new activities being developed, as mentioned above, USAID/OTI has already 

funded women’s NGOs for the following projects: a constitutional workshop for government, political, and civil society leaders; a public awareness campaign to promote 

reconciliation, unity, and forgiveness as a means to move the nation toward a peaceful transition; and a youth training session that included a field visit to a local women’s NGO. 

MEPI programs in the sphere of women’s empowerment include: a program to 

help Libyan businesswomen and women entrepreneurs connect with their counterFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

182

parts throughout the region; a National Democratic Institute-led candidate training 

for a group of aspiring women politicians; and a small grants and capacity-building 

program for several small women-led or women-focused civil society organizations. 

These organizations are working to combat discrimination against women, encourage the participation of Libyan housewives in the political process, support the advocacy efforts of women with disabilities and establish a women’s training center. 

I applaud and support all of these programs and, if confirmed, would like to continue similar programming in support of women’s political participation and the protection of women’s rights in the new Libya. 

RESPONSES OF JACOB WALLES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BARBARA BOXER

Question. As you know, the leaders of Tunisia’s ruling al-Nahda Party have stated 

that they intend to uphold the country’s progressive laws regarding women. 

However, many remain concerned about the future of women’s rights in Tunisia, 

particularly in light of growing calls by hard-liners for an Islamic State.

• Do you believe that al-Nahda will uphold and protect women’s rights? Or are 

you concerned that they could make modifications to the country’s laws to 

appease more hard-line elements? 

• If confirmed, will you commit to working with Tunisia’s leaders to encourage 

the promotion of women’s rights in the country’s new constitution, and to convey the message that women’s rights are critical to security and prosperity in 

Tunisia?

Answer. As you note, the leaders of the an-Nahda Party have affirmed their intention to uphold and protect the rights Tunisian women are afforded under that 

country’s constitution, as have other parties represented in Tunisia’s current 

government. 

We believe that the majority of Tunisians support the rights Tunisian women 

enjoy. Those rights have long been a source of justifiable pride, and they are essential to Tunisia’s future political and economic success. 

Equality under the law is a core tenet of our foreign policy. If confirmed, I will 

strongly convey the message that the advancement of women’s rights and political 

and economic participation are critical to Tunisia’s democracy and prosperity, and 

that these rights should continue to be enshrined in the Tunisian Constitution.

Question. As you may know, Tunisia made gains regarding freedom of the press 

following the ouster of longtime Tunisian President Zine El Abedine Ben Ali. In fact, 

Tunisia rose 30 slots—from 164th to 134th—on the Reporters without Borders ‘‘2012 

Press Freedom Index.’’

However, significant problems remain. 

1. Reporters without Borders has documented a number of attacks by Tunisian police on independent journalists. 

2. A television station executive is facing trial and possible jail time for 

screening the award-winning French film Persepolis. 

3. And recently, the government provoked controversy when it appointed two 

individuals associated with the Ben Ali regime to senior posts in the State 

media.

• Are you concerned about these developments? 

• If confirmed, will you commit to working to promote freedom of the press in 

Tunisia?

Answer. Freedom of the press is an important universal value that must be respected in order for Tunisia’s transition to democracy to succeed. I understand that 

our Embassy has already registered with the highest levels of the Government of 

Tunisia our concern about these cases. Tunisia is making progress in its democratic 

transition, but such transitions are often difficult and they take time. 

If confirmed, I will continue to underscore our belief that freedom of expression 

is a fundamental human right and key to Tunisia’s democratic success. 

I will also continue our efforts to invest in Tunisia’s capacity to responsibly exercise that freedom, including through training Tunisian journalists on the fundamentals of responsible, fact-based reporting. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

183

RESPONSE OF CARLOS PASCUAL TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BENJAMIN L. CARDIN

Question. The SEC will soon issue rules to implement section 1504 of the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. How will you use the example set by the United States on this issue to further encourage transparency in 

the extractive sector in other countries? In particular, in your new role, will you 

place a priority on encouraging EU progress on their similar legislation? Also, will 

you place a priority on encouraging an extractives transparency agenda within the 

G20 and other forums? Please describe your plans and strategy on this issue.

Answer. As Secretary Clinton underscored in recent testimony, the State Department will use its full diplomatic capabilities to encourage transparency in extractive 

industries around the world. Once the SEC issues the rules to implement section 

1504, if confirmed, we will help educate other nations about the changes in U.S. law 

and explain how the new rules may affect countries and companies around the 

globe. Already we have taken advantage of excellent materials written by nongovernmental organizations on section 1504 and shared them with the EU and many 

countries with extractive industries in order to sensitize them to the legislation, its 

scope and importance. When the SEC’s rules are issued, we will consult with these 

transparency organizations and draw on their materials and other publicly available 

information. We will use our extensive network of embassies to educate host governments and corporations about the existence and application of the Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act. In addition, if confirmed, I will work through 

our posts overseas to help host governments create the necessary conditions for companies listed in the United States to be compliant with U.S. law. 

The State Department has engaged senior European Union officials on the DoddFrank Act since September 2011 in anticipation of SEC rules. EU representatives 

and parliamentarians are well aware of our interest in creating a common platform 

for transparency. With issuance of SEC rules, ENR proposes to engage EU officials 

on compatibility with possible EU regulations. Similarly, we will work with the G20 

to advance the principles in Dodd-Frank, building on the strong anticorruption platform already created in the G20. The Seoul G20 in 2010 set up an Anticorruption 

Working Group that provides an excellent vehicle to seek action by others comparable to Dodd-Frank. 

Already, the 2010 G20 Seoul Anticorruption Action Plan commits countries ‘‘to 

promote integrity, transparency, accountability and the prevention of corruption, in 

the public sector, including in the management of public finances’’ and to combat 

corruption in specific sectors. We will use the G20 Anticorruption Working Group 

to drill down to actionable steps, including in the critical areas of transparency and 

integrity in public procurement, fiscal transparency, adoption and enforcement of 

laws criminalizing foreign bribery, and public integrity measures. 

Our promotion of transparency around the world is supported by the example we 

set here at home. In addition to Dodd-Frank, the President recently announced our 

intention to implement the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative in the 

United States. This international effort results in disclosure by companies of payments they make to governments, and by governments of payments they receive 

from companies. As the United States moves to become an EITI candidate country 

itself, we will look to encourage other members of the G20 to join the EITI as well. 

Moreover, through the Open Government Partnership (OGP), we are urging many 

of the more than 40 countries now developing national action plans to include EITI 

or other extractive industry transparency efforts in their plans. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(185)

NOMINATIONS OF TRACEY ANN JACOBSON, 

RICHARD B. NORLAND, KENNETH MERTEN, 

MARK A. PEKALA, AND JEFFREY D. LEVINE 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Tracey Ann Jacobson, of the District of Columbia, to be 

Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo 

Hon. Richard B. Norland, of Iowa, to be Ambassador to Georgia 

Hon. Kenneth Merten, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Croatia 

Mark A. Pekala, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Latvia 

Jeffrey D. Levine, of California, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Estonia 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Shaheen, Cardin, Lugar, and Barrasso. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator SHAHEEN. Good morning, everyone. My mike does work. 

I am delighted to welcome everyone here to the Senate Foreign 

Relations Committee hearing to consider the nominations of Tracey 

Ann Jacobson to be Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo; Richard 

Norland to be Ambassador to Georgia; Kenneth Merten to be Ambassador to the Republic of Croatia; Mark Pekala to be Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia; and, Jeffrey Levine to be Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia. 

I am the person conducting this hearing this morning, because 

I chair the European Affairs Subcommittee, and I am very honored 

to have the ranking member of the full Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Dick Lugar, here as part of this hearing. You are 

all career diplomats, so you know that usually there are not a lot 

of Senators who come to these hearings, and that that is not a bad 

thing. [Laughter.] 

So we’re delighted to be here with all of you today. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

186

Our nominees have been appointed to take on critical ambassadorial positions in countries throughout Europe and the Caucasus. 

Each of these posts will be important in strengthening U.S. influence and safeguarding American interests. 

I want to congratulate all of you on your nominations and welcome you and your families here today as we discuss the challenges 

and opportunities that you may face as you take on these new

responsibilities. 

Over the last 6 decades, the transatlantic community has committed itself to building the Europe that is whole, free, and at 

peace. The countries represented here today reflect the progress 

that we have made and the force for reform that institutions like 

NATO and the European Union have played over the last half 

century. 

However, as we will no doubt hear from our witnesses, the job 

is far from done, and we still have many challenges before us. 

Latvia and Estonia are relatively young but active and influential members of NATO and the EU. As Baltic countries, they are 

a testament to the success of the West’s open-door policies and 

have led the charge among other post-Soviet states to promote 

democracy and Euro-Atlantic integration. 

In addition, Estonia has recently met its NATO commitments to 

spend 2 percent of its GDP on defense, an impressive feat considering that only three of the 28 NATO countries have met that commitment in 2011. 

Croatia, already a member of NATO, is slated to become the 28th 

member of the EU next summer. Though it continues to struggle 

with economic difficulties and some corruption at home, Croatia 

stands as a model for the rest of the countries of the Western Balkans. And I hope that it will maintain its leadership in the region 

and continue to play a positive role in moving Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia, and others toward EU integration. 

Since the Rose Revolution in 2003, Georgia has made tremendous progress on its reform agenda and today seeks full EuroAtlantic integration. 

It is punching well above its weight, to use a boxing term, as a 

NATO partner country in Afghanistan and will soon be the largest 

per capita contributing nation in that fight. 

Georgia deserves to see some forward movement on its membership aspirations at the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago. 

Still, we must continue to emphasize the importance of Georgia 

continuing down the path of democratic reform, and the upcoming 

elections will be a critical test for the sustainability of Georgia’s 

democratic future. 

Kosovo faces many daunting challenges beyond its struggle for 

international recognition, including unemployment, weak rule of 

law, corruption, and challenging relations with its neighbor Serbia. 

Both Kosovo and Serbia have made some difficult yet necessary 

decisions to engage each other in technical dialogue over the last 

year. The progress made under the EU-sponsored talks allowed 

both countries to move further down the path to future EU membership earlier this year, a welcome development after some violence in northern Kosovo last summer. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

187

Our diplomats working closely with our European colleagues 

must do more to creatively engage on the Serbia-Kosovo issue and 

work to find a long-term solution to the challenge of northern 

Kosovo. 

Again, I want to thank each of you for your willingness to take 

on these important and challenging posts, and I will just introduce 

each of you briefly, and then I’ll turn it over to you for your 

testimony. 

First today we have Ambassador Tracey Ann Jacobson, who has 

been nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador to Kosovo. Ambassador 

Jacobson is the Deputy Director of the Foreign Service Institute. 

Prior to her tenure there, she served as U.S. Ambassador to both 

Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. 

Next we have Ambassador Richard Norland, our nominee for

the post in Georgia. Ambassador Norland currently serves as the 

international affairs adviser and deputy commandant at the 

National War College and was previously the U.S. Ambassador to 

Uzbekistan. 

We also have Ambassador Kenneth Merten, the President’s 

choice to be the Ambassador to Croatia. Ambassador Merten has 

a distinguished 25-year career in the Foreign Service and has 

served throughout Europe, in Central and South America, and is 

currently our Ambassador to Haiti. 

Mr. Mark Pekala has been nominated to take up the post in Latvia. Mark is currently a director in the Bureau of Human 

Resources and has served previously as the deputy chief of mission 

in France and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Europe. 

This will be Mr. Pekala’s first ambassadorial posting. 

And finally, we have Jeffrey Levine, who has been nominated to 

be the U.S. Ambassador to Estonia. Mr. Levine has served in a 

number of countries throughout Europe and is currently the Director of Recruitment, Examination, and Employment at the State 

Department. This will be his first ambassadorial posting as well. 

Again, thank you all for being here, for your willingness to serve, 

and I hope that you will feel free to introduce any family or friends 

who may be here with you this morning. 

Ambassador Jacobson. 

STATEMENT OF HON. TRACEY ANN JACOBSON, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF KOSOVO 

Ambassador JACOBSON. Thank you. I would like to introduce the 

Kosovo desk officer, Wendy Brafman, and my very good friend, 

Susan Bauer, from State, Dave Recker from Justice, and Lt. Zac 

Schneidt from the Marines, and in absentia, my partner, David 

Baugh, who serves at the British Embassy in Kabul. 

Madam Chairwoman, Senator Lugar, members of the committee, 

I am honored to appear before you as President Obama’s nominee 

to be the third U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo. 

I have had the privilege of serving twice as U.S. Ambassador to 

Turkmenistan and Tajikistan, where my teams and I worked successfully on a range of issues, including the promotion of democracy 

and human rights, economic development, and security cooperation. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

188

I believe these and other experiences have prepared me well to be 

the chief of mission in Kosovo. 

This administration, as the one before it, has consistently made 

clear its commitment to Kosovo’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, 

and independence, and its integration into regional and international institutions. This commitment will be the guiding principle of my mission as well, if confirmed. 

After 4 years of independence, Kosovo has come a long way. It 

is now recognized by 87 countries and is a member of the World 

Bank and International Monetary Fund. It is likely to meet 

another benchmark this year, with the end of supervised independence and the closure of the International Civilian Office. 

The goal of completing the integration of the Balkans into a 

Europe whole, free, and at peace has been an overarching, nonpartisan approach by successive U.S. Governments since the 1990s. 

Euro-Atlantic integration remains a top policy priority in our relationship with Kosovo as with all its neighbors, because this will 

promote necessary domestic reform and regional cooperation. 

Kosovo has made several concrete steps toward this future 

recently. In January, Kosovo and its partners welcomed the 

European Commission’s intention to launch a visa liberalization 

dialogue. And in March, it welcomed the decision to launch a feasibility study for a stabilization and association agreement. 

The EU consensus decisions in December of last year and February of this year mean that all members of the European Union, 

even those that have not recognized Kosovo’s independence, see 

that its progress of the European path is good for the region and 

good for Europe as a whole. 

Kosovo’s relations with its neighbors, in particular Serbia, are 

key to regional stability and cooperation. That is why the United 

States has fully backed the ongoing EU-sponsored dialogue 

between Serbia and Kosovo, which has resulted in significant 

achievement since it was launched last March. 

The two sides have been able to conclude a series of agreements 

that will improve the daily lives of citizens in both countries, to include the restoration of two-way trade, mutual recognition of university diplomas, and free movement across each other’s borders. 

The political leadership in Kosovo has shown maturity and foresight in taking some tough decisions to reach these agreements, 

which were not without their domestic critics. 

I believe this political will is also motivated by an understanding 

that Serbia’s progress on its European path is good for Kosovo, too. 

The United States has been able to consistently support Kosovo 

every step of the way, as it has demonstrated a forward-looking 

approach. And if confirmed, I will ensure that we continue to support Kosovo’s positive development. 

Kosovo faces a daunting agenda with many pressing reform priorities. The United States must continue to focus on Kosovo’s 

progress as a multiethnic democracy, ensuring respect for the 

rights of all of its communities—Kosovo Serbs, Roma, and others—

and protection and preservation of their cultural and religious 

heritage. 

Kosovo’s reform agenda also includes tackling corruption, 

cementing the rule of law, further developing the energy sector, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

189

removing barriers to business and investment, and strengthening 

public administration to improve governance. 

NATO’s Kosovo Force, KFOR, remains a relevant and crucial 

presence in Kosovo, as it helps to maintain, in accordance with its 

mandate, a safe and secure environment throughout the country. 

Its role has been particularly challenging in northern Kosovo, 

where tensions have run high and where hard-line Serb elements 

continue to deny Kosovo’s authority and full freedom of movement 

to the international community. 

On occasion, these tensions have escalated into violence, resulting in injuries to Kosovo troops, including Americans. Given this 

situation, it is likely that KFOR staffing will remain at current levels for the foreseeable future. 

A solution to the situation in the north and normalization of relations requires a durable modus vivendi that respects Kosovo’s sovereignty, takes into account the opinions of the citizens of the 

north, and allows both Serbia and Kosovo to make progress on 

their respective European paths. 

Madam Chairwoman, if confirmed, I will work with you, members of this committee and Congress, the Government and people 

of Kosovo, our European allies, the EU Rule of Law Mission, 

NATO, the OSCE, and the U.N., as well as our regional partners, 

to meet our shared goal of building a more stable, democratic, 

peaceful, and prosperous Balkan region. 

I would like to emphasize, as I’ve done before this committee 

before, that, if confirmed, I will not only be President Obama’s representative, but also the leader of an interagency team, and I will 

take seriously my obligation to ensure a positive, productive, and 

safe environment for the people of my mission. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today, and 

I look forward to answering any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Jacobson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TRACEY ANN JACOBSON

Madam Chairman, members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you 

today as President Obama’s nominee to be the third United States Ambassador to 

the Republic of Kosovo. 

I have had the privilege of serving twice as U.S. Ambassador—to Turkmenistan 

and Tajikistan—where my teams and I worked successfully on a range of issues 

including the promotion of democracy and human rights, economic development, and 

security cooperation. Prior to that I was deputy chief of mission in Latvia, where 

my main focus was to support Latvia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations. I believe these 

experiences have prepared me well to serve as chief of mission in Kosovo. 

This administration, as the one before it, has repeatedly made clear its commitment to Kosovo’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence, and its integration into regional and international institutions. This commitment will be the guiding principle of my mission, if I am confirmed. After 4 years of independence, 

Kosovo has come a long way. It is now recognized by 86 countries and is a member 

of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Kosovo will likely reach a 

major benchmark with the end of supervised independence and the closure of the 

International Civilian Office this year. The International Steering Group must first 

determine that Kosovo has adopted the constitutional and legislative amendments 

to ensure that key principles of the Comprehensive Status Proposal are incorporated 

and preserved, and progress on this is well underway. 

The goal of completing the integration of the Balkans into a Europe whole, free, 

and at peace has been the overarching, nonpartisan approach of successive U.S. 

administrations since the 1990s. Euro-Atlantic integration remains a top policy priority in our relationship with Kosovo, as with all its neighbors, because this will 

promote necessary domestic reforms and regional cooperation. Kosovo has recently 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

190

made several concrete steps in its advancement toward this future. This year, 

Kosovo and its partners welcomed the European Commission’s launch of a visa liberalization dialogue and the announcement of its intention to launch a Feasibility 

Study for a Stabilization and Association Agreement. The European Union (EU) consensus decisions taken in February and last December mean that all EU members, 

even the five that have not recognized Kosovo’s independence, believe that Kosovo’s 

progress on a European path is good for the region and for Europe as a whole. 

Kosovo’s relations with its neighbors, in particular Serbia, are crucial to regional 

stability and integration. This is why the United States has fully backed the ongoing EU-facilitated dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia, which has achieved significant progress since its launch last March. The two sides have concluded several 

agreements that will improve the daily lives of the citizens of both countries, such 

as the restoration of two-way trade, mutual recognition of university diplomas, and 

the ability to move freely across each others’ borders. The political leadership in 

Kosovo has shown maturity and foresight in making some tough decisions to reach 

these agreements, which have not been without domestic critics. I believe the political will shown by Kosovo’s leadership to reach practical agreements with its neighbor is also motivated by the understanding that Serbian progress on its European 

path is good for Kosovo, too. The United States was able to support Kosovo every 

step along this way, as it demonstrated maturity and a forward-looking approach. 

If confirmed, I will ensure that the U.S. Government continues that support and 

backing for Kosovo’s positive development. 

In the development of its democracy, Kosovo has a daunting agenda with many 

pressing reform priorities. The United States must continue to focus on advancing 

Kosovo’s progress as a multiethnic democracy, ensuring respect for the rights of all 

of Kosovo’s communities—Kosovo Serbs, Roma, and others—and the preservation of 

their cultural and religious heritage. Kosovo’s reform agenda also includes tackling 

corruption, cementing rule of law, further developing the energy sector, reducing 

barriers to business and investment, and strengthening public administration to improve governance. 

Like other post-socialist societies, Kosovo still has much to do in developing the 

conditions for sustained, private sector-led expansion. It must reduce redtape, 

decentralize decisionmaking authority, and—most importantly—ensure an independent judiciary and efficient court system to see that investors have legal certainty and timely resolution of disputes. There are some promising signs: as annual 

economic growth continues, spending remains within budgetary limits and inflation 

is stable. 

NATO’s Kosovo Force (KFOR) remains a relevant and crucial presence in Kosovo, 

helping to maintain, pursuant to its mandate, a safe and secure environment 

throughout the country. Its role has been particularly challenging in northern 

Kosovo, where the tensions have run high, and hard-line Serb elements deny 

Kosovo’s authority and the full freedom of movement for the international community. On several occasions, this tension has escalated to violence, resulting in injuries to several KFOR troops, including Americans. Given this situation, KFOR will 

likely remain at current troop levels for the foreseeable future. A solution to the situation in the north and normalization of relations require a durable modus vivendi 

that respects Kosovo’s sovereignty, takes into account the views of the citizens of 

the north, and allows both Kosovo and Serbia to proceed on their respective EuroAtlantic paths. 

Madam Chairman, if confirmed, I will work with you, members of this committee 

and Congress, the Government and people of Kosovo, our European allies, the EU 

Rule of Law Mission (EULEX), NATO, the OSCE and the U.N., as well as regional 

partners to meet our shared goal of building a more stable, democratic, peaceful and 

prosperous Balkan region. 

In my current position as the Deputy Director of the Foreign Service Institute, 

I have the privilege to mentor students at all levels from 47 government agencies. 

So I would like to emphasize, as I have during previous appearances before this 

committee, that if confirmed I will be not only the President’s representative to 

Kosovo, but also the leader of an interagency team, and I will take seriously my 

responsibility to ensure a positive, productive, safe environment for the people of my 

mission. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee today. I look forward to answering any questions you may have.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. 

Ambassador Norland. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

191

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD B. NORLAND, OF IOWA,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO GEORGIA 

Ambassador NORLAND. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Senator 

Lugar. 

First, let me introduce my wife, Mary Hartnett, who’s here with 

us today. And let me also thank Georgia desk officers, K.G. Moore 

and Laura Hammond for their help in preparing me for this testimony. 

It is a privilege to appear before you today as President Obama’s 

nominee to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Georgia. I am honored 

by the confidence placed in me by the President and by Secretary 

Clinton, and if confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and the Congress in advancing United States interests in 

Georgia. 

Madam Chairman, we meet today on the eve of the 20th anniversary of United States-Georgia relations, which were established on 

March 24, 1992. As President Obama noted during President 

Saakashvili’s visit to Washington earlier this year, Georgia has 

made extraordinary progress during this time in transforming itself 

from a fragile state to one that has succeeded in significantly 

reducing petty corruption, modernizing state institutions and services, and building a sovereign and democratic country. 

Georgia has also demonstrated itself to be a reliable partner on 

issues of importance to the United States and the international 

community, such as Afghanistan, nonproliferation, and trade. 

Much works remains to be done, however, as you pointed out. 

And if confirmed, I will build on the tremendous efforts of my predecessor, Ambassador John Bass, and of this committee and your 

colleagues in Congress to deepen our partnership with the Government and people of Georgia in these and other areas. 

Of paramount importance, I want to emphasize that the United 

States commitment to Georgia’s territorial integrity and sovereignty remains steadfast. The United States will continue to take 

an active role in the Geneva discussions to address security and 

humanitarian concerns, and to pursue a peaceful resolution to the 

conflict. I experienced these challenges firsthand while serving in 

Georgia and working on conflict issues there in the early 1990s. 

The United States will continue efforts to persuade Russia to fulfill 

its 2008 cease-fire obligations, while also working on the essential 

task of improving broader Georgia-Russia relations. 

Equally significant will be the strengthening of democratic institutions and processes in Georgia, especially in light of parliamentary elections this fall and Presidential elections in 2013. 

The elections provide Georgia with an extraordinary opportunity 

to realize its first peaceful and fully democratic transfer of power. 

Free and fair elections will bring Georgia closer to Euro-Atlantic 

standards and integration. To get there, the Georgian Government 

will have to build on reforms made to date to foster greater political competition, labor rights, judicial independence, and media 

access. 

I strongly believe that advancing our key interests in Georgia’s 

long-term security and stability is directly linked to the Government’s furthering democratic reforms. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

192

As President Obama indicated, the United States continues to 

support Georgia’s NATO membership aspirations. The Chicago 

summit is indeed an opportunity to highlight Georgia’s progress 

toward meeting membership criteria as well as its significant partnership contributions. As you pointed out, Georgia currently contributes some 850 troops to ISAF and plans to deploy another 750 

troops this fall, which will make it the largest non-NATO 

contributor. 

As a former deputy chief of mission in Kabul, I am keenly aware 

of the importance of our mission to help the Afghan people and of 

the hostile environment in Helmand province, where brave Georgian troops operate without caveats. 

Georgian soldiers and their families have also made extraordinary sacrifices with, sadly, 15 soldiers killed in action and more 

than 100 wounded, many severely. The United States will continue 

to work with the Georgian Government to care for the wounded 

soldiers. 

Sustaining robust bilateral security and defense cooperation with 

Georgia also will remain a high priority, if I am confirmed. Our 

plans for security assistance and military engagement with Georgia 

are to support Georgia’s defense reforms, to train and equip Georgian troops for participation in the ISAF mission, and to advance 

Georgia’s NATO interoperability. 

Both Presidents agreed in January to enhance these programs to 

advance Georgian military modernization, reform, and self-defense 

capabilities. Economic linkages to the wider world have long 

formed the lifeblood of the Caucuses region. 

And if confirmed, I will also work to deepen economic and trade 

relations between the United States and Georgia. President Obama 

took our relations in this area to a new level in January when he 

announced the launch of a high-level dialogue to strengthen trade 

ties, including the possibility of a free trade agreement. 

In the interest of time, Madam Chairman, my testimony has 

been submitted for the record. I will close by saying that, taken 

together, these efforts will help bring Georgia closer to achieving 

its Euro-Atlantic integration goals. And if confirmed, I pledge to do 

my very best to advance U.S. interests there. Thanks very much 

for considering my nomination, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Norland follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD B. NORLAND

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to appear 

before you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the United States 

Ambassador to Georgia. I am honored by the confidence placed in me by President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this 

committee and the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Georgia. I am pleased 

to introduce my wife, Mary Hartnett. 

Madam Chairman, we meet today on the eve of the 20th anniversary of United 

States-Georgia relations, which were established on March 24, 1992. As President 

Obama noted during President Saakashvili’s visit to Washington earlier this year, 

Georgia has made extraordinary progress during this time in transforming itself 

from a fragile state to one that has succeeded in significantly reducing petty corruption, modernizing state institutions and services, and building a sovereign and 

democratic country. Georgia has also demonstrated itself to be a reliable partner on 

issues of importance to the United States and the international community, such 

as Afghanistan, nonproliferation, and trade. Much work remains to be done, howFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

193

ever, and if confirmed, I will build on the tremendous efforts of my predecessor, 

Ambassador John Bass, and of this committee and your colleagues in the Congress, 

to deepen our partnership with the government and people of Georgia in these and 

other areas. 

Of paramount importance, I want to emphasize that the United States commitment to Georgian territorial integrity and sovereignty remains steadfast. The 

United States will continue to take an active role in the Geneva discussions to 

address security and humanitarian concerns, and to pursue a peaceful resolution to 

the conflict. I experienced these challenges first-hand while serving in Georgia and 

working on conflict issues there in the early 1990s. The United States will continue 

efforts to persuade Russia to fulfill its 2008 cease-fire commitments, while also 

working on the essential task of improving broader Georgia-Russia relations. 

Equally significant will be the strengthening of democratic institutions and processes in Georgia, especially in light of parliamentary elections this fall and Presidential elections in 2013. The elections provide Georgia with an opportunity to 

realize its first peaceful and fully democratic transfer of power. Free and fair elections will bring Georgia closer to Euro-Atlantic standards and integration. To get 

there, the Georgian Government will have to build on reforms made to date to foster 

greater political competition, labor rights, judicial independence and media access. 

I strongly believe that advancing our key interest in Georgia’s long-term security 

and stability is directly linked to the government’s furthering democratic reforms. 

As President Obama indicated, the United States continues to support Georgia’s 

NATO membership aspirations. The Chicago summit is an important opportunity to 

highlight Georgia’s progress toward meeting membership criteria as well as its significant partnership contributions. Georgia currently contributes some 850 troops to 

ISAF and plans to deploy another 750 troops this fall, which will make it the largest 

non-NATO contributor. As a former deputy chief of mission in Afghanistan I am 

keenly aware of the importance of our mission to help the Afghan people, and of 

the hostile environment in Helmand province where brave Georgian troops operate 

without caveats. Georgian soldiers and their families have also made extraordinary 

sacrifices with 15 soldiers killed in action and more than 100 wounded, many 

severely. The United States will continue to work with the Georgian Government 

to care for their wounded soldiers. 

Sustaining robust bilateral security and defense cooperation with Georgia will 

also remain a high priority if I am confirmed. Our plans for security assistance and 

military engagement with Georgia are to support Georgia’s defense reforms, to train 

and equip Georgian troops for participation in ISAF operations, and to advance 

Georgia’s NATO interoperability. Both Presidents agreed in January to enhance 

these programs to advance Georgian military modernization, reform, and self defense capabilities. 

Economic linkages to the wider world have long formed the lifeblood of the 

Caucasus region, and, if confirmed, I will also work to deepen economic and trade 

cooperation between the United States and Georgia. President Obama took our relations in this area to a new level in January when he announced the launch of a 

high-level dialogue to strengthen trade relations, including the possibility of a free 

trade agreement. Through this dialogue our two countries can pursue cooperation 

that will benefit both U.S. and Georgian citizens alike. With the support of Congress 

we can continue to help Georgia strengthen rule of law, provide commercial and 

judicial training, and improve investment protections through continued U.S. assistance. Finally, building on Georgia’s successful first Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact, I will also continue the work being done to develop a second 

compact proposal that, if completed, will make significant investments in the Georgian people through education. 

Madam Chairman, taken together, these efforts will help bring Georgia closer to 

achieving its Euro-Atlantic integration goals and, if confirmed, I pledge to do my 

very best to advance U.S. interests there. Thank you very much for considering my 

nomination, and I look forward to your questions.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Ambassador Merten. 

STATEMENT OF HON. KENNETH MERTEN, OF VIRGINIA,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA 

Ambassador MERTEN. Madam Chairwoman, members of the committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today as President 

Obama’s nominee to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Croatia. I am 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

194

honored by the confidence placed in me by the President and the 

Secretary of State. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and 

the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Croatia. 

I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by desk officer, Susan McFee, who is behind me there, and by my wife, Susan, 

and my daughter, Elisabeth. Sadly, my daughter, Caryl, could not 

get away from university today in Charlottesville to join us. 

We have been a Foreign Service family for over 20 years and 

have all felt proud to be given the chance to represent the United 

States at postings in Germany, France, the U.S. mission to the 

European Union, and three times in Haiti. 

As you are aware, my current assignment in Haiti has been 

slightly more eventful than we had hoped, but I am proud of the 

way my family and my colleagues at the Embassy responded following the earthquake to come to the aid of the Haitian people and 

to evacuate over 16,000 American citizens. 

While I hope not to face any similar crises in Croatia, my experience in Haiti demonstrates that I am an effective manager of people and resources, critical for any chief of mission. 

Our bilateral relationship with Croatia has never been stronger. 

In fact, this afternoon, Secretary Clinton will meet with Foreign 

Minister Vesna Pusic to discuss our many common interests and 

how we will further strengthen our partnership under Croatia’s 

new government. Just a few weeks ago, Attorney General Holder 

met with his Croatian counterpart to discuss our cooperation on 

rule-of-law issues. We have a robust military-to-military relationship. And next month, we will host the second Brown Forum, a 

regional conference held in honor of former Commerce Secretary, 

Ron Brown, focused on how to create positive conditions for increased trade and investment among the United States, Croatia, 

and the region. And these are only a few examples to illustrate our 

strong ties. 

Croatia has made remarkable progress in only two decades since 

independence, becoming a NATO member in 2009, and now standing on the threshold of the European Union with full EU membership expected in 2013. The citizens of Croatia deserve to be congratulated for all they have accomplished. 

Croatia’s success in implementing often difficult reforms and 

creating a strong democratic society demonstrate that it is positioned to serve as a role model and a leader in the region for European and Euro-Atlantic integration. 

Indeed, the United States supports the positive decisions Croatia 

has made to improve regional cooperation. We also encourage 

Croatian leaders to continue their efforts toward good neighborly 

relations and to continue working with neighbors to address bilateral and regional challenges, such as refugees and transnational 

crime. 

As an international partner, Croatia has proven itself to be an 

active and committed NATO ally, as evidenced by its important 

contributions to global security, particularly in ISAF, KFOR, and 

U.N. peacekeeping missions. 

While Croatia has come a great distance in terms of democratic 

progress, there is more to be done. The Croatian economy continues 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

195

to be challenged by high unemployment and anemic growth. This 

reflects both the global economic crisis and domestic challenges. 

The recently elected Government recognizes the urgent need for 

economic reform, and the United States will support Croatia’s 

efforts to undertake those reforms to improve the business and 

investment climate so that sustainable economic growth and prosperity can be achieved. This in turn can be the basis for expanding 

our economic and trade relations. 

If I am confirmed, I will seek to forge an even stronger partnership with Croatia, building on the excellent work of our outgoing 

Ambassador, James Foley, and our country team in Zagreb. 

My foremost priority as Ambassador will be promoting United 

States interests in Croatia while pursuing our goals of strengthening the rule of law, fighting corruption, promoting economic 

growth and prosperity, reinforcing democratic institutions, and promoting regional security. I will actively seek to deepen our strategic alliance through NATO, ISAF, the Adriatic Charter, and 

other cooperative means. 

I will also work closely with our EU partners to help Croatia 

complete the few remaining accession requirements. I look forward 

to Croatia’s celebrating its full EU membership in 2013. 

Madam Chairwoman and members of the committee, thank you 

for this opportunity to appear before you today. I will be pleased 

to answer any questions you have. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Merten follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KENNETH H. MERTEN

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the Republic of Croatia. I am honored by the confidence placed in me by 

the President and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward to working with 

this committee and the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Croatia. 

I am delighted and proud to be accompanied today by my wife, Susan, and my 

daughter, Elisabeth. My daughter, Caryl, could not get away from university in 

Charlottesville to join us. We have been a Foreign Service family for over 20 years 

and have all felt proud to be given the chance to represent the United States at 

postings in Germany, France, at our mission to the European Union and three times 

in Haiti. As you are aware, my most recent assignment in Haiti was more eventful 

than we had hoped, but I am proud of the way my family and my colleagues at the 

Embassy responded following the earthquake, to come to the aid of the Haitian people and to evacuate over 16,000 American citizens. While I hope not to face any 

similar crises in Croatia, my experience in Haiti demonstrates that I am an effective 

manager of people and resources, critical for any chief of mission. 

Our bilateral relationship with Croatia has never been stronger. In fact, this 

afternoon Secretary Clinton will meet with Foreign Minister Vesna Pusic to discuss 

our many common interests and how we will further strengthen our partnership 

under Croatia’s new government. Just a few weeks ago, Attorney General Holder 

met with his Croatian counterpart to discuss our cooperation on rule-of-law issues, 

including Croatia’s ongoing efforts to root out corruption and bring suspected war 

criminals to justice. We have a robust military-to-military relationship, which includes a joint NATO unit in Afghanistan and the State Partnership Program with 

the Minnesota National Guard. Next month, we will host the second Brown Forum, 

a regional conference held in honor of former Commerce Secretary, Ron Brown, 

focused on how to create positive conditions for increased trade and investment 

among the United States, Croatia, and the region. And these are only a few examples to illustrate our strong ties. 

Croatia has made remarkable progress in only two decades since independence 

and a costly war, becoming a NATO member in 2009, and now standing on the 

threshold of the European Union, with full EU membership expected in 2013. The 

citizens of Croatia deserve to be congratulated for all they have accomplished. Croatia’s success in implementing often difficult reforms and creating a strong demoFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

196

cratic society demonstrate that it is positioned to serve as a role model and leader 

in the region for European and Euro-Atlantic integration. 

Indeed, the United States supports the positive decisions Croatia has made to 

improve regional cooperation. We also encourage Croatian leaders to continue their 

efforts toward good neighborly relations and to continue working with neighbors to 

address bilateral and regional challenges such as refugees and transnational crime. 

As an international partner, Croatia has proven itself to be an active and committed 

NATO ally, as evidenced by its important contributions to global security, particularly in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, the 

Kosovo Force (KFOR), and U.N. peacekeeping activities. These contributions to 

regional and global stability reflect our shared values and the depth of our partnership with Croatia. 

While Croatia has come a great distance in terms of democratic progress, there 

is more to be done. The Croatian economy continues to be challenged by high unemployment and anemic growth. This reflects both the global economic crisis and domestic challenges, including a cumbersome bureaucracy and an investment climate 

that needs to be much more welcoming to business. The recently elected Croatian 

Government recognizes the urgent need for economic reform. The United States will 

support Croatia’s efforts to undertake reforms to improve the business and investment climate so that sustainable economic growth and prosperity can be achieved. 

This in turn can be the basis for expanding our economic and trade relations. 

If I am confirmed, I will seek to forge an even stronger partnership with Croatia, 

building on the excellent work of our outgoing Ambassador, James Foley, and our 

country team in Zagreb. My foremost priority as Ambassador will be promoting U.S. 

interests in Croatia while pursuing our goals of strengthening the rule of law, fighting corruption, promoting economic growth and prosperity, reinforcing democratic 

institutions, and promoting regional security. I will actively seek to deepen our strategic alliance through NATO, ISAF, the Adriatic Charter, and other cooperative 

means. I will also work closely with our EU partners to help Croatia complete the 

few remaining accession requirements and look forward to celebrating its full EU 

membership in 2013. 

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity 

to appear before you. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may 

have.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Pekala. 

STATEMENT OF MARK A. PEKALA, OF MARYLAND,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA 

Mr. PEKALA. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, distinguished 

manners of the committee. It is a genuine privilege to appear 

before you today, and I thank you. 

I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton 

for their support and confidence in nominating me to be the next 

U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia. 

If confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to devote all my energy to 

represent the United States to the very best of my ability and to 

advance U.S. interests in Latvia, while further strengthening the 

partnership between our two countries. 

I am fully committed to working closely with this committee, 

your staff, and your congressional colleagues to advance our common objectives and shared agenda. 

With your permission, I would like to introduce my wife, Maria. 

We are the very happy and proud parents of Julia and Nora, age 

10 and 7, who have spent nearly two-thirds of their lives overseas 

while Maria and I have tried our best represent the American 

people. 

I would also like to introduce and thank Julie-Anne Peterson, the 

Latvia desk officer at the State Department. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

197

Over the last 10 of my nearly 25 years of government as deputy 

chief of mission in France, deputy chief of mission in Estonia, and 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State responsible for our bilateral 

relations with for 15 European countries, including Latvia, as well 

as director of the entry-level division of human resources at the 

State Department. 

I believe that these experiences have prepared me well, if confirmed, to lead our mission and to exercise American leadership in 

Latvia. 

Last year, Latvia celebrated the 20th anniversary of regaining its 

independence; 2012 will mark 90 years of unbroken diplomatic 

relations with our friend and ally. 

Since 1991, Latvia has embraced democracy and the principles of 

an open market; it is an excellent partner in a good environment 

in which to carry out the President’s national export initiative dedicated to supporting U.S. businesses, increasing U.S. exports, and 

creating jobs in the United States. 

If confirmed, I will work with United States businesses to expand 

their markets into Latvia. United States exports to Latvia have 

been rising over the last 2 years, and recent successful advocacy by 

Embassy Riga on behalf of the American companies IBM and 

Datacard demonstrates that there is scope for expanded United 

States investment in the Latvian market. 

Latvia was hit extraordinarily hard by the economic crisis, losing 

nearly 25 percent of its GDP. But it has proven itself to be both 

resilient and innovative in meeting its economic obligations and 

finding creative ways to offer its expertise to its post-Soviet neighbors. After weathering its economic storm, Latvia is actively contributing to assistance projects in Moldova, including a rule-of-law 

program in cooperation with USAID. 

Latvia also provides training for Afghan railroad officials and is 

planning to participate in a training program for Afghan air traffic 

controllers. 

If confirmed, I will work with Latvia to continue this crucial 

development engagement. 

In 2004 Latvia joined NATO. It is a valued member of the alliance, contributing approximately 200 troops and police trainers in 

Afghanistan. In addition, the Latvian National Armed Forces have 

successfully developed a high-demand niche capability with their 

Joint Terminal Attack Controller, or JTAC program. 

Latvia is one of only six other allied countries certified to call in 

United States close air support on the battlefield. 

Standing with the alliance does not come without cost. Latvia 

has suffered the loss of four soldiers and had nine wounded during 

its years in Afghanistan. We are deeply grateful for Latvia’s contributions and for its decision to remain with us in Afghanistan 

until 2014. 

As a native of Michigan, I am particularly proud of Latvia’s partnership with the Michigan National Guard, now in its 20th year. 

In Afghanistan, Latvia successfully ran an operational mentoring 

and liaison team, or OMLT, with the Guard. 

Today, Latvia is once again is teaming up with its National 

Guard partners to train soldiers in Liberia, an effort that underlines not only how far Latvia has come in the 20 years since its 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

198

regained its independence, but also its increasing focus and venturing outside its neighborhood to share the valuable lessons 

learned during its evolution from newly independent country to 

mature democracy. 

Although Latvia has made tremendous strides in democracy and 

the rule of law, it is still struggling to come to terms with some 

aspects of its past, particularly the legacies of World War II and 

Soviet rule. 

Latvia has work to do to promote social integration of its minority populations. We are encouraged to see the Latvian Government 

considering measures that would improve integration of this population. We hope that the recent language referendum can be used 

by both sides as a means to open a constructive dialogue between 

ethnic Russians and ethnic Latvians. 

If confirmed, I hope to use my position as Ambassador to support 

outreach efforts to all minority communities in Latvia. 

Should the Senate confirm my nomination, I will dedicate myself 

to protecting and advancing United States interests in Latvia. 

I thank you again for the privilege of appearing before you today, 

and I welcome any questions you may have. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pekala follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARK PEKALA

Madam Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, it is a genuine privilege to appear before you today, and I thank you. I am deeply grateful to President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton for their support and confidence in nominating me to 

be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia. If confirmed by the Senate, 

I pledge to devote all my energy to represent the United States to the very best of 

my ability and to advance U.S. interests in Latvia, while further strengthening the 

partnership between our two countries. I am fully committed to working closely with 

this committee, your staff, and your congressional colleagues to advance our common objectives and shared agenda. 

With your permission, I would like to introduce my wife, Maria. We are the very 

happy and proud parents of Julia and Nora, age 10 and 7, who have spent nearly 

two-thirds of their lives overseas while Maria and I have tried our best to represent 

the American people. 

Over the last 10 of my nearly 25 years of Government service, I have served as 

deputy chief of mission in France, deputy chief of mission in Estonia, and Deputy 

Assistant Secretary of State, responsible for our bilateral relations with 15 European countries, including Latvia, and as Director of the Entry-Level Division of 

Human Resources at the State Department. I believe that these experiences have 

prepared me well, if confirmed, to lead our mission—and to exercise American leadership—in Latvia. 

Last year, Latvia celebrated the 20th anniversary of regaining its independence; 

2012 will mark 90 years of unbroken diplomatic relations with our friend and ally. 

Since 1991, Latvia has embraced democracy and the principles of an open market. 

It is an excellent partner and a good environment in which to carry out the President’s National Export Initiative, dedicated to supporting U.S. businesses, increasing U.S. exports, and creating jobs in the United States. If confirmed, I will work 

with U.S. businesses to expand their markets into Latvia. U.S. exports to Latvia 

have been rising over the past 2 years, and recent successful advocacy by Embassy 

Riga on behalf of American companies IBM and DataCard demonstrates that there 

is scope for expanded U.S. investment in the Latvian market. 

Latvia was hit extraordinarily hard by the economic crisis, losing nearly 25 percent of GDP in the global economic crisis. But it has proven itself to be both resilient and innovative in meeting its economic obligations and finding creative ways 

to offer its expertise to its post-Soviet neighbors. After weathering its economic 

storm, Latvia is actively contributing to assistance projects in Moldova, including a 

rule of law program in cooperation with USAID. Latvia also provides training for 

Afghan railroad officials and is planning to participate in a training program for 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

199

Afghan air traffic controllers. If confirmed, I will work with Latvia to continue this 

crucial development engagement. 

In 2004, Latvia joined NATO. It is a valued member of the alliance, contributing 

approximately 200 troops and police trainers in Afghanistan. In addition, the Latvian National Armed Forces have successfully developed a high-demand niche capability with their Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) program. Latvia is one of 

only six other allied countries certified to call in U.S. close air support on the battlefield. Standing with the alliance has not come without cost; Latvia has suffered the 

loss of four soldiers and had nine wounded during its years in Afghanistan. We are 

deeply grateful for Latvia’s contributions and for its decision to remain with us in 

Afghanistan until 2014. 

As a native of Michigan, I am particularly proud of Latvia’s partnership with the 

Michigan National Guard, now in its 20th year. In Afghanistan, Latvia successfully 

ran an Operational Mentoring and Liaison Team (OMLT) with the Guard. Today, 

Latvia is once again teaming up with its National Guard partners to train soldiers 

in Liberia—an effort that underlines not only how far Latvia has come in the 20 

years since it regained its independence, but also its increasing focus on venturing 

outside its neighborhood to share the valuable lessons learned during its evolution 

from newly independent country to mature democracy. 

Although Latvia has made tremendous strides in democracy and rule of law, it 

is still struggling to come to terms with some aspects of its past, particularly the 

legacies of World War II and Soviet rule. Latvia has work to do to promote social 

integration of its minority populations. Almost a third of Latvia’s residents are ethnic Russians, of whom just under 300,000 are noncitizens. We are encouraged to see 

the Latvian Government considering measures that would improve integration of 

this population; we hope that the recent language referendum can be used by both 

sides as a means to open a constructive dialog between ethnic Russians and ethnic 

Latvians. If confirmed, I hope to use my position as Ambassador to support outreach 

efforts to all minority communities in Latvia. 

Latvia is also making progress in coming to terms with the horrific events of the 

Holocaust, but more needs to be done. The restitution of private property is largely 

finished, but we need to see further progress on compensation for communal and 

heirless properties. If confirmed, I pledge to work diligently with the Government 

of Latvia and the local Jewish community to address Holocaust legacy and property 

restitution issues. 

Should the Senate confirm my nomination, I will dedicate myself to protecting 

and advancing U.S. interests in Latvia. I thank you again for the privilege of 

appearing before you today and I welcome any questions you may have.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Levine. 

STATEMENT OF JEFFREY D. LEVINE, OF CALIFORNIA,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA 

Mr. LEVINE. Madam Chair, members of the committee, it is an 

honor to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to 

be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia. 

I’m grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for the trust 

they have placed in me. 

If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to advance the interests of the 

United States and further strengthen the already deep and productive relationship we enjoy with Estonia. 

Madam Chair, with me today are my wife, Janie, and son, Nick. 

I’m very fortunate to have a supportive family who has shared the 

joys and challenges of my 27-year Foreign Service career. Nick will 

be remaining in the United States to start college, but if I am confirmed, I hope he will share at least part of this adventure on 

school breaks. 

I also would like to introduce Rodney Hunter, the State Department’s desk officer for Estonia. 

For nearly 50 years, the United States refused to acknowledge 

the illegal and forcible occupation of Estonia by the Soviet Union. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

200

Their regular statements of support that came from the White 

House and Congress served as signals of hope for Estonians both 

in Estonia and abroad. Since 1991 and the reestablishment of 

Estonia’s independence, each American President and every Congress have continued the support as Estonia transformed itself 

from a Soviet satellite to the strong and reliable democratic ally 

that it is today. 

Estonia is a modern free-market success story. Even during the 

worldwide economic crisis, Estonia’s fiscal and economic situation 

has steadily improved. After more than a year as a member of the 

eurozone, Estonia’s economic situation is stronger than ever. In the 

midst of Europe’s economic problems, Moody’s upgraded Estonia’s 

credit rating last year. 

Estonia is also sharing the benefits and lessons of its success 

with other democracies and nations in transition across the globe. 

Since it became a NATO ally in 2004, Estonia has shown unwavering support for shared objectives around the world. Estonian 

troops served with us in Iraq and continue to operate without caveats in southern Afghanistan. 

Estonia has expressed its commitment to stay on the ground as 

the NATO mission transforms into advice and assistance. This 

commitment will remain strong, though Estonia has paid a high 

price for the service with the lives of 11 of its brave soldiers in Iraq 

and Afghanistan, the second-highest per capita loss in Afghanistan 

of any ISAF partner. 

Estonia has also contributed to many other military missions, including Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the Horn of Africa. Estonia’s military remains a force in transition, but one that is willing 

to take on dangerous missions side by side with American troops. 

Our support remains a crucial tool to help Estonia create a military even more capable of serving alongside United States forces in 

the future. Estonian soldiers and officers attend training in the 

United States and have proven themselves accomplished and 

knowledgeable partners on the ground in Afghanistan and around 

the world. 

As you noted, Estonia has also committed 2 percent of its GDP 

to defense spending, serving as a model for other allies and sharing 

the burden of our common security. 

Estonia is a world leader in information technology and an Estonian entrepreneur is the creator of Skype, now used around the 

world. It hosts the NATO Cyber-Security Center of Excellence in 

Tallinn, which the United States joined officially in 2011. Estonia’s 

innovative Cyber Defense League works closely with the Maryland 

National Guard to boost cyber security in both our countries. 

In joint operations with the FBI and Secret Service, Estonia has 

been crucial in bringing a number of cyber criminals to justice in 

the United States. 

Estonia is also a pioneer in e-governance. In its last election, one 

quarter of Estonians voted online; electronic medical records are 

fully accessible from any doctor’s office; and its citizens have 

unprecedented access to information about their government. Moreover, Estonia has willingly shared this expertise with more than 40 

nations, from Tunisia to India to the Ukraine. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

201

If confirmed, I will work to continue our strong cooperation on 

cyber issues and find ways to leverage United States support of 

Estonia’s endeavors to ensure that our assistance to young democracies, like Moldova, for example, is as effective as possible. 

The United States also welcomes Estonia’s ongoing efforts to 

build strong communal relations among all Estonians, including 

the country’s sizable Russian-speaking population. 

If confirmed, I hope to work closely with my public diplomacy colleagues in Washington and in the region to further utilize social 

media resources to better reach out to all in Estonia, including the 

Russian-speaking minority and especially the young people. 

Madam Chair, members of the committee, the history of relations 

between the American people and Estonia is one of trust and 

mutual support. Just as we stood side by side with the Estonian 

people during their difficult past, Estonians today are at our side 

as we meet common challenges and seize joint opportunities. 

Estonians are not just dependable allies and strong partners but 

also close friends of the American people. If confirmed, I will dedicate myself to advancing that friendship and promoting United 

States interests in Estonia to further our partnership. 

Thank you again for allowing me to appear before you today. I 

look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Levine follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JEFFREY D. LEVINE

Madam Chairman, members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you 

today as President Obama’s nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia. I am grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for the trust 

they have placed in me. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to advance the interests 

of the United States and further strengthen the already deep and productive relationship we enjoy with Estonia. 

Madam Chairman, with me today are my wife, Janie, and son, Nick. I am indeed 

fortunate to have a supportive family who has shared the joys and challenges of my 

27-year Foreign Service career. Nick will be remaining in the United States to start 

college but—if I am confirmed—I hope he will share at least part of this adventure 

on school breaks. 

For nearly 50 years, the United States refused to acknowledge the illegal and forcible occupation of Estonia by the Soviet Union. The regular statements of support 

that came from the White House and the Congress served as signals of hope for 

Estonians both in Estonia and abroad. Since 1991 and the reestablishment of Estonia’s independence, each American President and every Congress have continued 

this support as Estonia transformed itself from a Soviet satellite to the strong, reliable, and democratic ally, that it is today. 

Estonia is a modern free-market success story. Even during the worldwide economic crisis, Estonia’s fiscal and economic situation has steadily improved. After 

more than a year as a member of the eurozone, Estonia’s economic situation is 

stronger than ever; in the midst of Europe’s economic problems, Moody’s upgraded 

Estonia’s credit rating last year. Estonia is also sharing the benefits and lessons of 

its success with other democracies and nations in transition across the globe. 

Since it became a NATO ally in 2004, Estonia has shown unwavering support for 

our shared objectives around the world. Estonian troops served with us in Iraq and 

continue to operate without caveats in southern Afghanistan. Estonia has expressed 

its commitment to stay on the ground as the NATO mission transforms into advice 

and assistance. This commitment remains strong, though Estonia has paid a high 

price for this service with the lives of 11 of its brave soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, the second highest per capita loss in Afghanistan of any ISAF partner. Estonia 

has also contributed to many other military missions, including in Kosovo, Bosnia/

Herzegovina, and the Horn of Africa. 

Estonia’s military remains a force in transition, but one that is willing to take 

on dangerous missions, side by side with American troops. Our support remains a 

crucial tool to help Estonia create a military even more capable of serving alongside 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

202

U.S. forces in the future. Estonian soldiers and officers attend training in the 

United States and have proven themselves accomplished and knowledgeable partners on the ground in Afghanistan and around the world. Estonia has also committed 2 percent of its GDP to defense spending, serving as a model for other allies 

in sharing the burden for our common security. 

Estonia is a world leader in information technology, and an Estonian entrepreneur is the creator of the Skype technology now used around the world. It hosts 

the NATO Cyber-Security Center of Excellence in Tallinn, which the United States 

joined officially in 2011. Estonia’s innovative Cyber Defense League works closely 

with the Maryland National Guard to boost cyber security in both our countries. In 

joint operations with the FBI and Secret Service, Estonia has been crucial in bringing a number of cyber criminals to justice in the United States. 

Estonia is also a pioneer in e-governance. In its last election one-quarter of Estonians voted online, electronic medical records are fully accessible from any doctor’s 

office, and its citizens have unprecedented access to information about their government. Moreover, Estonia has willingly shared this expertise with more than 40 

nations, from Tunisia, to India, to Ukraine. If confirmed, I will work to continue our 

strong cooperation on cyber issues, and find ways to leverage U.S. support for Estonia’s endeavors to ensure that our assistance to young democracies like Moldova, 

for example, is as effective as possible. 

The United States also welcomes Estonia’s ongoing efforts to build strong communal relations among all Estonians, including the country’s sizeable Russianspeaking population. If confirmed, I hope to work closely with my public diplomacy 

colleagues in Washington and in the region to further utilize ‘‘social media’’ 

resources to better reach out to all in Estonia, including the Russian-speaking 

minority and especially to young people. 

Madam Chairman, members of the committee, the history of relations between 

the American people and Estonians is one of trust and mutual support. Just as we 

stood side by side with the Estonian people during their difficult past, Estonians 

today are at our side as we meet common challenges and seize joint opportunities. 

Estonians are not just dependable allies and strong partners, but also close friends 

of the American people. If confirmed, I will dedicate myself to advancing that friendship and promoting U.S. interests in Estonia to further our partnership. 

Thank you again for allowing me to appear before you today. I look forward to 

your questions.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Levine. 

And thank you all for your testimony and for introducing your 

family members who are here. We especially appreciate their being 

here this morning and their support for the work that you have 

been doing and will continue to do. 

I know that Senator Lugar has some time constraints, so, Senator, would you like to begin the questioning? 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

Let me ask Ambassador Norland, you are aware of the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program in Georgia in which we recently 

have completed a central reference laboratory to address potential natural and bioterrorist infectious disease outbreaks which 

threaten Georgia, the United States, and others. 

This is taking some time and effort, but to my knowledge, this 

facility is presently functioning. I would just simply ask at the outset that you be aware of the project, and likewise be helpful in 

working with Georgian authorities to gain the greatest benefits 

from this, similar to other laboratories set up in the area under the 

Nunn-Lugar program where information is shared with the United 

States with the thought of stopping any potential biological threat. 

A specific question comes with regard to NATO, and I introduced 

the NATO Enhancement Act, which would encourage further 

NATO enlargement and designate all countries expressing a 

national interest in joining NATO, including Georgia, as potential 

aspirant countries. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

203

As you have studied the Georgian situation in preparation for 

your ambassadorship, what is the lay of the land as you see it? And 

what steps could the United States take constructively to help 

Georgian aspirations? 

Ambassador NORLAND. Well, thank you for both questions,

Senator. 

On the CTR issue, let me start by congratulating you for two decades of work on nonproliferation. These reference laboratories are 

sort of a continuation of that work. I am aware of this kind of 

project because we had one in Uzbekistan under way. I’m aware 

that the one in Georgia was recently inaugurated. It is an extremely important project, both for what it represents in terms of 

nonproliferation issues, but also in terms of public health, animal 

disease control, and things that are important to agriculture. 

The Embassy or mission there I understand is supporting the 

project actively, and the U.S. Army plans to actually station some 

people there to work with the Georgians to make sure the laboratory properly carries out its functions. 

On the NATO issue, also let me thank you and members of the 

committee for the tremendous work over the years that you have 

done in support of NATO enlargement, and particularly for the 

support you’re lending to Georgia’s NATO aspirations. We welcome 

this support from the Congress, and we strongly support Georgia’s 

NATO aspirations. 

NATO has declared that Georgia will be a member, so the issue 

really has to do with how and when. There is no single path to 

NATO membership. As it stands now, as I understand, the annual 

national program and the NATO-Georgia council all their primary 

mechanisms through which Georgia and the allies are pursuing the 

issue of Georgia’s membership. 

But a lot of emphasis at the same time is being placed on steps 

Georgia is taking already in the direction of membership. Its contributions to ISAF, which we noted already today, the steps it has 

taken on defense reform and modernization, and the steps which 

I alluded to regarding democracy and economic progress. These are 

all part of the package that go into meeting the criteria for NATO 

membership. 

As I carried out my consultations, I have become aware of a serious effort on the part of the administration to use the Chicago 

summit to signal acknowledgment for Georgia’s progress in these 

areas and to work with the allies to develop a consensus on the 

next steps forward. 

And I can assure you that, if confirmed, carrying that forward 

will be an extremely important part of my duties. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, that is a very, very important statement. 

I appreciate your leadership in that area. And you know you will 

have the support back here of many of us as you proceed. 

Let me ask you, Mr. Pekala, speaking of the NATO summit in 

Chicago, I am reminded of the NATO summit that occurred in Riga 

in 2006. I was honored to be the dinner speaker before the day of 

the summit and took that occasion to recall that the previous 

winter had been one in which natural gas shipments from Russia 

to Ukraine had been terminated. That also occurred in other 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

204

countries, but it was especially conspicuous in regard to Ukraine, 

with ramifications in Germany. 

So I suggested that article 5 of the NATO charter really ought 

to be expanded to energy security, that warfare in Europe might 

not commence through troops marching across territory or aircraft 

bombings, but simply by cutting off the gas or cutting off the oil. 

This has been a subject of great importance, obviously not only 

to the country that you’re going to represent, but its neighbors, and 

for that matter, all of Europe is represented with ideas like the 

Nabucco pipeline or other smaller projects. 

What is the situation now as you perceive it in the country that 

you are about to represent—the United States—in Latvia? What is 

the energy predicament? And what degree of energy independence 

or security does it have? 

Mr. PEKALA. Senator, thank you for that very important question. We share your concerns, obviously. 

We in the State Department, you, many others, over the past 

many years, have been talking to countries in the region about the 

importance of diversifying the sources of energy and diversifying 

the ownership of the pipelines that bring that energy to various 

countries. 

The situation in Latvia is evolving. They do understand the 

importance of diversity of ownership and supply. They are subject 

to a near-Russian monopoly on their gas and oil. But in other 

areas, the picture is a lot more optimistic. 

Latvia only imports a tiny percentage of its energy, that mostly 

from Estonia. They produce most of their own energy through 

hydroelectric plants and other means. And they are working with 

the other two Baltic States on other means of renewable energy 

sources. They are working with Estonia and Lithuania on a possible nuclear power plant in Lithuania, and they are talking to 

Estonia and Lithuania and many other countries in the region 

about a possible LNG, a liquefied natural gas terminal, somewhere 

in the Baltics, also thinking about tapping into supplies that might 

be in Germany and Poland and elsewhere. And the Latvians, like 

others, are looking into shale oil and shale gas as a means of diversifying their supply and enhancing their independence. 

So the good news is that the Latvians clearly understand, along 

with you and us and many others, the importance of diversification, and they are working hard on establishing means to work 

hard on that in the 21st century to increase their independence. 

Senator LUGAR. I appreciate that response. Obviously, you are on 

top of the subject, and I congratulate you. 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Senator. 

You probably saw us doing some quick whispering up here. We 

think we are going have some votes called very shortly, so Senator 

Cardin is going to go next, and then I will continue. We will recess 

to vote, and then I will come back if there are still questions. 

So, Senator Cardin. 

Senator CARDIN. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

What I will do is I will pose a question to all five that I will ask 

be answered for the record, so we don’t need to take the time now. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

205

But let me make the point, if I might, and that is, first, thank 

all five of you for your public service. And I thank you for your 

families. You have all had an incredible career of public service, 

and you are continuing that, and we know this is sacrifice not only 

for you, but for your families. We appreciate that very much. 

All five of the countries that are represented here have a lot in 

common. They are all strategically important to the United States. 

We have excellent relationships with all five countries. And they 

are countries that we want to continue to strengthen those ties. 

I have the honor of chairing the U.S.-Helsinki Commission, the 

Senate chair of the commission. And my question deals with the 

highlighting the important role that you can play as Ambassador 

to continue the advancements on the human dimensions of the 

OSCE. 

I particularly mention Estonia, because Estonia has been a successful country in using the OSCE format in dealing with its Russian-speaking minority, and I applaud the Estonian Government. 

I’ve been there. I’ve worked with them, in using the OSCE to 

advance the humans rights issues. 

[The written answers submitted for the record by Ambassador 

Merten, Mr. Pekala, and Mr. Levine follow:]

Ambassador MERTEN. The OSCE has played a key role in Croatia’s transformation into a NATO Ally and soon-to-be EU member. Evidence of its progress 

can be seen in the decision to close the OSCE Office in Zagreb, truly a success story 

for the region and the organization. Yet more work remains. If confirmed, as 

Ambassador I will strongly encourage Croatia to continue to meet its OSCE human 

dimension commitments on human rights and fundamental freedoms, both for the 

citizens of Croatia and so that Croatia can be a model for the rest of the region. 

These commitments include protecting human and minority rights, ensuring civil 

society and independent media have space in which to operate, and inviting international election observation. 

Mr. PEKALA. If confirmed as Ambassador, I would work closely with the Government of Latvia on the full panoply of OSCE activities throughout its geographic area 

of activity. We greatly value the work that the OSCE has accomplished. Both the 

United States and Latvia share its goals and objectives. We see Latvia as an excellent partner in these endeavors and anticipate a robust relationship on these issues 

in the future. 

In particular, I would urge close cooperation with OSCE institutions, with the aim 

of improving transparency. In the context of the OSCE, Latvia has demonstrated 

a willingness to share the experience it has gained through its democratic transition 

to assist other states in the region, and as part of OSCE’s efforts to support OSCE 

partner states in the Mediterranean and North Africa. 

Mr. LEVINE. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of Estonia to 

advance our shared goal of strengthening the OSCE’s human dimension. I believe 

that Estonia has a deep appreciation for OSCE’s democratization and human rights 

work, as it benefited directly during Estonia’s own democratic transition. Today, 

Estonia serves as an example of transparency, openness, and freedom and works to 

share its experience and expertise with other countries in the OSCE region, such 

as Belarus and Moldova. Estonia also takes the protection of freedoms of the press, 

speech, and Internet seriously, both domestically and abroad. 

Estonia has also worked over the past year to take several positive steps on its 

own issues of minority rights and citizenship, and it has reduced the number of people in the country who lack citizenship. While there is still some distance to go, 

Estonia is moving in the right direction. If confirmed, I will work closely with the 

Government of Estonia, as well as through our social media platforms with the public, to ensure that progress continues.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

206

Let me, if I just might very quickly, mention in Kosovo, there are 

challenges. There are serious challenges. Kosovo is not a member 

of the OSCE, because of the blockage of a minority number of countries within the OSCE. But it needs to pay attention to the rights 

of all of its citizens, and I will be asking, Ms. Jacobson, that you 

pay particular sensitivity to that in your role, when confirmed, as 

Ambassador. 

As Ambassador, what is the important role that you can play to 

continue the advancements on the human dimensions of the 

OSCE? 

[The written answer submitted for the record by Ambassador 

Jacobson follows:]

The Government of Kosovo is not currently a participating State, but its admission would be welcome in the future. Much work takes place every day in Kosovo 

that furthers the OSCE’s comprehensive view of security, especially in the human 

dimension. Supporting OSCE’s efforts to protect human rights and strengthen democracy will be a critical element of my mission, if I am confirmed. If confirmed, 

I would look forward to working with the OSCE and would also hope to have the 

same good partnership with the Helsinki Commission that I enjoyed as Ambassador 

to Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. This partnership resulted in significant achievements, for example in the area of religious freedom in Turkmenistan. 

In Kosovo there has been a lot of progress made in the area of human rights with 

regard to protection of all communities, as required in the Constitution, and some 

progress has also been made in terms of bringing to justice those officials who commit abuses. 

The GoK is also taking steps to address irregularities and electoral manipulations 

which marred Assembly elections in 2010. In preparation for the next parliamentary 

elections, a legislative committee is revising the electoral code, while another committee is preparing constitutional changes that would allow direct election of the 

President. Further, after some criticism of the lack of serious sentences and fines 

for people who committed electoral abuses, we have noted a positive trend since 

2011 toward serious sentences and fines for election fraud; 27 people have been sentenced to terms, and more than 100 people have been fined. 

There also remain concerns about discrimination, for example against ethnic and 

religious minorities, disabled persons and members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and 

transgender community. Additional human rights issues included allegations of prisoner abuse as well as corruption and favoritism in prisons; lengthy pretrial detention; judicial inefficiency; intimidation of media by public officials and criminal elements; limited progress in returning internally displaced persons (IDPs) to their 

homes; government corruption; trafficking in persons; and child labor in the informal sector. 

Roadblocks established by Serb hard-liners in northern Kosovo have also seriously 

restricted basic rights for citizens in the north, including the free movement of 

goods, people, and services. Serb hard-liners have employed violence and intimidation against domestic opponents and international security forces, which resulted in 

deaths and injuries during the year. 

Tackling these issues is going to take a concerted international effort to address, 

and will require leadership by the United States in cooperation with Kosovo.

My main question, though, is to Ambassador Norland, if I might. 

You’ve come from Uzbekistan, which is not exactly the best nation 

as an example of the advancement of human rights. Georgia has 

problems. They are strategically important to us. They are moving 

forward in transition. I had a chance to talk to President 

Saakashvili when he was here about what he is doing as far as 

open and free elections for both the Parliament and for the Presidency. We know that there are efforts to limit those who are eligible to run for President, and there have been statements made by 

the opposition that they are being denied opportunities to fairly 

compete in the national elections. 

So my question to you is—and you can answer this for the 

record—that’ll be fine—as to what steps you would take as AmbasFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

207

sador to make sure that Georgia continues its transition to free and 

open elections, allowing fair opportunities for opposition candidates 

to compete in the election? 

And, Madam Chair, I can have those answered for the record. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, I would actually like to hear the answer, 

so we have a few minutes before we have to recess for the vote. 

So perhaps, Ambassador Norland, you can go ahead and respond. 

Ambassador NORLAND. Thank you, Senator. 

And thank you, Senator Cardin, for the question, and for your 

work in support of the Helsinki Accords. I am familiar with that 

work from when I was with, at the time, CSCE in Georgia, and the 

principles that are represented by the accord are actually principles 

on the table still today with respect to the conflict zones in Georgia 

and also with respect to the democratic process that you have 

touched on. 

If confirmed, I would seek to develop broad firsthand knowledge 

of Georgia’s performance with respect to promotion of rule of law 

and fundamental freedoms afforded under Helsinki Accords and to 

urge the Georgians to take all necessary steps to ensure they are 

in full compliance. 

Georgia has made progress toward becoming a full democratic 

state. The elections this year and the Presidential elections next 

year are testimony to that. 

But, as you indicate, there are very real concerns. While there 

has been real progress, there are real concerns about what you 

might call of the level playing field. And there are reports of harassment of opposition candidates that trouble us deeply. The role 

of the so-called chamber of control and party financing is drawing 

a lot of concern in Georgia and in the international community. 

I can tell you already our mission is raising these concerns publicly and privately with the Georgian Government. And if confirmed, it would be my role to continue to monitor very carefully 

Georgia’s observance of the principles that we hold dear. This 

would be a central priority for my mission. 

The United States already spends millions of dollars in assistance to promote civil society, rule of law, and democracy in Georgia. And we need to be careful stewards of those funds to make 

sure that we are getting the results we’re looking for. 

Finally, I would just point out, given Georgia’s interests, Georgia’s aspirations to NATO membership, and our support for those 

aspirations, how these elections are conducted is very important 

litmus test, and we will be watching carefully to make sure that 

the way these elections unfold are in keeping with NATO standards. 

Senator CARDIN. I would just underscore the issue of qualification of opposition candidates. That has been used in too many 

European countries as a way of trying to block opposition opportunities. I would just urge our presence there to have the widest possible opportunities for opposition to effectively be able to compete 

on a level playing field. 

Ambassador NORLAND. Yes, sir. 

Senator CARDIN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. Would you like to hear a response 

from Ambassador Jacobson, too, on the Kosovo issue? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

208

Senator CARDIN. Yes, thank you. 

Ambassador JACOBSON. Thank you for the opportunity. 

If I am confirmed, the issue of human rights and promotion of 

democracy will be a critical element of my mission, as it was in my 

missions in Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. And I would look forward to working in very close partnership with the Helsinki 

Commission, a partnership which I think produces real results;

for example, our progress on the issue of religious freedom in 

Turkmenistan. 

In Kosovo, there has been a lot of progress made in the area of 

human rights with regard to protection of all the communities, 

which is included in the constitution. And some progress has also 

been made in terms of bringing to justice those officials who commit abuses. 

The Government is currently working on electoral law in preparation for parliamentary elections, which could occur as early as 

next year, and also looking at constitutional amendments to allow 

the direct election of the President. 

After some criticism of the lack of serious sentences and fines for 

people who committed electoral abuses, we have noted a positive 

trend in 2011 toward serious sentences and fines. And, in fact, 27 

people have been sentenced to terms and more than 100 people 

have been fined. 

There are still serious problems with discrimination, societal discrimination, for example, against ethic and religious minorities, 

against disabled and LGBT people. There are issues with corruption and rule of law. There are a variety of issues that are going 

to take a concerted international effort, including leadership by the 

United States in cooperation with Kosovo, to address. 

I would also point out that the human rights situation in the 

North is not helped by the existence of the illegal parallel institutions, which do prevent full human rights; for example, the freedom 

of movement. 

And these issues would all be critically important to my mission, 

if confirmed. 

Senator CARDIN. I am just pointing out there appears to be an 

opening with Serbia as it relates to north Kosovo. There appears 

to be a willingness to talk more openly about these issues, and Serbia is trying to become the leader; chair an office in the OSCE. 

So there is some opportunity, we think, to make significant 

progress in this area. And I agree with your assessment. But I 

think the United States can play a very important role, and our 

Embassy in Kosovo can be a critical partner. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

At this point, we will recess for about 15 minutes while we vote. 

And I will return. I’m not sure who else will. 

Thank you.

[Recess.]

Senator BARRASSO [presiding]. Thank you for resuming this. We 

apologize for the fact that there is a vote going on. Senator 

Shaheen will be back shortly. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

209

I wanted to first thank all of you for your willingness to serve, 

and congratulate you on your appointments, and look forward to 

additional discussions. 

I’m going to start, if I could, with the nominee to Kosovo. 

Ambassador Jacobson, in November last year, I traveled to Camp 

Bondsteel in Kosovo. That was my second visit. I spent Thanksgiving with the troops. We have 23 Wyoming Air National Guardsmen there. They are members of Detachment 3, the B Company, 

777th Aviation Support Battalion. For the next 6 months, they are 

going to continue to provide helicopter support and maintenance to 

the 112th Aviation Regiment. Also able to meet at the time on 

Thanksgiving Day with the Charge ́ d’Affaires, Michael Murphy, 

and had a nice visit. 

On paper, our forces in Kosovo are classified as the third responder in support of the peacekeeping operations. However, we 

know that more often than not when violence erupts, these forces 

become the first responders when Kosovo security forces and European Union forces can’t assist. 

So with the drawdown that is occurring there, I just want to 

know how we can encourage the people of Kosovo to step up and 

provide the type of security that people of Kosovo demand, expect, 

and who can we trust to make sure that that happens and what 

role you will plan that. 

Ambassador JACOBSON. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

KFOR staffing is currently at about 5,800 troops, which the 

United States usually forms around 10 percent. We are what is 

known as Gate 2 in terms of the level of staffing. Given the violence that occurred last summer and the conditions on the ground, 

we see the staffing levels remaining relatively consistent for the 

near foreseeable future, because KFOR, as you mentioned, does 

play an incredibly important role in terms of maintaining security 

throughout the country. 

In addition to that, KFOR is playing an important role in terms 

of mentoring and advising the Kosovo security force, which has 

responsibility in four major areas, including civil emergency, fire 

suppression, disposal of hazardous materials, explosive ordnance 

disposal. And KFOR will continue to play that role as the Kosovo 

security force develops. 

The commander of KFOR has recommended that the full operating capacity status for the Kosovo security force. This is a decision that has to be taken by the North Atlantic Council. And that 

decision will inform how we go forward in the future. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

Ambassador Norland, I had a chance to travel to Georgia with 

Senator McCain and others, and meet with the President there. On 

December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. It specifically calls on the 

Secretary of Defense to submit a plan to Congress for the normalization of U.S. defense cooperation with Georgia, including the sale 

of defensive weapons. 

If confirmed as United States Ambassador to the Republic of 

Georgia, will you be committed to stepping up the United States 

defense security cooperation with Georgia and support efforts to assist in developing Georgia’s self-defense capabilities? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

210

Ambassador NORLAND. Senator, yes. Thank you for the question. 

And thanks for your support for Georgia, for NATO enlargement, 

and for Georgia’s defense capabilities. 

I firmly believe that a robust military-to-military relationship 

needs to be a part of United States-Georgia relations. And fortunately, during President Saakashvili’s meeting with President 

Obama on January 30, I think some important forward impetus 

was given to that relationship. 

We have already seen approval of a shipment or the purchase of 

M4 carbines by the Georgians. There’s going to be I think enhanced 

focus on support for Georgian defense reforms, for Georgia’s ability 

to participate in the ISAF mission, and for NATO interoperability 

in that regard. 

As we speak, the U.S. Marines are wrapping up today an exercise, Agile Spirit, with Georgian military, in support of their ISAF 

presence. The Georgia National Guard here in the United States 

has a very important and active relationship with the military in 

Georgia. Deputy Assistant Secretary Wallander from the Department of Defense was there recently, and I understand a Georgian 

Deputy Minister of Defense is coming here next month to pick up 

the dialogue following the Presidential meeting here on this issue. 

Absolutely, if confirmed, I see it as an essential part of my mission to develop a robust military-to-military bilateral defense cooperation arrangement with Georgia. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Mr. Norland. I appreciate it. 

Ambassador Merten, with regard to Croatia, I’m just wondering 

how Croatia has been impacted by the global economic crisis, and 

what sort of efforts have been taken by Croatia to boost its competitiveness, to boost its economic growth, and how the United 

States may be involved and helpful in future efforts. 

Ambassador MERTEN. Thanks so much. 

I think Croatia’s accession to the European Union, if that goes 

forward as planned next summer—summer 2013—will be a large 

boon to the Croatian economy. 

One of the things I hope to focus on, should I be fortunate 

enough to be able to get out to post, is to work with the Croatians 

on investment and economic growth issues. I firmly believe that as 

a good partner economically, we can work with them and help 

them to develop their economy, to develop a business-friendly environment, which is very welcoming to foreign investment, particularly American investment. 

And, ultimately that is good for the American people, because a 

good, strong economic partner in Croatia will help create and generate jobs here in the United States. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

Mr. Pekala, the former President of Latvia is an orthopedic surgeon, and I’m an orthopedic surgeon. We trained with the same 

professors. So we have great relationships unrelated to all the 

things that you’re going to be doing. But if you ever get into a 

pinch, let the orthopedic surgeons come in, and we can help. 

Latvia was significantly impacted by the global economic crisis. 

The country’s gross domestic product dropped by 17 percent in 

2009, unemployment rose to 18 percent in 2010. In 2008, the IMF 

provided a stabilization loan to Latvia. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

211

What steps is the Government taking in response to the economic crisis? And what kind of impact will the uncertainty in the 

eurozone have on Latvia? 

Mr. PEKALA. Senator, thank you for that question, and I can ask 

former President Zatlers and you, then, if it hurts when I——

Senator BARRASSO. It hurts when you do that, stop doing that. 

Mr. PEKALA. Exactly. [Laughter.] 

As you well stated, Latvia was hit very hard by the economic crisis. I mentioned in my prepared remarks that between 2008 and 

2010, as you said, GDP in Latvia went down by 25 percent. 

Prime Minister Dombrovskis, starting right away after the economic crisis hit, undertook a very serious program of reducing Government expenditures in increasing revenue. And after 2010, and 

as you mentioned the IMF, some European countries, especially 

Nordic countries, and the European Union, undertook a lending 

program to Latvia. With the seriousness of the Government program, and the assistance from these other places, Latvia has very 

impressively rebounded. 

Last year, 2011, their growth rate was 5.5 percent, one of the 

highest growth rates in the European Union. In the last quarter of 

2011, their growth rate was 5.7 percent, the highest growth rate 

in the European Union. They have been very serious about the 

measures taken in the government and the economy to improve. 

There is great news on this for Latvia, of course. As you mentioned, unemployment went down from 20 through 15; it’s now at 

12. Still high but going in the right direction. 

And there’s good news for the Latvians and for us. One of the 

elements of the good news for us is that there is really fertile 

ground now for increased American investment in Latvia. That has 

grown over the last 2 years. Last year it was about $600 million, 

a growth of almost 70 percent from the previous year. And if I am 

confirmed, I intend to put very high on my list of priorities enhancing American investment in Latvia. This creates American jobs. It 

is good for all of us. Good for America, good for Latvia. 

Another element of the benefit here is that Latvia has now 

reengaged and restarted its assistance program in its neighborhood 

and beyond. Through the economic crisis, it wasn’t able to do so, 

it was so strapped. Some Government agencies lost 40 percent of 

their budgets, 30 percent of their people, during the economic crisis. But Latvia’s back, and it has restarted its assistance program. 

They are extremely well engaged with Georgia and have been 

over many years with the Ministry of Interior and Justice of the 

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Defense, on what 

Georgia can do to improve its democratic reforms and get closer to 

NATO membership. And they have a very important assistance 

program with Moldova, again, to teach the lessons that they have 

learned as they have evolved. 

So there’s good news for Latvia. And we want to be a part of that 

and help them and help America at the same time. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

Mr. Levine, I want to ask about the energy sector in Estonia. 

And I know they have called for diversification of Europe’s energy 

supplies, the Government of Estonia is looking at different energy 

sources to reduce the country’s dependence on Russian gas supply. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

212

So I just want to ask you, what kind of energy resources Estonia 

has and what progress is being made toward more energy independence, and what your evaluation is of the effectiveness of the 

country’s energy independence strategy. 

Mr. LEVINE. Thank you, Senator. 

Estonia is lucky to have large deposits of oil shale, which provides the majority of its oil and petroleum products. It is dependent 

on Russia for gas, which provides about 15 percent of their energy 

needs. But so far, that relationship has been working smoothly. 

They have been very much a proponent of a European energy 

strategy and, themselves, tried to diversify. As was mentioned earlier, they are a part of the partnership that is looking at a nuclear 

power plant in Lithuania. And working with Finland, they have 

been laying cables to connect themselves to the Finnish electricity 

grid. 

Their expertise in oil shale I think is both an opportunity for 

them on the energy front as well as the commercial front. They 

have purchased oil shale property in the United States, about 

30,000 acres in Utah, and hope to bring that into production by 

2016, producing about 30,000 barrels a day. 

I think that kind of partnership between our two countries on 

both energy and technology is one of the benefits that we can enjoy. 

Senator BARRASSO. Well, thank you. 

And, Madam Chairman, I now note a number of young people in 

the audience, obviously family members. And I congratulated each 

of the nominees. I also want to thank and congratulate each of the 

families. I know that it is a major family commitment to take on 

these kind of responsibilities for the United States. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. No further questions. 

Senator SHAHEEN [presiding]. Thank you very much, Senator 

Barrasso. And thank you for bringing reinforcements to keep the 

hearing going while I was voting. 

I want to follow up on the economic question that you asked Mr. 

Pekala, to Mr. Levine, because one of the things—a number of you 

mentioned that effect the economic crisis on the countries that 

you’re hoping to serve. But Estonia, actually, seems to have weathered the current economic crisis in Europe much better. To what 

do you attribute that? What are they doing right? 

Mr. LEVINE. I believe that Estonia is doing a lot right. They’re 

viewed as one of the most open, most liberal economies in the 

world. And the policies that they have pursued very much in the 

free market realm are working for them. 

They are back to positive growth. Unemployment is down. They 

are followers of Maastricht Criteria. And they have a relatively 

small population. And all those factors combined has led to a real 

economic success story. 

With that said, I would like to see greater commercial and economic activity between the United States and Estonia in a way 

that will benefit both of our economies. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. You mentioned in your testimony 

NATO’s Cyber Defense Center of Excellence, which is in Estonia. 

Can you comment on what impact that has had on Estonia? And 

also on NATO? What lessons have been learned from having that 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

213

Center of Excellence there that we may be ought to learn here in 

the United States? 

Mr. LEVINE. Thank you, Senator. 

Their expertise in cyber security is one of the niches that Estonia 

has been able to offer to both the alliance and the world at large. 

At the center, they are working on issues directly related to 

NATO’s internal cyber security, and in partnership with the Maryland National Guard, they have a similar program working on the 

development of cyber security strategies that are applicable to the 

society at large. 

We do have participants at the center in Tallinn. And it is 

viewed as a very successful enterprise. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And many people believe that the 2007 cyber 

attacks that have made Estonia one of the leaders in cyber security, because of their need to respond to those attacks, that those 

attacks originated in Russia. Can you talk about how Estonia feels 

about the current Obama administration’s reset policies toward 

Russia, and what the impact of both the 2007 attack and that reset 

policy have had on Estonia? 

Mr. LEVINE. Thank you, Senator. 

I would characterize the Estonian-Russian relationship as cool 

but correct. And our reset provided them a little bit more space in 

order to pursue the practical cooperation that they had with the 

Russians on things like border control, immigration. 

Outside of that, there isn’t a lot of contact between the two governments. The reset, as I said, it allows them a little bit more 

space, but we wouldn’t expect their own bilateral relationship to 

have any major improvements until there is a reconciliation of the 

50 years of history that they had together. 

It is a very different view of the Soviet occupation, very different 

view of what that era was about, is going to be an obstacle in a 

closer relationship. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Ambassador Jacobson, in your testimony, if I can find it here, 

you had a really good summary, I think, of what would be important to resolving the current situation with Serbia. And you say 

that a solution to the situation in the North, normalization of relations, require a durable modus vivendi that respects Kosovo’s sovereignty, takes into account the views of the citizens of the north, 

and allows both Kosovo and Serbia to proceed on their respective 

paths. 

How do we help that happen? 

Ambassador JACOBSON. Well, I think we have to continue to

engage using the United States leadership with our international 

partners, with the government and with the people of Kosovo, with 

our regional partners. 

One of the examples that I think is useful in this regard is the 

Kosovo Serbs who live in the south. And there are actually a lot 

more of those in the south than there are in the north. And they 

have been able to take full advantage of the far-reaching protections afforded them both by the comprehensive status proposal and 

by Kosovo’s own constitutions. 

I’m talking about local self-government and autonomy. I’m talking about the fact that the Kosovo Serbs in the south participate 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

214

in all levels of government, from municipal—and there are Serbmajority municipalities in the south, all the way to the national 

level. And I think this is an important model. 

But just as important is the idea of engagement and dialogue, 

and Prime Minister Thaci has said that he and his government will 

reach out to community leaders in the north. This is something 

that we absolutely promote and encourage. 

And if I am confirmed, I will do my best to listen; to understand 

the interests of all the stakeholders in this issue; and to work with 

our international partners, with the Congress, and with the government and the people of Kosovo to work toward that durable modus 

vivendi based on practical agreements that make a difference in 

people’s lives that I mentioned in my testimony. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And is there any evidence that in the northern part of Kosovo that those parallel structures that you mentioned are becoming a concern for Serbs who live in that area? 

Ambassador JACOBSON. Well, I think recent polling in the north 

of Kosovo has indicated that 70 percent of the Serbs that live up 

there don’t see that Belgrade has any sort of plan for their future. 

And this I think is a point. Nobody has any objections to Serbia 

providing legitimate, transparent assistance to Serbs in Kosovo in 

the areas of health and education and social welfare. But I don’t 

see that that is what the illegal parallel structures are providing. 

They are, in fact, interested in preserving their own authority, 

and in some cases have actually created an atmosphere of intimidation and fear for those in the north who do wish to cooperate with 

the international community and with the Government in Kosovo. 

So clearly, this is an issue that is going to require sustained 

engagement, leadership, and contacts. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And is there evidence that that environment 

of fear is coming from Belgrade? Or is it coming from the local 

Serbs in the northern part of the country? 

Ambassador JACOBSON. I think an environment of fear is a complex thing, and without having been there myself, I wouldn’t want 

to ascribe the origins to it. But it certainly does exist, and it’s 

something that we have to work toward ameliorating, both in 

terms of the security situation on the ground that is assisted by 

KFOR and in terms of our diplomatic engagement, and also in 

terms of ours assistance programs, some of which have been hampered in the north by the lack of freedom of movement. 

I have in mind some of USAID proposals for infrastructure, so 

we have had to focus more on community-building, short-term job 

creation. We have in fact created 1,600 jobs. 

So this is, I think, the kind of engagement that we need to continue together with our international partners in the countries of 

the region to reduce those levels of tension over time. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And one of the sources of conflict has been 

concern among Serbs about attacks on the Serbian monasteries 

that we have seen in the past. Is there a general acceptance now 

by the Kosovars that those monasteries are important historical 

and religious—I don’t want to use the term ‘‘artifacts’’—religious 

symbols? So accepting their presence there without destroying 

them, because obviously that will continue, until that point happens, that will continue to be a source of conflict. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

215

Ambassador JACOBSON. Well, I think the fact that the Government of Kosovo has really engaged in this reconstruction and 

implementation commission, which was established together with 

the Serbian Orthodox Church and the ministries of culture of both 

Serbia and Kosovo, to rebuild and repair those religious buildings 

that were destroyed in the 2004 riots is really testament to that 

fact. 

In fact, the Government of Kosovo not only financially supports 

that effort but also provides 17 sites with protection from the 

Kosovo security force. 

Societal discrimination does still exist—I don’t want to downplay 

that—in Kosovo with harassment or vandalism against both 

Serbian Orthodox sites. Also, last year there was vandalism in a 

Jewish cemetery in Pristina, which the Government moved quickly 

to clean up and denounce. 

The Protestants have complained that they haven’t been able to 

open a cemetery in Decani, and the Islamic community has protested the ban on headscarves in religious institutions. 

So these are all examples that appear in our religious freedom 

report. And if confirmed, I would work very hard on issues of respect for religious diversity. 

I’ve learned through my engagement with religious leaders at 

FSI that some of them don’t like the word ‘‘tolerance,’’ because it 

indicates that I’m just putting up with you. 

So the eventual goal is to produce a requirement that respects 

and promotes religious diversity. And I would work very hard on 

that issue with religious communities and leaders and with the 

government and people of Kosovo, if confirmed. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. 

Ambassador Norland, I know that Senator Cardin raised some 

concerns about open elections in Georgia and some of the activities 

that raise questions about how free the opposition is to compete in 

those elections. 

Yesterday, the Atlantic Council had a panel discussion here 

about NATO and the upcoming summit in Chicago, which as you 

point out, and others have, I did in my remarks, Georgia has aspirations and has been promised membership in NATO, ultimately. 

But one of the points that former Secretary Albright made yesterday is that there is a connection between rule of law, and free 

and open elections, and government values, and participation in 

NATO. 

And so can you talk about how important an open, competitive 

election for Georgia’s future, both for continued support here in the 

United States and Europe, and also in terms of NATO acceptance, 

will be? 

Ambassador NORLAND. Yes, Senator, thanks. 

I think that the relationship is pivotal, that Europe and the 

United States are closely watching the conduct of these elections to 

determine whether they meet the criteria that are expected of a 

NATO member country. 

There are real concerns about the way certain aspects of these 

elections are being conducted, harassment of opposition. Our goal 

is to see a level playing field. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

216

We have extended thanks to Congress. We have extensive assistance programs to try to develop the rule of law, to promote a civil 

society, the role of the media. 

And it is not that we are focused on any particular individual. 

What we are seeking to do is to protect the integrity and support 

the integrity of the process. And I think Georgian officials are 

beginning to understand that, in fact, they are being watched, that 

this is being monitored closely, and that it is being viewed as a 

litmus test for their membership in NATO. 

We hope that they will take the right steps. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. I certainly hope that is the case 

as well. 

As you remember so well, back in 2008, the Russian—there was 

a conflict between Georgia and Russia over Abkhazia and South 

Ossetia. There’s not a lot that is being heard right now about what 

the status of that situation is, except that Russia has not complied 

with all of the terms of the agreement that ended that conflict, or 

at least created a cease-fire. 

So can you talk about whether there any recent measures that 

we have taken to encourage Russia to fulfill its obligations under 

the agreement? 

Ambassador NORLAND. Well, first of all, let me thank you for 

your participation in the Atlantic Council publication on Georgia in 

the West, because I think a lot of good ideas are contained in there, 

which I know will help guide me, if I am confirmed. 

Senator SHAHEEN. My staff appreciates your mentioning that. 

Ambassador NORLAND. What happened in Georgia in 2008 was 

a tragedy. And I think the entire international community is seized 

now with the issue of how do we overcome that tragedy and find 

a way to move forward, and, if you will, in a way, to move back 

toward the status quo ante. 

We continue to object to the presence of Russian troops in the 

occupied territories, and we strongly support Georgia’s sovereignty 

and territorial integrity. These are matters of principle. 

You asked what additional steps can we take now; what is the 

prospect for galvanized movement on this? I will know better if 

confirmed and able to get out and get a sense on the ground of 

what is possible. 

But quite clearly, we need to continue to use the forum in 

Geneva and other fora to urge Russia to fulfill its 2008 cease-fire 

obligations. 

There is no military solution to the situation, so the issue is how 

do we galvanize out diplomacy. As George Kennan would say, all 

measures short of war, to try to address the situation. 

In addition to the talks in Geneva, there’s another round coming 

up at the end of this month. We can find ways to try to take steps 

to, for example, get international monitoring groups, whether from 

OSCE, the EU-monitoring mission, or others, into the occupied territories themselves and not simply on the margins. 

Try to get humanitarian assistance into those areas, and look for 

small confidence-building measures that can lay the groundwork 

for progress, such as Georgia’s no-first-use-of-force declaration. 

Hopefully, Russia would reciprocate—the projects that OSCE is 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

217

doing with regard to water management in South Ossetia, or the 

UNDP’s youth projects in Abkhazia. 

I think if we approach these issues in a spirit of transparency 

with a desire to minimize regional tensions and find a way forward, I think diplomacy can play a very important role in getting 

us out of this mess. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. 

Ambassador Merten, you talked about Croatia’s EU membership, 

which will soon happen, in 2013. Can you talk a little bit more 

about how that membership is going to benefit Croatia? And what 

might be the impact of that on some of Croatia’s neighbors in the 

Western Balkans? 

Ambassador MERTEN. Thanks for that question. 

I think full EU membership for Croatia opens up, obviously, a 

huge market for Croatian producers. It also presents them with a 

challenge, however, because they’re going to need to raise the bar 

of their competitiveness to at least meet the level of their EU 

neighbors. 

But given Croatia’s past performance over recent years, I am 

quite confident that the Croatian private sector and Croatian Government will be able to meet those challenges. 

Regarding the rest of the immediate neighborhood, if you will, I 

think Croatia sets a good example for the way other countries in 

the region can move forward. We have a mature partnership now 

with Croatia. We no longer have an AID mission there. They have 

made terrific progress. And I think they show a good roadmap to 

other countries in the region, to what is possible. 

And I am very optimistic that their EU membership will give 

them great opportunities if they are able to take advantage of 

them. 

Senator SHAHEEN. I had the opportunity to visit Croatia a couple 

years ago with Senator Voinovich when he was still in the Senate. 

And as I am sure you are aware, he is beloved in the Western 

Balkans. But one of the things we did was to meet with the Prime 

Minister at the time who had been very successful in cracking 

down on corruption, much more so, I think, than was anticipated 

when she took over that job. 

Can you talk about the extent to which many of those reforms 

are continuing and how big a challenge that continues to be in the 

country? 

Ambassador MERTEN. Of course. Thank you. 

My understanding is that there continue to be some challenges 

in that area. However, I think, as, again, part of Croatia’s EU 

accession process, they have had to put in certain safeguards in 

place. As I understand it, they are still in the process of doing some 

of that, so there is some of the remaining homework, if you will, 

that needs to be done by Croatia before they can fully join next 

year. 

We will certainly encourage them, should I be confirmed, in continuing to meet those requirements and any offers of assistance or 

advice that we can offer, I would certainly make those available. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Pekala, in your testimony, you talked about the effort to 

reach out to the minority communities in Latvia. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

218

What kind of things do you have in mind as you’re talking about 

outreach? What could you do as the U.S. Ambassador, to help with 

that effort? 

Mr. PEKALA. Madam Chairwoman, thank you for the question. 

I think we can operate on two levels in Latvia. And if I am confirmed, I would try to operate on both. 

On the overall approach to tolerance and understanding and dialogue, we, the United States, represent the world’s best example of 

how multicultural societies can work in terms of diversity, inclusion, understanding, study, and conferences, and education, and 

teaching teachers, and so on. 

And we can present the example of how this works in practice. 

And Latvians understand that. And of course, they look to us for 

some examples. 

Under that level, on the ground, the Embassy now in Riga is 

very active on bringing people together and helping them achieve 

this kind of dialogue and understanding. So when they have 

events, they don’t include any particular ethnic group and exclude 

others; they bring everyone together. And sometimes they find people haven’t met their colleagues who speak a different language. 

And they can provide the lubrication and the mechanism for people 

to make these connections. 

As we all know, there are few things more powerful than just 

people-to-people connections. Our Embassy in Riga is doing a great 

job on those. If confirmed, I would like to continue and accentuate 

and reinforce those. 

And we have a simple goal of getting people together, help them 

understand each other, help them tolerate and move together on 

what will be, eventually, a fully integrated multicultural society. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, as you point out in your testimony, 

again, one of those groups are ethnic Russians. And obviously, 

given the history, the relationship with Russia has been challenging. 

There are some Latvians who suggest that NATO isn’t prepared 

to deal with Russia, should conditions between Russia and its 

Baltic neighbors deteriorate. Do you share those concerns? And can 

you talk about why Latvians might be feeling that way right now, 

beyond just the historical context? 

Mr. PEKALA. Madam Chairwoman, I don’t share that view. I

believe that most Latvians, certainly officials and most of the population, feel that their strategic context, their historic and geographical connections with Russia, shifted in 2004, when Latvia 

joint NATO. 

They feel very confident about the article 5 guarantees of their 

security in NATO. 

I was serving in Estonia on March 29, 2004, when the Baltic 

States join NATO. And in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, this was a 

historic moment, a really joyous day when they found that their 

security concerns were shared now in an alliance that was not only 

throughout Europe but across the Atlantic as well. They take great 

comfort and pride in being associated with the United States and 

NATO. 

They can be very confident of this article 5 commitment. I think 

most of them are confident. And we take every opportunity to demFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

219

onstrate that. I won’t go on and on about Baltic air policing, but 

they feel, again, that this is a very real commitment to their security, a very real undertaking by the allies, and particularly the 

United States. 

I think they feel pretty comfortable about the security in the context of NATO and beyond. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Great, and thank you very much for that

answer. 

And I’m very impressed that your daughters are still awake. So, 

good job, girls. [Laughter.] 

Mr. PEKALA. Thank you. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you all very much. I have no further 

questions. 

We will keep the record open for 24 hours in case there are questions submitted. 

And I wish you all great luck in your new roles. And if this committee can be helpful to you in any way, please let us know. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF RICHARD B. NORLAND TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Little progress has been made in bringing Russia back in line with its 

international commitments to withdraw from the breakaway regions of Georgia, and 

confidence-building measures across the administrative boundary line have met 

with limited success and enthusiasm. If you are confirmed as Ambassador, what priorities will you pursue with respect to the breakaway territories of Georgia, in terms 

of advocating U.S. policies and bringing greater transparency to the situation?

Answer. If confirmed, my priorities on this issue will be to continue to voice U.S. 

objection to Russia’s occupation and militarization of the separatist Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and to insist that Russia fulfill its obligations 

under the 2008 cease-fire agreement, including withdrawal of its forces to preconflict positions and free access for humanitarian assistance. I will also support 

diplomatic efforts by the United States, as an active participant in the Geneva discussions, to work with the cochairs and others in pursuit of a resolution to the conflict. In addition, if confirmed, I will continue to speak out in support of Georgia’s 

territorial integrity, as the United States did recently in statements regarding the 

March 10 illegitimate ‘‘elections’’ in the separatist region of Abkhazia. We will also 

continue to support strongly Georgia’s efforts to prevent any further recognitions of 

the occupied territories. 

The United States is supportive of efforts by all stakeholders to reach a peaceful 

resolution to the conflict, pursue confidence-building measures, increase transparency, promote security and stability, and address humanitarian issues through 

projects that directly improve the lives of the communities on the ground. I will support U.S. efforts to continue to press for full access to the separatist regions by the 

European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) and international organizations like 

the OSCE to increase transparency and address ongoing humanitarian and human 

rights concerns there.

Question. Georgia will hold important elections for Parliament and President over 

the next year. Where do you see Georgia in terms of ensuring a free and fair playing 

field for these upcoming elections?

Answer. The upcoming elections represent an important opportunity for Georgia 

to advance its democratic development through its first formal transfer of power via 

elections. Georgia has made important progress on democratic reforms since the 

Rose Revolution. However, the United States is concerned about reports of harassment of opposition party members. The United States is committed to supporting 

free and fair parliamentary and Presidential electoral processes in Georgia. The 

administration’s focus is on contributing to efforts to strengthen processes and instiFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

220

tutions, not to support individual candidates, specific political parties, or a particular outcome. The United States will continue to encourage the Government of 

Georgia to foster a competitive and pluralistic campaign environment leading to 

elections that allow the Georgian people to decide on the leadership that is best for 

them. Ensuring free and fair elections is also vital to Georgia achieving the standards necessary to facilitate its Euro-Atlantic integration.

Question. During President Saakashvili’s visit to the United States, reports suggested that the administration would be conducting an ‘‘elevation’’ of security cooperation with Georgia that would focus on territorial self-defense. What tangible 

changes will this new emphasis entail?

Answer. President Saakashvili and President Obama discussed building upon existing successful programs to help the Georgian military continue its institutional 

reform and defense transformation efforts that support Georgia’s self-defense, sustain its work with ISAF in Afghanistan, and help it operate more effectively with 

NATO. The Department of Defense and Georgian Ministry of Defense are discussing 

specific steps that will help Georgia achieve its goals. The administration will also 

work with the Georgian Government under our existing Charter on Strategic Partnership and Bilateral Defense Consultations forums to discuss and further develop 

these concepts, subject to fiscal constraints on both sides.

Question. What is the timeline for negotiation of a free trade agreement with 

Georgia?

Answer. President Obama and President Saakashvili agreed to increase trade and 

economic cooperation during President Saakashvili’s visit to Washington earlier this 

year and agreed to launch a high-level dialogue to consider how to accomplish this 

through enhanced trade and investment frameworks, investment agreements, and 

the possibility of a free trade agreement. Initial USTR-led discussions will commence in the near future, as well as parallel discussions within the U.S.-Georgia 

Strategic Partnership Commission’s economic working group as early as this spring.

Question. Some reports have suggested that opposition supporters in Georgia have 

been detained. Are these reports correct and what steps are being undertaken to 

address this matter?

Answer. We are not aware of any opposition supporters being detained, although 

there have been some credible reports of their harassment. In addition, there are 

indications that Georgia’s new campaign finance law is being implemented in a 

manner which is curbing political speech. 

The United States has urged and will continue to urge the Government of Georgia 

to foster a campaign environment that is free and fair and perceived as such by the 

Georgian people. The Embassy has worked closely with all interested parties, both 

inside and outside the government, and including the opposition, in an effort to 

achieve a competitive campaign environment. Our focus is on the process and ensuring that all qualified candidates and political parties are able to compete on equal 

terms; the administration does not support any particular party or candidate.

Question. Solomon Kimeridze, an opposition supporter, reportedly died while in 

custody. Is this report accurate and what is your understanding of the circumstances of his death?

Answer. Official reports indicate that Solomon Kimeridze died while in custody 

of police in the town of Khashuri. As a result of the investigation by the Georgian 

Government, I understand new rules regarding law enforcement monitoring were 

implemented and the Khashuri Chief of Police was relieved of his duties due to ‘‘failure to institute safety norms’’ which led to injuries reportedly sustained from a fall 

from the third floor to the first floor of the police building. Embassy Tbilisi personnel met with Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Internal Affairs officials following the incident to discuss the ongoing investigation by the Chief Prosecutor’s 

office and reiterated the importance of an independent and transparent investigation. The United States has raised rule-of-law concerns with the Georgian Government and spoken out repeatedly on rule of law and human rights issues, including 

concerns about ensuring the judiciary’s independence and even-handed and consistent application of due process protections. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(221)

NOMINATIONS OF SCOTT DELISI, MICHAEL 

RAYNOR, AND MAKILA JAMES 

THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Scott DeLisi, of Minnesota, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Uganda 

Michael Raynor, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Benin 

Makila James, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to the 

Kingdom of Swaziland 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher A. 

Coons, presiding. 

Present: Senators Coons, Udall, and Isakson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE 

Senator COONS. I am pleased to chair this hearing of the Senate 

Foreign Relations Subcommittee for Africa, considering nominees 

to serve as Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda, the Republic of 

Benin, and Kingdom of Swaziland. 

As always, I welcome my good friend and ranking member, Senator Isakson, hopefully as well as some other members of the Foreign Relations Committee who may join us. 

I would like to welcome today our distinguished nominees, 

Ambassador Scott DeLisi, the nominee for Uganda; Makila James, 

the nominee for Swaziland; and Michael Raynor, the nominee for 

Benin. I apologize that ongoing votes and deliberations of the floor 

have delayed our start by a few moments. I am grateful for your 

patience. 

These three nominees bring to the table today a vast array of 

professional experience, and I look forward to hearing your vision 

for advancing United States interests, values, and policy concerns 

in Africa. We will speak about three important countries in three 

very different regions of Africa. 

Uganda, a country I visited 25 years ago, but have not had the 

joy yet of returning to. It is a valued strategic partner of the 

United States. Uganda is playing a critical role in regional efforts 

targeting Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army in close 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

222

coordination with recently deployed U.S. military advisers in Central Africa. Uganda is also a leading contributor to the AMISOM 

peacekeeping mission in Somalia and has shown a longstanding 

commitment to countering al-Shabaab and other destabilizing 

forces in the Horn. 

The U.S. Ambassador to Uganda will have the challenging job of 

continuing that strategic partnership, while urging Uganda to also 

improve systems of governance and adopt democratic reforms. 

President Museveni has ruled for 26 years, and government security forces have at times taken a heavy-handed approach toward 

political opponents. Also, in my view, a deeply troubling bill imposing harsh criminal penalties for homosexuality that is currently 

making its way to the Ugandan Parliament, and has been a source 

of some tension between our governments. 

Last, new discoveries of oil promise to bring new revenue and 

economic opportunities to Uganda, but also increase the importance 

and urgency of insuring transparency and combating corruption. 

Swaziland, a tiny country on the border of South Africa, has a 

long record of stability, and is a top exporter of textiles to the 

United States under AGOA. Its constitutional monarchy has created tension between the dominant royal family and pro-democracy 

opposition groups who want the right to form political parties and 

participate more directly in governance. 

Swaziland has the highest HIV/AIDS infection rate in the world 

with more than a quarter of adults suffering from this infection. 

Challenges for the new Ambassador will include working with the 

government to encourage political freedom and democratic reform 

while continuing our effective health sector funding and partnership. 

Last, Benin, a country that Senator Isakson and I had an opportunity to visit together last year, has made important progress on 

governance, and has had two decades of peaceful and democratic 

transitions. With vital assistance from the Millennium Challenge 

Corporation, Benin has upgraded and rehabilitated its port, and it 

remains an important producer of cotton. 

I would be remiss if I failed to mention the important trade 

between the Port of Wilmington in my home State and the Port of 

Cotonou, making Benin one of the biggest international trading 

partners for the State of Delaware. 

Benin has the potential to be an even more diversified and 

important trading partner with the United States, and I hope the 

new Ambassador will work with President Yayi and his government to increase transparency, combat corruption, and improve the 

ease of doing business. 

All three nominees before us have had long, distinguished 

careers with the State Department and bring a wealth of experience to these positions. Ambassador DeLisi has 30 years of Foreign 

Service experience, is currently the Ambassador to Nepal, previously served as Ambassador to Eritrea, and deputy chief of mission to Botswana. 

Ms. Mikala James is also a Senior Foreign Service officer currently serving as Office Director for Caribbean Affairs, having previously served as Deputy Director in the Office of Southern African 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

223

Affairs, and as the principal officer at the consulate general in 

Juba. 

Last, Mr. Michael Raynor is currently serving as the Executive 

Director of the Bureau of African Affairs, where he oversees support of U.S. policy goals for the Bureau and its 53 overseas embassies, consulates, and offices. He has served primarily in Africa, 

including Zimbabwe, Namibia, Guinea, Djibouti, and Congo 

Brazzaville. 

I look forward to hearing from them after first turning to Senator 

Isakson for some opening remarks. 

Senator Isakson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON,

U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would ask 

unanimous consent that a prepared statement be put in the record. 

Senator COONS. Without objection. 

Senator ISAKSON. And I want to welcome all of you today to this 

hearing and do what I always do when people accept posts that are 

not necessarily considered the political plums of assignments 

around the world. And your sacrifice for your country is noted and 

appreciated. And we appreciate your willingness to serve very, very 

much. 

I have had the occasion to have quite a relationship with the 

nation of Benin, which Mr. Raynor and I have discussed. The 

Ambassador preceding you, Mr. Knight, has done a phenomenal 

job, and I enjoyed visiting with him, along with Senator Coons. 

President Yayi has done a remarkable job in terms of reform, 

and I have to congratulate and commend Minister of Justice Ms. 

Bedo, who is undertaking the prosecution or the hopeful prosecution of the perpetrators of the murder of the young Georgian by the 

name of Kate Puzey, who served in the Peace Corps and was brutally murdered in Benin for doing the right thing, I might add. 

But I really appreciate the State Department’s cooperation on 

this. Aaron Williams has been fantastic. Knight has been fantastic. 

And I am sure that will continue with Michael Raynor, and it is 

my hope that justice will ultimately be done. 

I also congratulate Benin on just entering into their second Millennium Challenge contract with further expansion to Port 

Cotonou. That shows that they are working on corruption issues 

and other issues that MCC requires for improvement. And like 

Senator Coons, acknowledge they will continue to be a growing 

trading partner with the United States of America. 

I have never had the privilege of going to Swaziland, but I have 

read the briefs, and I know it has got a number of challenges. I 

know its location is close to South Africa, and a part of the world 

I want to get to one day so I can add it to the list of African countries I visited. And I will be interested in seeing Ms. James’ comment on what alarmed me, which was the high rate of AIDS infection in Swaziland, which was 25.9 percent of something we are 

obviously, because of PEPFAR and the initiative of President Bush 

and President Obama, interested in trying to make a contribution. 

Mr. DeLisi, it is a pleasure to see you again. I honor you for 

accepting this appointment to Uganda. I look forward to going to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

224

Uganda in the not too distant future. As you note in your prepared 

testimony, we have introduced advisors, military advisors, to help 

the Ugandan Government and the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo in terms of the issues with Joseph Kony and the Lord’s 

Resistance Army. But that is—you are right in the garden spot of 

the Great Lakes Region of all of Africa. The friendship the United 

States has with Uganda has grown since the 1986 election, and we 

appreciate the improvements in democracy that have been made 

there. I look forward to hearing your comments, not only about our 

relationship, but also about any comments you have on Joseph 

Kony and the advisors we have deployed in that country. 

So, on behalf of the people of Georgia that I represent, thank you 

for your willingness to serve the country, and I look forward to 

your testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Isakson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA

Thank you, Chairman Coons. I am pleased to join you in welcoming Ambassador 

Scott DeLisi, Mr. Michael Raynor, and Ms. Makila James to the committee. I appreciate this opportunity to discuss your nominations and discuss our bilateral relationships with Benin, Swaziland, and Uganda. All three countries present many opportunities and challenges. 

Last June, Chairman Coons and I had the opportunity to visit Benin to engage 

Benin’s Government on the ongoing investigation into the murder of a young Georgian named Kate Puzey who was killed while serving as a Peace Corps Volunteer 

in northern Benin. Finding justice for Kate and her family has been a priority of 

mine and I am thankful for the U.S. mission to Benin and the Government of Benin 

for their cooperative efforts and continued dedication to pursuing justice. The current U.S. Ambassador to Benin, James Knight, has been a great advocate for the 

United States, particularly for the Puzey family, and I have greatly appreciated his 

efforts during his term. 

President Yayi’s continuing reform efforts in Benin are helping to develop its 

economy and his collaborative efforts with fellow ECOWAS leaders have seen Benin 

emerge as a leader on the issues important to West Africa. In December 2011, Benin 

was declared eligible for a second compact with the Millennium Challenge Corporation. This compact would allow Benin to continue the development of the Port of 

Cotonou which is crucial to economic growth for Benin. 

While I have not had the chance to visit Swaziland or Uganda, I am well aware 

of some of the challenges facing the nominees if they are confirmed. Swaziland, with 

the world’s highest HIV infection rate, has been the recipient of much U.S. assistance to turn the tide of the growth of that rate. As we consider U.S. commitments 

to global health, it is important to understand the strategy for implementation of 

U.S. global health programs in countries such as Swaziland. Swaziland has made 

great strides in increasing its ownership over U.S.-funded HIV/AIDS treatment programs, and the next Ambassador will be charged with encouraging the continuation 

of this positive trend. 

President Museveni has been in power in Uganda since 1986 and has helped to 

bring stability and democracy to a country that had experienced years of civil war. 

However, concerns have been recently been growing about a deterioration in democratic rights and President Museveni’s increasingly entrenched hold on the Presidency. 

Located in the troubled Great Lakes Region, Uganda is crucial to regional security 

cooperation. There are currently 100 combat-equipped U.S. military advisors providing training to the Ugandan military in their quest to track down and capture 

Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army. I look forward to hearing Ambassador 

DeLisi’s thoughts on how he plans to continue to engage the Government of Uganda 

on our shared interest of regional stability and security. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for calling this important hearing. I look forward 

to hearing the testimonies of the nominees.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Senator. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

225

I now look forward to hearing from our nominees, starting with 

Ambassador DeLisi, followed by Ms. James, and finally Mr. 

Raynor. 

Please start, if you would, by introducing your families or anyone 

else you would like to recognize that is here in support of you. And 

I would like to also start by thanking both you and your families 

and circle of friends and supporters for sustaining your long 

careers in service to the United States. 

Ambassador. 

STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT DELISI, OF MINNESOTA,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA 

Ambassador DELISI. Thank you, Senator, and I am honored to 

introduce my wife, Leah, who has been a partner in diplomatic 

service to our Nation for decades, and probably a better diplomat 

than I am. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am 

deeply honored to appear before you today as the nominee to be the 

next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda. I am 

grateful to the President and the Secretary of State for their confidence and their support. 

Uganda is a vital partner in a volatile region. As the major troop 

contributor to the African Union mission in Somalia, AMISOM, 

Uganda has made tremendous sacrifices to promote peace and stability in the Horn of Africa. 

The Ugandan military has also led regional efforts to counter the 

Lord’s Resistance Army. Although the LRA has not been active in 

Uganda since 2006, it continues to cast a wide shadow across Central Africa. The United States has supported Uganda’s constructive 

role both in AMISOM and against the LRA. Most recently, we 

deployed a small number of U.S. military personnel to serve as 

advisors to Uganda’s counter LRA forces and those of other regional partners. 

Uganda has also contributed to the peace and development in 

South Sudan, Africa’s newest nation and Uganda’s neighbor to the 

north, by providing training and assistance to its civil service, judiciary, and military. 

Uganda stands out not only for its current contributions to 

regional peace and security, but also for its own transition from a 

state in chaos to one of the region’s most stable nations. When 

President Yoweri Museveni came to power in 1986, after decades 

of violent internal strife in Uganda, he instituted political reforms 

and sound macroeconomic policies that created a more inclusive 

government and contributed to steady economic growth. 

Against this backdrop, the United States has enjoyed a close 

bilateral partnership with Uganda for the past quarter century. We 

recognize, however, that we must continue to work with Uganda to 

address a number of ongoing challenges in terms of broad economic 

development and the nurturing of a democratic political culture. 

On the development front, we have a robust set of programs. The 

President’s Feed the Future initiative focuses on improving productivity and incomes in the agriculture sector on which 70 percent of 

Uganda’s citizens rely for their livelihoods. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

226

Another area of focus has been Northern Uganda where we pro- vided $102 million last year to help the region’s people, including 

many former LRA abductees, rebuild their lives and communities. 

The health sector is another challenge. Although HIV/AIDS prevalence rates have decreased from a high of 20 percent in the 1990s, 

they have stagnated at around 6 percent for the past decade. 

Malaria is another lethal threat in Uganda, causing an estimated 

100,000 deaths per year. 

There are also very significant challenges in the area of maternal 

and child health. Through the Global Health Initiative, the President’s emergency plan for AIDS relief, the President’s malaria initiative, we are working the Ugandan Government to improve the 

quality and accessibility of health services and to address Uganda’s 

most pressing health concerns. 

We recognize, however, that long-term success will require a significant and sustained commitment from the Ugandan Government. If confirmed, I will continue to reinforce this point and seek 

to build an even more effective partnership with the Ugandan Government, civil society, and faith-based groups in the areas of economic development and health. 

We are also working to help Uganda strengthen its multiparty 

democracy and reinforce its respect for human rights. Although 

Uganda’s electoral process last year was more transparent and 

peaceful than previous elections, it was carried out on an uneven 

playing field and fraught with irregularities. More can be done to 

improve and empower Uganda’s governing institutions, and we will 

continue our efforts in that regard. Likewise, we continue to urge 

the Ugandan Government and civil society to respect not just 

political freedoms, but also the fundamental human rights of all 

individuals. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, the protection of U.S. citizens and U.S. business interests in Uganda will be one of my foremost concerns for my team and for me. 

In sum, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will seek to strengthen our 

partnership with Uganda as a force for regional peace and security. 

I will also work with the government and people of Uganda in pursuit of a healthier, more productive, and more prosperous society 

where protection of citizens’ political and personal freedoms is a 

priority for all. Achieving these objectives will be critical to Uganda’s future stability and economic growth, as well as its continued 

role as an important and constructive regional leader. 

I look forward to the opportunity to serve our Nation and 

Uganda if confirmed, and welcome any questions that the committee may have. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador DeLisi follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR SCOTT DELISI

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am deeply honored to appear 

before you today as the nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to the 

Republic of Uganda. I am grateful to the President and Secretary of State for their 

confidence and support. 

Uganda is a vital U.S. partner in a volatile region. As the major troop contributor 

to the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), Uganda has made tremendous 

sacrifices to promote peace and stability in the Horn of Africa. The Ugandan military has also led regional efforts to counter the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

227

Although the LRA has not been active in Uganda since 2006, it continues to cast 

a wide shadow across central Africa. 

The United States has supported Uganda’s constructive role both in AMISOM and 

against the LRA. Most recently, we deployed a small number of U.S. military personnel to serve as advisors to Uganda’s counter-LRA forces and those of other 

regional partners. Uganda has also contributed to peace and development in South 

Sudan, Africa’s newest nation and Uganda’s neighbor to the north, by providing 

training and assistance to its civil service, judiciary, and military. 

Uganda stands out not only for its current contributions to regional peace and 

security but also for its own transition from a state in chaos to one of the region’s 

most stable nations. When President Yoweri Museveni came to power in 1986 after 

decades of violent internal strife in Uganda, he instituted political reforms and 

sound macroeconomic policies that created a more inclusive government and contributed to steady economic growth. Against this backdrop, the United States has enjoyed a close bilateral partnership with Uganda for the past quarter century. 

We recognize, however, that we must continue to work with Uganda to address 

a number of ongoing challenges in terms of broad economic development and the 

nurturing of a democratic political culture. 

On the development front, we have a robust set of programs. The President’s Feed 

the Future Initiative focuses on improving productivity and incomes in the agriculture sector, on which 70 percent of Uganda’s citizens rely for their livelihoods. 

Another area of focus has been northern Uganda, where we provided $102 million 

last year to help the region’s people, including many former LRA abductees, rebuild 

their lives and communities. 

The health sector is another challenge. Although HIV/AIDS prevalence rates have 

decreased from a high of 20 percent in the 1990s, they have stagnated at around 

6 percent for the past decade. Malaria is another lethal threat in Uganda, causing 

an estimated 100,000 deaths per year. There are also very significant challenges in 

the area of maternal and child health. Through the Global Health Initiative, the 

President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and the President’s Malaria Initiative, 

we are working with the Ugandan Government to improve the quality and accessibility of health services and to address Uganda’s most pressing health concerns. 

We recognize, however, that long-term success will require a significant and sustained commitment from the Ugandan Government. If confirmed, I will continue to 

reinforce this point and seek to build even more effective partnerships with the 

Ugandan Government, civil society, and faith-based groups in the areas of economic 

development and health. 

We are also working to help Uganda strengthen its multiparty democracy and 

reinforce its respect for human rights. Although Uganda’s electoral process last year 

was more transparent and peaceful than previous elections, it was carried out on 

an uneven playing field and fraught with irregularities. More can be done to 

improve and empower Uganda’s governing institutions, and we will continue our 

efforts in that regard. Likewise, we continue to urge the Ugandan Government and 

civil society to respect not just political freedoms but also the fundamental human 

rights of all individuals. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, the protection of U.S. citizens and U.S. business interests in Uganda will be one of the foremost concerns for my team and for 

me. 

In sum, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will seek to strengthen our partnership 

with Uganda as a force for regional peace and security. I will also work with the 

government and people of Uganda in pursuit of a healthier, more productive, and 

more prosperous society where protection of citizens’ political and personal freedoms 

is a priority for all. Achieving these objectives will be critical to Uganda’s future stability and economic growth, as well as its continued role as an important and constructive regional leader. 

I look forward to the opportunity to serve our nation in Uganda if confirmed, and 

I welcome any questions the committee may have.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador DeLisi. 

Ms. James. 

STATEMENT OF MAKILA JAMES, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF SWAZILAND 

Ms. JAMES. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is 

a great privilege and honor to appear before you today as President 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

228

Obama’s nominee to be the Ambassador to the Kingdom of Swaziland. 

I am extremely pleased to have my family here with me—my 

husband, Louis Welles; my son, Mandela; and several close friends. 

They have always provided me with unwavering love and support 

throughout my Foreign Service career, and I am most grateful to 

them. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you 

and the honorable members of this committee to advance U.S. 

interests in Swaziland. I am confident that based on my 24 years 

in the Foreign Service, I am prepared for the challenges of leading 

our efforts to strive for an HIV-free generation, promote democracy 

and good governance, support respect for human rights and the 

rule of law, and foster sustainable development in Swaziland. 

Swaziland is an extraordinary country and a valued partner to 

the United States. As one of the few resident diplomatic missions 

in the Kingdom, we have a unique opportunity to engage directly 

and to influence the government on issues of shared strategic interest. We must take advantage of the opportunity to do so as Swaziland faces an uncertain future. 

After decades of absolute monarchy, the government’s initial 

efforts to expand political freedoms have slowed. Swazi citizens 

have limited ability to engage meaningfully in politics, and basic 

rights, such as freedom of assembly, speech, and press are restricted. A deeply traditional society that prides itself on stability, 

the Kingdom is beset by modern problems: fiscal shortfalls, a devastating HIV/AIDS rate, and the need for political change toward 

a more inclusive democratic system. Despite these serious challenges, I am confident that progress remains possible, and that we 

must work diligently to pursue our goals in Swaziland. 

If confirmed, I will serve during a crucial moment in Swazi history. Under my guidance, the U.S. Embassy would continue to advance democracy in Swaziland by encouraging support for key government institutions, including Parliament and the judiciary. We 

will support civil society, labor unions, the media, and other institutions that hold the government accountable, in particular in the 

run up to the 2013 parliamentary elections, a possible turning 

point in Swaziland’s future. 

I would also work closely with the Government of the Kingdom 

of Swaziland and civil society to enhance the status of women and 

children—a critical area of engagement to help address HIV/AIDS 

and uphold universal human rights. Like many Swazis, I, too, am 

convinced that there is no fundamental tradeoff between democracy 

and tradition, that Swazis can be both proud of their culture and 

proud of their freedom. Perhaps the greatest threat to Swaziland’s 

future, however, lies in the health of its people. Swaziland has the 

most severe national HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis crisis in the world 

with a prevalence rate of 26 percent and a life expectancy of only 

43 years. 

The United States is helping Swaziland fight the HIV/AIDS epidemic by providing resources under the President’s Emergency 

Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR. The PEPFAR budget for Swaziland 

has risen from roughly $9 million in 2007 to $33 million in 2011. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

229

To stem the tide of HIV/AIDS and help improve aid effectiveness, 

the U.S. Government has signed a Partnership Framework Agreement with the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland that has 

contributed significantly to Swaziland’s prevention of mother-tochild transmission and HIV/AIDS treatment programs, amongst 

some of the most effective in all of Africa. 

The aim now is to strengthen public health and community systems to sustain the response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic beyond the 

PEPFAR program lifespan. If confirmed, I will work to increase 

Swazi Government accountability and capacity to combat HIV/

AIDS while promoting Swazi-led efforts to create an HIV-free generation. 

The Government of Swaziland is also challenged by a fiscal crisis 

that has hampered its ability to operate effectively. If confirmed, I 

will continue our work with the Swazi Government to promote economic reforms, provide technical assistance, and encourage fiscal 

transparency and accountability. In addition, I will promote labor 

reform and provide other guidance for Swaziland to remain eligible 

for African Growth and Opportunity Act benefits, and I will advocate for U.S. businesses who are seeking to enter the Swazi 

market. 

As a rotating chair of regional organizations, including the 

Southern African Development community and the African Union, 

Swaziland is important to United States interests as it wields significance influence despite its small size. It is critical to our 

regional strategic interests that we ensure that Swaziland remains 

stable. 

Fortunately, the United States-Swazi bilateral relationship is 

strong. There is no greater evidence of our friendship than the 

vibrant Peace Corps program through which 66 American volunteers are currently engaged in community health, HIV/AIDS prevention programs, and youth development. Encouraged by the 

mutual respect our two nations share, and energized by the challenges that lie ahead, I look forward to serving as Ambassador to 

Swaziland if confirmed. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank 

you for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I will be 

happy to answer any questions you have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. James follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MAKILA JAMES

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a great privilege and honor 

for me to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be Ambassador 

to the Kingdom of Swaziland. I am extremely pleased to have my family here with 

me—my husband, Louis Wells, and my son, Mandela. They have always provided 

me with their unwavering love and support throughout my Foreign Service career 

and I am most grateful to them. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you and the honorable 

members of this committee to advance U.S. interests in Swaziland. I am confident 

that based on my 24 years in the Foreign Service I am prepared for the challenges 

of leading our efforts to strive for an HIV-free generation, promote democracy and 

good governance, support respect for human rights and the rule of law, and foster 

sustainable development in Swaziland. I have spent the vast majority of my Foreign 

Service career working in or on Africa. I have served as Principal Officer in Juba, 

Southern Sudan; Political Officer in Harare, Zimbabwe; and Political/Economic Officer in Kaduna, Nigeria; as well as Desk Officer for Sierra Leone and The Gambia; 

International Relations Officer for Africa in the United Nations Security Council; 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

230

and a Member of the Secretary of State’s Policy Planning Office responsible for 

Africa. I believe that my experiences in Zimbabwe, a country still in transition 

toward greater democratization, has especially prepared me to serve as the U.S. 

Ambassador to Swaziland as it confronts similar challenges in expanding democracy. My overall experiences in each of these assignments has prepared me to serve 

in a difficult environment and afforded me a broad knowledge of the region and 

people. 

In my current position as Director of Caribbean Affairs, I have led my staff in 

supporting U.S. policy in the 14 countries and several independent territories for 

which I am responsible, helping to strengthen democratic institutions, address 

major threats to citizen security, promote human rights, and encourage economic 

development. I have also served as Deputy Director and Acting Director of the Office 

of Southern African Affairs. These positions, as well as my service in Juba, have 

provided me with the important management skills which I would bring to an 

assignment as U.S. Ambassador to Swaziland. 

Swaziland is an extraordinary country and valued partner of the United States. 

As one of the few resident diplomatic missions in the Kingdom, we have a unique 

opportunity to directly engage and influence the government on issues of shared 

strategic interest. We must take advantage of this opportunity as Swaziland faces 

an uncertain future. After decades of absolute monarchy, the government’s initial 

efforts to expand political freedoms have slowed. Swazi citizens have limited ability 

to engage meaningfully in politics, and basic rights such as the freedom of assembly, 

speech, and press are restricted. A deeply traditional society that prides itself on 

stability, the Kingdom is beset by modern problems: fiscal shortfalls, a devastating 

HIV/AIDS epidemic, and the need for political change toward a more inclusive 

democratic system. 

Despite these serious challenges, I am confident that progress remains possible 

and that we must work diligently to pursue our goals in Swaziland. If confirmed, 

I will serve as Ambassador during a crucial moment in Swazi history. Under my 

guidance, the U.S. Embassy would continue to advance democracy in Swaziland by 

encouraging support for key government institutions, including Parliament and the 

judiciary, which engender and uphold democratic values. We would also support 

civil society, labor unions, the media, and other institutions that hold the government accountable, in particular in the runup to the 2013 parliamentary elections, 

a possible turning point in Swaziland’s future. I would also work closely with the 

Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland and civil society to enhance the status 

of women and girls—critical areas of engagement to help address the HIV/AIDS epidemic, support poverty alleviation efforts, and uphold universal human rights. Like 

many Swazis, I, too, am convinced that there is no fundamental tradeoff between 

democracy and tradition, that Swazis can be both proud of their culture and proud 

of their freedom. 

Perhaps the greatest threat to Swaziland’s future, however, lies in the health of 

its people. Swaziland has the most severe national HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis crises in the world, with an HIV prevalence of 26 percent and a life expectancy of only 

43 years. The United States is helping Swaziland fight the HIV/AIDS epidemic by 

providing resources under the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or 

PEPFAR. PEPFAR’s budget for Swaziland has risen from roughly $9 million in 2007 

to $33 million in 2011. To stem the tide of HIV/AIDS and help improve aid effectiveness, the U.S. Government has signed a Partnership Framework Agreement with 

the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland, the second-ever agreement of its 

kind. This Partnership has contributed significantly to Swaziland’s prevention of 

mother-to-child transmission and HIV treatment programs, among the most effective in all of sub-Saharan Africa. The aim now is to strengthen public health and 

community systems to sustain the response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic beyond the 

PEPFAR program’s lifespan. If confirmed, I will work to increase Swazi Government 

accountability and capacity to combat HIV/AIDS, while promoting Swazi-led efforts 

to create an HIV-free generation. 

Compounding the challenges of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, the Government of Swaziland is challenged by a fiscal crisis that has hampered the government’s ability 

to operate effectively. If confirmed, I will continue our work with the Swazi Government to promote economic reforms, provide technical assistance, and encourage 

fiscal transparency and accountability. In addition, I will promote labor reforms and 

provide other guidance for Swaziland to remain eligible for African Growth and 

Opportunities Act (AGOA) benefits, and I will advocate for U.S. businesses seeking 

to enter the Swazi market. AGOA is a critically important program in Swaziland 

that is helping the country address its serious unemployment rate of 41 percent. 

Swaziland is a country that has successfully utilized AGOA and is one of the top 

African exporters of textile to the United States. AGOA employs approximately 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

231

15,000 Swazi workers in the textile sector, many of them women. I would encourage 

Swaziland to demonstrate the continued progress required for renewed AGOA eligibility to ensure its continued access to its trade preferences. 

As a rotating chair of regional organizations, including the Southern African 

Development Community (SADC), and the African Union, Swaziland is important 

to U.S. interests as it wields significant influence despite its small size. It is critical 

to our regional strategic interests that we ensure Swaziland is stable. Fortunately, 

the U.S.-Swaziland bilateral relationship is strong. There is no greater evidence of 

our friendship than the vibrant Peace Corps program, through which 66 American 

volunteers are currently engaged in community health/HIV prevention and youth 

development. As the impact of the Peace Corps Volunteers continues to gradually 

expand throughout 2012, I would focus on working with the in-country Peace Corps 

staff to ensure the effectiveness of this important program—the face of America 

throughout much of rural Swaziland—as well as the safety and welfare of each of 

the volunteers. Encouraged by the mutual respect our two nations share and energized by the challenges that lie ahead, I look forward to serving as U.S. Ambassador 

to Swaziland, if confirmed. 

Mr. Chairman and nembers of the committee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I will be happy to answer any questions you have.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ms. James. 

Mr. Raynor. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL RAYNOR, OF MARYLAND,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF BENIN 

Mr. RAYNOR. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman and members 

of the committee, I am honored to appear before you today, and 

grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for Ambassador 

to the Republic of Benin. 

I am happy to introduce my wife, Kate, my son, Bradley, and my 

daughter, Emma. They have all done America proud through many 

years overseas, and I could not be more grateful for their support. 

I have focused on Africa during 20 of my 24 years in the Foreign 

Service, including 14 years at our Embassies in Congo, Djibouti, 

Guinea, Namibia, and Zimbabwe, and 6 years in Washington, most 

recently as the Executive Director of the Bureau of African Affairs. 

From this experience. From the service I have gained rich experiences upon which I will draw to support U.S. interests if confirmed 

as the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Benin. 

Mr. Chairman and Senator Isakson, I greatly respect the interest 

you have taken in Benin. Your visit last June highlighted important U.S. Government programs, as well as your strong interest in 

achieving justice for Kate Puzey, a wonderful Peace Corps Volunteer who was tragically murdered just over 3 years ago. The 

impressive luncheon you hosted last July for President Yayi and 

three other West African Presidents further reflected your significant engagement in the region. 

The United States and Benin have a strong relationship founded 

on common interests and objectives. Benin is a West African success story and a proponent of values we Americans hold dear. Since 

the early 1990s, Benin’s embrace of democratic pluralism has 

resulted in multiple free and fair elections, including peaceful 

democratic transitions between political parties. And it continues to 

buttress its democratic institutions and procedures. 

If confirmed, I will promote U.S. engagement in support of good 

governance, accountability, and capacity-building within the government and civil society. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

232

Benin has a strong record on human rights. Religious tolerance 

and freedom of expression are hallmarks of Beninese society. Benin 

and the United States have collaborated to promote women’s and 

children’s rights and to counter violence against women. If confirmed, I will build upon efforts to protect Benin’s most vulnerable 

populations. This commitment extends to investing in the health of 

the Beninese people to boost maternal and child health, keep 

Benin’s HIV rate in check, and combat malaria and other diseases. 

Benin and the United States share an interest in countering terrorism and promoting regional stability. Benin’s region presents 

significant terrorist and maritime security concerns. Benin participates actively in U.S. international military education and training 

programs, and has contributed to United Nations’ peacekeeping 

efforts in Africa and Haiti. If confirmed, I will support Benin’s 

capacity to promote regional and global security. 

Since embracing free market principles over 20 years ago, Benin 

has pursued economic reforms and diversification. Last October, 

Benin completed a $307 million Millennium Challenge Corporation 

Compact that improved Benin’s port and increased its citizens’ 

access to entrepreneurial credit, land title, and legal remedies. Due 

to this success, and in light of Benin’s commitment to good governance an economic development, Benin was deemed eligible to develop a proposal for a second MCC compact. If confirmed, I will 

work closely with the Government of Benin toward a second compact, both to enhance Benin’s economic vitality and to promote U.S. 

commercial opportunities in Benin. 

While Benin is indeed a success story, it faces challenges to sustaining and building upon its progress. Benin ranks low on many 

of development indicators, including measures of education, health, 

corruption, personal income, and business climate. The United 

States has a strong stake in helping Benin overcome these challenges, not only for the sake of the Beninese people, but because 

of the value that a democratic, responsible, and economically 

vibrant Benin brings to the United States efforts to promote these 

values more broadly. 

When he met with President Obama in Washington last July, 

President Yayi reiterated his commitment to building upon Benin’s 

strengths, addressing its vulnerabilities, and expanding its positive 

role on the world stage. If confirmed, I will work hard to enhance 

the vital role of the United States in these efforts. 

Any discussion of United States interests in Benin must sadly 

include the terrible murder of Kate Puzey, a tragedy not only for 

her family and friends, but for all who stood to benefit from her 

positive influence on the world. Great good was brought from this 

tragedy through the enactment of the Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act last November, but legal justice is needed as 

well. The United States continues to assist Benin in investigating 

the crime. If confirmed, I will press efforts to achieve justice and 

resolution. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, for 

the opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look forward 

to working with you and representing the interests of the American 

people in Benin. I am happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Raynor follows:]

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

233

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL RAYNOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you 

today, and grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence 

they have placed in me as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of Benin. 

I am happy that my wife, Kate, my son, Bradley, and my daughter, Emma, are 

able to join me today. They have all done America proud through many years overseas, and I couldn’t be more grateful for their support. 

I have focused on Africa during 20 of my 24 years in the Foreign Service, including 14 years at our Embassies in Congo, Djibouti, Guinea, Namibia, and Zimbabwe, 

and 6 years in Washington, most recently as the Executive Director of the Bureau 

of African Affairs. From this service I have gained rich experience upon which I will 

draw to support U.S. interests, if confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to the 

Republic of Benin. 

Mr. Chairman and Senator Isakson, I greatly respect the interest you have taken 

in Benin. Your visit last June highlighted important U.S. Government programs as 

well as your strong interest in achieving justice for Kate Puzey, a wonderful Peace 

Corps Volunteer who was tragically murdered just over 3 years ago. The impressive 

luncheon you hosted last July for President Yayi and three other West African 

Presidents further reflected your significant engagement in the region. 

The United States and Benin have a strong relationship founded on common interests and objectives. Benin is a West African success story and a proponent of values we Americans hold dear. Since the early 1990s, Benin’s embrace of democratic 

pluralism has resulted in multiple free and fair elections including peaceful democratic transitions between political parties, and it continues to buttress its democratic institutions and procedures. If confirmed, I will promote U.S. engagement in 

support of good governance, accountability, and capacity-building within the government and civil society. 

Benin has a strong record on human rights. Religious tolerance and freedom of 

expression are hallmarks of Beninese society. Benin and the United States have collaborated to promote women’s and children’s rights and to counter violence against 

women. If confirmed, I will build upon efforts to protect Benin’s most vulnerable 

populations. This commitment extends to investing in the health of the Beninese 

people to boost maternal and child health, keep Benin’s HIV rate in check, and combat malaria and other diseases. 

Benin and the United States share an interest in countering terrorism and promoting regional stability. Benin’s region presents significant terrorist and maritime 

security concerns. Benin participates actively in U.S. International Military Education and Training programs and has contributed to United Nations peacekeeping 

efforts in Africa and Haiti. If confirmed, I will support Benin’s capacity to promote 

regional and global security. 

Since embracing free market principles over 20 years ago, Benin has pursued economic reforms and diversification. Last October, Benin completed a $307 million 

Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact that improved Benin’s port and increased its citizens’ access to entrepreneurial credit, land title, and legal remedies. 

Due to this success, and in light of Benin’s commitment to good governance and economic development, Benin was deemed eligible to develop a proposal for a second 

MCC Compact. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of Benin toward a second compact, both to enhance Benin’s economic vitality and to promote 

U.S. commercial opportunities in Benin. 

While Benin is indeed a success story, it faces challenges to sustaining and building upon its progress. Benin ranks low on many development indicators, including 

measures of education, health, corruption, personal income, and business climate. 

The United States has a strong stake in helping Benin overcome these challenges, 

not only for the sake of the Beninese people, but because of the value that a democratic, responsible, and economically vibrant Benin brings to U.S efforts to promote 

these values more broadly. When he met with President Obama in Washington last 

July, President Yayi reiterated his commitment to building upon Benin’s strengths, 

addressing its vulnerabilities, and expanding its positive role on the world stage. If 

confirmed, I will work hard to enhance the vital role of the United States in this 

effort. 

Any discussion of U.S. interests in Benin must sadly include the terrible murder 

of Kate Puzey, a tragedy not only for her family and friends but for all who stood 

to benefit from her positive influence on the world. Great good was brought from 

this tragedy through the enactment of the Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act last November, but legal justice is needed as well. The United States 

continues to assist Benin in investigating the crime. If confirmed, I will press efforts 

to achieve justice and resolution. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

234

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to 

address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you in representing 

the interests of the American people in Benin. I am happy to answer any questions.

Senator COONS. Thank you to all three of our nominees today. I 

would like to open our first round of questions by just asking each 

of you in turn if you would, to broadly address what you see as the 

most critical policy objectives for the United States in your country 

of appointment, and, in particular, given our fairly difficult and 

limited budget environment in the coming decade, what you see as 

the means that you will use to focus our partnership, our assistance with these three countries to make sure that they are effective, and what you will be doing to promote trade and responsible 

economic development in partnership between the United States 

and your countries of appointment. 

Ambassador DeLisi. 

Ambassador DELISI. Thank you for the question, Senator. It is 

wide ranging. 

Certainly in your introductory remarks, you touched on the key 

issues, I think, for us in Uganda. They certainly would be part of 

what I would address if confirmed. Strengthening and maintaining 

the strategic partnership that we have and the role that they have 

continued to play in support of bringing peace and stability to both 

the Horn of Africa and the Great Lakes Region is tremendously 

important. We appreciate the sacrifices that Uganda has made, 

especially in Somalia. We want to keep that relationship vibrant. 

But just because we have a strong security partnership does not 

mean that we cannot speak candidly and constructively to our partners about issues of concern, and that includes democracy and 

human rights. You have noted that there are challenges in that 

arena, and that is something that I think that we have to address. 

And on that front, it is not always about resources. We have 

some money that is in our democracy and governance programs 

that is intended to address those concerns, but it is about leadership, and it is about visibility. And I think one of the things that 

an ambassador has to do is be the spokesperson, to be seen as visibly and in a very clear way demonstrating that we care about these 

issues. And that is something that I have tried to do in Katmandu. 

It is something that I would try to do as well in Kampala if I am 

confirmed. 

Equally, as we seek to build strong partners in Africa, prosperous, stable societies, public health issues are critical. We have 

a robust budget there. We are not strained for resources. But I 

think it is imperative, given that it is a resource constrained world, 

that we look at the budget that we have and that we use it in the 

most effective way possible; that we review our programs, make 

sure they are directed toward the support of a comprehensive and 

strategic vision about what we are doing there. 

The other thing that I would hope to be able to do in terms of 

addressing our resources and the constraints is to leverage other 

people’s money. I have found it can be an effective tool in Nepal 

and many of the efforts that we launched. We have provided leadership, but we have not been able to use the resources from partners in the private sector, other diplomatic partners, to support the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

235

issues of concern on which we have led, and I would hope we would 

be able to continue to do that. 

In terms of building the economic relations, the trade relationships, right now we have not a very robust trade partnership with 

Uganda. I would like to see that change, but I know that is not 

going to be easy. It is about building infrastructure. It is about 

addressing some of the fundamentals within the Ugandan economy 

that have to be looked at first before they can be the kind of partner that we might want. And that is what we are trying to do. We 

are trying to look at issues of corruption. We are looking at issues 

related to energy. We are looking at ways that we can strengthen 

the agricultural sector, which is the heart of the economy, and that 

is where we are directing our Feed the Future resources. 

We will continue to do all of that. And meanwhile, once I am on 

the ground, if confirmed, I will be looking to see what other opportunities there are for U.S. business, and we will pursue them as 

strongly as we can. 

Thank you, sir. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador. 

Ms. James. 

Ms. JAMES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As you know, Swaziland does have a very difficult and challenging political environment, and so democracy and governance 

are very high on the agenda for me, in particular. It has been a 

challenge because this is an absolute monarchy. Political parties 

are effectively banned, and basic rights have been severely 

restricted. Nevertheless, there are some signs of positive developments which I would want to take advantage of and really work 

very hard to engage on. 

Swaziland does have democratic institutions. The court system 

and Parliament are targets of opportunity that I think we would 

want to work very closely on. We try to build capacity there with 

the limited program funding that we do have. 

I also think it is important that we engage heavily with civil society and with the government to keep a regular dialogue open and 

to underscore that these are priority issues for the United States 

Government. As Ambassador, I would be very visible, very vigilant, 

in following up on these kinds of conversations with all parties in 

the country. 

We have very limited democracy and governance funds, and so 

it is going to require that we are smart, that we are efficient, and 

that we leverage all of our programs, because within a number of 

our programs, we have the opportunity to build good governance 

capacity. 

Within the PEPFAR program, which is very focused on the 

Health Ministry and the Finance Ministry, we have an opportunity 

to work to build up systems to help address accountability and 

transparency issues. Similarly, with the AGOA eligibility requirements, we have an opportunity to engage with the government on 

a regular basis to encourage anticorruption efforts and political 

pluralism. So, we have vehicles there that we will use, even though 

we do not have dedicated, significant democracy, and governance 

funds. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

236

With respect to promoting trade, I would note that Swaziland 

has actually benefited very much from the African Growth and 

Opportunity Act. They have exported extensively to the United 

States, and that is creating a more prosperous Swaziland. A key 

ingredient for American businessmen who want to operate in Swaziland is the need for a market. They need a purchasing market, 

and so to the extent that we are using AGOA to help build up Swaziland’s own economy and its own income there, that is good for the 

U.S. economy as well. 

There is also a very enabling business environment in Swaziland 

despite the issues we talked about on the political front. There is 

a very good business climate there. Senator Isakson, as you may 

know, Coca-Cola has the largest plant on the continent in Swaziland. They have been there for many years successfully. They are 

a good corporation which exercises social responsibility. They are a 

role model. And I would want to engage with them to think about 

how we could bring in more businesses there. 

So, I think the enabling business environment and working with 

the government on labor issues, would support the kinds of conversations that I would want to have to encourage businessmen to 

look at Swaziland. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ms. James. 

Mr. Raynor, if you would. 

Mr. RAYNOR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, on your question 

with regards to policy objectives, in a nutshell I would say that I 

would see, if confirmed, my objective in Benin to be essentially to 

solidify and build upon the gains that Benin has made, and then 

to look at the obstacles that it faces to further progress. 

As you noted, Mr. Chairman, Benin has established quite a 

strong track record in terms of democracy and good governance, as 

well as human rights. Indeed, it also has established a good record 

with regards to economic structural reforms and sustained rates of 

economic growth. As such, it already serves as something of a role 

model within West Africa and beyond of a stable, democratic 

society. 

I think one thing I would do if confirmed would be to stress in 

diplomacy and public diplomacy that these attributes are things 

that we, the United States, value very highly in Benin, and they 

essentially form the cornerstone of our very positive relations. 

And from that basis, I would then engage with the Government 

of Benin to look at the obstacles to further progress and what we 

may be able to do with regards to formal aid and otherwise to help 

the country overcome them. These obstacles include the need for 

further progress in areas of health and education. Also, the business climate. And I think we would need to look at what we are 

doing with our formal aid, and we would have to make sure that 

evolves in response to gains made, in response to the Beninese own 

assessment of their priorities, in response to what other actors in 

the donor community and the international community are engaging on so that there is complementarity and a sort of a multiplier 

effect to our engagement. 

Certainly growing Benin’s economy, I think, is central to its interests in the future, and I would certainly look for ways to leverage and build upon the gains made through the MCC compact, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

237

which, as you noted, Senator Isakson, markedly improved the Port. 

It both expanded and renovated it. It also addressed some of the 

issues related to the business climate in the country with regards 

to access to credit, access to judicial process. 

So, I think those are gains that need to be solidified and built 

upon. The prospects of a second compact would also be a very 

encouraging prospect. And, more generally, I think we just need to 

look for ways to assist in Benin in diversifying its economy, both 

diversifying its agricultural sector and its broader economy. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Raynor. 

Ambassador DeLisi, if I might, one last question this round, and 

then I will turn it over to Senator Isakson. 

Ambassador DeLisi, have we been doing enough as a nation to 

support the pursuit of Joseph Kony and to be actively engaged in 

the efforts to end the Lord’s Resistance Army? What more could we 

be doing? How can we sustain this effort? And what has the United 

States been doing to help the communities in Northern Uganda 

recover from the impact of the Lord’s Resistance Army? 

Ambassador DELISI. Thank you very much for the question, Senator, and I would like to thank you and your colleague, Senator 

Isakson, and others who passed the resolution yesterday addressing this issue. The sort of leadership that we have seen on the Hill, 

and I do not say this just because I am here before you today, but 

this is important. It sends a powerful message to support what the 

administration is trying to do in pursuit of Joseph Kony and his 

lieutenants. 

And, yes, I think we are doing well. I am very pleased with what 

I have been able to learn in the few weeks that I have been reading. I think we have had a very active engagement and support of 

our African partners, because this is an African-driven initiative, 

and I think that that is a good thing. But we have been active in support. We have provided over $50 

million in assistance over the past 4 years as we have pursued this. 

We have now deployed, as you know, special operations forces to 

support, again, our African partners to give them both the intelligence and operational coordination that is necessary to make this 

more effective. 

We are looking to partner more effectively with the African 

Union, which is it sees now with this issue, and is launching their 

own initiative to press forward. And that is good. I think that will 

be especially important to us in terms of standing up the coordination center in South Sudan, giving us a standing headquarters that 

we can engage with, but also in encouraging the regional partners 

to work together as effectively as we need. 

We can always try to do more, but we know that this is a 

daunting task. Kony and his cadre are in an area the size of the 

State of California in some of the most inhospitable terrain, some 

of the most dense jungle, without roads, without easy access, not 

easy to track. This is a long-term effort. But we believe that the 

governments of the region and that the Government of Uganda in 

terms of its role is committed to staying the course. I hope that we 

will be as well. 

I know that there is pending legislation that was introduced in 

the House that would expand the Rewards for Justice Program. I 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

238

think that that would be a tool that would be very useful for us 

if we could apply the Rewards for Justice Program to Mr. Kony and 

his top commanders, again another step in the right direction. 

We are looking as well to see what we can do in terms of assisting with one of the greatest challenges, and that is mobility, and 

that is something that we will be consulting with, and I will be 

talking to colleagues in the Africa command if I am confirmed, and 

we will look at these issues in coordination with colleagues in 

Washington. 

Finally, turning to Northern Uganda, we provided just last year alone, as I noted in my open remarks, $102 million. We have seen 

that close to 95 percent of the people who were displaced during 

the conflict, of those 2 million people, 95 percent have now 

returned to their homes, to their communities, or are in transitional centers. We are starting to move from humanitarian assistance to more traditional development mechanisms. We are working 

with vocational training, creating jobs, revitalizing agriculture. 

And in that group that we are assisting are many former LRA 

abductees. There is over 12,000 who have come out in the past decade, little more than a decade. And many of them are being 

assisted by our programs in Northern Uganda. But we are doing 

that in partnership with the Government of Uganda, which has its 

own peace recovery and development program for the north, and 

they have been funding it, and they are continuing to do so as well. 

And that is the important part that this is in partnership with 

Africa and with African nations. I think we are making good 

progress. We will continue to do so, I hope. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador DeLisi. We look forward 

to working with you and sustaining our effective engagement on 

this issue. 

Senator Isakson. 

Senator ISAKSON. Mr. Raynor, I want to sincerely thank you for 

your prepared statement and your commitment to the Puzey family. I want to make sure that statement gets in the hands of Kate’s 

mom and dad. They will appreciate the fact that you are carrying 

on where Ambassador Knight began. Senator Coons and I are 

interested in following that and appreciate any communication 

along the way you can give to us as the process of that investigation and hopefully ultimately a trail. But I want to thank you for 

your acknowledgment of the gravity of that situation and your personal commitment to it. 

And I might also say, Ms. James, I want to thank you for mentioning Coca-Cola. Any time somebody mentions the biggest business for my home State, I am always grateful. 

Also, Senator Coons and I visited in Ghana a Coca-Cola water 

project. I do not know if you are aware of what Coca-Cola is doing 

in Africa, but they are investing millions of dollars in clean water 

projects where they put in purification systems, teach the people 

how to maintain the system, charge them 7 cents a day for 5 gallons of water, which is the amount of money necessary to maintain 

and keep the plant in condition. And with clean water being the 

biggest issue, Africa really has, among many, many issues, I would 

encourage you to talk with Coca-Cola about that. But thank you for 

acknowledging them. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

239

And thank you for acknowledging the AIDS problem and the 

AIDS infection rate. And I would only—I read the governmental 

organization of the Kingdom of Swaziland, and it is a kingdom. It 

is not a democracy. I mean, any time the King can dissolve the 

Parliament, you got one person in charge. And I wish you a lot of 

luck with the democracy efforts that you make. 

But I would ask that you, for a second, comment on the fact. One 

thing Senator Coons and I are working on, every time we meet 

with African countries that are in the PEPFAR program, is to get 

the governments receiving—who are in PEPFAR to take over more 

of the human responsibility of testing and delivering the 

retrovirals. The more countries can help—and Tanzania, by the 

way, is doing a great job of that now. The more they can replace 

the manpower that we have been using through NGOs and through 

USAID and through CDC, the more we can put in retrovirals, but 

the less the total cost. So, I would appreciate your comment on 

that. 

Ms. JAMES. Thank you, Senator Isakson. 

First of all, I want to thank you back for your kind words. I look 

forward to engaging with Coca-Cola. I understand they are a good 

corporate partner in the country, and I am very much interested 

to see what more we can do with that partnership. 

With respect to PEPFAR, PEPFAR is a very successful story in 

Swaziland. The program has been active for a while, and it is 

really a partnership with the government. Specifically, you mentioned antiretrovirals. I am really pleased to report that the Government of Swaziland has basically taken over the distribution of 

all the antiretrovirals. So, we are not in the business of doing that. 

We are in the business of capacity-building, working with community organizations, getting more local engagement in solutions for 

the orphans and vulnerable children. The numbers there are just 

astronomical, about 10 percent of the population. 

We are really working at the grassroots level and the capacitybuilding level, and the government has taken ownership of the 

ARV programs. At least since 2010, they have been solely in the 

business of distributing the ARVs. And from all accounts, it is 

going well. It is a multifaceted program. 

As I said, we also have Peace Corps engaged, and I think Peace 

Corps has been doing a great job for us in the rural areas, and they 

are working in partnership, one on one with local leaders in small 

community centers helping to build life skills and helping to deal 

with the needs of orphans and vulnerable children. And so, we 

really have a partnership out in the rural areas through Peace 

Corps as well as PEPFAR staff that is working in the major areas 

engaging with the Ministry of Health. 

So, I thank you, and I look forward to furthering that. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, I thank you. 

Ambassador DeLisi, when you were referring to the north and 

humanitarian effort, I guess you were talking about Gulu or that 

region of Uganda, is that correct? 

One of the big NGOs in Africa is based out of Atlanta. That is 

CARE, and their presence, as I understand it, is pretty complete 

in Northern Uganda. And I am glad to hear we are going from 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

240

humanitarian focus to vocational focus in trying to bring that area 

back, which was so devastated by Kony and his people. 

On Joseph Kony, I say the same thing to you I said to Mr. 

Raynor regarding his passion on the Puzey case. I think it is very 

important that America’s diplomats and America’s politicians speak 

forcefully when we see a human tragedy like what is going on at 

the hands of Kony. I traveled to Rwanda and saw firsthand how 

the world looked the other way. And they paid no attention to a 

genocide that was taking place in that country. 

And I think it is important that we as a country be a leader in 

focusing when we know there is an injustice. And I commend you 

on your passion for that. And when I go to Uganda later on, I 

intend to meet both with the military personnel as well as hopefully yourself or the person that you are succeeding, one way or another, to try and help in any way we can in the Congress of the 

United States to do that. 

And one other question on the South Sudan. I have traveled to 

Sudan and Darfur and South Sudan, or near South Sudan. We are 

grateful that the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was reached, 

but we are scared to death that the South Sudan and the North 

will get into a civil war like what happened in the past. 

You refer to Uganda’s deployment or Uganda’s assistance in 

South Sudan. Can you elaborate on what they are doing to help 

stabilize that area? 

Ambassador DELISI. Senator, I have looked at this somewhat. I 

have not looked at it extensively. From what I have seen, though, 

I know that Uganda has been a longstanding friend of the people 

of the South to begin with, and has supported them through their 

struggles, and now supporting them into independence. 

The support at this point in time is largely on two fronts. One 

is to build an effective government, so they are working on establishing the government institutions, the military, the civil service, 

all of the things that a nation needs to begin to function effectively. 

And this is a challenge when you are starting from scratch in many 

ways. 

They are also involved very much in the economy of the region. 

I know that South Sudan is the major trading partner for Uganda, 

and there is a lot that goes on there. But the nuts and bolts I really 

cannot speak to at the moment. I would have to look at that a little 

bit closer. But this is one of the areas that I know is going to be 

extremely important as we move forward. And, like you, I think we 

all recognize that this is a volatile region. The potential for problems is always there, and it also means the potential for new refugee flows if problems erupt. 

So, it is in our interest and it is in Uganda’s interest as well to 

try to forestall problems, to look at these things, to strengthen 

their regional partners. And that is one of the things that is so 

important to us and why our partnership with Uganda has really 

mattered. It is something that I will work to continue to build if 

confirmed and when I am in Uganda, and I know that we have to 

look across the region broadly, not just at Somalia, not just at 

Sudan, not just at Joseph Kony, but, again, many challenges 

throughout that part of Africa. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

241

And so far, Uganda has been a very good partner for us in addressing them, and I hope will be able to continue that. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, I really appreciate your mentioning it in 

your remarks because you are being named Ambassador, and I 

hope confirmed Ambassador, to Uganda, in fact, South Sudan may 

be a major part of your role as you are in Uganda. That is a very 

nasty neighborhood, and to the east of South Sudan you have got 

Somalia. To the north you have got the North of Sudan, and you 

have got the rebels that are fighting, the Janjaweed, I think they 

call them, in the Darfur area. So, there is a lot of potential for an 

expansion of the bad things that have happened in West Sudan 

and in Somalia. 

And I think engagement by Uganda, which has been a forceful 

player in that portion of Africa, and our support for their engagement to help the South Sudan go from a fledgling democracy to a 

functioning democracy, will be critically important because if we 

fail to do that, we will be confronted with a civil war primarily over 

petroleum between the north and the south, and that would be a 

tragedy. 

Let me just conclude my remarks by thanking the spouses and 

the families of each one of these nominees because an ambassador’s 

job is a team effort. Without your support, they could not do their 

job. Thank you for your support for these nominees. 

Senator COONS. I have one more round of questions. Thank you. 

If I might, just a few more questions for each of our nominees 

today because you each will be representing us, if confirmed, in 

countries I think with great and complex challenges. 

Mr. Raynor, if you might, piracy off the coast of Somalia has 

received a great deal of deserved attention for a number of years 

now. But piracy off of Benin and across the whole West African 

region is also a significant and growing challenge. 

What could we do to more effectively partner with Benin, with 

regional allies, in strengthening maritime security? 

Mr. RAYNOR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You are absolutely right. Piracy on the West Coast of Africa is 

certainly growing as a problem and a concern, and Benin has taken 

actually a leadership role in addressing that. I think it recognizes 

the potential impact of piracy on, for example, its port, which is a 

major economic driver in the country. 

Therefore, it has taken a lead role in trying to develop a national 

maritime strategy that the United States has been providing technical assistance toward. In addition, I think the United States can 

do more to help forge a common strategy between the states of 

Central and West Africa who share that coastline so that there is 

a coordinated approach and a pooling of resources. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. 

Ms. James, AGOA has meant a lot for Swaziland. What can we, 

should we be doing to make sure that AGOA is reauthorized in an 

appropriate timeline, and what impact do you think it might have, 

if, as has sadly often been the case here in the Congress, we wait 

right up until its expiration to deal legislatively with its reauthorization? 

Ms. JAMES. Well, thank you, Senator, for the question. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

242

As I noted, AGOA has been very successful in Swaziland. It is 

one of the major producers of textiles on the continent exporting to 

the United States, and it has had an amazing impact on the 

country. 

About 15,000 people are actually employed, but each one of those 

people supports a very large extended family. So, it has had a 

broad impact in the country as well. It has been a source of stability, and many of those employees are women, and so we would 

like to see that kind of a program stay in place. It has a great impact on the health and the productivity of the country. 

With respect to the annual reauthorization, we have had some 

questions and some difficulties with Swaziland’s status of governance, its levels of transparency and questions of corruption. And 

the AGOA reauthorization process has been an entry point for us 

to engage the government at all levels to talk about addressing 

those issues. 

We have focused heavily on labor rights and practices, and I 

think we can report today that the recent reeligibility decision to 

reapprove their AGOA status was a result of the fact that the 

Kingdom has made some progress, not a lot of progress, but 

progress nevertheless. And we will just keep hammering away on 

the areas of concern still to be addressed. The Government of Swaziland has actually begun to have more conversations with labor 

unions and with the international labor organization. The government has a tripartite standing dialogue that is ongoing on labor 

issues. So, this conversation that we have around AGOA has actually been helping democracy and labor and human rights across the 

board. 

As you may know, the country depends upon imported fabrics. It 

has a third-country preference in place, and that has been very 

important, and that has been a helpful thing for the country. If 

they were to lose that, it would probably have a very devastating 

impact on the ability to continue to operate as they have with 

AGOA. So, it is very important that AGOA remain and that it 

remains strong with all the elements that are currently in place. 

Senator COONS. Well, it is my hope and intention to support proceeding to the AGOA reconsideration as promptly as we can 

because of concerns that we have already heard from a number of 

African Ambassadors. 

Ms. JAMES. That is very encouraging to hear. Thank you, sir. 

Senator COONS. Ambassador DeLisi, there was a tragic murder 

in Uganda, the killing of a gay activist, David Kato, last year. And 

I am concerned about the antihomosexuality bill that has been 

introduced and is proceeding in Uganda. It is one of the more 

extreme such laws being considered around the world because it 

includes the death penalty for homosexual acts. 

I think the opposition in the United States is clear. What do you 

think are its prospects of passage, and, if adopted, what are the 

options you would see in your role as Ambassador? 

Ambassador DELISI. Thank you, Senator. I share your concern, 

and, as you know, our Embassy, our government has been forthright in stating our opposition to the bill. 

In terms of its potential for passage, obviously that is a decision 

that the people and the legislature in Uganda will have to make. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

243

But I think that I find encouraging several signs. First, the Ugandan Human Rights Commission has been very forthright, and has 

spoken out, and has made it clear that this bill as written, and I 

think almost in any form, would be contrary to both the Ugandan 

Constitution and violation of the constitution, and contrary to 

Uganda’s international commitment and obligations on human 

rights. 

Other NGOs and civil society groups have become much more 

vocal and have spoken out strongly on this. I just saw an article 

recently in which some of the LGBT organizations said that their 

dialogue, that the community dialogue in Uganda, has become 

richer as a result of this. And they have seen not an outpouring 

of public support, but at least a greater degree of support for their 

efforts. And those are promising signs. 

I am also heartened by the fact that the Ugandan judiciary overall has shown consistent support for the rights of all communities, 

all the marginalized communities, and that is also promising. 

I hope the bill will not pass. I think most in the international 

community would hope that. I think that there are also many in 

Uganda who recognize that if the bill passes, that it has—there is 

significant potential consequences. The impact on Uganda’s international reputation and standing, the impact on tourism. They are 

very proud to have been named as tourist destination of the year 

for 2012, and it is the pearl of Africa. But this is the sort of thing 

that does have an impact. And so, they have to look, and I think 

they are looking, at the realistic—the practical, pragmatic consequences of this also. 

For us meanwhile, I think that the Secretary has made it clear 

that while we are absolutely committed on these issues, we also 

recognize that it is not always about being punitive or lecturing; it 

is about engaging constructively. It is about educating civil society 

groups, supporting them. It is about getting the right sort of debate 

going, showing people that when the rights of any community within your country are being brought under attack, when you are discriminating against any element within society, all society ends up 

suffering, and everyone’s rights are ultimately at risk. 

Those are the sorts of conversations that we have had that we 

will continue to have, no matter what the outcome of the legislation, even if it is not passed. We need to continue to be affirmative 

in our engagement and be good partners as we discuss these sometimes very sensitive social issues, but issues that have to be 

addressed and recognized, and that the fundamental human rights 

issues involved here are central to any engagement with our partners. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador. 

I, last, would be interested in hearing a little more detail on the 

regional effort in the hunt for Joseph Kony, how the Central African Republics, how Sudan and, in particular, the DRC, have 

responded, how engaged they are with allowing Ugandan troops 

either in their territory or working collaboratively with them, and 

what you see as the critical next steps in this ongoing pursuit to 

remove Joseph Kony and his top lieutenants from the battlefield. 

Ambassador DELISI. Thank you, Senator. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

244

I think the regional effort is going pretty well overall. I had the 

chance last week—we had our global chief of missions conference 

here, and we took advantage of that to sit down with our ambassadors throughout the region and our leadership in the State 

Department to discuss how we are coordinating our efforts and 

what we are finding in the respective capitals in the region. 

I think we are seeing very strong support for the overall goal of 

bringing Kony and his commanders to justice, and that is good 

news because these countries are still being affected. We see the 

continuing impact of the LRA in the DRC, and the CAR, and, to 

a degree, in South Sudan. 

I think that the militaries in these countries are participating. 

They are participating actively. Not all of them have as much to 

bring to the table in terms of resources as the Ugandans have, but 

they have long military experience. But it is improving. And we are 

working with those governments in all four instances to make sure 

that that partnership is right, that we are giving them the 

logistical and other support that they need to be effective in their 

efforts to bring Kony to justice. 

Overall, the coordination between the four countries is good, but 

there is that concern about Ugandan forces at this point in time 

are not entering into the DRC. The DRC asked the Ugandans to 

refrain from coming into their sovereign territory. This was in part 

due to the elections that were coming in the DRC; we understand 

that. I think that is an issue that does need to be addressed, and 

I know the two governments, the governments involved are talking 

to each other. I know our Ambassador in Kinshasa is working on 

these issues as well. I think that with the AU effort, we will also 

have perhaps greater traction in making this happen. 

So, I think that we are moving in the right direction. As I said 

earlier, if we can find ways to bring the Rewards for Justice Program to apply here, that could be a good thing. We will continue 

to look at issues of mobility, and sit down and say—figure out 

what—where we can make the greatest additional value to this 

effort in the coming months. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador. 

Senator Isakson. 

Senator ISAKSON. In deference to Senator Udall, who has arrived, 

I am going to ask one question and then give him a chance, if that 

is all right, Mr. Chairman, to——

Senator COONS. Absolutely. 

Senator ISAKSON [continuing]. Ask a question. But I would—

actually it is not a question. It is an observation. 

When the chairman and I were in West Africa, and, in particular, in Benin, you have got Nigeria, which had its first ‘‘successful’’—and I put that in quotes—democratic election with Goodluck 

Jonathan. And then you have got Benin, and then you have got 

Togo, and then you have got Ghana, and then you have got Cote 

d’Ivoire, I think, is the right—if I got my geography right. 

And one of the barriers to their growth or some of the trade barriers between the countries and the fact that the roads are not 

always open, many times are manned by folks who are collecting 

corruption fees to let you pass. And so many of the goods are perishable—poultry, pineapple in particular, which is so prevalent in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

245

the region and which the chairman and I sat and ate in the middle 

of a pineapple patch one day, and it is the best pineapple I have 

ever eaten in my life. But the problem is it is highly perishable, 

and the roads are not that good. And the barriers to trade are. 

Can you share with us some ideas you might have on expanding 

the trade between countries on the West Coast of Africa so they 

can benefit from their own assets one to another? 

Mr. RAYNOR. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. You are absolutely 

right. It is one of the great hindrances to development in Africa, 

the interconnectivity, or lack thereof, between countries. And certainly these are a lot of countries that are very close to each other, 

and that should have very robust trading relationships, and for 

infrastructure reasons and other reasons, do not. 

Specifically with regards to infrastructure, it is a challenge. It is 

the sort of thing that one could look at as part of the second phase 

of the MCC potentially. I think ultimately it is something that 

requires collective effort, and I think perhaps ECOWAS would be 

a useful partner in that regard. Certainly President Yayi is very 

strongly engaged in ECOWAS. I think issues of economic integration within West Africa are central to his concerns and ECOWAS, 

and I think we would certainly look for opportunities to promote 

that sort of dialogue and to look for opportunities to build those 

linkages, and eventually those physical linkages, to improve those 

trade connections. 

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you very much. And I will defer the balance of my time to Senator Udall. 

Senator COONS. Senator Udall. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I very much

appreciate your courtesy, Senator Isakson. 

First of all, let me just thank Mr. Raynor for bringing up Kate 

Puzey and her—Peace Corps volunteer, her service to the country. 

We know she died in Benin, and we ended up honoring her, I 

think, in terms of naming a bill after her. And thank you for bringing her up. 

You know, Benin recently completed a successful 5-year compact 

with the Millennium Challenge Corporation. How do you think that 

Benin and the United States can build off the successes of this 

partnership and continue to encourage economic development? 

Mr. RAYNOR. Thank you, Senator. Yes, indeed, the MCC was 

quite successful in proving the port and in addressing certain 

aspects of the business climate that have been deficient—access to 

credit, access to judicial process. 

I think the first and most important thing is to build on those 

gains and to make sure they are sustained. I think it is also important that we look for ways to engage with the Government of Benin 

and the people of Benin to boost U.S. commercial engagement in 

the country. Part of that will be looking for opportunities to diversify the economy of the country, which right now is very heavily 

dependent on cotton and to the vagaries of the cotton prices and 

production. So, I think it will be important to work with Benin in 

looking for ways, both to invite and promote U.S. engagement, and 

also for ways that Benin can itself expand its economic base. 

I think also part of that is building the human capacity of the 

people of the country. Right now you have got serious challenges 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

246

with regards to education, with regards to health, and I think it 

will be important to continue to build the capacity of the people to 

be active agents for their own material as well as other gains. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that answer. You know, experts 

estimate that Uganda’s Albertine Basin holds up to 2.5 million barrels of oil. Accessing this reserve could impact both Uganda’s economy and its environment. What steps can Uganda take to ensure 

that should the decision to access it be made, it is done with 

respect to this ecologically sensitive area, and should we be worried 

that Uganda signed a contract with China’s CNOOC given China’s 

record of environmental degradation in the region? 

Ambassador DELISI. Thank you very much for the question, Senator. 

First of all, they are moving forward. They have recently 

approved the decision to move forward, and you have got three 

major companies that will be operating in the Albertine Basin. One 

of them is CNOOC. 

One of the things that we are doing, and we recognize the challenges and the potential for this great potential benefit to Uganda 

could also become a curse. And we all know that this is a challenge 

that has to be addressed. 

We are tackling it in a number of ways. USAID has already 

engaged on these environmental questions and is working with the 

government to talk about if they are going to exploit this oil, how 

do you do this in an ecologically sound way, and how do you protect 

this tremendous natural resource for Uganda? Those partnerships 

will continue I hope. If I am confirmed, certainly it would be one 

of my primary interests to see that they continue. 

Equally, USAID, through some of their programs, is working 

with civil society because civil society’s voice and role in the managing of this and in holding the government accountable in looking 

at these issues will also be important. So, we are working with 

them, showing them what has happened elsewhere, giving them 

the skills that they will need to address these questions. 

But equally, we are working with the government. And through 

our new energy governance and capacity initiative, we are helping 

the government to try to build the legal and the financial framework, the system that they need to manage this resource in an 

effective way, to tie the resources that they are getting to their 

longer term development goals, and to do this in a coherent, effective way, to improve communication between ministries, all of this 

needs to be done. 

I am not familiar with CNOOC’s record in terms of their environmental protection, but I certainly take you at your word that this 

is a concern. And no matter who it is, though, any of these oil companies, as I noted at the outset, this is a very sensitive environmental region. So, we are attuned to this, have already been working on this, and will continue to do so, Senator. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. One other question on Uganda. In 

2010 and early 2011, Uganda’s economy and population suffered 

from high food prices, high fuel prices, and high inflation. In the 

past few months, it is my understanding that these indicators have 

leveled or dropped slightly. Is this a long-term trend, or is Uganda 

suffering from issues of chronic food instability? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

247

Ambassador DELISI. I think that it—from what I have read, and, 

again, I am not yet an expert on all of this. But what I am seeing 

and what I am told is that most economists believe that it will 

level, that this leveling off will continue, that the degree of economic growth we are going to see in Uganda will continue this past 

year, that it was still 5.8 percent. Not quite as robust as in earlier 

years, but still doing well. 

The issue of food security, though, is one that we really have to 

be cognizant of, and this is part of the reason that our Feed the 

Future Program is looking so closely at where we are going. And 

it becomes all the more of a concern because of the high population 

growth rate in Uganda. 

At present, we were looking at a population of 33 or 34 million 

people, but in 20 years it is estimated that that is going to be a 

population of 60 million, and 20 years after that it will probably 

be 90 million. 

So, food security and the sustainability of agriculture becomes a 

crucial factor for us, and this is what we are starting to look at 

very careful, I believe, through our Feed the Future Program. Also 

increasing agricultural livelihoods, the whole agricultural process, 

including agro industries. Again, if confirmed, this is an area that 

I think I will work on because we have to be focusing on this in 

the days ahead. 

Senator UDALL. Great. Thank you. 

Mr. Raynor, you mentioned that Benin’s economy is dependent 

on cotton production, and we all know that in some of these areas, 

cotton production and this crop have been linked to degradation of 

the soil, in turning areas into deserts. And what I am wondering 

is, you know, is there a sustainable way to do this? I mean, is this 

an environmental threat they should be worried about? What, how 

will the United States work with them in order to bolster their 

economy, but at the same time make sure it is done in a sustainable way? 

Mr. RAYNOR. Thank you, Senator. Yes, in fact, Benin has been 

seeing cotton yields over time, and that is certainly—desertification 

is an aspect of the problem they’re facing. I think that is why one 

of the things that Benin really does need to focus on and we need 

to focus on in our engagement with Benin is ways for them to 

diversify their agricultural sector. 

Right now, cotton accounts for 40 percent of GDP, potentially as 

high as 80 percent of exports in a given year. So, really a vastly 

disproportionate bet on one commodity. I think it would be important for us through USAID engagement, Peace Corps engagement, 

there is a component of our Peace Corps activities that focuses 

exactly on issues of conservation and good stewardship of the land. 

I think we can build upon that. We can certainly look for additional 

ways to bring professional expertise to bear, to help the government understand the consequences of overreliance on one crop, and 

to explore opportunities for diversification. 

Senator UDALL. Great. Thank you very much. 

And, Chairman Coons, good to be here with you. And I once 

again, even though Senator Isakson is not here, thank him for his 

courtesies on yielding time. And really appreciate all your hard 

work on chairing the African Subcommittee. I know you are workFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

248

ing hard at that, and spending time in Africa, and also doing a lot 

of visits here with many of the officials that come through Washington. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. And, Senator Udall, I am hoping you 

will join us in a future visit to Africa. It would be great to have 

your company. 

Senator UDALL. I look forward to it. 

Senator COONS. Senator Isakson is well and widely recognized 

for his graciousness and is a wonderful partner in this work. And 

our trip to West Africa last year was memorable. 

Kate Puzey had Delaware roots. Her father was born in Delaware, and there has been a lot of attention paid to that case in 

Delaware as well. And I am really grateful for Senator Isakson’s 

focus and leadership on this. And I know it will produce long-term 

benefits to Peace Corps Volunteers who serve all over the world, 

and who are an important part of our diplomatic and development 

presence globally. 

If you will forgive me, I need to go preside. We have had a thorough and full hearing. I am, again, impressed with the preparation 

and the professionalism, the dedication and the willingness to serve 

of all three of you, as Ambassadors, as nominees to be Ambassadors. It is my hope that the Senate will take up your nominations quickly and confirm you. 

I wanted to thank Leah, Louis, Mandela, Kate, Bradley, and 

Emma, for your patience. And neither Bradley nor Emma fell 

asleep. I am quite impressed. 

I was quite struck when my own children just two weekends ago 

asked me if I knew anything about the Lord’s Resistance Army and 

Joseph Kony, and whether I was going to do anything about it. And 

I reminded them that I chair the Africa Subcommittee, the Foreign 

Relations Committee. They all three expressed quite, you know, 

they were really rather surprised by that and were unaware that 

I did things as I got on the train and went to Washington in the 

morning. 

So, one of the things that has been most inspiring to me about 

the very broad response of tens of millions of Americans and folks 

around the world is how many young people have been inspired 

and challenged by the issue of the Lord’s Resistance Army and the 

hunt for Joseph Kony. And it is my hope that working together, we 

can engage them, and inform, and sustain their concern for African-led solutions to African problems, for an ongoing American 

engagement in responsible, mutual development, and for the kind 

of positive role for the United States and the world that all three 

of you have exemplified in your service, in the Foreign Service. 

With that, thank you very much. 

The record will be kept open for any members of the committee 

who had questions but were not able to join us today. 

And this hearing is hereby adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:35 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

249

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF SCOTT DELISI TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Uganda is the youngest country in the world with approximately 50 percent of the population under the age of 15. If confirmed, what would your strategy 

be to engage with the youth of Uganda?

Answer. I believe it is essential that we continue to engage effectively with the 

youth of Uganda, and, if confirmed, I would hope to emulate what I have done in 

Nepal in that regard. In Nepal, I have used social media (principally Facebook) to 

spark a dialogue with the more than 13,000 young Nepalis who follow that page. 

We have used it to great effect to discuss both U.S. policy and basic issues of development, governance, and economic growth. In addition, we created a Youth Council 

that continues to grow and provides us another platform from which to reach the 

youth of Nepal who, as in Uganda, make up a majority of the population. If confirmed, I would draw on these experiences, including the funding of civil action and 

democracy, building projects through the Youth Council, to deepen our engagement 

with the young people of Uganda. I would also build on Embassy Kampala’s current 

activities, including its outreach to a number of Ugandan universities and to a 

group of 30 Youth Advisors drawn from academia, NGOs, media, and other civil 

society backgrounds.

Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 imposes restrictions 

on assistance to any unit of a foreign country’s security forces for which there is 

credible evidence that the unit has committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. 

Embassies are heavily involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement. If 

confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively implements section 620M?

Answer. Effective implementation of section 620M starts with the selection of host 

country candidates for security assistance. If confirmed, I will ensure that we carefully select units and individuals for U.S.-sponsored training based on their records 

and reputations. I will continue to ensure that Embassy Kampala thoroughly vets 

all individuals and units nominated for training before submitting the vetting requests to Washington for further review. If confirmed, I will make a point to be engaged in, and closely monitor, U.S.-funded security sector assistance and training 

while also ensuring that the Embassy’s vetting of selected candidates continues to 

occur in a thorough and timely fashion.

Question. In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a case in which 

there is credible evidence that a gross violation of human rights has been committed, that assistance will not be provided to units that committed the violation?

Answer. The Department of State does not provide training to individuals or units 

against whom there is credible information of gross human rights violations. Leahy 

vetting is an important tool not only for ensuring that U.S. funding is not used to 

train or assist units or individuals who have committed gross human rights violations, but also for engaging host country military and security forces on the need 

to put in place accountability mechanisms and strengthen respect for human rights. 

If confirmed, I will ensure that we take advantage of any instances where Ugandan 

candidates do not pass Leahy vetting requirements to engage the Ugandan Government in a broader discussion of ways that the Ugandan military and police can 

strengthen respect for human rights and institutionalize accountability at all levels.

Question. What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust 

capacity to gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of 

human rights by units of security forces?

Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Embassy’s vetting process to see if any 

changes are needed to make it more efficient, streamlined, and coordinated across 

the various relevant sections of the Embassy. I will ensure open and regular communication between the Defense Attache ́ Office, Regional Security Office, and Political Section for the purposes of gathering and evaluating information from a range 

of different sources. I will also ensure that our Ugandan counterparts understand 

and take into consideration the vetting requirements when proposing candidates for 

U.S. security assistance, while at the same time encouraging them to institute reform where needed to institutionalize respect for human rights within the military 

and security sector. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

250

RESPONSES OF MAKILA JAMES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Given your previous experience as Director of the Office of Caribbean 

Affairs and Deputy Director of the Office of Southern African Affairs as well as your 

other posts in the field, what lessons have most significantly shaped your approach 

to managing a post like Swaziland?

Answer. Throughout my 24 years as a Foreign Service officer, I have served as 

a Political/Economic Officer in Nigeria, Desk Officer for Sierra Leone and The Gambia, Political Officer in Zimbabwe, Principal Officer in Southern Sudan, as well as 

International Relations Officer for several Africa-wide positions in the Bureau of 

International Organizations Affairs and as a Member of the Secretary of State’s Policy Planning Staff, where I have engaged extensively in promoting democracy and 

good governance, respect for human rights and the rule of law, and sustainable economic development. In each of these positions, I served in or worked on countries 

that have had authoritarian or military regimes, and understand the challenges of 

engaging with such governments while also maintaining a robust dialogue with opposition groups and civil society to support their efforts to press for greater political 

rights and freedoms. 

One of the most important lessons I have learned in working on these issues is 

the necessity to engage all parties to underscore the mutual rights and responsibilities of governments and their citizens to promote democracy and development. The 

United States remains an influential partner for many African governments. Our 

values are respected by their citizens, who look to us to uphold democratic principles 

of good governance and universal human rights—critical elements for ensuring development and stability. My experiences have also impressed upon me the importance of promoting strong democratic institutions, particularly parliaments, courts, 

and independent oversight bodies to ensure transparency and accountability from 

every branch of government. Similarly, my election observation experiences have 

underscored the importance of engaging at all levels to help ensure political pluralism, civic education, and a level playing field before and after voting takes place. 

If confirmed, I would draw upon these experiences to support all elements of the 

mission in actively engaging with government and civil society to help identify opportunities for institutional capacity-building, promote greater budget transparency, 

and strengthen oversight of government activities at every level. A daunting challenge I have worked on in every post, and which is a concern in Swaziland as well, 

is the need to enhance the status of women and children to address the HIV/AIDS 

epidemic, alleviate poverty, and protect universal human rights. I would urge the 

Mission to work closely with civil society organizations to expand their ability to 

participate in dialogue with their government on these fundamental rights. Each of 

my assignments has given me the chance to help promote efforts to expand U.S. 

exports and engage with the local private sector to encourage employment and 

development. I would draw on my knowledge of the many U.S. Government agencies 

responsible for trade and business development, along with State Department resources, to support American companies in the United States and the region who 

are seeking access to the Swaziland market. 

My experiences as the Director of the Office of Caribbean Affairs, in which I am 

responsible for the management, staff and policies of U.S. Government missions 

serving 14 developing countries, along with my experience as Deputy Director of the 

Office of Southern African Affairs and Principal Officer at U.S. Consulate Juba, 

have provided me with strong management skills to support the needs of small 

posts in difficult environments. I appreciate the importance of using limited resources wisely in a tight budget environment by seeking efficiencies and leveraging 

all available program funds to pursue our goals, as well as taking advantage of the 

close proximity of our mission in South Africa to work with their staff to bring activities to Swaziland. Most importantly, in a small mission without a significant 

U.S. security presence, I have learned to be extremely attentive to the safety of all 

Americans employees, as well as U.S. citizens in the country, and to ensure high 

morale within the community. If confirmed, I would bring a positive attitude, broad 

knowledge of American and African culture, and a commitment to public service to 

ensure that Embassy Mbabane is a strong diplomatic presence representing U.S. 

values and interests.

Question. Male circumcision programs have encountered difficulties in Swaziland, 

although in other countries demand has been very high. How would you seek to 

work with the government and civil society in Swaziland to encourage the uptake 

of this important HIV prevention tool?

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

251

Answer. The low level of male circumcision in Swaziland is one of the main drivers of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and it is imperative that we do as much as possible 

to address it. The rapid expansion of male circumcision is a top priority of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) Partnership Framework Plan. 

Since 2008, PEPFAR has contributed to the circumcision of 36,453 men in Swaziland. In 2011, PEPFAR and the Swazi Government launched the Accelerated Saturation Initiative (ASI), which is a comprehensive package of HIV prevention, care, 

and treatment services centered on male circumcision. Its target was to reach 80 

percent of 15–49-year-old men within a 1-year period with male circumcision services (approximately 152,000 MCs). The initiative, however, has fallen considerably 

short of that goal, reaching only 11,331 males. 

The main challenge facing ASI has been the low demand for male circumcision. 

Many Swazi men fear the pain of circumcision, lack information about it, or have 

heard bad stories and myths. To address these challenges, the PEPFAR in Swaziland will restrategize the male circumcision program for 2012 based on recommendations from the recent visit by the Office of the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator 

(OGAC) and the male circumcision Technical Working Group (TWG). Recommendations focused on augmenting the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland’s ownership of the male circumcision program in Swaziland and increasing national leadership. While there was high-level buy-in for the campaign from the Minister of 

Health, the Prime Minister, and King Mswati III, there were challenges with buyin from mid-level officials. More research will be done on the health seeking behaviors of Swazis and exploration of why demand has been low to date, followed by 

greater dialogue with local leaders and government management on the implementation of the male circumcision program moving forward. Increasing dialogue with 

civil society would also help the U.S. Government understand cultural barriers and 

myths that have resulted in low demand for male circumcision in Swaziland. 

If confirmed, I will encourage the augmentation of the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland’s ownership and leadership of the male circumcision program, increase dialogue with local leaders on the implementation of the male circumcision 

program, and increase dialogue with civil society to understand how the program 

can best overcome cultural barriers and how the local community can encourage 

men to seek male circumcision services. 

RESPONSES OF MICHAEL RAYNOR TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Given your experience as Executive Director of the Bureau of African 

Affairs and as Management Officer in Namibia, Guinea, and Djibouti, among other 

posts, what lessons have most significantly shaped your approach to managing a 

post like Benin?

Answer. These experiences have taught me several lessons in building successful 

teams, eliciting strong performance, fostering high morale, and operating effectively 

in small, isolated, and hardship posts like Benin. 

To maximize operational impact and effectiveness at such a post, it is essential 

to engage every element of the mission in establishing clear goals within the framework of administration priorities, and to lead employees as an integrated team in 

pursuit of those goals. 

As at my previous posts, many employees in Benin are relatively inexperienced, 

including some who are new to the Foreign Service and others who are performing 

their current functions for the first time. In such a context, it is vital that employees 

receive the guidance, mentoring, feedback, training, and encouragement necessary 

to promote their professional development and to help them be as successful and 

happy in their jobs as possible. 

From my previous experiences at difficult, remote posts like Benin, I have learned 

that it is equally important to attend to issues of community morale and cohesion: 

ensuring that working and living conditions for employees and family members are 

safe, secure, pleasant, and responsive to the hardships faced; meeting the health, 

educational, recreational, and spousal employment needs of the community to the 

fullest extent possible; and promoting opportunities for community members to benefit both professionally and personally from the dynamic host-country environment 

to which they have been posted.

Question. Though Benin is eligible for trade benefits under the African Growth 

and Opportunity Act, U.S. imports from Benin are typically quite limited. Given 

your previous experience, in what ways would you seek to increase trade between 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

252

the United States and Benin, including efforts to increase U.S. exports to Benin and 

promote American business interests?

Answer. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) is about more than 

trade preferences for African products. By creating tangible incentives for African 

countries like Benin to implement the sometimes difficult economic and political reforms needed to improve its investment climate, AGOA contributes to better market 

opportunities and stronger commercial partners in Africa for U.S. companies. In addition, AGOA advances African regional economic integration efforts and helps promote larger markets and creating trade opportunities for U.S. exports. While Benin 

alone is a relatively small market that might have difficulty attracting U.S. companies, the West African market as a whole is a very attractive destination for U.S. 

trade and investment. 

Over the last several years, Benin has worked hard to increase trade and investment. If confirmed, I will work with my team at the Embassy to support U.S. business interests in Benin and work with the Government of Benin to promote an open 

business environment. Benin successfully completed its $307 million Millennium 

Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact in October of 2011 and was selected as eligible to develop a second Compact. Benin’s success with the MCC program demonstrates its commitment to providing an open and transparent business climate, 

protecting both rule of law and sanctity of contract. One major outcome of Benin’s 

MCC Compact is the revitalization of its port in Cotonou. With improved efficiency 

and infrastructure at the port, we can expect Benin to increase trade regionally and 

hopefully attract more trade and investment from the United States. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(253)

NOMINATIONS OF PETER WILLIAM BODDE, 

PIPER ANNE WIND CAMPBELL, AND DOROTHEA-MARIA ROSEN 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

Hon. Peter William Bodde, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the 

Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal 

Piper Anne Wind Campbell, of the District of Columbia, to be 

Ambassador to Mongolia 

Dorothea-Maria Rosen, of California, to be Ambassador to the Federated States of Micronesia 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jim Webb, presiding. 

Present: Senators Webb and Inhofe. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JIM WEBB,

U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA 

Senator WEBB. Good afternoon. The hearing will come to order. 

Let me begin by saying we are graced with the presence of Congresswoman Hochul here, and she has early votes in the House, so 

I will be as quick as I can with my opening statement to allow the 

Congresswoman to make a statement on behalf of one of our nominees and then we will get this hearing in the books. 

As everyone here knows, the confirmation process for senatorially 

approved positions is a very intricate and often lengthy process. I 

have gone through it twice myself, first as Assistant Secretary of 

Defense and then as Secretary of the Navy. It begins with the vetting of people inside the executive branch and then with very 

detailed examinations of all different parts of individuals’ experiences and qualifications by committee staff over here. So this is 

simply the second-to-the-last hurdle to be overcome before people 

who have given great service to our country have the opportunity 

to do that in a different, and I am not going to say more important 

way, but certainly ‘‘very important to the country’’ way. 

Today we are hearing the nominations of Ms. Piper Campbell to 

be Ambassador to Mongolia, Ms. Dorothea-Maria Rosen to be U.S. 

Ambassador to the Federated Sates of Micronesia, the Honorable 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

254

Peter Bodde to be Ambassador to the Federal Democratic Republic 

of Nepal. 

Asia is a vast region with more than half the world’s population 

and is of vital importance to the United States. Countries in this 

region differ economically, culturally, and in their governmental 

systems. The pursuit of democratic governance faces significant difficulties whether in consolidating a democratic transition or improving public accountability. However, while Asia’s democracies 

may be challenged, they are seeking to thrive. Mongolia, Micronesia, and Nepal are no different. 

Mongolia, landlocked between Russia and China on the Asian 

Continent, has long sought to maintain its independence, officially 

proclaiming it in 1911 from China. Nearly 80 years later in 1990, 

Mongolia held its first multiparty elections, a development in sharp 

contrast to other countries in the region. With a population of less 

than 3 million, it has continued to pursue a democratic path. This 

year is President of the Community of Democracies, an intergovernmental coalition of democratic countries. 

Consequently, the United States has become an important third 

neighbor to Mongolia, supporting its democratic development. This 

year, we celebrate the 25th anniversary of the establishment of our 

diplomatic relations. Because of its reforms, Mongolia was one of 

the first countries eligible for the Millennium Challenge Account 

initiative. The United States and Mongolia signed a compact agreement in 2007, worth $285 million, to improve property rights, road 

infrastructure, vocational training, and access to energy by 2013. 

These two countries also share an important security relationship. In particular, Mongolia became the 45th nation to contribute 

troops to the NATO mission in Afghanistan, providing training to 

Afghan national forces, and last year increased its commitment of 

troops from 200 to 400. Mongolia has also supported the six-party 

process to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and bring stability to 

Northeast Asia. 

The Federated States of Micronesia is another important economic and security partner for the United States. We share a bond, 

in part based on our collective history following World War II when 

Micronesia became part of the United States-administered United 

Nations Trust Territory. In 1979, four districts of this trust territory united to form the Federated States of Micronesia, and in 

1986, it entered into a Compact of Free Association with the 

United States. 

The United States and Micronesia share a distinctive relationship through this compact. The United States provides economic 

assistance and security guarantees. Micronesia provides rights for 

the United States to operate military bases in the former territories. Micronesian citizens have the right to reside and work in 

the United States as lawful nonimmigrants, allowing entry into the 

United States without a visa. I am interested to know more about 

the mechanics of this process and its impact on Micronesia, with 

a population of some 100,000 people. 

Micronesia’s geostrategic position is important to the United 

States, as well as for the region. The United States is a key 

balancing force in the region, and it is incumbent upon us to 

strengthen our relationships and promote security and economic 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

255

development in the Pacific. It is also important to note that Micronesia is a democratic partner for the United States in this region. 

It is in the United States interest to support this role in terms of 

regional democracy. 

Nepal, another landlocked country, located between China and 

India, is still striving toward a system of democratic governance. 

Peace only came to this South Asian nation in 2006 following a decade-long insurgency led by Nepal’s Maoists-Communist Party. At 

the time of this committee’s last consideration of Nepal, a coalition 

government had formed and Nepal faced a considerable task in 

consolidating its newly formed parliamentary system. 

Currently Nepal is confronting a May 27 deadline for the completion of its new constitution, and reports of protests around this 

event are troubling. Nepal sits in a prominent geostrategic position 

with a population of nearly 30 million. It is in the United States 

interest to bolster the democratic process in an inclusive manner 

and to promote stability within the country. 

Nepal is a threshold country for a Millennium Challenge 

Compact and, with further reforms, will become eligible for this 

assistance. Such a development would not only promote economic 

growth and democratic governance within Nepal, but would also 

strengthen the United States-Nepal relationship. 

We look forward to discussing these and other issues with our 

nominees today. 

I would like to begin by welcoming Ms. Piper Campbell, the 

nominee to be the Ambassador to Mongolia. Prior to this assignment, Ms. Campbell was consul general in Basrah, Iraq. She has 

also served as Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of State for 

Management, as an advisor on Asian issues at the U.S. mission to 

the United Nations. Her overseas postings include Geneva, Croatia, 

Brussels, Cambodia, and Manila. Ms. Campbell speaks French, 

Cambodian, Serbo-Croatian, and Japanese. 

Second, I would like to introduce Ms. Dorothea-Maria Rosen, the 

nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Micronesia. She is currently 

a Diplomat in Residence at the University of Illinois in Chicago. 

Her previous overseas assignments include Frankfurt, Berlin, 

Stuttgart, Bern, Reykjavik, Bucharest, Accra, Manila, and Seoul. 

Ms. Rosen is a lawyer, a member of the California State Bar, and 

served in the Army as a JAG Corps captain. She speaks German, 

French, and Romanian. 

And last, I would like to introduce the Honorable Peter Bodde, 

the nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Nepal. Mr. Bodde currently is the assistant chief of mission for assistance transition at 

the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. He previously served as the U.S. 

Ambassador to Malawi and as the deputy chief of mission at the 

U.S. Embassy in Islamabad. His other overseas postings include 

Frankfurt, Hamburg, New Delhi, Copenhagen, Sofia, and Guyana. 

He is no stranger to Nepal where he worked as a budget and fiscal 

officer as deputy chief of mission at the Embassy. Mr. Bodde 

speaks German, Bulgarian, and Nepali. 

Again, I would welcome all of you here today and encourage all 

of you to speak English as we go through the hearing. We have a 

tremendous respect for all of the linguistic skills that are at the 

table. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

256

And Congresswoman Hochul, I am appreciative of you for waiting for us to finish the opening remarks, and the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF HON. KATHY HOCHUL,

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK 

Ms. HOCHUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the

courtesy. 

On behalf of a very proud western New York community, I am 

honored to introduce nominee Piper Anne Wind Campbell who was 

born and raised in Buffalo, NY. I have known Ms. Campbell and 

her family, her parents in particular, David and Gay Campbell, for 

decades since she was a little girl. I am confident that her upbringing in Buffalo has prepared her well to handle any adversity, including any weather she might encounter in Mongolia. [Laughter.] 

A graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, 

Ms. Campbell focused her undergraduate work on the Asian region 

and received a certificate in Asian studies. Later she received a 

master’s degree in public administration from Harvard’s Kennedy 

School with a specialization in negotiation and conflict resolution, 

certainly skills that will serve her well in her new capacity. 

Ms. Campbell has outstanding professional and academic qualifications for this post. A senior Foreign Service officer with 22 

years of experience, Ms. Campbell currently serves as the consul 

general in Basrah, southern Iraq, one of our largest and certainly 

our most trying overseas posts. 

She has completed several tours with an Asian focus, as previously stated, including tours as the deputy chief of mission in 

Cambodia, an expert on Asian issues with the U.S. mission to the 

United Nations, counselor of humanitarian affairs in Geneva during the Asian tsunami, and a first tour as a consular and management officer at the U.S. Embassy in Manila. 

She has demonstrated her skills as a manager in Cambodia and 

Basrah, as well as her command over complex policy issues as 

Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of State and, earlier, in wartorn Croatia. 

Many years ago as an attorney on the staff of Senator Daniel 

Patrick Moynihan, I guided Ms. Campbell in applying for an internship with the Senator’s office. So I also know she understands 

the important role the Senate plays in foreign affairs issues. 

The Campbells have instilled in her a belief that we should look 

out for our neighbors, not just here in the United States, but 

abroad as well. In 2004, her father started All Hands—hands.org—

an organization that assists international communities affected by 

national disasters. Working with her parents, she certainly has a 

firsthand understanding of the importance of reaching out to and 

uniting the global community. 

Ms. Campbell has the skills, the energy, and aptitude to represent the United States in engaging with an important partner 

Mongolia. She truly represents all that is good and noble about 

public service, and I am confident that she will be a phenomenal 

U.S. Ambassador on behalf of our great country. 

Thank you very much, and I have to go vote. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much for being with us today, 

Congresswoman Hochul. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

257

Just for the record, Daniel Patrick Moynihan was one of my 

great political heroes. As you are on your way out the door, I have 

to say when I was talking to Bob Kerrey about running for the 

Senate, he knew that I had a previous career as a writer, and he 

said Senator Moynihan wrote a book every year he was in the Senate. I have not been able to quite keep up with the example that 

he set. 

Senator INHOFE. Let me chime in here, too, if I could, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. Senator Inhofe. 

Senator INHOFE. He was born and raised next door to me in 

Tulsa, OK. You probably did not know that. 

Senator WEBB. I knew he was born in Oklahoma. I did not know 

that you were in propinquity. 

Ms. HOCHUL. Well, thank you very much. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Congresswoman. 

I think we will proceed from Ms. Campbell to my left or your 

right. Welcome. 

Let me make a couple of quick points here. First is that your full 

statement will be entered into the record at the end of your oral 

statement. Second, please feel free to introduce anyone who has 

come to share this day with you, family, people who are close to 

you, whatever. And the floor is yours. 

Senator Inhofe, did you want to make any kind of an opening 

statement before we proceed? 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE,

U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA 

Senator INHOFE. Well, yes. It will be very brief. 

First of all, I had a chance to speak to Mr. Bodde, and I appreciate that very much. We have Africa and airplanes in common. So 

we had a chance to visit. 

And I apologize to you, Ms. Rosen, because we had it set up and 

you met with staff because we had a vote during the time you were 

in. And I have had a chance to look at both of you and all three 

of you and I am very much impressed. 

I would only say this. There is one thing that I thought maybe 

it is something we can look into. But I noticed, Ms. Campbell, I 

think it is the first time in the 22 years that I have been here that 

a career person makes political contributions to candidates, and I 

have never seen that before. And I understand that you have made 

considerable campaign contributions to candidates. They are checking. I do not think there is anything illegal about it, but I have just 

never seen it before. And that is something that perhaps you can 

maybe address during your comments. 

That is all. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator Inhofe. 

Ms. Campbell, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF PIPER ANNE WIND CAMPBELL, OF THE 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO MONGOLIA 

Ms. CAMPBELL. Senator Webb, Senator Inhofe, thank you very 

much. It is an honor to appear before you as President Obama’s 

nominee to be Ambassador to Mongolia. I am deeply grateful for 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

258

the confidence the President and Secretary Clinton have shown in 

me. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with this committee to build on the already strong ties between the United 

States and Mongolia. 

I want to thank Congresswoman Hochul for introducing me. 

Although the Foreign Service has taken me far from Buffalo, my 

roots there are deep. As the Congresswoman said, she helped 

arrange my internship with Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan 

whose passion for foreign policy was one of the things that shaped 

my path of service which has taken me from the Philippines to Iraq 

and many places in between. 

The other thing that shaped my path has been the support of my 

family, and I want particularly, publicly, to express my love and 

gratitude to my parents, David and Gay Campbell, who are here, 

along with friends and neighbors from the District who I am 

pleased to have sitting behind me. My siblings and their spouses, 

my nieces, nephews, and cousins are not here today but they have 

actually visited me in every posting that I have had overseas 

except for Basrah, and I had to insist that Basrah was off limits. 

Senator WEBB. To all your family and friends, welcome. I know 

what a big moment this is. 

Ms. CAMPBELL. This is an exciting year for United States-Mongolian relations as we mark the 25th anniversary of the establishment of bilateral relations. Over that time, our partnership has 

grown stronger so that now this relationship really is about opportunities, particularly on the economic front where Mongolia’s 

resource-rich economy and significant growth potential have propelled it to the top ranks of frontier markets. With large reserves 

of coal, copper, gold, uranium, and other minerals, Mongolia has 

the potential to double its GDP over the next decade, making it one 

of the world’s fastest growing economies. 

As Mongolia’s economy continues to expand, there will be more 

opportunities for United States firms. Already Mongolia is charting 

a growth path for United States exports that puts it among the 

highest of any country in the world. If I am confirmed, our 

Embassy will actively practice what Secretary Clinton calls ‘‘jobs 

diplomacy’’: connecting U.S. industry with the best possible information and advocating on their behalf. Current United States programs in Mongolia, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, as well 

as USAID, Department of Agriculture, and the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, all are focused on helping Mongolia 

to diversify its economy, expand its economic growth, and promote 

trade and investment. 

Any successful market-based economy must operate with openness and transparency, as well as good governance and accountability, but these attributes are particularly important in a situation like Mongolia’s where you are seeing such rapid growth. And 

although the physical environments in Iraq and Mongolia are 

about as different as two countries can be, I think that my experience working on the oil industry in southern Iraq will very much 

shape what I am able to do in Mongolia. 

In the near term, it will be a very important step for the Mongolian Government to sign the proposed United States-Mongolia 

agreement on transparency in international trade and investment. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

259

If confirmed, that would be one of my first efforts at post, to encourage that. 

Last summer, this body passed a resolution recognizing the 

increasingly prominent role the Government of Mongolia has 

assumed internationally. And Senator Webb, you mentioned that 

yourself. Mongolia has dispatched over 5,600 peacekeepers to 15 

different peacekeeping operations, has troops now in Afghanistan, 

and currently chairs the Community of Democracies. 

I spent much of my career representing the United States in 

international fora and focusing on conflict situations. And, if confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to work with Mongolian officials 

to advance our shared interests in these globally important areas 

consistent with Mongolia’s Third Neighbor Policy—by which it actively engages with the United States and others while also maintaining good relations with its neighbors, China and Russia. 

Mongolia’s decision for democracy in the 1990s was a truly 

remarkable development, and the United States has been a consistent and supportive partner on Mongolia’s democratic path. 

While the challenges continue, I believe that Mongolia’s tremendous economic potential and increased participation in multilateral 

fora bring enormous opportunities for further strengthening its 

democracy. 

I know that the rest of my statement has been added in the 

record, and I thank you very much. I look forward to taking any 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Campbell follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PIPER ANNE WIND CAMPBELL

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you 

as President Obama’s nominee to be Ambassador to Mongolia. 

I am deeply grateful for the confidence that the President and Secretary Clinton 

have shown in me, and, if confirmed, I look forward to working closely with this 

committee to build on the already strong ties between the United States and 

Mongolia. 

I want to thank Congresswoman Hochul for introducing me. Although my 22 

years in the Foreign Service have taken me far from Buffalo, NY, my roots there 

are deep. It seemed fitting for Congresswoman Hochul to be here today as she 

helped arrange my internship with the great Senator from New York—a former 

member of this committee—Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Senator Moynihan’s passion 

for foreign policy was one of the things that shaped my path of service, which has 

taken me from the Philippines to Iraq, and many places in between. 

The other thing that shaped my path has been the support of my family. I would 

like publicly to express my love and gratitude to my parents, David and Gay Campbell; my siblings, Todd, April, and Skip; and my nieces, nephews, and cousins, who 

are here. They are an intrepid bunch, having visited me at almost every overseas 

post. Indeed, I am convinced they would have visited me in southern Iraq this past 

year, if I hadn’t consistently told them that Basrah was off limits. 

This is an exciting year for United States-Mongolian relations, as we mark the 

25th anniversary of the establishment of bilateral relations. Over that time, our 

partnership has grown stronger. One of the most exciting things about working in 

Mongolia, if I am confirmed, will be that so much of this relationship is about opportunities. Let me try to explain this better by briefly highlighting some of the key 

areas on which I plan to work, should I be confirmed as the next Ambassador to 

Mongolia. 

Creating opportunities for U.S. businesses in a growing economy: Mongolia’s 

resource-rich economy and significant growth potential have garnered international 

attention and propelled it to the top ranks of what some call ‘‘the frontier markets.’’ 

With large reserves of coal, copper, gold, uranium, and other minerals, Mongolia has 

the potential to double its GDP over the next decade—making it one of the world’s 

fastest growing economies. U.S. goods exported to Mongolia increased an astonishing 171 percent in 2010 over 2009 levels, and in 2011 they rose above the $300 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

260

million mark for the first time. Mongolia continues to chart a growth path for U.S. 

exports that ranks among the highest of any country in the world. 

As Mongolia’s economy continues to expand, there will be more opportunities for 

U.S. firms. If I am confirmed, our Embassy will actively practice what Secretary 

Clinton calls ‘‘jobs diplomacy’’: connecting U.S. industry, small businesses, and state 

and local governments with the best possible information about opportunities in 

Mongolia and advocating on their behalf. I would like to see strengthened business 

ties not only in the mineral sector but also in ‘‘downstream’’ industries as Mongolia’s 

economy becomes larger and more complex and as interest in U.S. consumer goods 

grows. I think it is important to note that current U.S. programs in Mongolia—the 

Millennium Challenge Corporation as well as U.S. Agency for International Development and U.S. Department of Agriculture activities and our Trade and Investment Framework Agreement—also are helping Mongolia to diversify its economy, 

expand economic growth, and promote trade and investment. 

Any successful market-based economy must operate with openness and transparency, as well as good governance and accountability—but these attributes are 

particularly important in a situation of rapid growth, especially when driven by a 

single sector. Although the physical environments in Iraq and Mongolia are about 

as different as two countries can be, I believe that my experience working on southern Iraq’s oil sector and dealing with a region experiencing rapid economic change 

provides excellent preparation in better understanding the issues Mongolia will be 

confronting and the opportunities rapid growth can provide for Mongolia—as well 

as for our growing trade and investment relationship. Certainly, in the near term, 

it would be an important step in the right direction for the Mongolian Government 

to sign the proposed U.S.-Mongolia agreement on transparency in international 

trade and investment. 

Building already excellent international cooperation to mutual advantage: Last 

summer, this august body passed a resolution recognizing the increasingly prominent role the Government of Mongolia has assumed internationally. Mongolia has 

participated in the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; it currently chairs the Community of Democracies and will host the next Ministerial 

Meeting in Ulaanbaatar; and it has been active in international peacekeeping from 

Afghanistan to Darfur and South Sudan, from the Western Sahara to Chad, in 

Kosovo, and in Iraq. Mongolia has dispatched over 5,600 peacekeepers to 14 different peacekeeping operations since 2002, and runs a unique Training Center for 

International Peace Support Operations. 

The United States and the Government of Mongolia share a common interest in 

promoting peace and stability. I have spent much of my career representing the 

United States in international fora and focusing on conflict situations. If confirmed, 

I will welcome the opportunity to work with Mongolian officials to advance our 

shared interests in these globally important areas. As one concrete example: In 

March of this year, Mongolia’s Partnership Plan with NATO was approved, which 

will allow for greater cooperation and assistance to make Mongolia’s military compatible with those of NATO allies. Mongolia already has a history of operating with 

NATO forces in Afghanistan, a history that demonstrates its commitment to global 

responsibility and security. 

Mongolia’s ‘‘decision for democracy’’ in the 1990s was a truly remarkable development: Through its competing political parties, transparent and peaceful elections, 

and respect for human rights, Mongolia can serve as a positive role model for other 

countries in the region and beyond. A quarter of a century ago, Mongolia’s contacts 

with the outside world were limited. Mongolia’s progress over the last 20-plus years 

provides an important and timely illustration of the value and importance of democratic systems. Mongolia recognizes the value of engagement with the United States 

and others in a ‘‘Third Neighbor Policy,’’ while also acknowledging the importance 

of maintaining good relations with its two immediate neighbors, Russia and China. 

The United States has been a consistent and supportive partner in Mongolia’s 

journey to democracy. While this journey has included a number of difficult challenges, I believe that Mongolia’s tremendous economic potential and increased participation in multilateral fora bring enormous opportunities for further strengthening its democracy and ensuring that all of Mongolia’s citizens have a role to play 

in this journey. As Mongolia looks forward to two important elections—parliamentary elections in June 2012 and a Presidential election in 2013—we will continue 

our robust engagement with Mongolia on advancing its democracy, strengthening 

the rule of law, combating corruption, and developing its civil society. If confirmed, 

I will support and increase these efforts. 

U.S.-Mongolian people-to-people engagement: Our current Ambassador in Mongolia has unearthed documents that seem to show that the first U.S. citizen visited 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

261

Mongolia 150 years ago. Although I cannot claim that U.S.-Mongolian people-topeople engagement flourished without interruption from that point, the past decade 

has seen a tremendous growth in U.S. interest in Mongolia (which was ranked last 

year by National Geographic as one of the top 20 places to visit), as well as Mongolian interest in the United States. I understand that two-way travel by Mongolians 

and Americans alike keeps the Embassy’s consular section busy. The visa workload 

has been growing steadily over the last 5 years. We have facilitated educational and 

cultural exchange travel, giving qualified Mongolians the opportunity to experience 

the United States and its people. This supports our bilateral relationship and the 

many areas of mutual interest I already described. I believe that U.S. support, both 

governmental and private, of Mongolia’s cultural heritage sites, media sector, and 

amazing environment also is linked to increased U.S. interest—and to all the new 

associations our ever-more interconnected world engenders. If confirmed, I also 

would be delighted to serve in a country that hosts a vibrant Peace Corps program. 

Our Peace Corps Volunteers are among the best grassroots ambassadors for the 

United States and its values, and in Mongolia they are having a major and lasting 

effect. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it would be the highest honor for 

me to serve our country as the U.S. Ambassador to Mongolia. I joined the Foreign 

Service 22 years ago, coming in with a certificate in Asian studies from Georgetown 

University and a fascination with the region. Secretary Clinton recently predicted 

that the world’s strategic and economic center of gravity in the 21st century will 

be the Asia-Pacific region. She framed one of the most important tasks of American 

statecraft over the next decade as locking in a substantially increased investment—

diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise—in this region. I welcome the opportunity to be on the front lines of that challenge. If confirmed, I will lead a diplomatic 

mission of approximately 200 U.S. and Mongolian employees, representing seven 

agencies. I will do my very best to ensure that all members of that community and 

their families have the leadership, security, and support they need to get their jobs 

done and to engage on behalf of the United States to work with, and benefit from, 

the growth and dynamism so apparent in the Asian region.

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, and your full written 

statement will be entered into the record at this point. 

Ambassador Bodde, I want to start off by saying I apologize here. 

I think I made a mistake in diplomatic protocol. As a former 

Ambassador, is it not true that Foreign Service grade is probably 

the highest at the table? I should have called on you first, and I 

apologize. But welcome. I think you, at least from your written testimony, have some pretty important folks in the audience today, 

important to your personal history. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PETER WILLIAM BODDE, OF MARYLAND, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC 

REPUBLIC OF NEPAL 

Ambassador BODDE. Thank you, Senator. No apology needed. I 

am honored to be here with my two colleagues. We joined the Foreign Service together and Piper and I serve in Iraq together. So it 

is a great honor. 

Mr. Chairman, Senator Inhofe, it is an honor and a privilege to 

appear before you today as the President’s nominee to serve as the 

next United States Ambassador to Nepal. I am grateful for the 

trust placed in me by President Obama and Secretary Clinton. If 

confirmed, I look forward to working with the committee and my 

colleagues in the U.S. Government to further the interests of the 

United States in Nepal and in the region. 

I also want to take this opportunity to express my appreciation 

for the special efforts the committee has made to schedule these 

nomination hearings. Out of respect for the committee’s valuable 

time, I will keep my remarks here brief and will submit an 

expanded statement for the record. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

262

Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce four generations of my 

family this morning: my grandson, Andrew, my daughter, Sara——

Senator INHOFE. Have them stand up. 

Ambassador BODDE [continuing]. My son-in-law, David, who I 

note is an Iraq veteran. And Senator Webb, they are all constituents of yours in Woodbridge, VA. 

Senator WEBB. We appreciate all of you. 

Ambassador BODDE. I would like to also introduce my son, Christopher, who recently started his career at USAID and my father, 

Ambassador William Bodde, Jr. Mr. Chairman, he and I literally 

switched seats today. More than 30 years ago, I sat where he is 

when he appeared before your predecessor, the late Senator Paul 

Tsongas, during my dad’s first confirmation hearing prior to becoming Ambassador to Fiji. Unfortunately, the press of work in Baghdad has precluded my wife, Tanya, from being present today. I am 

very proud of her, and I note that as a career Foreign Service employee, she has accompanied me on my tours, including Pakistan 

and in Iraq. 

Senator WEBB. Well, Ambassador Bodde, will you please take a 

stand here, make a bow? And I will do my best to be easier on your 

son than Senator Tsongas was on you. [Laughter.] 

Ambassador BODDE. As you may already be aware, should I be 

confirmed, this will be my third time representing the United 

States in Nepal. Among the lessons I have learned during my 

career is that the success of every U.S. mission abroad depends on 

a strong interagency effort and a cohesive country team. It also 

requires clear goals, strict accountability, adequate funding, and 

trained personnel. These same critical concepts apply to our bilateral engagement and the delivery of significant levels of U.S. 

assistance at a critical juncture in Nepal’s development. You have 

my full assurances that, should I be confirmed, I will ensure that 

these concepts are an essential element of all mission programs. 

While the generosity of the American people is great, all of us involved in the stewardship of this generosity must be accountable 

for measuring success and failure. 

The primary objective of the U.S. mission in Nepal, of course, is 

to promote and protect the interests of the United States and of 

U.S. citizens who are either in Nepal or doing business with Nepal. 

In addition to that fundamental responsibility, we are working 

with Nepal to promote political and economic development, 

decrease the country’s dependence on humanitarian assistance, and 

increase its ability to make positive contributions to regional security and the broader global community. 

Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world. It faces the 

daunting challenges of consolidating peace after a decade of civil 

conflict, writing a new constitution that will enshrine the values of 

a new federal democratic republic, developing its economy, expanding access to health and education, and improving its poor 

infrastructure. 

Despite these challenges, the Nepali Government has made significant strides over the last few years. The 10-year civil conflict is 

over. The Maoists have not only joined mainstream politics, but are 

heading the current government tasked with completing the peace 

process. And the government has made a meaningful commitment 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

263

to raise living standards and improve the lives of its people. The 

United States is an important and growing partner in this process. 

Our assistance programs focus on governance, antitrafficking, private sector development, basic education and health, disaster risk 

reduction, and human rights training. I am also delighted that 

Peace Corps Volunteers will be returning to the country in September after an 8-year hiatus. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will take a special interest in the 

promotion of Tibetan and Bhutanese refugee rights. This is an 

issue I dealt with the last time I served in Nepal and it is one that 

deserves particular attention. 

In closing, I want to note that anyone who represents the United 

States abroad has a unique responsibility. More often than not, we 

are the only nation that has the will, the values, and the resources 

to solve problems, help others, and to be a positive force for change 

in our challenged world. Being nominated to serve as an ambassador representing our Nation is in itself an incredible honor. With 

the consent of the Senate, I look forward to assuming this responsibility while serving as the next United States Ambassador to 

Nepal. 

Thank you for this opportunity to address you. I look forward to 

answering your questions.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. PETER WILLIAM BODDE

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor and a privilege to 

appear before you today as the President’s nominee to serve as the next United 

States Ambassador to Nepal. I am grateful for the trust placed in me by President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this 

committee and my colleagues in the U.S. Government to further the interests of the 

United States in Nepal and in the region. I also want to take this opportunity to 

express my appreciation for the special efforts the committee has made to schedule 

these nomination hearings. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce four generations of my family this morning. My grandson, Andrew; my daughter, Sara, who is one of your constituents in 

Woodbridge; my son, Christopher—who recently started his career at USAID—and 

my father, Ambassador William Bodde. Mr. Chairman, he and I literally switched 

seats today. More than 30 years ago, I sat where he is when he appeared before 

your predecessor, the late Senator Paul Tsongas, during my dad’s first confirmation 

hearing prior to becoming Ambassador to Fiji. Unfortunately, the press of work in 

Baghdad precluded my wife, Tanya, from being present today. I am very proud of 

her and I note that as a career Foreign Service employee, she has accompanied me 

to all of my assignments, including Pakistan and now Iraq. 

As you may already be aware, should I be confirmed, this will be my third time 

representing the United States in Nepal. Among the lessons I have learned during 

my career is that the success of every United States mission abroad depends on a 

strong interagency effort and a cohesive Country Team. It also requires clear goals, 

strict accountability, adequate funding and trained personnel. These same critical 

concepts apply to our bilateral engagement and the delivery of significant levels of 

U.S. assistance at a critical juncture in Nepal’s development. You have my full 

assurances that, should I be confirmed, I will provide the necessary leadership to 

ensure that these concepts are an essential element of all mission programs. While 

the generosity of the American people is great, all of us involved in the stewardship 

of this generosity must be accountable for measuring success and failure. 

In my current position as assistant chief of mission for assistance transition in 

Iraq, as well as in my previous positions as Ambassador to Malawi and in 

Islamabad, Frankfurt, Nepal, and Bulgaria, I have had the opportunity to regularly 

brief dozens of your colleagues both in the House and Senate. Such regular interaction—whether at post or in Washington—is critical to our continued success. 

Frank exchanges of accurate information that build trust are essential for the Congress to make difficult resource and policy choices. Should I be confirmed, I will 

make every effort to interact on a regular basis with the members of the committee 

and other Members of the Congress and congressional staff. Nepal is one of the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

264

poorest countries in the world; it faces the daunting challenges of consolidating 

peace after a decade of civil conflict, writing a new constitution that will enshrine 

the values of a new federal democratic republic, developing its economy, expanding 

access to health and education, and improving its poor infrastructure. Despite these 

challenges, the Nepali Government has made significant strides over the last few 

years: the 10-year civil conflict is over, the one-time insurgent Maoists have not only 

joined mainstream politics but are heading the current government tasked with 

completing the peace process, and the Government has made a meaningful commitment to raise living standards and improve the lives of its people. The United States 

is an important and growing partner in this process. 

The primary objective of the U.S. mission in Nepal, of course, is to promote and 

protect the interests of the United States and of U.S. citizens who are either in 

Nepal or doing business with Nepal. In addition to that fundamental responsibility, 

we are working with Nepal to promote political and economic development, decrease 

the country’s dependence on humanitarian assistance, and increase its ability to 

make positive contributions to regional security and the broader global community. 

Our USAID program focuses on governance, antitrafficking, private sector development, basic education, and disaster risk reduction. Nepal was recently chosen as a 

threshold country by the Millennium Challenge Corporation. And in another sign 

of the progress Nepal has made since the insurgency ended in 2006, Peace Corps 

Volunteers will also be returning to the country in September after an 8-year hiatus. I have seen firsthand the significant impact a single Peace Corps Volunteer can 

make. I want to assure you that, should I be confirmed, I will support this inspiring 

American outreach program. 

If confirmed, I will do my utmost to ensure that Nepal finalizes its peace process 

and establishes a stable democracy. Nepal will soon integrate former Maoist combatants into the Nepal Army, one of the final steps in Nepal’s peace process. Department of Defense programs are cultivating a professional force that respects human 

rights and civilian control. In addition, the Constituent Assembly is working to complete work on a new constitution by the upcoming May 27 deadline, grappling with 

such issues as how to devolve power to newly created federal states, how to ensure 

inclusiveness for long-marginalized ethnic minorities and women, and what form of 

government to establish. If confirmed, my previous experience in helping young or 

challenged democracies—including, especially, Nepal itself—will serve me well. Success, however, will require U.S. and international support to reinforce Nepal’s developing democratic system. 

On the economic front, Nepal faces significant challenges in the near term, including energy shortages, poor roads, and a lack of education, especially for girls at the 

secondary level. Another problem is the lack of adequate and suitable employment 

for Nepal’s burgeoning youth demographic, in which more than 64 percent of the 

population is under the age of 30. For me personally, this means the vast majority 

of the population was not even born when I completed my first tour there in 1984! 

Many villages in the countryside are populated primarily by the elderly and children, as many working-age Nepali citizens now go to the gulf countries, India, or 

elsewhere in Asia to earn a living, sending back as much as 25 percent of Nepal’s 

GDP in remittances. From a longer -term perspective, however, the end of the conflict in Nepal and political stability means the country’s leaders can refocus attention on improving economic opportunities for its citizens—indeed, this will be crucial 

for the peace process to be considered successful. Nepal has genuine opportunities 

for U.S. exporters and investors in sectors such as hydropower, agribusiness, tourism, and information technology. To that end, I will seek to improve the environment for foreign direct investment. 

Nepal also faces ongoing human rights challenges. If confirmed as Ambassador, 

I will continue to promote the rights of refugees, including the large Tibetan and 

Bhutanese refugee communities in Nepal. Reducing trafficking-in-persons will be 

another top priority, working closely with the government and courageous NGOs 

such as Maiti Nepal. Finally, the country is also still coming to terms with the gross 

human rights abuses that took place during the conflict, and we are urging the 

country’s leaders to establish transitional justice mechanisms that are credible are 

consistent with best practices and address the concerns and ensure the rights of the 

victims. 

Weak health systems and disease, including malaria, tuberculosis, and chronic 

malnutrition, pose a tremendous obstacle to Nepal’s continued growth. The Nepali 

Government has been a willing partner in addressing the challenges of improving 

access to health care, but government and public sector capacity remain weak. The 

United States, through the President’s Global Health Initiative, has played a critical 

role in increasing access to treatment and public awareness and in improving health 

indicators such as maternal and infant mortality. Although Nepal is now on track 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

265

to meet its Millennium Development Goals in reducing maternal and under-5 mortality rates, there is still much work to be done. If confirmed, I will be proud to 

shepherd the continued growth of these critical programs. 

As Nepal continues to develop domestically, it is increasingly able to play a constructive role in advancing important issues throughout the region. One example of 

such contributions is Nepal’s continued deployment of peacekeeping battalions to 

U.N. missions in Sudan, Iraq, Congo, and other countries. Kathmandu is also host 

to the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Secretariat, to 

which my predecessor was appointed the lead U.S. Government representative. As 

an official observer to SAARC, the United States is encouraging the development 

of the organization’s leadership in areas of regional concern such as trade, environment, and disaster risk reduction. 

In closing, I want to note that anyone who represents the United States abroad 

has a unique responsibility. More often than not, we are the only nation that has 

the will, the values, and the resources to solve problems, help others, and to be a 

positive force for change in our challenged world. Being nominated to serve as an 

Ambassador representing our Nation is in itself an incredible honor. With the consent of the Senate, I look forward to assuming this responsibility while serving as 

the next U.S. Ambassador to Nepal.

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Ambassador. And again, 

welcome to your family and your friends who are here today. Your 

full written statement will be entered into the record at this point. 

Ms. Rosen, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF DOROTHEA–MARIA ROSEN, OF CALIFORNIA, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE FEDERATED STATES OF 

MICRONESIA 

Ms. ROSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Inhofe. I am 

honored to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee 

to be the Ambassador to the Federated States of Micronesia. I am 

deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their 

trust and confidence in nominating me. 

I just wish my parents had lived to see this moment. They would 

have been as thrilled and as proud as I am. 

If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to return to the 

Asia-Pacific region. I have fond memories of my service in Korea 

and the Philippines. 

I am an educator, a lawyer, a veteran, a Foreign Service officer, 

and a mother. My three children were born while I was serving 

overseas and grew up as truly global citizens. All have graduate 

degrees and are gainfully employed in California, and they make 

me proud every day. 

Currently I am the Diplomat in Residence for the Midwest based 

out of Chicago. My challenge is to recruit future generations of Foreign Service officers and to be a resource and foreign policy expert 

to students in my region. This position has a strong public diplomacy component and it complements my many years of service as 

a consular officer and a political officer. Several of my positions, 

including service as Deputy Principal Officer in Frankfurt, required 

a great deal of interaction with other U.S. Federal agencies. And 

Frankfurt, with over 40 regional offices and Federal agencies, is 

often cited as an example of how interagency coordination and 

cooperation should work. If confirmed, I will seek to apply my 

interagency experience, which will be critically important in the 

FSM, where so many domestic Federal agencies operate side by 

side with foreign affairs and defense colleagues. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

266

The FSM consists of over 600 mountainous islands and low-lying 

coral atolls spread over a million square miles of Pacific Ocean. It 

is one of the least populated countries in the world and one of the 

most isolated. Today the FSM and the United States enjoy a close 

relationship based on historical, moral, and security ties. 

The United Nations entrusted the United States with the administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands in 1947. In 

1986, the FSM and the United States signed the Compact of Free 

Association, and the FSM became independent. This compact, 

which was amended in 2004 to extend economic assistance for an 

additional 20 years, provides the framework for much of our bilateral relationship. Under the compact, citizens of the FSM can live, 

study, and work in the United States without a visa. Mutual security of our nations is an underlying element of the special relationship between the United States and the Federated States of Micronesia. The FSM has no military of its own, and under the compact, 

the United States has committed to defend Micronesia as it would 

our own territory. 

Citizens of Micronesia serve proudly in the United States military and at a far higher per capita rate than United States citizens. Many have made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom in Iraq 

and Afghanistan, and many have been seriously wounded. I would 

like to specifically note that President Mori’s daughter and one of 

Vice President Alik’s sons are currently serving in the armed 

forces. If confirmed, I pledge to ensure that these soldiers and their 

families continue to receive the recognition and support they 

deserve from a grateful nation. 

To help achieve the compact goal of economic self-sufficiency, the 

United States provides assistance focused on six sectors: health, 

education, infrastructure, public sector capacity-building, sustainable private sector development, and the environment. And each 

year, all of the services, programs, and grants—the amount exceeds 

$130 million. 

If confirmed, I will work with the FSM on compact development 

goals, including improving the standard of living of citizens and 

reducing dependence on public sector employment funded by foreign contributions. I will strive to improve the business climate and 

fiscal policies, focus on the goals of greater accountability and implement this assistance based on well-informed assessments for 

those on the ground. 

If confirmed, I will coordinate closely with the other Departments 

involved with these efforts, and I will work to ensure that assistance is visible, recognized, and complements efforts in the region. 

In closing, I am grateful for the honor and opportunity to lead 

the United States mission in Micronesia and work with all these 

colleagues on this effort. It is a time of renewed focus on our role 

in the Pacific, and I am excited and proud to be a part of it. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee, the 

Congress, and others in the government to invigorate our relationship with Micronesia. I believe that the executive and legislative 

branches will be important to this endeavor. 

I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and would be 

pleased to answer your questions. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Rosen follows:]

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

267

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DOROTHEA-MARIA ROSEN

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you 

today as President Obama’s nominee to be the Ambassador to the Federated States 

of Micronesia (FSM). I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their trust and confidence in nominating me. 

I wish my parents had lived to see this moment; they would have been as thrilled 

and as proud as I am. 

If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity this assignment will provide to return to the Asia-Pacific region. I have fond memories of my service in Korea and 

the Philippines. 

My early background was in education, and I went on to study law. I remain interested in education and rule of law issues. Upon admission to the New York State 

Bar, I joined the U.S. Army. As a JAG Corps captain I had the privilege of serving 

in the International Law Division at Headquarters U.S. Army Europe in Heidelberg, 

Germany. While in Germany I passed the Foreign Service Exam and have been a 

member of the Foreign Service since 1981. My three children were born while I was 

serving overseas and are truly global citizens. 

Currently, I am the Diplomat in Residence for the Midwest, based out of Chicago. 

My challenge is to recruit future generations of Foreign Service officers and to be 

a resource and foreign policy expert to students in my region. This position has a 

strong public diplomacy component which complements the many years of service 

I have had as a consular officer and political officer. Several of my positions, including service as Deputy Principal Officer in Frankfurt, required a great deal of interaction with other United States Government agencies. Frankfurt was often cited as 

an example of how interagency coordination and cooperation should work. We had 

the advantage of sharing a building and seeing each other on a daily basis so we 

developed excellent working relationships. If confirmed, I will seek to apply my 

interagency experience, which will be critically important in the FSM, where so 

many domestic federal agencies operate side by side with foreign affairs and defense 

colleagues. 

The FSM consists of over 600 mountainous islands and low-lying coral atolls 

spread over a million square miles of Pacific Ocean. It is one of the least populated 

countries in the world. The landscapes are beautiful and the people are friendly. 

Today, the FSM and the United States enjoy a close and unique relationship. 

The United Nations entrusted the United States with the administration of the 

Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands in 1947. In 1986, the FSM and the United 

States signed the Compact of Free Association and the FSM became independent. 

This compact, which was amended in 2004 to extend economic assistance for an additional 20 years, provides the framework for much of our bilateral relationship. 

Under the compact, citizens of the FSM can live, study, and work in the United 

States without a visa. Mutual security of our nations is an underlying element of 

the special relationship between the United States and the Federated States of 

Micronesia. The FSM has no military of its own. Under the compact the United 

States has committed to defend Micronesia as if it were part of our own territory. 

Citizens of Micronesia serve in the U.S. military at a higher per capita rate than 

citizens of the United States. Many have made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom 

in Iraq and Afghanistan and others have been wounded, some with life-long injuries. I would like to specifically note that President Mori’s daughter and one of Vice 

President Alik’s sons are serving in the U.S. Armed Forces today. If confirmed, I 

pledge to ensure that these soldiers and their families continue to receive the recognition and support they have earned from a grateful nation. 

To help achieve the compact goal of economic self-sufficiency, the United States 

will provide the Government of the FSM over $90 million a year in direct economic 

assistance through FY 2023. This assistance is directed toward six sectors: health, 

education, infrastructure to support health and education, public sector capacity 

building, private sector development and the environment. Each year, U.S. assistance to the country—including all federal services, programs, and grants—exceeds 

$130 million. 

If confirmed, I will work with the FSM to help attain its Compact development 

goals; these include a significant increase in the standard of living of the citizens 

of the FSM and a reduction in their economy’s dependence on public sector employment funded by foreign contributions. To reach those goals I will seek to improve 

the business climate, fiscal policies, and capacity to govern, while reducing dependence on foreign assistance. I will also seek to ensure that U.S. assistance programs 

are implemented consistent with well-informed assessments from those on the 

ground. I will continue to work with others who are concerned with the economic 

impact of Compact State migrants on U.S. states and territories. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

268

If confirmed, I will coordinate closely with the Department of the Interior, which 

has primary responsibility for implementing the compact’s economic provisions. I 

also look forward to working with the Department of Defense’s Pacific Command on 

continued security and humanitarian assistance activities in the FSM. I will also 

continue our close cooperation with the United States Coast Guard to implement the 

Shiprider agreement with FSM and other maritime security arrangements. These 

activities strengthen the bonds of friendship that undergird our entire relationship 

with the FSM. I will also work to ensure that U.S. assistance is visible and recognized, and complements the efforts of other regional donors. If confirmed, my overarching goal will be to strengthen the positive relationship our two countries have 

enjoyed for decades and to support the people and government of the FSM as they 

work toward a more prosperous future. 

In closing, I can think of no greater honor or opportunity than to lead the U.S. 

mission in the Federated States of Micronesia and work with our valued Micronesian friends and allies on these and other important issues. It is a time of renewed 

focus on our role in the Pacific and I am excited to be part of it. If confirmed by 

the Senate, I look forward to working with this committee, the Congress, and others 

in the U.S. Government who seek to invigorate our relationship with Micronesia, 

across a range of interests relating to security, good governance, economic and budgetary self-reliance, health, education, and environmental protection. I believe that 

coordination between the executive and legislative branches will be important to 

this endeavor.

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much. Your full written statement will be entered into the record at this point. 

I would also like to point out that the hearing record will be held 

open until close of business tomorrow in case other members of this 

committee wish to submit questions in writing or if there are follow-on questions from myself or Senator Inhofe. 

Senator Inhofe, I am going to yield to you for your questions, and 

then I will pick up after you are done. 

Senator INHOFE. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. 

And on the issue that I brought up, Ms. Campbell, maybe for the 

record you could kind of send me a letter because this is something 

I had not seen before. And you might have some ideas on it, and 

I will certainly respect those ideas. 

Let me ask you, Ms. Rosen. You served some time in Ghana. Is 

that correct? 

Ms. ROSEN. Yes, sir. 

Senator INHOFE. In Accra? When was that? 

Ms. ROSEN. 1989 to 1991, quite some time ago. 

Senator INHOFE. I have spent quite a bit of time there and gone 

all the way through the Rawlings machine and John Kufuor and 

now with the new President. And I see that as a real shining star 

in west Africa with some great opportunities. It has changed considerably since that time. 

Ms. ROSEN. I understand they have highways. The main street 

actually has high-rise buildings. 

Senator INHOFE. They do. But Bukom is the same. Does that 

mean anything to you? Bukom? 

Ms. ROSEN. No. I never made it there. 

Senator INHOFE. That is the impoverished district. They are 

keeping that, I guess, part of their history maybe. I do not know. 

But anyway, I just wanted to say, Mr. Chairman, I have had the 

opportunity, of course, to visit with Mr. Bodde at some length, and 

I have looked very carefully at all three. 

And I have to say this, Ms. Campbell, about the job that you are 

taking on. I had occasion to—I have been in aviation all my life—

fly an airplane around the world. I went right over the area that 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

269

you will be representing, and your work is cut out for you. [Laughter.] 

Good luck. 

But I have looked at the credentials of these people, Mr. Chairman, and I am in full support of their confirmation. I look forward 

to working with all three of you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe. And I 

share your confidence in the abilities of these nominees to fulfill 

their responsibilities to our country. 

Let me start, Ms. Rosen, with something that you and I had a 

discussion about yesterday, and it relates to something that I said 

in my opening statement, that the citizens of this area have the 

right to reside and work in the United States as lawful, nonimmigrants, allowing entry into the United States without a visa. And 

when we were discussing this yesterday—let me get the exact numbers—I think what we were talking about was approximately 

100,000 citizens in this area. Is that correct? And 30,000 of which 

are here. Or is that 100,000 presently living in the area and an 

additional 30,000 in the United States? 

Ms. ROSEN. Yes. The figures I have seen are a little over 100,000 

in Micronesia and then approximately 30,000 in the United States. 

Senator WEBB. So that would be 130,000—30,000 out of 130,000 

roughly? 

Ms. ROSEN. Roughly. 

Senator WEBB. Roughly speaking? 

And I also understand that this could serve as something of a 

pass-through. If you are not from Micronesia and you live in Micronesia for a certain period of time, you can then—how does that 

work? Can you then come to the United States as a citizen? 

Ms. ROSEN. The compact allows Micronesian citizens to come 

without a visa. And they acquire citizenship by birth to a Micronesian parent. They can also apply for naturalization, but naturalization in Micronesia is quite—it is actually an act of Congress. So it 

does not happen all that often. The President can naturalize someone based on a bill from Congress, but there are a number of 

requirements as well. They require knowledge of the government 

and the history and the culture, one of the four indigenous languages. They have to have resided there legally for 5 years. So it 

is rather a lengthy and difficult process to do. Our colleagues at the 

Department of the Interior have indicated that in the past 10 years 

that it has not occurred. So it does not seem to be a large number. 

Senator WEBB. So can you walk us through the mechanics of

Micronesian——

Ms. ROSEN. Naturalization? 

Senator WEBB. No. How a Micronesian citizen would come to the 

United States without a visa. Mechanically how does that work? 

Ms. ROSEN. They need passports because it is an independent 

foreign country. So they would book their flights and go down with 

their passport, and if they are citizens, they do not require a visa. 

So they could travel to the United States. They are subject to the 

ineligibilities. So they would be ineligible if they were a felon or 

public charge, but obviously, DHS does not have the opportunity at 

port of entry to know all those things. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

270

Senator WEBB. So basically you come back and forth on a Micronesian passport in the same way as, say, we would do in Europe, 

but you can live——

Ms. ROSEN. But they can stay. 

Senator WEBB. They can stay. 

Ms. ROSEN. They can work. They do not require a work visa. 

They do not require any particular visa in order to stay. They can 

establish a residence in the United States, but it is a nonimmigrant 

status. They do not establish a residency that leads to citizenship. 

Senator WEBB. So it is basically free flow. 

Ms. ROSEN. It is free flow, but again it does not lead to citizenship, so they would not acquire U.S. citizenship. 

Senator WEBB. But they could remain here permanently under 

the compact. 

Ms. ROSEN. Yes. There is no time limit. 

Senator WEBB. What is the principal economic future of the

region? How are we looking at that? 

Ms. ROSEN. Well, the compact provides funding that is phasing 

down. So each year they receive less direct funding from the compact funds. And the funding goes into the trust fund, but that is 

not designed to fully support them in 2023. So we are encouraging 

increased development, hopefully in things that bring income. They 

do have tuna reserves that are worth a great deal of money. There 

is some potential for tourism, but it is a very isolated location, so 

there are difficulties with that. But there is a focus on greater 

accountability and focus on the goal of developing sustainable economic, viable possibilities. 

Senator WEBB. So right now, in terms of volume of trade, most 

of the volume in actual commercial product is the United States 

going into Micronesia. Is that correct? 

Ms. ROSEN. The source of income? Yes, in terms of monetary

income. 

Senator WEBB. And what are they exporting? 

Ms. ROSEN. Tuna. 

Senator WEBB. I look forward to hearing some thoughts about 

what——

Ms. ROSEN. What they could export? 

Senator WEBB. Yes, as you take your position out there. From 

what I am reading, there is not a lot of commercial enterprise in 

Micronesia. Is that fair to say? 

Ms. ROSEN. That is fair to say. I think the farming is basically 

subsistence farming. From my colleagues in Agriculture, I did not 

learn of a great opportunity for raising cocoa or coffee beans. 

Senator WEBB. I know when I was out there many, many years 

ago, the No. 1 export for a long time was scrap metal left over from 

all the battles in World War II. Hopefully, if we are going to have 

this relationship and if it is going to be such an open relationship 

in terms of the citizens involved, we could put some of our minds 

together and figure out what economically might benefit the region 

in the future. 

Ms. ROSEN. We do need to try and create opportunity there so 

there is less of a need to migrate. 

Senator WEBB. Ms. Campbell, can you give us your experiences 

in this region to date that relate to the ambassadorship? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

271

Ms. CAMPBELL. Well, both my studies and the beginning of my 

professional focus was on East Asia, primarily on Southeast Asia. 

So I have lived or worked in Japan, the Philippines, Cambodia, 

worked on Indonesia, worked on East Timor. And so I feel like that 

combination of experience in East Asia and then my more recent 

experience in working more in supporting U.S. businesses, as I am 

doing now as the consul general in Basrah, that that is a good combination, both of a pretty deep understanding of the East Asian region, but also an understanding of some of the economic challenges 

and opportunities that are going to face Mongolia over the next 

decade. 

Senator WEBB. You have a good bit of experience in the Middle 

East as well. Mongolia has been involved in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

I think the number that we were provided is they have gone from 

200 to 400 troops, and they also benefit from our international 

military education training programs——

Ms. CAMPBELL. That is correct. 

Senator WEBB [continuing]. And foreign military funds. Can you 

give us an idea of how those two realities interact? 

Ms. CAMPBELL. Well, it was interesting. When I first started to 

speak with people in Iraq about the fact that I had been nominated 

for this position, they said, ‘‘oh, yes, we remember the Mongolians. 

We remember when they came and sacked Baghdad.’’ [Laughter.] 

And then they said, ‘‘oh, yes, and then they came back about 8 

years ago as part of the international effort in Iraq.’’ And so it has 

been interesting to have that conversation. 

What I understand from my colleagues at the Department of 

Defense—and I should also say that one of my first exposures to 

Mongolia was actually when I was deputy chief of mission in 

Cambodia because we were working with the Cambodian military 

to have them go and participate in a military exercise that is held 

each year in Mongolia, which is called Khan Quest. And so we encouraged the Cambodians to go and participate, and when they 

came back, the Cambodian military interlocutors were so positive 

about what they had seen on the Mongolian side, including a Mongolian peace training institute which I believe is unique in East 

Asia. And so the Cambodians then started to try to build a training 

center for peace support missions similar to what they had seen in 

Mongolia. So that was one of the things which piqued my interest 

in Mongolia. 

So Mongolia has participated strongly—Mongolian officers have 

participated in training in the United States. Ten percent of all 

officers in the Mongolia Army have actually participated in training in the United States. You also have, as I said, the Mongolian 

military having participated in 14 different peacekeeping operations, primarily in Africa but also in Europe, in Iraq, and currently in Afghanistan. And so they are starting to develop some 

very specific niche expertise which I think is going to be useful and 

certainly the assessment of my colleagues from the Department of 

Defense is that their military capabilities, as well as their interest 

in participating in these international peacekeeping operations and 

efforts like in Afghanistan, where they are increasingly shifting——

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

272

Senator WEBB. Do you know the level of our funding for these 

two programs as it goes to Mongolia? 

Ms. CAMPBELL. The combination of—it is approximately $3 million per year, sir. 

Senator WEBB. Combined? 

Ms. CAMPBELL. That is our FMF. Our IMET is small, and I can 

provide you the exact figure. I do not remember it offhand. 

Senator WEBB. Does that fund their activities in Afghanistan? 

Ms. CAMPBELL. Let me please get a full answer to that and provide that to you because I believe that their activities in Afghanistan should be covered under NATO support funds as opposed to 

from our direct IMET and FMF contributions. 

[The submitted written information referred to follows:]

In FY 2012, the Department of State allocated $875,000 IMET to Mongolia. IMET funding in FY2011 was $997,000. 

The U.S. Government reimburses Mongolia for its predeployment expenses related 

to Afghanistan (training, medical preparation, individual equipment) using Coalition 

Support Funds (CSF). Mongolia received $356,118 from CSF in December 2011

(FY 2012 funds) as reimbursement for troop rotation costs incurred in FY 2010. 

Expenses incurred during deployment, such as for the care and feeding of troops in 

the field, are borne by the Mongolians themselves. 

U.S. FMF assistance totaled $3 million in FY 2012 and helps Mongolia’s Ministry 

of Defense to train and equip units to participate in international peacekeeping and 

coalition operations. This includes acquiring equipment, such as radios and medical 

gear, that will be used by Mongolian troops in Darfur, South Sudan, and other 

future deployments.

Senator WEBB. It is an additional fund as compared to their

national defense budget. 

Ms. CAMPBELL. That is correct. 

Senator WEBB. That would be correct to say. OK. 

Ambassador Bodde, this is, I think, your third trip back to 

Nepal? Do you have any observations on the differences over the 

three? 

Ambassador BODDE. Well, each trip has been a different trip. 

When I went back the second time, Senator, it was right after the 

first restoration of democracy, and I was there for 3 years. I think 

we had four governments in the 3 years I was there. I was there 

for the beginning of the civil strife. Obviously, Nepal is a much different place than when I arrived there 30 years ago. Sadly, some 

of the challenges they face, in terms of the poverty, the health conditions, while we have made tremendous progress, our assistance 

programs have been of great assistance, there is still a lot of work 

to be done. 

I have to say, having read in preparation for this hearing for my 

new position, should I be confirmed, that I am very optimistic 

about where things stand. What I have been seeing is that all of 

the parties involved now have made a lot of progress. Even today 

we got good news that they have agreed on 13 states and how it 

is going to be. 

My concern is that this is only the beginning. They have, as you 

mentioned, up until May 27 to have their new constitution drafted, 

but once that is done, then comes the hard work of implementation 

in terms of the new states, what their authorities will be, the whole 

question of revenues, who is going to have the ability to generate 

things. There is a lot of work to be done. So I go back with a lot 

of experience, country experience, knowing the culture, knowing 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

273

many of the political players there, but it will be a much different 

experience than the last two times I was there. 

Senator WEBB. More optimistic I assume. 

Ambassador BODDE. Yes, I am more optimistic. 

Senator WEBB. Well, I would have to—just as a general comment 

as someone who is privileged to chair the subcommittee and someone who spent a good bit of my life in and out of East and Southeast Asia including, Ms. Rosen, as we discussed, having in and out 

of Micronesia many, many years ago, I am really impressed by the 

scope of the language skills that the three of you combined have. 

It is an amazing comment, I think, about the capabilities of our 

own Department of State. 

Ms. Campbell, you particularly, you seem to pick small countries 

linguistically, Cambodia, Serbo-Croatian, not that small, and now 

Mongolia. How long is the Cambodian language program? Was that 

a Foreign Service Institute program? 

Ms. CAMPBELL. It was, sir, and I should also say that my Cambodian is rusty and was never particularly fluent. 

Senator WEBB. I do not know many people who can speak

Cambodian. 

Ms. CAMPBELL. There are so few people who speak Khmer that 

even just the effort and being able to navigate simple conversations 

was, in fact, extremely useful. What I found was I had great pronunciation, and so I could work with a teacher and I, for example, 

was able to be the emcee for our Fourth of July and people could 

understand enough of what I was saying, could understand me for 

that. But Cambodian is a unique language. 

Serbo-Croatian actually, interestingly, will be more useful for 

Mongolia because the Serbs use the Cyrillic alphabet as do the 

Mongolians. So I have got a leg up in at least being able to read 

Mongolian, even though I do not at this point have the ability to 

decipher it. 

Senator WEBB. I know having learned Vietnamese largely as an 

act of will, but I began by buying the Foreign Service Institute 

tapes years ago. One thing that I find is that the people who have 

taken those courses develop this defined vocabulary where you can 

actually sit down with each other and speak for hours and nobody 

around you of that language knows quite what you are talking 

about. [Laughter.] 

And when they break into slang, you are lost. But it is a great 

start. 

Well, I want to echo what Senator Inhofe said. I think these are 

very strong nominees, not just for the process, but for continuing 

to serve our country in this region. And I think I am on record 

about as strongly as I can be about how important this region is 

to our country and how important we are to the region in terms 

of long-term stability that allows the economies to grow and governmental systems to evolve. And I am glad we were able to get 

this hearing in and hopefully to get all three of you on your way 

as soon as possible. 

Again, to all friends and family, thank you for coming and sharing this day with us. I think there is maybe one more hurdle and 

then we can get you off to do what you are supposed to be doing 

for our country. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

274

Thank you. 

This hearing is over. 

[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSE OF HON. PETER WILLIAM BODDE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY

SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Congress has long expressed an interest in the Tibetan population in 

Nepal, both those in transit to India and those who reside there. The Government 

of China is putting political pressure on Nepal regarding Tibetans. Will the U.S. 

Government continue to urge the Nepali Government to allow the transit of all 

Tibetan refugees and work with UNHCR to ensure that Nepali officials, including 

border personnel, are properly briefed on the so-called ‘‘Gentlemen’s Agreement’’ and 

relevant international laws? Will the U.S. Government continue to press for a durable solution to the problem of the long-staying Tibetan residents without status and 

for a resettlement program for Tibetans modeled after the successfully implemented 

resettlement program for Bhutanese refugees?

Answer. My predecessors have placed both protecting and finding a durable solution for Tibetan refugees at the top of the administration’s agenda in Nepal and, 

if confirmed, it is my firm intention to keep it there. I am very concerned both by 

reports of deteriorating conditions for the long-staying population and by the drop 

in the number of new refugees transiting through Nepal to India. If confirmed, 

advocacy on behalf of the Tibetan refugees, including continued adherence to the 

Gentlemen’s Agreement, will be one of my first and highest priorities. 

RESPONSES OF HON. PETER WILLIAM BODDE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY

SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. Nepal is not party to the 2000 U.N. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and 

Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. If confirmed, how 

would you engage the Nepalese Government in a dialogue to join this important 

human trafficking treaty?

Answer. Nepal is just now concluding a more than 5-year long struggle to draft 

a new constitution and conclude their peace process. If confirmed, I would use this 

opportunity to press Nepal to join the 2000 U.N. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and 

Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. We are partnering 

with NGOs and the Government of Nepal to combat trafficking in persons. More 

needs to be done, however, and I believe that as the new government stands up, 

we will have an extremely important opportunity to make progress on this issue.

Question. According to the State Department’s 2011 Trafficking in Persons Report, 

Nepal is a Tier 2 country for human trafficking. Nepal is mainly a source country 

for men, women, and children subjected to labor and sex trafficking. If confirmed, 

what would be your approach to encourage the Nepalese Government to take significant steps toward protecting its own citizens from being trafficked abroad?

Answer. Embassy Kathmandu, through State’s Trafficking in Persons Office, and 

through USAID, currently partners with NGOs on programs to combat trafficking 

in persons in Nepal. These programs, totaling more than $8.2 million over 3 years, 

seek to prevent trafficking, assist and protect the victims of trafficking, and help 

Nepal’s Government to investigate and prosecute suspected trafficking offenders 

more effectively. If confirmed, I will advocate to ensure that this issue remains high 

on the U.S. Government’s assistance agenda. I believe that we also fight the scourge 

of trafficking in persons through our broader assistance to Nepal. Our initiatives to 

address food insecurity and other constraints to development also help address the 

root causes of trafficking in persons. 

RESPONSES OF PIPER ANNE WIND CAMPBELL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. According to the State Department’s 2011 Trafficking in Persons Report, 

during the reporting period there were an estimated 525 North Koreans employed 

in Mongolia as contract laborers despite concerns that North Korean workers overseas do not appear to have rights and receive only a fraction of the money paid to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

275

the North Korean Government for their work. If confirmed, what steps would you 

take to ensure that the Mongolian Government no longer allows contracted laborers 

from North Korea who may have been trafficked into Mongolia?

Answer. I am very concerned about the situation you describe. The Department 

of State and the Embassy in Ulaanbaatar have called on the Government of Mongolia to address well-documented concerns that North Korean workers in Mongolia 

are not free to leave their employment and receive only a fraction of the money paid 

to the North Korean Government for their work. If confirmed, I will again raise 

these concerns with Mongolian officials and urge that the practice cease.

Question. The Mongolian Supreme Court’s interpretation of Mongolia’s antitrafficking laws confuses judicial officials, resulting in trafficking offenders to be prosecuted under the lesser offense of ‘‘forced prostitution.’’ If confirmed, how would you 

engage the Mongolian judicial system to ensure clarity in article 113 of the criminal 

code, which prohibits all forms of trafficking?

Answer. On January 19, 2012, the Mongolian Parliament passed the Law to 

Combat Trafficking in Persons (LCTP). Subsequently, the criminal code was also 

amended to bring certain articles into conformity with the LCTP, including article 

113 (The Sale and Purchase of Human Beings), which now broadly criminalizes all 

forms of trafficking in persons. Our Embassy contributed significantly to Mongolian 

efforts to pass the LCTP, including by implementing Department of State-funded 

projects with several NGOs that raised awareness about the lack of judicial clarity, 

which the LCTP and the subsequent amendments resolved. 

Our next priority is to encourage the Government of Mongolia to implement this 

law so that perpetrators of human trafficking are held accountable with jail time 

and victims are identified and appropriately protected. If confirmed, I will continue 

to urge Mongolia to implement its law and to address human trafficking fully and 

effectively. 

RESPONSE OF DOROTHEA-MARIA ROSEN TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. Micronesia is a Tier 3 country according to the 2011 State Department’s 

Trafficking In Persons Report for its failure to fully comply with the minimum 

standards to eliminate trafficking and is not making any efforts to do so. The Federated States of Micronesia does not have a comprehensive federal antitrafficking 

law and has never identified any human trafficking victims in the country despite 

being a source country for women subjected to sex trafficking.

• If confirmed, what is your strategy to engage the Government of the Federated 

State of Micronesia to enact a strong antitrafficking policy which will address 

prosecution, protection, and prevention? What specific steps will need to be enacted to ensure comprehensive trafficking legislation is passed? 

• If confirmed, what key policies need to be in place to ensure that Micronesia 

is not listed as a Tier 3 country for trafficking in place in the next Trafficking 

In Persons Report?

Answer. Combating trafficking in persons remains a problem in the Federated 

States of Micronesia (FSM). If confirmed, I will pay special attention to and press 

the FSM to focus on human trafficking issues. On March 5, 2012, the FSM Congress 

passed the Trafficking in Persons Act of 2011 along with two protocols of the United 

Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child. The newly passed legislation allows 

for the prosecution of cases involving human trafficking of FSM nationals occurring 

within the FSM. The law is also intended to address the FSM’s obligations arising 

from its accession to the Palermo Protocol and is the first step toward its obligations 

to criminalize human trafficking. The FSM Government continues to make positive 

strides on antitrafficking efforts; however much more needs to be done to upgrade 

FSM from its current Tier 3 ranking. If confirmed, I will work closely with the FSM 

Government to ensure that the new legislation is implemented quickly and effectively. I will work with the government to encourage the collection and maintenance 

of crime data on forced labor and prostitution. I will work with appropriate officials 

to ensure that adequate resources are used for law enforcement training, a critical 

component in helping to identify and assist trafficking victims. In an effort to reach 

out to local communities, I will also work with the appropriate NGOs and women’s 

groups to help support and facilitate comprehensive and visible antitrafficking 

awareness campaigns. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(277)

NOMINATIONS OF EDWARD ALFORD, MARK 

ASQUINO, DOUGLAS GRIFFITHS, AND DAVID 

LANE 

THURSDAY, MAY 17, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Edward M. Alford, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of The Gambia 

Mark L. Asquino, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to 

the Republic of Equatorial Guinea 

Douglas M. Griffiths, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Mozambique 

David J. Lane, of Florida, to serve as U.S. Representative to the 

United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture, with the 

rank of Ambassador 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:36 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher Coons, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Coons and Isakson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE 

Senator COONS. I am pleased to chair this hearing of the Senate 

Foreign Relations Committee and would like to welcome my good 

friend, Senator Isakson, as well as Senator Nelson, and our distinguished nominees. 

Today we will consider the nominees to be Ambassador to 

Mozambique, to Equatorial Guinea, and to The Gambia, as well as 

the U.S. Representative for the U.N. Agencies for Food and Agriculture. 

Turning first to the nomination of David Lane as the nominee for 

the U.N. Agencies for Food and Agriculture in Rome, I want to just 

briefly highlight the crucial role those agencies play in Africa and 

throughout the developing world. The World Food Programme provides lifesaving nutrition in countries like Somalia, Sudan, Niger, 

and many other conflict and famine zones. The U.N. Food and 

Agricultural Organization is a key complement to our own Government’s Feed the Future program. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

278

We will also today consider nominations for Ambassador to three 

African countries that are all important to our national interests, 

including security, trade, investment, health, governance, and civil 

rights. 

Douglas Griffiths is the nominee for Mozambique, a country that 

has recently emerged from a long civil war as a promising democracy with impressive economic growth. Like many African countries, it is rich in natural resources but suffers from high levels of 

poverty. The next Ambassador will have a number of challenges in 

working with the Mozambican Government to consolidate democratic gains, use resources wisely, and increase trade with the 

United States. 

Equatorial Guinea where Mark Asquino is the ambassadorial 

nominee is an important producer of oil and natural gas with a 

GDP of more than $14 billion, but the United States has serious 

concerns about human rights protections, lack of political freedoms, 

and widespread corruption. President Obiang is Africa’s longest 

serving and most entrenched political leader, and opposition parties regularly complain of oppression issues we will take up today. 

Our final nominee, Edward Alford, has been nominated to serve 

as Ambassador to The Gambia, a West African country almost entirely enveloped by Senegal which has few natural resources and 

relies on tourism and exporting for its economy. U.S. interests in 

The Gambia include concerns about drug trafficking, human rights, 

and governance. A number of Senators, including Senators Durbin 

and Casey, have repeatedly raised concerns about the lack of press 

freedom and the disappearance and death of journalists critical of 

the government. The Gambia is eligible for benefits under AGOA, 

and I encourage the next Ambassador to work closely with the government to increase trade and investment with the United States. 

With that summary, I now turn it over to Senator Isakson for his 

opening remarks. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON,

U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Alford, Mr. Asquino, Mr. Griffiths, and Mr. Lane, congratulations on your nomination. We look forward to your testimony today. 

And it is always good to see my dear friend, Bill Nelson, who is 

always out when there is a hometown boy being nominated for anything. So, Mr. Lane, you are fortunate that he is on your side. 

And we welcome the family members of each of the nominees. 

Thank you for your support of them in their quest and their jobs. 

This is an important—all three of the African countries are very 

important, and they are not the places you get when you are a big 

donor to the President. They are places you go when you care passionately about your country and about the future of the continent 

of Africa, and I commend each of you on your willingness to take 

those posts on. 

And I think Senator Coons agrees with me that we look forward 

to being your conduit back here in America when you are out there 

on point and think everybody has forgotten about you. Please use 

us as a resource to try and help you in any way we can. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

279

Mr. Lane, let me just say that food security in Africa is critically 

important to me. I have traveled to all four of the countries that 

will be at the G8 this weekend, Benin, Ghana, President Mills from 

Ghana, Tanzania, all coming in to testify on the issue of food security, which is so critical. 

You come very highly recognized by two friends of mine, Beau 

Cutter and Helene Gale, and if you can pass that test, you ought 

to be pretty good at anything. But they are obviously delivering on 

the front through the U.N. Food Programme in Somalia, Dadaab, 

Darfur, and other places like that. And food security in Africa is 

a critical issue. In fact, there is a looming potential problem in the 

Sudan right now, which I am sure you are aware of as a hot bed. 

So I will be interested in hearing from you about those issues and 

your experience and hopefully the contribution you want to make 

to the program. 

But I end where I began. Thank you all for your willingness to 

serve, and I look forward to being a supporter of each and every 

one of you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Senator Isakson. 

And I, too, would like to thank your families who will support 

you, have supported you, and whom I hope you will introduce when 

we get to each of your opening statements. 

I would now like to turn it over to Senator Bill Nelson of Florida. 

I understand Senator Rubio will be introducing some comments for 

the record. 

So, Senator Nelson, if you would please. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Senator Isakson, you are right. When there is a home Florida person, it is my privilege to be here. 

But I am particularly pleased not only that both David Lane and 

I are Melbourne High School Bulldogs, but all of his family that is 

here today is as well. 

And he comes uniquely qualified for this position. You know, it 

is not all the time that we get to name an Ambassador who does 

not come from the ranks of the Foreign Service. This particular 

ambassadorship in Rome to all of the three U.N. organizations has 

been people who really have a heart for hunger and the poor. 

Our former colleague from the House, Congressman Tony Hall, 

served with great distinction, and he was the one that came to 

national prominence when he had the Hunger Committee in the 

House and suddenly the House decided they were taking the funds 

away from the Hunger Committee and to highlight that that was 

the wrong decision in his opinion, he went on a hunger strike. And 

the House reversed itself after days and days. And of course, Tony 

became uniquely qualified to be in this position in a previous 

administration. 

So too David is uniquely qualified. He has been coming to this 

position, if you all confirm—if we confirm in the Senate, which I 

think we will—he comes from the White House where he has been 

assistant to the President and counselor to the Chief of Staff. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

280

Before that, he was over at the Bono organization, the ONE Campaign, where he was the CEO. And during that time, ONE managed to grow more than 2 million members in over 100 countries 

on all seven continents. 

I think David’s passion for poverty, to fight it, and preventable 

disease—I think it is remarkable, and I think he comes to you as 

an exceptionally qualified person. You know all the background, 

how this is a unique position that relates between the Department 

of State and those three U.N. humanitarian agencies. And as we 

project the interest of the United States around the globe, this is 

one of the areas that we are uniquely capable of distinguishing ourselves because of our big humanitarian heart to try to help people 

all across the globe. And I think David will be a fitting representative for the United States in leading that effort. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Senator Nelson. 

And I understand Senator Rubio, also of Florida, had wanted to 

join us but is going to submit a statement for the record. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Rubio follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

Chairman Kerry and Senator Lugar, thank you for the rare opportunity to introduce to the committee a fellow South Floridian, Mr. David Lane, for the position 

of United States Representative to the United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture. I ask that these remarks be included in the record. 

David was born at Mercy Hospital, a storied institution in the Miami area. Both 

his parents, George and Mary Lou, were raised in Coral Gables, a beautiful community of tree-lined streets in the heart of Miami. 

David has had the rare opportunity of participating at all levels of the policymaking process, from Senate advisor, to Chief of Staff in a Federal Agency (Commerce 

Department), to the executive branch as Assistant to the President and Counselor 

to the Chief of Staff. 

Out of government, David served as President & CEO of the ONE Campaign from 

November 2007 to January 2011. ONE is a world-renown international advocacy 

organization focused on reforms to public policy to more effectively combat extreme 

poverty. At the ONE, he oversaw the team that sets strategic policy and main initiatives of the organization. 

The combination of these experiences will serve him well as he takes on the challenge to represent U.S. views at the three leading U.N. agencies focusing on food 

security and agricultural development—the Food and Agriculture Organization, the 

World Food Programme, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development. 

Despite robust U.S. aid in bilateral and multilateral programs, food insecurity is 

a daily concern for millions of people around the world and a source of instability 

that impact U.S. interests abroad. As we speak, a severe food crisis is affecting, once 

again, the countries of the Sahel, with the potential to increase tensions in a region 

already affected by unrelated political and security challenges. 

The U.N. agencies in which he will represent the United States serve as significant force multipliers to American bilateral efforts. It is my greatest hope that he 

will succeed in achieving consensus to implement the key FAO reforms as highlighted in the September 2011 Government and Accountability Office report on this 

matter. 

In these challenging fiscal years, we all have an obligation to be good stewards 

of taxpayers’ contributions. As president of ONE, David has firsthand experience of 

the need to strategically allocate precious resources to achieve the greatest results. 

I wish him every success in working with other U.S. missions at the U.N. and likeminded nations to increase fiscal accountability in U.N. programs and strengthen 

the agencies’ mission with the adoption of free market policies that would reduce 

the occurrence of nutritional emergencies in vulnerable aid-recipient countries. 

I appreciate the opportunity to welcome David to this committee, and I urge the 

committee to act swiftly on his nomination to be the next the U.S. Representative 

to United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

281

Senator COONS. Mr. Lane, I invite you to begin a series of four 

opening statements by our different nominees today, and I would 

encourage you to begin by introducing and recognizing your family. 

Mr. Lane. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID J. LANE, OF FLORIDA, TO SERVE AS 

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED NATIONS AGENCIES 

FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, WITH THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR 

Mr. LANE. Thank you, Senator, and thank you, Mr. Ranking 

Member. 

I should say my four siblings and various nieces and nephews 

are here: Tom Lane, John Lane, Susan Davies, and Lisa Wright. 

And I am very grateful that they have been able to join me. 

First of all, I should probably say I have a longer statement, a 

longer presentation, which as you know, has been presented for the 

record. So I am going to try to keep this as brief as possible. 

I do want to thank Senator Nelson for those very kind words. I 

am very grateful for his generous introduction. 

And I am honored to be the President’s nominee for the U.S. 

Representative to the U.N. Agencies for Food and Agriculture. I 

would like to thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the 

confidence they have shown in me through this nomination. 

I just pointed out that my four brothers and sisters are here and 

a few of my amazing nieces and nephews. In front of them, I would 

actually like to say a few words about our parents, George and 

Mary Lou Lane. They are too frail to travel to Washington, but I 

know they are proud that I am being considered for a position that 

can help the United States make a difference for millions of poor 

people around the world. They instilled in all of us a deep love of 

our country and a strong commitment to serve others. By their 

example, our parents taught us the true meaning of compassion, 

the importance of service, and the moral necessity of helping those 

who are less fortunate than we are. And I want to thank them for 

their primary role really in preparing me to serve my country in 

this important position, if confirmed by the Senate. 

If you do confirm me, I would consider it a great privilege to 

serve the American people in pursuit of goals that I know we all 

hold dear: alleviating hunger and helping the poor lift themselves 

out of poverty through agricultural development. The United States 

has many important interests before the U.N. Food Agencies in 

Rome, and I am eager to help protect and advance those interests. 

If confirmed, I am committed to helping the U.S. mission, which 

has representatives from the Department of State, the Department 

of Agriculture, USAID, advance our national interests in a wholeof-government approach while helping to make agriculture a major 

force for poverty alleviation and economic transformation around 

the world. 

The Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Programme, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development 

can and must play a critical role in continuing recent momentum 

behind food security. I believe now is the perfect time for these 

three important agencies to sharpen their focus, clarify their roles, 

and improve their coordination, and I am optimistic that the U.S. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

282

mission in Rome can work with these agencies and align priorities 

in such a way that U.S. policies and investments can have the galvanizing effect that we all hope to see. 

Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, I know the fiscal challenge we face, which is why, if confirmed, I would work to ensure 

that U.S. taxpayer-provided resources are used to their fullest 

effect and in the most efficient way possible. Americans are the 

most generous donors in the fight against hunger and they deserve 

vigilance in making sure their tax dollars are well spent. If confirmed, I will work with the U.N. Food Agencies to ensure that 

every penny of U.S. taxpayer-provided assistance is well spent and 

that we are doing our utmost to avoid costly emergencies in the 

future. 

I truly believe that there has never been a more important time 

for U.S. leadership on food and agriculture issues at the U.N. 

Agencies in Rome and around the world, and I would be honored 

to do my part to build on current momentum and help ensure that 

we make the most out of this historic opportunity. 

I thank you for your time, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lane follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID J. LANE

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee. And 

thank you, Senators Nelson and Rubio, for your kind introductions. 

I am honored to be the President’s nominee for the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture. I would like 

to thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have 

shown in nominating me for this important post. 

If confirmed by the Senate, I would consider it a great privilege to serve the 

American people in pursuit of goals I know we all hold dear: alleviating hunger and 

helping the world’s poor lift themselves out of poverty through agricultural development. The United States has many important interests before the U.N. food and 

agriculture agencies in Rome, and I am eager to help protect and advance them. 

If confirmed, I am committed to helping the U.S. mission, which has representatives 

from the Department of State, USDA, and USAID, advance our national interest in 

a whole of government approach while helping to make agriculture a major force 

for poverty alleviation around the world. 

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I believe there has 

never been a more important time for U.S. leadership on food and agriculture issues 

within the U.N. agencies in Rome and around the world. This is a time of unprecedented progress in food and nutrition security, and I want to do my part to sustain 

the momentum and help ensure that we make the most out of our historic opportunity. At the same time, the ongoing lack of food security in regions like the Horn 

of Africa and the Sahel continues to drive instability and slow progress in the development of these areas. With both the opportunity for accelerated progress and lingering challenges in mind, I appreciate this opportunity to share my views on how 

I would contribute to the fight against hunger, if confirmed. 

I hope you will agree that my experience prepares me well for the responsibilities 

of the position for which I have been nominated. I have spent most of my career 

in nonprofit service, and from 2001 until 2011 I worked to help develop and promote 

public policies focused on enabling the world’s poor to lift themselves out of poverty. 

At the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation I established and led the organization’s 

East Coast office in Washington, DC, for 6 years. In this role, I initiated and managed our collaboration with many of the key actors in the global development field. 

After we concluded that mobilizing public support for smart policies could be as important as making smart programmatic investments, I led the Foundation’s senior 

leadership team in designing and implementing policy advocacy strategies. I believe 

strongly in the importance of data-driven public policy, and this conviction shaped 

my approach while leading the Gates Foundation’s policy advocacy work. Driven by 

the strong evidence that improved agricultural productivity can have a transformative impact on rural communities, the Foundation chose to make agriculture 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

283

a top priority, and it continues to be a major force helping to improve lives in poor 

countries through improved agriculture. 

From 2007 until 2011, I was president and CEO of ONE, a nonpartisan global 

organization committed to mobilizing public support for effective development and 

humanitarian policies. While there, I constantly heard how important the fight 

against poverty is to people all over the world and from all walks of life. In my experience, Americans from across our society—students, businesspeople, members of 

diverse faith communities, Republicans, Democrats—strongly support effective

efforts—both in terms of cost and impact. Feeding the hungry is perhaps the most 

powerful charitable impulse of all. In every sector of development, people just want 

to know—and deserve to know—that the programs they support are making a difference. And they want to know that our focus is on creating long-term transformation and self-reliance, not only addressing short-term suffering. 

I frequently traveled to Africa during my tenure at ONE. I saw for myself the 

critical linkages between agriculture and other aspects of economic and social development. These linkages confirmed my belief that smart policies and public investments from developed countries like ours must build on and work in concert with 

committed leadership from developing countries themselves. Without the two working in concert, investments will not be as effective or transformative. 

I am also proud of other roles I’ve been given the opportunity to play in my career, especially those in the Federal Government. I believe my experience as a policy 

analyst, manager, convener, negotiator, and integrator of different perspectives 

would help me fulfill your expectations for this role. 

In addition, I would like to acknowledge the primary importance of my family in 

preparing me to serve my country in this important position, should the Senate confirm me. My parents, George and Mary Lou Lane, instilled in me a deep love of my 

country and a strong commitment to serve others. They were unable to travel to 

Washington, DC, but I know they are proud that I’m being considered for a position 

that can help the United States make a difference for millions of people. I have four 

wonderful brothers and sisters and nine amazing nieces and nephews, some of 

whom are here today, and they will all tell you the same thing: my parents—by 

their example—taught us the true meaning of compassion, the importance of service, and the moral necessity of helping those who are less fortunate than we are. 

I am particularly pleased to join my colleagues today who have been nominated 

for posts in Africa. Although the U.N. food agencies are based in Rome, the focus 

of their work must be in the field, especially Africa, which remains both the region 

of greatest concern and a potential source of long-term solutions. As I’m sure my 

fellow panelists know better than I, Africa is the only continent where agricultural 

productivity has remained stagnant for the past 30 years. And yet, there are countries in Africa where agriculture is on the brink of taking off, responding to strong 

leadership, smart new policies, and increased investment. Many believe that if we 

apply key lessons learned from recent experience we can dramatically increase agricultural productivity in Africa in the coming decade. This may offer the best chance 

we have to help lift tens of millions out of poverty and chronic hunger. 

In recent years, leaders in both developing and developed countries have, in fact, 

reaffirmed the importance of agricultural development and prioritized it as an area 

of policy focus and investment. Recent government-led initiatives—The G8’s 

L’Aquila Food Security Initiative, The Rome Principles for Sustainable Global Food 

Security, The AU’s Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program, the 

G20’s Global Agriculture and Food Security Program—have given new momentum 

to the drive to feed the world’s hungry and lift millions of smallholder farmers out 

of poverty, and these efforts are beginning to show results. And civil society/NGO 

initiatives have long played a critical role addressing food security. In fact, according to one estimate, in 2008 U.S. NGOs that engaged in development work managed 

$11.8 billion in private contributions and gifts-in-kind resources. 

Seventy-five percent of the world’s poor live in rural settings and are dependent 

on agriculture, and most of these are women tending small plots of land. Studies 

have shown that growth in agriculture is three-to-six times more effective than 

growth in other sectors in raising the incomes of the very poor. The stakes are very 

high for getting this right, and I believe the U.N. food and agriculture agencies can 

play a vital role supporting and facilitating the transformation of agriculture around 

the world. At the end of the day, I am confident that the American people will support these efforts if they are having an impact in a cost effective way. 

I would like to say a few words about the U.N. food and agriculture agencies—

the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Programme, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development. I realize many of you approach these 

and other large multilateral organizations with a fair amount of skepticism, and I 

believe past inefficiencies and other shortcomings confirm that we should take a 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

284

firm approach to reform and renewal—something that the mission in Rome is pursuing. But I also believe that these organizations are in a better position than 

they’ve been in a long time to pursue their missions effectively and efficiently and 

serve as reliable partners in combating hunger. 

These three agencies—with dynamic leadership and a renewed commitment to 

their important mandates—can and must play a critical role in continuing recent 

momentum behind food security. I believe now is the perfect time for these three 

agencies to sharpen their focus, clarify their roles, and improve their coordination, 

and I am very optimistic that the U.S. mission in Rome can work with these important agencies and align priorities in such a way that U.S. policies and investments 

have the shaping and even galvanizing influence we all hope to see. 

While I am eager for your guidance on how best to advance U.S. policies and priorities in Rome, there are several issues that I believe will be important areas of 

focus if I am confirmed:

(1) Ensuring that the humanitarian responses of the multilateral agencies are 

effective and efficient, even in the most challenging circumstances, while fostering 

resilience so that affected populations emerge less vulnerable after emergencies with 

the goal of breaking the cycle of disaster and expensive relief. 

(2) Building on the progress that has been made on food security in the past few 

years by ensuring that these agencies promote increased investments—both public 

and private, with a special emphasis on recruiting new donors—in initiatives and 

projects that contribute to developing resiliency and transform rural economies 

while fighting poverty. 

(3) Ensuring that efforts to reform the Rome-based U.N. agencies result in modern institutions that reduce redundancies, and are agile and responsive as well as 

efficient and transparent. 

(4) Using all the modern tools of public diplomacy to ensure that the leadership 

of the United States and great generosity of the American people in support of food 

and nutrition security and agricultural development is well understood around the 

world. This message is critical in underscoring our commitment to international 

peace, security, and development and can contribute to freedom, the development 

of democracy, and the promotion of good governance and market principles worldwide. 

(5) Ensuring that all the important day-do-day work of the U.S. mission I’ve been 

nominated to lead—dealing with standards, norms, international agreements, etc.—

is responsive to our national interests while generating positive results on the 

ground.

The work of the U.S. mission to the food and agriculture agencies in Rome is only 

possible because of the generosity of the American people you represent and we all 

serve. The United States leadership in this space has been in no small part the result of the continued determination by the branches of the United States Government to promote food security internationally. For instance, the United States contributed approximately $1.428 billion to the World Food Programme in CY 2011, 

which alone made up 37 percent of WFP’s budget. We were the single largest donor 

to the FAO in FY 2011, providing an assessed contribution of $111 million—22 

percent of the assessed budget—and an additional $66.67 million to FAO in extrabudgetary funding, mostly for emergency programs. We are also the largest donor 

to IFAD, at $30 million per year. 

Distinguished members of the committee, I am filled with pride when I think of 

the determination of the American people and the ability of the United States Government—the legislative and executive branches alike—to join together to fight hunger worldwide. Since the emergency broke out last year in the Horn of Africa, in 

which drought affected parts of Ethiopia, Kenya, and Djibouti and famine was 

declared in five regions of Somalia, the United States has responded with more than 

$1.1 billion in life-saving assistance, reaching an estimated 4.5 million people, many 

of whom would have otherwise died from starvation or related disease. As the specter of crisis rises once again, this time in the Sahel, I am sure the American people 

will continue to be in the vanguard of fighting it there as well. 

As president of the G8 this year and host of the G8 summit taking place this 

weekend at Camp David, the United States has been working with its partners to 

focus on food and nutrition security in sub-Saharan Africa. Building on the success 

of the 2009 G8 L’Aquila Food Security Initiative and the U.S. Feed the Future initiative, the G8 effort will focus on continuing our commitments to the financial 

pledges made at L’Aquila and to following the Rome principles while also stimulating private investment in agriculture at all scales and across the agriculture 

value chain. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

285

Working together, the actions taken by African Governments, the AU, international partners, private investors, and civil society will substantially accelerate 

agricultural growth across the continent and help more than 50 million people 

emerge from poverty over the next 10 years. We believe that collectively, we can 

achieve this goal based on strong evidence that investments in agriculture—including CAADP Country Investment Plans and G8 actions—will significantly spur agricultural growth. This will be accomplished by working with African leaders to increase private capital investments in African agriculture, take innovations that can 

enhance agricultural productivity to scale, and reduce the risk borne by vulnerable 

economies and communities. We know from history and experience that agricultureled growth resulting from these types of actions, paying special attention to smallholder women farmers and to nutrition, is a powerful driver of broader economic 

growth and poverty reduction. 

Clearly there is a role for the U.N. Rome-based agencies in G8 food and nutrition 

security efforts, and, if confirmed, I will work to ensure that the agencies’ contribution is effective, complementary, and appropriate to their strengths. 

Distinguished members of the committee, I know the fiscal challenges we face, 

which is why, if confirmed, I would work to ensure that U.S. taxpayer provided resources are used to their fullest and with the greatest possible efficiency.

Senator COONS. Thank you so much, Mr. Lane. 

Mr. Alford. 

STATEMENT OF EDWARD M. ALFORD, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF THE GAMBIA 

Mr. ALFORD. Thank you, Senator. 

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you today. I wish to express 

my gratitude to the President and to the Secretary of State for the 

trust and confidence they have placed in me as the nominee for 

Ambassador to the Republic of The Gambia. 

I want to recognize my family, represented by my daughter, 

Sylvia, who is here to support me. 

As a U.S. Foreign Service officer for more than 33 years, I 

enjoyed assignments which provided a variety of experiences in 11 

different countries, including three assignments in Africa totaling 

almost 9 years. I have worked extensively with the interagency 

community, especially in recent assignments in Frankfurt and 

Baghdad. I have particularly enjoyed mentoring my younger colleagues and helping them develop their careers. If confirmed, I 

believe the variety of my experience and my record of leadership 

and fostering mission effectiveness and morale under often difficult 

circumstances, will enable me to carry out the duties and responsibilities of a U.S. Ambassador. 

The United States has a close and historic relationship with The 

Gambia which has embraced the role of the Peace Corps in the 

country since 1967. With 83 Volunteers in-country, the Peace Corps 

is the central component of our public diplomacy and U.S. development assistance. Last year, President Jammeh showed his gratitude for the Peace Corps by hosting the commemoration of the 50th 

anniversary of the Peace Corps and their 45 years in The Gambia. 

The United States has a small diplomatic footprint in Banjul, but 

we arguably have more leverage than any other Western country, 

thanks to our positive bilateral relationship and continuing Peace 

Corps presence. 

The U.S. Embassy closely followed the 2011 and 2012 electoral 

processes and worked to support credible and independent media 

and political parties, as well as democratic processes. Despite 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

286

shortcomings, the Presidential elections in November 2011 were 

adjudged free and fair by several international and domestic observation teams. While there was high voter turnout, several organizations expressed concern at the unlevel playing field for candidates in advance of the elections. 

Promoting human rights remains the top U.S. priority in The 

Gambia. The U.S. mission in Banjul maintains a close dialogue 

with the government and civil society on the human rights situation. Continued engagement with Gambian authorities on press 

freedom and civil liberties will constitute a central piece of our 

bilateral relationship. 

If confirmed, I will continue our economic and regional security 

partnership with The Gambia. Through The Gambia’s contributions to peacekeeping missions, we have enjoyed a steadfast partnership in efforts to promote regional stability. The Gambia also 

plays a positive role in counternarcotics in the region, and sustaining these efforts, along with enhancing the country’s maritime 

security capacity, is another focus of our diplomacy. 

The U.S. Embassy must continue to work with the government 

and private sector to facilitate the growth of the tourism industry 

and the export of several commodities, including apparel and fish 

to the United States under the African Growth and Opportunity 

Act. 

U.S. staffing in Banjul consists of 13 Embassy officials and two 

Peace Corps American staff. If confirmed, I would make my top 

concern the safety and security of the nearly 2,000 U.S. citizens in 

The Gambia, half of whom at any time are tourists. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear today. 

I would be pleased to respond to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Alford follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF EDWARD M. ALFORD

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you 

today. I wish to express my gratitude to the President and Secretary of State for 

the trust and confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for Ambassador 

to the Republic of The Gambia. I want to recognize my family, represented by my 

daughter, Sylvia, who is here to support me. 

As a U.S. Foreign Service officer for more than 33 years, I enjoyed assignments 

which provided a variety of experiences in 11 different countries including three 

assignments in Africa totaling almost 9 years. I have worked extensively with the 

interagency community, especially in recent assignments in Frankfurt and Baghdad. 

I have particularly enjoyed mentoring my younger colleagues and helping them develop their careers. If confirmed, I believe the variety of my experience and my 

record of leadership in fostering mission effectiveness and morale under often difficult circumstances will enable me to carry out the duties and responsibilities of 

a U.S. Ambassador. 

The United States has a close and historic relationship with Gambians, who have 

embraced the role of the Peace Corps in their country since 1967. With 83 Volunteers in country, the Peace Corps is the central component of our public diplomacy 

and U.S. development assistance. Last year, President Jammeh showed his gratitude for the Peace Corps by hosting the Golden Jubilee, which commemorated the 

50th anniversary of the Peace Corps and their 45 years in The Gambia. The United 

States has a small diplomatic footprint in Banjul, but we arguably have more leverage than any other Western country thanks to our positive bilateral relationship 

and continuing Peace Corps presence. 

The U.S. Embassy closely followed the 2011 and 2012 electoral processes and 

worked to support credible, independent media and political parties, as well as 

democratic practices. Despite shortcomings, the Presidential elections in November 

2011 were judged free and fair by several international and domestic observation 

teams. While there was high voter turnout, several organizations expressed concern 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

287

at the ‘‘unlevel playing field’’ for candidates in advance of the elections. The March 

2012 parliamentary elections were also deemed generally peaceful and fair, but 

opposition parties boycotted the election, leaving them with only 5 of the 48 elected 

seats in Parliament. 

Promoting human rights remains the top U.S. priority in The Gambia. The U.S. 

mission in Banjul maintains a close dialogue with the government and civil society 

on the human rights situation. The Gambia has taken significant steps to address 

trafficking in persons through enforcement of legislation and the rescue and rehabilitation of victims. Continued engagement with Gambian authorities on press freedom and civil liberties will constitute a central piece of our bilateral relationship. 

If confirmed, I will continue our economic and regional security partnership with 

the Gambia. Through The Gambia’s contributions to peacekeeping missions, we 

have enjoyed a steadfast partnership in efforts to promote regional stability. The 

Gambia also plays a positive role in counter narcotics in the region and sustaining 

these efforts along with enhancing the country’s maritime security capacity is another important focus of our diplomacy. 

The U.S. Embassy must continue to work with the government and private sector 

to facilitate the growth of the tourism industry and the export of several commodities including apparel and fisheries to the United States under the African Growth 

and Opportunity Act. 

U.S. staffing in Banjul consists of 13 Embassy officials and two Peace Corps 

American staff. If confirmed, I would make my top concern the safety and security 

of nearly 2,000 U.S. Citizens in The Gambia, half of whom at any time are tourists.

Senator COONS. Thank you so much, Mr. Alford. 

I now turn to Mr. Asquino. 

STATEMENT OF MARK L. ASQUINO, OF THE DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF 

EQUATORIAL GUINEA 

Mr. ASQUINO. Thank you, Chairman Coons, Ranking Member 

Isakson. It is a great honor for me to appear before you this afternoon as the nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea. I am grateful for the confidence that 

President Obama and Secretary Clinton have placed in me, as well 

as for the support of Assistant Secretary of State Carson. If confirmed by the Senate, I will do my best to uphold this trust. 

Mr. Chairman, please allow me to introduce my wife, Jane. She 

is here today. We met and were married almost 2 decades ago in 

Bucharest, Romania. Jane has been with me ever since then. I 

have been incredibly fortunate to have had her accompany, support, and inspire me in often difficult and dangerous postings. 

Mr. Chairman, I have spent more than three decades as a Foreign Service officer, serving in Latin America, Europe, Asia, and 

Africa. Presently I am the Executive Assistant and Chief of Staff 

in the Office of the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights. There I supervise a staff of 18 employees 

who work on these crucial issues. 

I have served in countries including Spain and Romania, which 

were in transition to democracy, as well as in oil-rich nations such 

as Kazakhstan and Sudan. The knowledge and experience I have 

gained in such postings have resulted in my deep commitment to 

advancing democracy, human rights, and transparency. 

Today I would like to speak to you briefly about the three major 

U.S. foreign policy issues that form the cornerstone of our bilateral 

relationship with Equatorial Guinea. 

The first is good governance and democracy. Although Equatorial 

Guinea is nominally a multparty constitutional republic, President 

Obiang’s party controls all but one seat in the 100-member legislaFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

288

ture. Equatorial Guinea is the third-largest producer of oil in subSaharan Africa, and has one of the continent’s highest per capita 

income rates. Despite this, much of the population lives below the 

poverty level. Official corruption is widespread in a country that 

needs to spend more on the health and educational needs of its 

citizens. 

Equatorial Guinea was unsuccessful in meeting the requirements 

to join the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, or EITI. 

However, it is considering applying again, and we support that 

action. Meeting the conditions to become an EITI candidate would 

be one positive signal by the Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea, or the GREG, that it intends to improve its fiscal 

transparency through revenue reporting. 

The GREG is investing in major public works projects that are 

improving infrastructure. It is also funding public health programs 

that have lowered infant mortality and drastically reduced the incidence of malaria. These are encouraging steps, and if confirmed, I 

will urge the GREG to devote more attention to transparency and 

governance and continue to invest in its people. 

The second issue is the protection of human rights. In 2010 and 

2011, following urgings from the United States and the international community, the GREG released a significant number of 

political prisoners. The GREG in recent years has also made modest progress in prison conditions and in human rights training for 

security forces. 

While Equatorial Guinea has taken measured actions to improve 

its human rights record, major problems remain. These include 

arbitrary arrests, restrictions on freedom of the press, assembly, 

and association. Since the 2008 visit of the U.N. Special Rapporteur for Torture at the invitation of the GREG, Equatorial Guinea 

has partnered with the International Committee of the Red Cross, 

or the ICRC, to speak out against torture and call for the prosecution of human rights abusers. One notable advance, the 2011 signing of a residency agreement between the ICRC and the GREG, 

culminated this year with the opening of the ICRC’s fully functioning office in Malabo. 

In addition, the GREG recently announced it will revive the 

Interagency Commission on Trafficking in Persons. The government deserves credit for these actions, but Equatorial Guinea must 

do more to promote respect for human rights and also for transparency. 

The third issue, briefly, is U.S. national security and access to 

energy resources. With close to $14 billion invested in Equatorial 

Guinea, United States oil companies are that country’s largest 

investors, and they have the lead role in oil and gas exploration 

and extraction. The United States presently imports approximately 

12 percent of its oil from African nations in the Gulf of Guinea. For 

this reason, we have an abiding interest in the security of this 

zone. 

If confirmed, I will focus on these three issues—governance, 

human rights, and national security—and I will give them my 

utmost energy and attention. I promise to work closely with you 

and the members of this committee. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

289

I thank you very much for the opportunity to speak with you this 

afternoon, and I welcome your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Asquino follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARK L. ASQUINO

Chairman Coons, Ranking Member Isakson, members of the committee, it is a 

great honor for me to appear before you this afternoon as the nominee to be the 

next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea. I am grateful 

for the confidence that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have placed 

in me as well as for the support of Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs 

Carson. If confirmed by the Senate, I will do my best to uphold this trust. 

Mr. Chairman, please allow me to introduce my wife, Jane, who is here today. 

We met and were married almost two decades ago in Bucharest, Romania. Jane was 

there as a Peace Corps Volunteer, and I was serving at the U.S. Embassy. Since 

then, I have been incredibly fortunate to have had Jane accompany, support, and 

inspire me, often in difficult and dangerous postings. 

Mr. Chairman, I have spent more than three decades as a career Foreign Service 

officer, serving in Latin America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Presently, I am the 

Executive Assistant and Chief of Staff in the Office of the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights. There I supervise a staff of 18 foreign 

and civil service employees who work on these crucial issues. I have served in countries including Spain and Romania, which were in transition to democracy, as well 

as in oil rich nations such as Kazakhstan and Sudan. During my most recent overseas assignment as deputy chief of mission in Khartoum, I focused on human rights 

abuses in Sudan. The knowledge and experience I’ve gained in such postings have 

resulted in my deep commitment to advancing democracy, human rights, and transparency. 

Today I would like to speak to you briefly about the three major U.S. foreign policy issues that form the cornerstone of our bilateral relationship with Equatorial 

Guinea. 

The first issue is good governance and democracy. Equatorial Guinea, with a population of fewer than 1 million people, is located in west central Africa’s Gulf of 

Guinea. Although the country is nominally a multiparty, constitutional republic, 

President Obiang Nguema’s Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea controls all but 

one seat in the 100-member legislature. Equatorial Guinea is the third-largest producer of oil in sub-Saharan Africa, and has one of the highest per capita income 

rates in Africa. Despite this, much of its population lives below the poverty level; 

and official corruption is widespread, in a country that needs to spend more on the 

health and educational needs of its citizens. 

Equatorial Guinea was unsuccessful in meeting the requirements to become compliant with the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). However, it is 

considering applying once again, and we are encouraging this action. Meeting the 

conditions to become an EITI candidate country would be one positive signal by the 

Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea (or, GREG) that it intends to improve its fiscal transparency through revenue reporting. 

In regard to the welfare of its people, the GREG has invested in major public 

works projects that are improving the country’s infrastructure, and it is also funding 

public health programs that have lowered the infant mortality rate and dramatically reduced the incidence of malaria. These are encouraging steps, and if confirmed, I will urge the GREG to devote more attention to transparency and governance and continue to invest in its people. 

The second issue is the protection of human rights. In 2010 and 2011, following 

calls from the United States and the international community, the GREG released 

a significant number of its political prisoners. The GREG in recent years has also 

made modest progress in improving prison conditions and providing human rights 

training for its security forces. 

While Equatorial Guinea has taken measured actions to improve its human rights 

record, major problems remain. These include arbitrary arrests, and restrictions on 

freedom of the press, assembly, and association. Since the 2008 visit of the U.N. 

Special Rapporteur for Torture, at the invitation of the GREG, Equatorial Guinea 

has partnered with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to speak 

out against torture and call for the prosecution of human rights abusers. One notable advance, the 2011 signing of a residency agreement between the ICRC and the 

GREG, culminated this year with the opening of ICRC’s fully functioning and fully 

staffed office in Malabo. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

290

In addition, the GREG has announced it will revive the Interagency Commission 

on Trafficking in Persons created to enforce its 2004 Trafficking in Persons Law. 

The government has requested Embassy Malabo’s technical assistance on how best 

to structure the commission. This is the first time in recent history that the GREG 

has taken the initiative to request assistance to prevent human trafficking, which 

is a major problem in Equatorial Guinea. The government deserves credit for such 

positive actions, but Equatorial Guinea must do more to promote respect for human 

rights. 

The third issue is U.S. national security, especially access to energy resources. 

During 2003–2006, I served as deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in 

Kazakhstan. There I worked to protect the commercial interests of U.S. oil companies that were major oil consortium partners. With close to $14 billion invested in 

Equatorial Guinea, U.S. oil companies are Equatorial Guinea’s largest investors, 

and they have the lead role in oil and gas exploration and extraction. The United 

States presently imports approximately 12 percent of its oil from African nations in 

the Gulf of Guinea. For this reason, our country has an abiding interest in the maritime security of this vital, economic zone. 

If confirmed, I will focus on this issue, as well as on the security and well-being 

of the 500 U.S. oil company employees and other American citizens in Equatorial 

Guinea. I will also be a strong advocate for U.S. commercial interests. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will give these three issues, governance, human 

rights, and national security interests, my utmost personal attention and energy. 

While our dialogue and engagement with Equatorial Guinea needs to respect its 

sovereignty and traditions, we also must be frank in discussing our concerns in each 

of these areas. If confirmed, I promise to work closely with you and the members 

of this committee.

Senator COONS. Thank you. 

Mr. Griffiths. 

STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS M. GRIFFITHS, OF TEXAS, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MOZAMBIQUE 

Mr. GRIFFITHS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 

Isakson. It is an honor to appear before you today as President 

Obama’s nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic of Mozambique. I am grateful to the President and Secretary Clinton for the 

confidence they have placed in me as their nominee. 

I am also thankful for the enduring support of my wife, Alicia, 

and our two daughters. Through evacuations, earthquakes, gunfire, 

and floods, they have been enthusiastic and adventurous partners 

in public service. It is finals week, so they were not able to travel 

to be with me, but I expect through the wonders of Internet, they 

are here virtually with me, and they are represented by our dear 

friends and the godparents of our children, John and Betty Shippe. 

In my 24 years in the Foreign Service, I have served in Canada, 

Portugal, Mozambique, Morocco, Switzerland, Haiti, and Ecuador, 

gaining broad geographic exposure and solid experience in management, trade, and the promotion of good governance. While working 

in the Africa Bureau at the State Department, I covered economic 

issues across Southern Africa. In Haiti, Ecuador, and Geneva, I 

had the privilege to serve as charge ́ d’affaires for extended periods. 

Mr. Chairman, I believe that my current position as Deputy Permanent Representative at the U.S. mission to the United Nations 

in Geneva where we engage daily on public health, economic development, and humanitarian relief is excellent preparation to serve 

as American Ambassador to Mozambique. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you 

and the honorable members of this committee to advance American 

interests in Mozambique. Following three decades of conflict, 

Mozambique has enjoyed peace and stability since the early 1990s. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

291

We commend Mozambique on its progress over the past two decades and on its more recent steps in addressing governance concerns since the 2009 elections. As development depends on good 

governance and a strong civil society, if confirmed, my top priority 

will be to work alongside the Mozambican people to continue to 

strengthen democracy and governance. 

In recent years, Mozambique’s economic growth has consistently 

been among the highest in sub-Saharan Africa, averaging 6 to 8 

percent per year. However, despite this sustained growth and the 

quadrupling of gross domestic product since 1992, the majority of 

Mozambique’s 23 million people still live below the poverty line. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will support growth-oriented policies 

to foster job creation and poverty reduction, while stimulating 

broad-based economic growth. I will also aggressively identify and 

pursue every opportunity for American firms. 

Sound economic policies and transparent governance will be increasingly important in Mozambique as the country is poised to 

experience a boom in natural resource revenue in the coming years 

from recently discovered natural gas and newly developed coal 

deposits. For this reason, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will champion U.S. Government efforts that support sustainable economic 

growth throughout Mozambique with a focus on the poorest areas 

of the country. 

The United States Government is helping Mozambicans boost the 

productivity of key crops, reform their agricultural policy, and 

improve maternal and child nutrition, with the ultimate goal of 

sustainably reducing hunger and poverty. The $506.9 million Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact is focused on road construction, water projects, and the land tenure system. 

The United States directs the bulk of our assistance to improving 

the health of Mozambicans. The President’s Emergency Plan for 

AIDS Relief, the President’s Malaria Initiative, the Global Health 

Initiative, and the Peace Corps are working jointly toward this 

goal. If confirmed, I will advance our vision of creating an AIDSfree generation by reducing the transmission of HIV/AIDS, boosting 

the percentage of HIV-positive Mozambicans on treatment, and 

encouraging the Mozambican Government to commit more of its 

own resources to improving the health of its people. 

Mozambique and the United States share a strong common interest in promoting regional stability. Mozambique will assume the 

Presidency of the Southern African Development Community this 

August, significantly elevating its role in promoting regional stability and economic integration. Securing the country’s long land 

borders and coastline are indispensible to economic development in 

Mozambique and the region at large. Facilitating the legal flow of 

goods, services, and people is a major driver for economic growth, 

but it must be coupled with sustained efforts to curb maritime 

piracy and illegal trade flows. I will, if confirmed, build upon our 

partnership with the Mozambican authorities to promote regional 

maritime and border security. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank 

you for the privilege of appearing before you today. If confirmed, 

I welcome the challenge of protecting and advancing American 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

292

interests in Mozambique and accept the corresponding responsibilities of that duty. 

I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Griffiths follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS M. GRIFFITHS

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor for me to appear 

before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Mozambique. I am grateful to the President and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as their nominee. I am also thankful for the enduring support of my wife, Alicia, and my two daughters. Through evacuations, earthquakes, gunfire and floods they have been enthusiastic and adventurous partners 

in public service. 

In my 24 years in the Foreign Service, I have served in countries of vastly different economic and social circumstances. Through postings in Canada, Portugal, 

Mozambique, Morocco, Switzerland, Haiti, and Ecuador I have gained broad geographic exposure and solid experience in management, trade, and the promotion of 

good governance. I also worked in the Office of Southern African Affairs at the State 

Department, gaining invaluable insight into regional issues. In Haiti, Ecuador, and 

Geneva, I have had the opportunity to serve as charge ́ d’affaires, a.i. for extended 

periods. Mr. Chairman, I believe that my current position as Deputy Permanent 

Representative at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations and Other International 

Organizations in Geneva, where we engage daily on public health, economic development, and humanitarian relief, is excellent preparation to serve as American 

Ambassador to Mozambique. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you and the honorable 

members of this committee to advance U.S. interests in Mozambique. Following 

three decades of conflict, Mozambique has enjoyed peace and stability since the 

early 1990s. We commend Mozambique on its overall progress over the past two decades and on its more recent steps in addressing governance concerns since the 2009 

elections. The upcoming 2014 Presidential and parliamentary elections will be key 

barometers of democratic freedoms. As development depends on good governance, if 

confirmed, my top priority will be to work alongside the Mozambican people to continue to strengthen democracy and governance in advance of these elections. 

Mozambique’s economic growth has consistently been among the highest in subSaharan Africa in recent years, averaging 6 to 8 percent. However, despite this sustained growth and the quadrupling of Gross Domestic Product since 1992, the 

majority of Mozambique’s 23 million people live below the poverty line, some well 

below that line. Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will support growth-oriented policies 

to foster job creation and poverty reduction, while stimulating broad-based economic 

growth. I will also aggressively identify and pursue every opportunity for American 

firms. 

Sound economic policies and transparent governance will be increasingly important in Mozambique as the country is poised to experience a boom in natural resource revenue in the coming years from recently discovered natural gas and newly 

developed coal deposits. For this reason, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will champion U.S. Government efforts that support sustainable economic growth throughout 

Mozambique, including the poorest areas of the country. The U.S. Government is 

helping Mozambicans to boost the productivity of key crops, improve their agricultural policy, and improve maternal and child nutrition, with the ultimate goal of 

sustainably reducing hunger and poverty. The $506.9 million Millennium Challenge 

Corporation (MCC) Compact is focused on road construction, water systems, and 

modernization of the land tenure system. 

As the largest bilateral donor to Mozambique, the United States directs the bulk 

of our assistance to improving the health of Mozambicans. The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the President’s Malaria Initiative, the Global Health 

Initiative, and the Peace Corps are all working toward this goal. If confirmed, I will 

advance our vision of creating an AIDS-free generation by reducing the transmission 

of HIV/AIDS, boosting the percentage of HIV-positive Mozambicans on treatment 

and encouraging the Mozambican Government to commit more of its own resources 

to improving the health of its people. 

Mozambique and the United States share a strong common interest in promoting 

regional stability. Mozambique will assume the Presidency of the Southern African 

Development Community in August 2012, significantly elevating its role in promoting regional stability and economic integration. Securing the country’s long land 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

293

borders and coastline are indispensable to economic development in Mozambique 

and the region at large. Facilitating the legal flow of goods, services and people is 

a major driver for economic growth, but it must be coupled with sustained efforts 

to curb maritime piracy and illegal trade flows. I will, if confirmed, build upon our 

partnership with the Mozambican authorities to promote regional maritime and border security. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank you for the privilege of appearing before you today. If confirmed, I welcome the challenge of protecting and advancing the interests of the United States in Mozambique and accept 

the corresponding responsibilities of that duty.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Griffiths, and thank you to our 

whole panel. 

You have attracted, Mr. Lane, interest and support from a wide 

range of acquaintances of mine from Max Finberg and John Doerr, 

who both send their best, to Dr. Raj Shah, Administrator of the 

USAID, who has joined us in the back. There are very exciting 

developments over the next few days that Dr. Shah and I have 

been in communication about that I know all of us are eager to 

hear more about. 

So let me begin, if I could, a first round of questioning by focusing on food and agriculture and food security across the whole 

panel. 

First, if I might, Mr. Lane, in a difficult international financial 

environment and because Dr. Shah is here, how should the United 

States and other G8 members, given the impending conversations, 

approach the issue of global food security? And as the largest contributor to the Food and Agricultural Organization, World Food 

Programme, International Fund for Agricultural Development, 

what factors should we be seeking as we try and balance building 

long-term resilience in food security against emergency humanitarian needs? 

Mr. LANE. Senator, thank you. And I want to thank Dr. Shah for 

coming. I am pleasantly surprised that he is here. 

It has been estimated that by the year 2050, the world population will be 9 billion people and that agricultural productivity will 

have to increase by somewhere between 50 to maybe 70 percent in 

order to meet the world’s needs for food. You mentioned the 

resource constraint that we face, the fiscal constraint. We cannot 

get there from here in terms of donor country providing the investment that is going to be necessary to achieve those kinds of productivity gains. It is going to be important for especially developing 

countries themselves to step forward with their own prioritization 

of agriculture investment but also for the private sector. 

And it is not my place to preview the G8 initiatives of the next 

couple days. I have, as a nominee, been asked to stay out of those 

things. But perhaps Raj would like to come up and elaborate. 

[Laughter.] 

But I think it is fair to say that the foundation was set at the 

Locula summit for public investment. There was, I think, a $22 

billion donor, G8 and other wealthy country commitment and a

commitment that this Senate and Congress has supported by

the United States of $3.5 billion that I think is starting to show 

benefits. 

But the really, to me, very important part that I saw from my 

time at the Gates Foundation and from ONE is country-owned 

plans and country leadership, and that those countries are now 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

294

starting to step up. And I think in my role in Rome, it is going to 

be important for me to work with my counterparts to be sure that 

they are doing their part to meet their own targets of 10 percent 

budget for agriculture spending, which is part of the Maputo targets, but even more importantly, the private sector investment that 

is going to be necessary to transform agriculture. And I have a feeling, a strong sense honestly that in the next few days that we are 

going to be hearing much more about the private sector side of 

agricultural development, and I think that is really going to be necessary to get done what we need done. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Lane. 

If we might, the countries of The Gambia and Equatorial Guinea, 

both relatively small countries, but one is, Equatorial Guinea, 

resource-rich. In both cases, they need to strengthen the priority of 

their focus on meeting basic human needs and on agriculture. And 

Mozambique, a very large country, with a lot of potential in terms 

of arable land—the targets you referenced were established in 

Maputo. 

If you might each in turn just speak to how AGOA has or has 

not been used successfully by the country to which you have been 

nominated to serve as an Ambassador, in what sectors other than 

natural resources, extractive industries we might see some private 

sector investment from the United States, and in particular, how 

we might prioritize food security going forward in each of your 

respective countries. 

Mr. Alford. 

Mr. ALFORD. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

Food security in The Gambia depends very much year-to-year on 

the crop. Eighty percent of the people are involved in agriculture, 

although agriculture is only 38 percent of the GNP. I am pleased 

to note that our Peace Corps is involved in increasing the productivity there. USAID, working with the University of Rhode Island 

and with the World Wildlife Foundation, is working to improve 

fisheries. And the U.S. Department of Agriculture has a project to 

improve cashew production, and that is a combined project with 

Senegal and The Gambia. 

That being said, since 2008, The Gambia’s exports have been limited to clothing and fisheries. And there may be other sectors in the 

future, primarily agricultural-based sectors where we could 

increase exports. Industry there is minimal now. Our exports to the 

country are about $30 million a year and we import less than $1 

million a year. So the scope for increasing the imports there but 

primarily agriculture, fisheries, and of course tourism is a big, big 

industry there, primarily European tourists but a lot of Americans 

go there too. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Alford. 

Mr. Asquino. Are there sectors other than oil and gas that might 

be attractive for U.S. investment and how does food security play 

into the future for Equatorial Guinea? 

Mr. ASQUINO. Thank you very much for the question, Senator. 

As you noted, Equatorial Guinea is a very small country. It has 

less than a million people. And yet, it is not independent in terms 

of food production. Only 2.2 percent of this GDP comes from agricultural production. And yet, if you look at the history of the counFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

295

try, in 1968 when it became independent from Spain, it was a 

major producer of cocoa, and it had a thriving agricultural sector. 

So I think to answer your question, AGOA is not running a program in Equatorial Guinea and we do not have USAID programs 

there. But there is great interest, including from U.S. companies, 

in developing the agricultural sector. The Chinese as well have 

been involved in various projects. And I really do feel that this is 

an area where Equatorial Guinea can improve its production. 

Almost everything right now is imported. Inflation runs at 9 or 10 

percent every year. So this makes it very hard for the people of 

that country, and because of that, you have nutritional issues as 

well that are raised. 

So if I were confirmed, sir, I certainly would focus on agricultural 

investment. I think it is an area where we can, and we should, be 

doing more in Equatorial Guinea. Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. 

Mr. Griffiths, Mozambique is an enormous country with lots of 

natural resources. What is the prospect for food security? They are 

an MCC compact partner. What are the major areas of investment 

or activity in Feed the Future and in other agricultural sectors? 

Mr. GRIFFITHS. Great. Thank you, Senator, for the question. 

And I fully agree that for Mozambique, this is one of the most 

important issues, and if confirmed, it is something that I will 

devote a lot of attention to. 

As in The Gambia, 80 percent of Mozambicans work in the agriculture sector. Yet, it only makes up 29 percent of GDP. So Feed 

the Future is the centerpiece very much for U.S. Government 

engagement in this process, and we have already had some successes and I think we will continue to have more. 

You were talking about, or Mr. Lane was talking about, private 

sector investment, and we have an example in Mozambique, an 

American investor. He is working on agricultural extension products and in helping families with crop rotation and with growing 

food crops interspersed with cash crops like tobacco that are having 

an impact. I think we also have to note the importance of Mozambique to regional food security. Transport corridors to landlocked 

countries pass through Mozambique. So it is important that we 

focus on these issues. 

As to AGOA, they have not made significant use of it. I would 

like to highlight two areas. One is cashews where USAID has 

worked for a long time in helping Mozambicans take advantage of 

processing cashews. They are not sending out raw nuts. And the 

second is the Embassy has been very engaged in working with 

Mozambique to get turtle excluder devices into their fisheries so 

that shrimp can be exported to the United States. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. I will turn it over to my friend, Senator Isakson, 

and note that both of us come from States with long and broad 

experience in poultry both in the science of poultry and in the export of poultry. And so if there is any way we could be helpful as 

to the respective countries you will be serving in, we would be 

happy to be drawn upon as a resource. 

Senator Isakson. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, thank you, Senator Coons. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

296

Each of you made very positive remarks, which I am going to try 

and refer to and your awareness of some of the important roles 

that you are going to have in the next couple years. 

Starting with you, Mr. Lane, you made an acknowledgment of 

the American taxpayers need accountability in terms of U.S. funds 

that go into food programs and U.N. programs. As you probably are 

aware—I can speak for myself; I cannot speak for Senator Coons—

but in our part of the world in the southern United States, there 

has been a growing resentment for the amount of disproportionate 

funding of the U.N. that the United States does through its dues. 

Now, that is not my statement, but that is a statement that I deal 

with. 

In terms of U.N. food programs and the three agencies within the 

U.N.—I think you said there were three—who deal with food, what 

percentage of the cost of that food does the U.S. taxpayer pay? 

Mr. LANE. Sir, as you have indicated in a very good question, we 

are the leading funder of all three. In the case of the World Food 

Programme, which is a voluntary set of contributions as opposed to 

an assessment, usually based on need, usually based on campaigns 

for emergency food relief, this year, in the current year, it is estimated that we will be 37 percent of global funding to the WFP. The 

FAO slightly less, and 22 percent of the assessed amount plus different amounts depending on particular programmatic requirements. It can vary. And in the case of the International Fund for 

Agricultural Development, it is $30 million a year which I think is 

11 or 12 percent, but still significant and the leading amount. So 

it is quite significant. 

I take it as one of my important responsibilities, if I am confirmed, is to try to leverage our contribution to be sure that other 

donor countries are doing their part and to be sure that developing 

countries themselves are starting to take responsibility for their 

own food assistance. 

Senator ISAKSON. I was recently in Uganda, and I was asked the 

question by an NGO with reference to funding of the foreign affairs 

budget, what was going to be the top priority. I said, you know, the 

foreign affairs budget and the United States aid overseas is going 

to go from a compassion-driven appropriation to a politically driven 

appropriation. And I do not mean that in a crass way, but I mean 

it in a way that I think the American people are looking for our 

programs to do more than just feed the people for a day, but help 

to teach them to feed themselves for a lifetime. 

I am wondering if you had any ideas on taking that concept and 

making it a part or a contingency of the United States contribution. 

Mr. LANE. I do, sir, and I appreciate very much the question. In 

fact, I feel badly that Senator Coons has left because he mentioned 

this term ‘‘resiliency,’’ which is a new and emerging concept in food 

policy which I think is extremely important. 

Just if I can take a step back, the WFP provides humanitarian 

and emergency relief in situations of conflict or emergency disaster. 

The FAO has a different mission which is more focused on agricultural development, sharing of information, best practices so that 

countries can develop their agricultural sectors and ultimately 

transform their economies through economic growth. And I am sure 

you know, sir, that agricultural productivity is one of the most 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

297

effective areas of economic growth as a stimulus for growth across 

the economy. 

While, on the one hand, my mission in many ways is to keep the 

different agencies sticking to their knitting and responsible to their 

own areas of responsibility, the blend between emergency response 

and development is this concept called resiliency, which is becoming much more important. and I think Dr. Shah, Gail Smith from 

the White House, a number of others, were in East Africa just this 

spring where they launched a new initiative with other international donors focused on this concept. 

So the idea is when we go in, in the case, for instance, of Somalia 

to help feed people in a dire situation, are we doing everything we 

can from a joint planning point of view and from a programmatic 

point of view to prepare for the recovery and averting a disaster 

and the next disaster. And there are things we can do. There are 

tools we have in terms of livestock preservation, vaccination, getting livestock to safety, crop insurance, drought resistant seeds, 

water management that can be much more effective because I 

think from a cost-effective point of view, as you have indicated, it 

is the disaster in humanitarian relief which is the most expensive 

and is giving a man a fish as opposed to helping a man to learn 

to fish. And I think making this transition will be very important. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, I want you to understand clearly that I 

am well aware of some of our food security and our food effort go 

to countries where we have displaced individuals in a host country 

who have left a place like Somalia or southern Sudan or someplace 

like that. 

But I do think everywhere the American people can be aware 

that there is a contingency tie—I think Mr. Alford referred to country-owned plans where we can have a part of that be a part of our 

mission. We want to feed the people that are hungry, but we also 

want to help the countries to develop agricultural programs where 

it will lessen the pressure on the American taxpayer and improve 

the plight of that African country. 

So you recognized this in your remarks. I wanted to accentuate 

the importance of doing that. 

And I will go to Mr. Alford for a minute. I think we are going 

to do a second round anyway. 

And I appreciate your mentioning AGOA. For all of your benefit, 

the chairman and I offered an amendment to the bill we passed 

earlier this week on the EXIM Bank, which we did not call up, but 

we did it to send the signal that America needs to renew the AGOA 

act quick, sooner rather than later, and we think the African 

Growth and Opportunity Act is an important partnership between 

the United States and the entire continent of Africa. So I appreciate your mentioning it. I know Mr. Griffiths mentioned it and I 

appreciate it very much that you did. 

Mr. Asquino, we talked about the new Embassy that is being 

built. Is that right? 

Mr. ASQUINO. Yes, sir, that is correct. I would be happy to speak 

about that if you would like. 

Senator ISAKSON. I would mainly because my last trip to Equatorial Guinea, there was a 10-foot hole in the ceiling of the rented 

U.S. Embassy and it was raining the day I was there. [Laughter.] 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

298

And I worked hard to try and get the State Department to raise 

the priority level of that Embassy. So I would love to have a report 

on it. 

Mr. ASQUINO. Well, first of all, thank you for the question. But 

I also want to thank you for the support. As you know from that 

visit, we have been working out of facilities that are woefully inadequate and housing that is really terrible. 

We expect that the new Embassy complex, which will include 

workspace, a chancery, as well as housing, will be completed by the 

summer of 2013. And that is important for a couple of reasons, sir. 

In addition to providing people with decent workspace, there were 

security issues in that Embassy. We had to have certain security 

waivers from our diplomatic security office in order for us to continue working there. So we will have far better security when we 

open the new Embassy. 

And the other issue that I would like to raise is our provision of 

American citizen services. We have over 500 American citizens, 

mostly who are connected with the oil industry, who live and work 

in Equatorial Guinea. So having a decent consular section where 

they can come, where we can assist them across the board, is enormously important. 

So I will end by thanking you, and I will also end by offering an 

invitation. We would be deeply honored, sir, if you could come to 

the inauguration in the summer of 2013. Thank you again. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, I will try and do that, but you should 

know my interest is more about your lovely wife having a good 

place to stay than it was you having a nice Embassy. [Laughter.] 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Senator Isakson. 

It is striking and just a reminder of his dedication to this work 

that the good Senator can say on my most recent trip to Equatorial 

Guinea, a sentence I suspect is not one widely said here on this 

panel. And I agree that keeping your family and your coworkers 

secure and providing appropriate support for Americans and their 

activities abroad, whether in the Peace Corps or private sector, is 

a critical part. 

Let me turn, if I could, to some governance and human rights 

questions. In The Gambia, there is a troubling and long pattern of 

press harassment. There have been some real challenges in terms 

of human rights. And current and former members of this committee, most principally Senator Durbin, but also Senators Casey 

and Feingold who previously was the chair, have been urging the 

government to allow greater press freedoms and to account for a 

missing Gambian journalist, Ebrima Manneh. The plight of this 

journalist is widely seen as symbolic of press harassment there. I 

did not know if you could comment on this particular case or if you 

could tell us something about what sorts of messages about human 

rights and press freedoms you would carry forward as Ambassador. 

And then last, it seems to me that Gambia’s questionable human 

rights records and press freedom has raised real issues for them in 

terms of eligibility for Millennium Challenge Corporation funds. Is 

there a positive possibility of a positive outcome here or do you 

think this will be a challenging issue for your new service as 

Ambassador? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

299

Mr. ALFORD. Thank you for the question, Senator. It will be challenging. If confirmed, I intend to consistently speak for press freedom. I do note that the case of the disappearance of Mr. Manneh—

the President Jammeh has agreed to have a U.N. study group look 

into that, and I would look forward, if confirmed, on cooperating 

with the U.N. and with NGOs and with the Government of The 

Gambia to see if we can get clarity in that case. And press freedom 

is one of our fundamental beliefs. If confirmed as American Ambassador, of course, I would speak consistently and forcefully for press 

freedom in every case. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. We would appreciate your persistent 

engagement on that and your reporting back to us any progress on 

that particular case and then whether the MCC provides some 

positive leverage as well. 

If I could to Mr. Asquino, President Obiang is now the world’s 

longest ruling leader after 33 years, and the Government of Equatorial Guinea has recently amended its constitution in ways that 

many observers believe are designed to pave the way for his son 

to succeed him as President. In a number of other countries 

throughout the continent, we have recently seen constitutional 

changes that similarly led to a lack of full and fair and open 

elections. 

What sorts of messages as Ambassador would you deliver about 

democracy and rule of law? 

And last, their most prominent human rights activist was 

recently sentenced to 3 years in prison after what seemed to be a 

politically motivated trial. What role would you play in advancing 

human rights more broadly? 

Mr. ASQUINO. Thank you. You have touched on some very important issues, Senator. 

In terms of President Obiang, what we would seek is for him to 

view as his legacy to his country bringing about democratic reform. 

This is a country that is faced with some very serious challenges, 

both economic and political. And as he looks at his long time in 

office, what we have urged him to do, and what we have offered 

to partner, is to look at ways to open political space that will leave 

for his people a better life in terms of provision of services, fairer 

distribution of resources and also a society in which basic freedoms 

and liberties are respected. 

I would agree with you certainly on the constitutional package. 

It created the position of Vice President, and there is widespread 

concern that that referendum was held solely in order to create 

that position. So certainly as we look to municipal elections, which 

are the next elections coming up in 2013, if confirmed, I would certainly urge for more openness, giving the one political party there 

that really is in the opposition, the Convergence for Social Democracy, a true level playing field. 

And I will finish by talking about Dr. Wenceslao Mansogo, whom 

you referred to. He is the Secretary General for Human Rights 

within the Convergence for Social Democracy Party. He was convicted of malpractice. We had an Embassy observer at that trial. 

Ambassador Fernandez met with the government and urged that 

he be treated fairly and humanely. And when that sentence was 

issued on May 7, shortly after that, the U.S. Embassy and the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

300

State Department issued a statement expressing major concerns 

about due process for Dr. Mansogo and also for guarantees of his 

rights under the constitution of Equatorial Guinea, which many 

observers felt he was not afforded. 

So if I were confirmed, sir, I would certainly urge that the President look to his legacy, that he look to ways to leave a country that 

is more democratic, and one that provides better for its people, and 

also that the opposition be given a chance to compete in the political sphere. 

Thank you, sir. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Asquino. 

If I might, Mr. Griffiths. Former President Chissano was the first 

recipient of the Mo Ibrahim Prize, as you may know. Dr. Ibrahim 

recently testified in a hearing that we held on openness, transitions, governance, democracy. And to what extent has Chissano’s 

legacy helped shape a more positive political environment for 

Mozambique and how durable do you think is the path forward 

toward multiparty democracy in Mozambique? 

Mr. GRIFFITHS. Thank you very much for the question, Senator. 

That is correct. And sort of in terms of legacy, he was succeeded 

by President Guebuza who as finishing his second mandate and 

recently there were reports in the press that President Guebuza 

had confirmed that he would not seek another term. I think that 

is an excellent sign for not only Mozambique’s democracy and stability but also is a symbol to the region where we have seen Presidents extend their mandates. 

I underscored that this would be, if confirmed, my top priority, 

and that is not only because of the importance we put toward governance, but I think as Senator Isakson was pointing out, the importance of ensuring that people know how to fish. Institutions 

matter which is why the Embassy has been focusing a lot on building up civil society, having a plethora of voices, people who can 

express pressure on the executive so that there are various sources 

of power. And I think it is very important to continue working as 

we have been with decentralized governments—some of the mayors 

now are from opposition powers—to continue working with business groups so that they too can articulate different points of 

views. 

And civil society has been key in Mozambique in pushing forward a recently passed series of anticorruption legislation, which 

I think puts the country in the right direction. They have whistleblower protection, which is very important not only for government 

but also for trafficking in persons protection. And there was recent 

legislation where civil servants have to declare their revenue. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Well, thank you. 

Nelson Mandela to South Africa, George Washington to our own 

country, having founding executives, Presidents, Prime Ministers 

who voluntarily relinquish their elected role is a critical piece in 

most countries’ transition to democracy. And I hope that you will 

be able to build regionally on Chissano’s contributions. 

Senator Isakson. 

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

301

Mr. Griffiths, I mentioned that each of you made comments that 

impressed me, and the one that you made in your presentation 

about the PEPFAR program was the need for the countries to use 

more of their own resources in the delivery of that program. 

You know, PEPFAR is a program a lot of people do not understand why we are making the investment we are making in it. But 

I am reminded of the fact that AIDS came to America through a 

flight attendant on a flight from Africa. And if we had had the type 

of CDC-type attention in Africa at the time, maybe that would not 

have happened, and think of the dollars it would have saved the 

American taxpayer and the world. So I think it is important that 

we do what we are doing through the PEPFAR program, but it is 

essential, as I said to Mr. Lane, that I can say to the American taxpayer in Georgia that that program is paying a dividend to the 

United States of America and that the countries in Africa are taking more ownership of it. 

I was in Tanzania a few years ago in 2009. They then—now, this 

may have changed, but then they were a pretty shining example. 

Ambassador Green had been there for a couple of years. They had 

taken over most all of the testing, most all of the delivery, and 

what we were really doing was providing the retrovirals, but they 

were delivering the manpower and everything else. 

I would like for you to comment on your vision of that as far as 

your country is going to be. 

Mr. GRIFFITHS. Thank you very much for the question, Senator. 

And indeed, I think that is exactly the vision we have for 

Mozambique, and I will talk a bit about the program, but if I may 

just make a point on the transition. I spoke about the resource 

boom that is coming Mozambique’s way, and I think it is essential 

that we do have these strong institutions in place so that we can 

see this transition, as you pointed out, when the government has 

more of its own resources that it can put it to benefit its own 

people. 

We do have a number of very impressive successes in our 

PEPFAR program in Mozambique. If I may just cite a few statistics. In 2003, fewer than 5,000 patients were on antiretroviral 

treatment. In 2011, we had 273,000. One other of those numbers, 

people on treatment increased 89 percent between September 2009 

and March 2012. 

And what our Embassy is focusing on through the interagency 

work of the PEPFAR program is really building up the health care 

system which was destroyed during the civil war, and that is going 

to have a huge impact on rural societies. 

We talked a bit about the importance of agriculture, and if you 

have a rural health care system that can address the needs of the 

population, they can be vectors of growth within the community as 

well. And I think our partnerships with faith-based organizations 

which have a great deal of credibility in their communities, our 

partnership with the Peace Corps, our partnership with the 

Department of Defense in helping to ensure that the military is 

ready to fulfill its mandate to protect the long land and sea borders, all of this comes together and the aim is very much what you 

signaled, Senator, that we will be able to transition the responsibility and the funding to the host government. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

302

Senator ISAKSON. Well, one thing a lot of people do not understand is because of PEPFAR, we have gone from a situation where 

we were supplying retrovirals to try and prevent to where now 

people are living a lifetime of relatively normal and productive lifetimes on those retrovirals. And so you are going to have a continuum of care, not just taking care of a pregnant mother for a few 

years and having a child born to that pregnant mother passing 

away in a few months. That continuum of care is going to have to 

be hosted by the countries in which those people reside because the 

United States, in a macrosense and in a longitudinal way, cannot 

continue to fund all of that. But if we have turned that paradigm 

and those countries are taking more of the ownership of the continuum of care, then it would be a great legacy for our entire country and what we did for mankind. 

Mr. Asquino, just do me one favor. The next time you see Mr. 

Obiang—we had a conversation when I was over there about the—

you know, Marathon Oil helped develop the—I forgot the wildcatter 

who found the gas in the Gulf of Guinea, but Marathon helped do 

the liquefication plant. Am I not right? 

Mr. ASQUINO. That is correct, sir. There is a $1.5 billion gas 

liquefication plant that Marathon funded. 

Senator ISAKSON. Is the son that everybody suspects is the one 

the constitution was amended for, the good son that does the gas 

and oil or the one that is Malibu on the beach? 

Mr. ASQUINO. Malibu on the beach, sir. [Laughter.] 

The other son’s name is Gabriel. 

Senator ISAKSON. I have met him. He is a pretty competent guy, 

seemed to be anyway. 

Mr. ASQUINO. Yes. That is what everyone says. 

Senator ISAKSON. But I talked to President Obiang about the fear 

of the Dutch disease infecting Equatorial Guinea because they were 

the poorest. But prior to the discovery of that gas and oil, they 

were, I think, the poorest country on the face of this earth, now as 

the chairman said, one of the richest growing economies. But if 

they are just investing that money in things and not investing it 

in their people, then they are going to have the same thing happen 

that has happened in most of the Middle East where they suffer 

from the Dutch disease and they do not develop their infrastructure themselves. So tell him I have not forgotten that conversation, 

and I encourage him to invest in his people. 

Mr. ASQUINO. Sir, if confirmed, I certainly will do so. Thank you. 

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Senator. 

If I might, just a last question or two. I am interested in and concerned about across all three countries—there were in the background materials concerns about piracy, about maritime security, 

about regional cooperation. And we have varying degrees of partnership or relationship both military and diplomatic, relatively 

modest relations, in one case relatively broad and strong. 

What will you be doing and what do you see as our role in 

addressing what is an increasingly regional challenge, all the way 

down from Somalia in the case of Mozambique, all the way across 

the Gulf of Guinea, in your case in Equatorial Guinea, and then 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

303

regionally with narcotrafficking into Europe with The Gambia? 

What role can we as a country constructively play in improving 

maritime security and in contributing to regional security across 

the continent? If you might, Mr. Alford, first. 

Mr. ALFORD. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

The Gambia is a relatively poor and resource-poor country. However, they have been engaged militarily in peacekeeping operations 

in Liberia and Sierra Leone, and they have over 400 troops in 

Darfur now. I think building on this perhaps through IMET and 

through training—we are sending the first trainees down to Botswana for some INL-funded training. I think we can enhance their 

capabilities by using our expertise, by working with them on this. 

I do note that they are a committed regional player. They are very 

active in ECOWAS. I think with a little more training, maybe a little more resources down the road, I think they can play an even 

more constructive role on this. 

I would note that they recently seized, within the past 2 years, $1 billion in cocaine with the assistance of the British, and I think 

that was the largest cocaine seizure ever in West Africa. So that 

is something else we can build on. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Alford. 

Mr. Asquino. 

Mr. ASQUINO. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. 

Certainly piracy and the rise of militancy in the Gulf of Guinea 

are of major concerns to the United States. I had mentioned in my 

testimony that some 12 percent of our oil imports now come from 

the Gulf of Guinea. 

In terms of what the United States is doing in the Gulf of 

Guinea, we are working very closely with regional countries, specifically Cameroon, Gabon, and Nigeria through the Africa Partnership Station. And this provides training to those countries, helps 

them to develop the capacity, but also helps them to coordinate in 

terms of their response to those sorts of threats. 

Given the fact, as I said in my testimony, that human rights 

really is a top priority in Equatorial Guinea, we do not have military assistance programs with Equatorial Guinea. But Equatorial 

Guinea has worked with us, and we do guide them in terms of 

these issues. They themselves started a regional naval academy in 

2009, which is the first regional naval academy for training on the 

African Continent. And so they themselves have been addressing 

these issues. 

Although we do not have programs with them, we have encouraged them to look to contractors who can help them, and in recent 

years, they have improved their own capacity for naval security. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. 

Mr. Griffiths, I was struck to see that Somali pirates seemed to 

be an issue in Mozambique, and certainly regional integration and 

security collaboration, something you referred to in your opening 

statement—what role can we possibly play to strengthen that security regionally? 

Mr. GRIFFITHS. Thank you, Senator. Mozambique has the fourthlargest coastline in Africa. So it is a very important issue, and not 

only on the issue of piracy but also in its capacity to interdict illegal trafficking both of people and of drugs and other contraband, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

304

but also in protecting their fisheries and protecting the offshore gas 

exploration that will be continuing in the northern part of the 

country. So we have been working with the Mozambican Navy and 

we have given 17 rigid hull inflatable boats, providing training, 

and other equipment to help them be able to patrol more and have 

a higher surveillance of the Mozambican channel. As you mentioned, helpfully they are working with Tanzania and South Africa 

so that the three countries can jointly assist in controlling the 

waters off the coast. If confirmed, I would certainly focus on these 

issues and see how we could further deepen our relationships with 

the Mozambican Government. 

Senator COONS. Terrific. Thank you. 

Senator Isakson, no further questions? 

Senator ISAKSON. No. 

Senator COONS. I just want to thank all four of you for appearing 

before us today. I want to thank your families for supporting you 

across what has collectively been more than a century of public 

service across quite difficult postings all over the world. I am confident that you will represent the United States well and that you 

will advocate for our interest as a nation and help move forward 

the values that I think are our greatest resource in our engagement with the world. 

There may be members of the committee who were not able to 

join us today who would like to submit questions for the record. I 

will keep the record open through next Friday, but in the absence 

of any further questions, thank you very much for your appearance 

before this committee. 

And this hearing is hereby adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:39 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF EDWARD M. ALFORD TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Given your previous experience as a management officer in multiple 

posts around the world, what lessons have most significantly shaped your approach 

to managing a post like The Gambia?

Answer. Many years of supervising and leading large and diverse staffs have prepared me well to lead this small Embassy in a hardship environment. I have 

learned the importance of mentoring younger employees and fostering their career 

development and the importance of treating the locally employed staff with respect. 

I believe in the importance of integrating State Department Direct Hire employees, 

local employees, family member employees, and other agency employees into a team 

focused on our mission objectives and that the morale and well-being of family members is a vital component to managing any mission, but especially so in a hardship 

post. On the programmatic side, my experience in prioritizing finite resources to 

meet the most critical mission objectives will serve me well as we focus on democracy, human rights, and development agendas in tough budgetary times.

Question. According to the State Department Country Report on Human Rights, 

Gambia’s challenges include restrictions on freedom of speech and press. Are there 

ways to utilize new media as a way of increasing outreach to advance U.S. goals? 

In your past experience, have you seen examples of effective uses of new media to 

support U.S. priorities?

Answer. The State Department is adapting our statecraft by reshaping our development and diplomatic processes to meet old challenges in new ways. New media 

complements traditional foreign policy tools by using new technology to reach more 

people and reach them in a more direct and targeted way. In response to the challenges outlined in the State Department Human Rights Report for The Gambia, we 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

305

are using new media as a means of bolstering freedom of speech and press while 

also increasing outreach to The Gambian youth, who constitute over 60 percent of 

the population. 

Embassy Banjul’s Facebook Page is an excellent example of an effective use of 

new media to support U.S. priorities. According to the page statistics, the page is 

most popular with 25–34 year olds with broad participation including civil society 

organizations, universities, local musicians, even The Gambian talk shows. 

RESPONSES OF MARK L. ASQUINO TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Given your most recent position as Executive Assistant in the Office of 

the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights, and your 

previous experience, what lessons have most significantly shaped your approach to 

managing a post like Equatorial Guinea?

Answer. My present position as Executive Assistant in the Office of the Under 

Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights has provided me 

with comprehensive knowledge of the various programs, resources, and tools the 

State Department has at its disposal to promote democracy and address human 

rights abuses. This knowledge, plus my overseas experience in engaging constructively on such issues with tough, nondemocratic governments, would form the basis 

of the firm, honest, and goal-oriented approach I would use to direct Embassy 

Malabo’s interactions with the Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea 

(GREG) if I were confirmed. 

In Kazakhstan, I emphasized to the government the importance the United States 

places on transparency in reporting earnings from extractive industries, especially 

oil and gas. During my tenure as deputy chief of mission and Charge ́ d’Affaires, a.i., 

in Almaty, Kazakhstan applied to be a candidate for membership in the Extractive 

Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). My productive experience in working on 

this key issue with Government of Kazakhstan officials would shape how I envision 

leading Embassy Malabo’s efforts to encourage the GREG to create the conditions 

that would make a reapplication for EITI membership possible.

Question. In your testimony, you noted that during your most recent overseas

assignment as deputy chief of mission in Khartoum, you focused on human rights 

abuses in Sudan. Though State Department human rights reports have noted some 

human rights improvements in Equatorial Guinea in recent years, serious issues 

continue to exist. Given your previous experience, and considering the very limited 

U.S. aid to Equatorial Guinea, are there ways to engage the government to support 

greater improvements and how would you characterize your approach?

Answer. In Khartoum, I was a forceful advocate with the Government of Sudan 

(GOS) on the need for it to allow nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and other 

civil society organizations to expand their humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons in Darfur. If confirmed, I would draw on this experience and provide 

the Equatoguinean Government (GREG) with specific areas in which it needed improvement in its respect for human rights. I would advocate that the government 

ease restrictions on international and domestic organizations to allow them, with 

government cooperation, to continue to improve prison conditions, denounce human 

rights abuses, and ensure that Equatoguinean citizens are accorded their basic 

rights, including due process. 

Equatorial Guinea is ranked Tier 3 in the Trafficking in Persons Report. But on 

a positive note, the GREG has recently asked for the United States technical assistance in restructuring the country’s dormant Interagency Commission on the 

Trafficking in Persons. If I am confirmed, I would like to further the GREG’s restructuring of the Commission. As noted above, I would raise specific areas for improvement and inform the GREG what it needs to accomplish to improve its TIP 

ranking. 

Just as was the case in Sudan, my approach on such issues would be one of respectful, but firm and deliberate, engagement with Equatorial Guinea. 

RESPONSES OF DOUGLAS M. GRIFFITHS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Mozambique is home to a wide array of natural resources, but over half 

its population lives on less than 50 cents a day. Based on your experience in other 

posts, how can a government most effectively try to bridge those gaps rather than 

falling victim to the so-called resource curse that has plagued so many other counFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

306

tries? How can the U.S. Government most effectively assist that sort of genuinely 

democratic economic development?

Answer. Strengthening democracy and governance is one of the highest priorities 

for the U.S. Embassy in Mozambique. If confirmed, I will continue to focus on U.S. 

Government efforts in this area to include the development of civil society and implementation of anticorruption legislation. Building strong local institutions and 

host government administrative capacity are crucial to Mozambique’s long-term stability and economic growth. Specific to natural resources, I will continue to encourage Mozambique in its ongoing application process to the Extractive Industries 

Transparency Initiative (EITI). Moving beyond transparency, I will encourage the 

Mozambican Government to adopt a fiscal regime that will govern the responsible 

management of natural resource revenues. 

Making progress toward more broad-based growth will be a significant challenge 

during my tenure, if confirmed. Broad-based economic growth and poverty reduction 

are also top priorities of the U.S. Embassy in Mozambique and U.S. Government 

initiatives are already working toward this goal. Through Feed the Future, the U.S. 

Government and Mozambique are working to sustainably reduce poverty by improving key agricultural value chains and supporting the policy enabling environment 

for agricultural development. Mozambique will soon take part in the ‘‘New Alliance 

to Increase Food Security and Nutrition,’’ launched at the Camp David G8 summit 

in May, which aims to increase responsible private investments in agriculture. 

Promoting a more dynamic private sector is an integral aspect of Feed the Future 

and the ‘‘New Alliance,’’ and will create new jobs and improve livelihoods across 

Mozambique. 

Additionally, the Millennium Challenge Corporation is working in the less developed northern provinces of Mozambique—where many of the natural resources are 

found—to improve the road and water supply infrastructure, support farmers, and 

formalize land tenure administration. These improvements will create an environment more conducive to growth across all socioeconomic levels.

Question. Given your previous experience, what management lessons will shape 

your approach if confirmed as chief of mission of the U.S. Embassy in Mozambique?

Answer. My previous postings in places such as Haiti and Geneva have taught 

me the true value of the ‘‘whole of government’’ approach. While these postings 

starkly contrasted in many ways, the teamwork required to tackle complex crises 

across U.S. agencies remained at the core. If confirmed, I plan to harness all of the 

U.S. Government resources available at post and in Washington to achieve our mission goals. 

The U.S. Embassy in Mozambique is a fast-growing mission with employees from 

seven U.S. agencies spread out across the city in a number of annexes. If confirmed, 

I will lead by example in fostering interagency cooperation by encouraging crosscutting projects and activities across the mission. 

RESPONSES OF EDWARD M. ALFORD TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. According to the State Department’s 2011 Trafficking In Persons 

Report, The Gambia is a Tier 2 Watch List country for human trafficking for its 

failure to demonstrate increasing its efforts to address human trafficking over the 

previous year.

• If confirmed, what would be your strategy to encourage the Government of The 

Gambia to institute stronger human trafficking policies?

Answer. Gambia is a ‘‘Tier 2 Watchlist’’ source, transit, and destination country 

for children and women subjected to trafficking in persons, specifically forced labor 

and forced prostitution. If confirmed, I will encourage the Government of The Gambia to increase efforts to investigate and prosecute trafficking offenses and convict 

trafficking offenders. I will also urge the government to develop an educational module for police and government officials to distinguish smuggling from trafficking as 

well as encourage the government to train its law enforcement to improve victim 

identification efforts. In addition, I will work to support the development of the 

newly created National Agency Against Trafficking in Persons to become a strong 

partner in combating trafficking in persons in The Gambia. I will also urge it to 

complete the promised database that tracks the government’s antitrafficking efforts.

Question. The 2007 Trafficking in Persons Act mandated the formation of the 

National Agency Against Trafficking In Persons. This agency has not entered into 

formal existence and has not received its allocated funds from the government.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

307

• If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the government fulfills its 

obligation for the creation of this agency?

Answer. Despite limited resources, the Government of The Gambia is making significant efforts to meet the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking in 

persons (TIP). In December 2011, the Ministry of Justice launched the National 

Agency Against Trafficking. This was in direct response to the 2011 Trafficking In 

Persons Report, which expressed concerns about the delayed formation of a national 

agency as mandated in the 2007 Trafficking in Persons Act. The new agency has 

the lead role in coordinating anti-TIP efforts and its boards of directors includes representatives from most of the government agencies that cover TIP-related issues as 

well as from local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that are active in 

antitrafficking efforts. The agency itself has staff and budget assigned to it. If confirmed, I will work to support the development of this nascent agency to become a 

strong partner in combating trafficking in persons in The Gambia. 

RESPONSES OF MARK L. ASQUINO TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. According to the State Department’s 2011 Trafficking In Persons 

Report, Equatorial Guinea is a Tier 3 county for human trafficking for its failure 

to make significant efforts to combat trafficking, despite the government’s substantial financial resources.

• If confirmed, what is your strategy to engage the Government of Equatorial 

Guinea to enact a strong antitrafficking policy which will address prosecution, 

protection and prevention?

Answer. Our Embassy in Malabo is working with the Equatoguinean Government 

to strengthen Equatorial Guinea’s efforts to combat and prevent trafficking in persons and to assist trafficking victims. Our mission regularly engages with the Ministries of Social Affairs, Interior, National Security, Defense and Foreign Affairs, 

and has raised the importance of combating human trafficking directly with Equatorial Guinea (EG) President Obiang. In part due to our intervention, EG’s Director 

General for Immigration has recently informed our Embassy that EG will revive its 

Interagency Commission for Trafficking in Persons, which was formed when EG 

passed its trafficking in persons law in 2004, but which has not met in over 2 years. 

The Director General also intends to update EG’s National Plan to Fight Human 

Trafficking and to begin steps to implement it. He has asked for U.S. advice on how 

to revive and structure the Commission. The State Department’s Office to Monitor 

and Combat Trafficking in Persons is actively working with the Embassy on the request. Last week the Equatoguinean Government cohosted a seminar on trafficking 

in persons with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). While these 

first steps indicate a renewed commitment to trafficking issues, I believe that we 

must remain engaged with the Equatoguinean Government and continue to urge the 

government to take a holistic approach to combat trafficking. The Under Secretary 

for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights (J) is responsible for overseeing the work of the Office to Monitor and Combat the Trafficking in Persons

(J/TIP). As Chief of Staff in this Under Secretariat, I am directly involved in discussions of TIP issues on a day-to-day basis. If confirmed, I will coordinate closely with 

J/TIP and continue the Embassy’s dialogue with the Equatoguinean Government to 

encourage it to take concrete steps to combat human trafficking. I will strongly urge 

it to adopt a robust antitrafficking policy that addresses prosecution, protection, and 

prevention.

Question. Public officials are often engaged in human trafficking and smuggling 

operations in Equatorial Guinea, which is principally a destination for children subjected to forced labor.

• If confirmed, how would you engage the Equatoguinean Government in a dialogue on the sensitive subject of government officials engaging in trafficking?

Answer. The U.S. Embassy in Malabo has maintained a frank dialogue with the 

Equatoguinean Government on a range of sensitive issues, including human rights 

and trafficking in persons. Our candid relationship extends to the highest levels, 

and previous ambassadors have been able to deliver tough human rights messages 

to President Obiang; if confirmed, I will continue this practice. When faced with 

credible accusations of official complicity in human trafficking, I will draw on my 

extensive experience in combating trafficking in persons in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, 

and Sudan to raise the issue at the highest levels of government. I understand that 

the Equatoguinean Government has generally been receptive to U.S. messages on 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

308

the trafficking issue, and has some interest in ending official complicity in human 

smuggling and trafficking. In June 2010, an Equatoguinean court convicted an army 

officer and two others guilty of human trafficking and sentenced them to 15 years 

in prison in connection with the deaths of several foreign nationals who died of 

asphyxiation while being smuggled into Equatorial Guinea. 

RESPONSES OF DOUGLAS M. GRIFFITHS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. According to the State Department’s 2011 Trafficking in Persons Report, 

Mozambique is a Tier 2 country for human trafficking. There are loose Mozambican 

and South African trafficking networks and also larger Chinese and Nigerian trafficking syndicates active in Mozambique.

• If confirmed, how would you encourage the Mozambican Government to investigate the transnational organization crime element of human trafficking?

Answer. In the 2011 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Report, the Government of 

Mozambique received an upgrade to Tier 2 from Tier 2 Watch List following 

progress made through its efforts to combat TIP in 2010. Continuing its strong 

efforts, in 2011 the Mozambican Government initiated 15 new investigations of trafficking-in-persons cases, and 11 new prosecutions. Eight cases were completed, 

seven of those resulting in convictions. These law enforcement efforts occurred 

under its strong 2008 antitrafficking act and demonstrate the capacity of the 

Mozambican Government to address transnational crime. 

The Mozambican Government has implemented TIP training programs for border 

guards, customs officials, and police officers to help them recognize and prevent trafficking. If confirmed, I will continue to encourage U.S. support for this type of training, as well as for other programs that combat these illegal activities. I will also 

continue to encourage progress, specifically to finalize Mozambique’s implementing 

regulations for the 2008 legislation, develop a formal system to refer victims to care, 

and continue to build the capacity of the antitrafficking police unit. 

The Mozambican Government recently began to compile data on trafficking cases 

nationwide, a first and significant step toward understanding TIP crime networks 

and trends. Parallel to this effort, Mozambique began drafting a national 

antitrafficking action plan. The U.S. Embassy in Mozambique has been assisting in 

these ongoing efforts. If confirmed, I will continue to make our assistance in these 

areas a priority. 

Our International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE) assistance to 

Mozambique has historically focused on border security. State is coordinating with 

USAID to expand the scope of our assistance to the Attorney General’s office with 

a focus on strengthening prosecutorial capacity. We also are planning to target 

assistance to strengthening the enforcement of customs, antimoney laundering laws, 

and detecting and deterring drug trafficking—all initiatives with direct links to combating human trafficking networks.

Question. The Mozambican Government deports foreign trafficking victims without screening them for possible victimization.

• If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that foreign trafficking victim 

cases are investigated and that the victims are treated as victims instead of 

criminals?

Answer. There are increasing numbers of migrants arriving in Mozambique from 

a number of other countries in Africa, particularly Ethiopia and Somalia, as well 

as from South Asian nations. The overwhelming majority of these are economic 

migrants voluntarily transiting Mozambique on their way to South Africa. 

The government has a national system of Women and Children’s Victim Assistance Units, operating in over 200 police stations throughout the country, and these 

Units assist trafficking victims as well as victims of domestic violence. If confirmed, 

I will encourage the Mozambican Government to meet its responsibilities under 

international conventions to erect comprehensive screening procedures at its borders, as well as to increase the capacity of the Victims Assistance Units for the benefit of foreign trafficking victims. 

The Mozambican Parliament recently passed a comprehensive Witness and Victims Protection Act, which will offer a broad range of protective measures, including 

physical protection and foreign and domestic relocation. This law will have direct 

application to Trafficking in Persons (TIP) cases. If confirmed, I will encourage the 

Mozambican Government to devote adequate resources to this new act. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(309)

NOMINATIONS OF MICHELE SISON, BRETT 

MCGURK, AND SUSAN ELLIOTT 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Michele Jeanne Sison, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the 

Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and to serve concurrently as Ambassador to the Republic of Maldives 

Brett H. McGurk, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Iraq 

Susan Marsh Elliott, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Tajikistan 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room SD–

419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert P. Casey, Jr., 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Casey, Udall, Lugar, and Risch. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT P. CASEY, JR.,

U.S. SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA 

Senator CASEY. Good morning. Today the Senate Foreign Relations Committee meets to consider the President’s nominees to 

serve as Ambassador to the following countries: Iraq, Sri Lanka, 

the Maldives, and Tajikistan. I want to thank all of the witnesses 

and others who are here with us today for appearing to discuss 

challenges in these countries and obviously to discuss each nominee’s work, as well as their work upon confirmation, and of course, 

U.S. policy in each of the countries. 

Let me just go through a little bit about each place first and then 

we will get to our witnesses, our nominees. 

In Iraq, the picture, of course, is mixed nearly 6 months after the 

redeployment of United States troops from the country. We know 

that political and ethnic divisions remain sharp as Iraq recovers 

from years and years of war. The current government took months 

to establish in 2010 and a high degree of mistrust still exists 

among key political factions. Iraqis and Americans have sacrificed 

mightily to support the democratic process in Iraq. At this critical 

time, we should continue to support the political reconciliation 

among key players in the country as they work to further deepen 

the democratic process. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

310

This unsettled political environment exists within a very precarious security situation where extremist groups are still capable of 

and have launched significant attacks in the country. Just last 

week, six bomb blasts across Baghdad killed at least 17 people 

mostly in Shia neighborhoods. On Monday, a suicide bomber killed 

at least 26 people in Baghdad and wounded more than 190 in an 

attack on the government-run body that manages Shiite religious 

and cultural sites. While security is certainly a significant challenge in Iraq and all loss of life is a tragedy, violence has, in fact, 

decreased substantially since the height of the conflict. 

With the end of the U.S. military presence in the country at the 

end of 2011, Iraq has sought to deepen the roots of its sovereignty 

and play a leadership role in the region. Iraq recently hosted a 

meeting of the Arab League in Baghdad, a symbol that it is once 

again a key player in the region after years of isolation under Saddam Hussein. With this enhanced standing in the region, there are 

serious questions about Iraq’s position on, for example, Syria. 

While I understand Iraq’s concerns about Syria’s stability in a postAssad era, the violence over the past year perpetrated by Assad’s 

forces is inexcusable. Iraq should join with others in the international community and use its position in the Arab League to 

bring increased diplomatic pressure to bear on Mr. Assad. 

I also continue to have significant concerns about Iran’s efforts 

to exert influence in Iraq. I look forward to hearing the nominee’s 

thoughts on this seminal issue and an assessment of the United 

States ability to diplomatically mitigate the negative effects of Iranian influence in Iraq. 

Despite these continuing challenges, there is positive news in 

Iraq that we can build upon. This was reflected in a recent public 

opinion survey fielded by the National Democratic Institute, known 

as NDI. NDI found that 48 percent of Iraqis believed that Iraq was 

headed in the right direction. Oil exports have increased by 20 percent this year to nearly 2.5 million barrels a day. American companies have increased their presence in Iraq. And, as mentioned, 

violence levels have, in fact, decreased. We are seeing signs of 

progress, but this progress is delicate and fragile. 

In October of last year, the State Department became the lead 

U.S. agency in the country. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad is the 

biggest U.S. presence in the world with approximately 16,000 staff 

and contractors. Questions remain about the State Department’s 

ability to operate in this still precarious security environment and 

handle the significant workload associated with the processing of 

billions of dollars’ worth of arms sales to the Iraqi Government. A 

diplomatic presence of this size requires sustained oversight from 

Congress. And I look forward to continued engagement with our 

nominee, upon confirmation, to ensure our footprint in Iraq is the 

right size and that we have the right amount of resources to pursue our interests. 

The President has nominated Brett McGurk to represent our 

interests amid the myriad significant challenges in Iraq. Mr. 

McGurk, perhaps due to his great upbringing in Pittsburgh, PA, is 

eminently capable to assume this position. Of course, there are 

other reasons for his preparation, but it does not hurt that you 

have roots in Pittsburgh. He has been engaged in U.S. policy in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

311

Iraq since 2004, advising every U.S. Ambassador at post in Iraq. 

He has an intimate understanding of the political players and history of Iraq, as well as the role of the United States in the country 

since 2004. His unique experience across two administrations is 

very good preparation to establish a leadership vision for the 

Embassy that reflects U.S. diplomatic, security, and economic interests. Mr. McGurk is the right choice at the right time in United 

States-Iraq diplomatic relations. 

Mr. McGurk, welcome. We will hear from you in a moment. 

In Sri Lanka, 3 years after the end of more than a quarter century of devastating civil war, we also see a mixed picture. On the 

one hand, the end of the conflict has led to strong economic growth, 

driven by large-scale reconstruction and development projects, 

increasing commodity exports, and a growing tourist industry. 

However, the war left Sri Lanka with a legacy of internal displacement, mistrust among ethnic groups, and of course, insufficient 

protection for human rights that have yet to be adequately addressed. According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center, nearly 100,000 people remain displaced and even more have 

been unable to repossess their homes. The military’s significant 

presence in the north and east of the country poses an obstacle to 

returning internally displaced people, as well as to the delivery of 

humanitarian aid. Some observers have expressed concern about 

the ongoing Sinhalization of ethnic Tamil areas. 

Perhaps most importantly, the Sri Lankan Government has 

failed to meet expectations with regard to investigating alleged 

human rights violations and holding culpable individuals accountable. International experts have found credible allegations of serious human rights violations committed by both sides in the last 

stages of the war, but the perpetrators have not been called to 

account yet for their crimes. The recommendations of the Lessons 

Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, the so-called LLRC, released more than 6 months ago have yet to be implemented. 

I and others remain very concerned about the lack of accountability for actions taken during the final days of the war, as well 

as about reports of ongoing human rights violations in the country. 

In March 2011, I led a resolution in the Senate calling for greater 

accountability in Sri Lanka, and in November of that year, I wrote 

a letter to Secretary Clinton, along with Senators Leahy and 

Cardin, calling for an independent international investigation into 

the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. Recent reports by the 

Department of State, the U.N., and international human rights 

groups cite forced disappearances, arbitrary detention and torture, 

and repression of media and political opposition all as ongoing 

problems. The United States should continue to work with the 

international community to push for greater accountability and 

protection for human rights in Sri Lanka. 

The Maldives is certainly an important ally of the United States 

and we enjoy a productive relationship. In 2008, the Maldives experienced historic elections which heralded a new democratic beginning for this small island, and we know that this year’s political 

unrest has unfortunately threatened to derail the progress that has 

been made. The United States should continue to press for elecFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

312

tions as soon as possible to ensure that the seeds of the democratic 

process, planted in 2008, are able to flourish. 

I welcome Ambassador Sison, and I met the Ambassador during 

my visit to the Middle East in 2010 where she was in charge of 

our Embassy in Lebanon. I was impressed with her ability to navigate a complicated and at times, indeed, treacherous political environment in Beirut. She has also served as Ambassador in the 

United Arab Emirates and in a variety of diplomatic positions in 

Iraq, Pakistan, India, the Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Benin, Togo, and 

Haiti. She will be well prepared for what I know will be a very 

challenging assignment in Sri Lanka and the Maldives. 

Ambassador, I know that your two daughters, Alexandra and 

Jessica, are in Arizona today. But as they have accompanied you 

to seven overseas posts over the years, they deserve special recognition for their unwavering support for you and for the country. 

And we want to recognize that today. 

And finally, Tajikistan. Tajikistan’s strategic location and internal instability pose important challenges for United States policymakers. While the United States operations in Afghanistan continue, we must rely upon close cooperation with Tajikistan in order 

to manage the flow of goods and people into and out of Afghanistan. This includes bringing materials and equipment into Afghanistan that are critical to progress there, disrupting the dangerous 

flow of narcotics across the border, and preventing militants from 

seeking safe haven and causing instability in Tajikistan. 

However, we must balance these strategic priorities with the 

need to address serious human rights concerns in the country. The 

U.N. Human Rights Council in March 2012 reported on Tajikistan 

and revealed worrying trends in human rights, including reports of 

repression of media freedom and political opposition and the use of 

torture by law enforcement officials. I am particularly concerned 

about the reported restrictions on the rights of women and ethnic 

and religious minorities, and I appreciate the work that our dedicated Foreign Service and USAID personnel are doing in Tajikistan 

and look forward to hearing more about how we will advance this 

work going forward. 

The President has nominated Susan Marsh Elliott to be the new 

U.S. Ambassador to Tajikistan. Susan, I note that you were born 

in Doylestown, PA. I cannot say that that will guarantee your confirmation, but it will not hurt. [Laughter.] 

It certainly will not hurt. 

She is currently the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for 

South and Central Asian Affairs. She has served in Russia, Northern Ireland, Greece, Peru, and Honduras. She also has the distinction of having been born in Pennsylvania, but I do not want to put 

too much weight on that. 

I would also like to welcome her son who has joined her today, 

Kurt Mitman, for being with her today, and I would also like to 

acknowledge Deputy Assistant Secretary Elliot’s husband, Matthias 

Mitman, who could not be with us today because he is currently 

serving as the deputy chief of mission in our Embassy in Honduras. 

And please wish him well for us. 

Again, I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here. 

Madam Ambassador, we will start with you and maybe go from my 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

313

right to the left. If you could try to keep your opening remarks to 

5 minutes. If you have a longer statement, that will certainly be 

made part of the record, and then we will get to questions. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHELE JEANNE SISON, OF MARYLAND, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST 

REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY 

AS AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MALDIVES 

Ambassador SISON. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Senator, it is an 

honor to appear before you as President Obama’s nominee to be the 

U.S. Ambassador to Sri Lanka and U.S. Ambassador to Maldives. 

I am deeply grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for 

their confidence in my abilities. If confirmed, I look forward to 

working with the committee and interested Members of Congress 

to represent the American people and to advance U.S. goals in Sri 

Lanka and Maldives. 

In my 30 years in the U.S. Foreign Service, I have been posted 

as U.S. Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates and as U.S. 

Ambassador to Lebanon, as you noted, Mr. Chairman. I also have 

considerable experience in South Asia, having served in India and 

Pakistan and as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the 

South Asia region. 

The United States has important interests in both Sri Lanka and 

Maldives. Sri Lanka is located along the busiest shipping lanes in 

the Indian Ocean, a region emerging as a strategic arena in which 

America’s enduring interests are increasingly at play. Sri Lanka 

has also been a contributor to U.N. peacekeeping operations. The 

United States thus recognizes the importance of maintaining a 

broad range of partnerships with Sri Lanka as we encourage a lasting democratic peace in the country after nearly 3 decades of devastating conflict. 

The United States and other international partners have encouraged the Government of Sri Lanka to pursue the steps needed to 

foster genuine reconciliation and accountability. Although the Government of Sri Lanka defeated the terrorist organization, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, serious allegations of violations of 

human rights law and international humanitarian law committed 

by both sides at the end of the war remain to be investigated and 

have slowed reconciliation. 

In March, the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a U.S.-sponsored resolution calling on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of Sri Lanka’s own governmentappointed Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. In April, 

the State Department issued its third report to Congress on 

accountability in Sri Lanka since the end of Sri Lanka’s conflict in 

2009. Achieving genuine reconciliation will require Sri Lanka to 

take credible steps to ensure equality and justice for all Sri 

Lankans, particularly for those living in the former conflict areas. 

Such steps include demilitarization of the former conflict zones, 

establishment of a mechanism to address cases of the missing and 

detained, and setting a date for provincial elections in the north. 

Also critical will be the achievement of an agreement between the 

Sri Lankan Government and the elected representatives of the 

Tamil community on devolution of power to provincial institutions. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

314

During a May 18 meeting with the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister, 

Secretary Clinton underscored that an enduring peace is unsustainable without adequate measures to address reconciliation and 

accountability. She encouraged a transparent and public process 

with regard to reconciliation and accountability to strengthen confidence inside and outside of Sri Lanka and to speed the healing 

of the country. If confirmed, I stand ready to lead our efforts to 

support Sri Lanka as it moves forward and to use U.S. assistance 

strategically to promote reconciliation, strengthen democratic institutions and practices, and foster economic growth particularly in 

the north and east, the former conflict zones. 

The U.S. Ambassador in Colombo is also accredited to the Republic of Maldives. In February, following a series of controversial 

events and protests, the former Vice President took office after the 

resignation of the President. The United States continues to 

encourage Maldives to work within existing democratic institutions 

to resolve political challenges peacefully and transparently. The 

U.S. Government now has a window of opportunity to step up its 

engagement in Maldives, and USAID recently committed funding 

to assist Maldives in ensuring that the next round of Presidential 

elections is free and fair. 

The United States also recognizes the importance of promoting 

security in the Indian Ocean. To that end, the U.S. Coast Guard 

has provided training to the Maldivian Coast Guard to improve its 

ability to respond to threats of piracy, as well as to combat transshipment of illicit commodities. U.S. assistance to the Maldives 

also promotes the development of a robust ‘‘climate resilient 

islands’’ model. 

If confirmed, I plan to consult with Sri Lankans and Maldivians 

from all walks of life on how the United States can best support 

local initiatives to promote civil society, protect freedom of expression, and encourage youth exchanges. It would also be my goal, if 

confirmed, to engage in vigorous commercial advocacy in Sri Lanka 

and Maldives on behalf of U.S. companies, in support of President 

Obama’s National Export Initiative. 

I would welcome your insights and views, as well as any questions you might have for me today. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Sison follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR MICHELE JEANNE SISON

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you 

as President Obama’s nominee to be the United States Ambassador to Sri Lanka 

and United States Ambassador to Maldives. I am deeply grateful to the President 

and to Secretary Clinton for their confidence in my abilities. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and interested Members of Congress to represent the American people and to advance U.S. goals in Sri Lanka and Maldives. 

My 30 years in the U.S. Foreign Service includes postings as U.S. Ambassador 

to the United Arab Emirates and U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon. I also have considerable experience in South Asia, having served in India and Pakistan and as Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for the region. 

The United States has important interests in both Sri Lanka and Maldives. Sri 

Lanka is located along the busiest shipping lanes in the Indian Ocean, a region 

emerging as a strategic arena in which America’s enduring interests are increasingly at play. Sri Lanka has also been a contributor to U.N. peacekeeping operations. The United States recognizes the importance of maintaining a broad range 

of partnerships with Sri Lanka as we encourage a lasting, democratic peace in the 

country after nearly three decades of devastating conflict. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

315

The United States and other international partners have encouraged the Government of Sri Lanka to pursue the steps needed to foster genuine reconciliation and 

accountability. Although the Government of Sri Lanka defeated the terrorist organization Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, serious allegations of violations of human 

rights law and international humanitarian law committed by both sides at the end 

of the war remain to be investigated and have slowed reconciliation. 

In March, the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a U.S.-sponsored resolution 

calling on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of Sri 

Lanka’s own government-appointed Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. 

In April, the State Department issued its third report to Congress on accountability 

in Sri Lanka since the end of Sri Lanka’s conflict in 2009. Achieving genuine reconciliation will require Sri Lanka to take credible steps to ensure equality and justice for all Sri Lankans, particularly for those living in former conflict areas. Such 

steps include demilitarization of the former conflict zones, establishment of a mechanism to address cases of the missing and detained, and setting a date for provincial 

elections in the north. Also critical will be the achievement of an agreement between 

the Sri Lankan Government and the elected representatives of the Tamil community on devolution of power to provincial institutions. 

During a May 18 meeting with the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister, Secretary Clinton underscored that an enduring peace is unsustainable without adequate measures to address reconciliation and accountability. She encouraged a transparent and 

public process with regard to reconciliation and accountability to strengthen confidence inside and outside of Sri Lanka and to speed the healing of the country. If 

confirmed, I stand ready to lead our efforts to support Sri Lanka as it moves forward and to use U.S. assistance strategically to promote reconciliation, strengthen 

democratic institutions and practices, and foster economic growth, particularly in 

the north and east. 

The U.S. Ambassador in Colombo is also accredited to the Republic of Maldives. 

In February, following a series of controversial events and protests, the former Vice 

President took office after the resignation of the President. The United States continues to encourage Maldives to work within existing democratic institutions to 

resolve political challenges peacefully and transparently. The U.S. Government now 

has a window of opportunity to step up its engagement in Maldives, and USAID 

recently committed funding to assist Maldives in ensuring that the next round of 

Presidential elections is free and fair. 

The United States also recognizes the importance of promoting security in the 

Indian Ocean. To that end, the U.S. Coast Guard has provided training to the 

Maldivian Coast Guard to improve its ability to respond to threats of piracy as well 

as to combat transshipment of illicit commodities. U.S. assistance to the Maldives 

also promotes the development of a robust ‘‘climate resilient islands’’ model. 

If confirmed, I plan to consult with Sri Lankans and Maldivians from all walks 

of life on how the United States can best support local initiatives to promote civil 

society, protect freedom of expression, and encourage youth exchanges. It would also 

be my goal if confirmed to engage in vigorous commercial advocacy in Sri Lanka 

and Maldives on behalf of U.S. companies, in support of President Obama’s National 

Export Initiative. 

I would welcome your insights and views, as well as any questions you might 

have for me today. Thank you.

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Madam Ambassador. 

Mr. McGurk. 

STATEMENT OF BRETT H. MCGURK, OF CONNECTICUT,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF IRAQ 

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Risch, Senator Lugar. It is a tremendous honor to appear before 

you today as President Obama’s nominee to become U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. I am deeply grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me with this 

nomination. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with 

you to advance America’s many important and vital interests in 

Iraq. 

I have had the distinct privilege of serving alongside each of the 

last five U.S. Ambassadors to Iraq. I was with Ambassador John 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

316

Negroponte in July 2004 when he raised the American flag to open 

a U.S. Embassy in Baghdad for the first time since 1991. Nearly 

8 years later, I was with Ambassador Jim Jeffrey as he led the 

challenging transition from military to civilian lead for the first 

time since the toppling of Saddam Hussein. 

I have also served alongside our heroic military commanders, 

including Generals Petraeus, Odierno, and Austin. The opportunities that are now before us in Iraq exist only because of the leadership of these individuals and the more than 1 million Americans 

who have served there, including the nearly 4,500 who have paid 

the ultimate price. 

Like too many Americans, I have lost friends in Iraq. If confirmed, I will do everything in my power, drawing on all the tools 

of our foreign policy, to build a lasting partnership with Iraq that 

is worthy of their memory and sacrifice. 

I believe such a partnership is possible. I also believe, however, 

that we are not there yet. There is so much the United States must 

do to mitigate risks of backsliding and increase prospects for consolidating the many gains that we have seen since the worst periods of the war. 

Iraq today is slowing emerging from decades of war, isolation, 

and dictatorship. More recently, it faced down, with American help, 

a sectarian war that left tens of thousands of Iraqis dead and millions displaced. The violence threatened to collapse the Iraqi state 

and reduced many citizens to their most basic ethnic and sectarian 

identities. 

This legacy is felt most acutely in the political process. For the 

first time in Iraq’s modern history, politics is now the primary 

arena for engagement among all of Iraq’s many different sects and 

ethnicities. That is the good news. The bad news is that their vast 

differences still threaten to overwhelm the nascent institutional 

framework that was established under the Iraqi Constitution. I am 

deeply concerned about this situation. 

Iraq’s Constitution envisions a united, federal, democratic, and 

pluralistic state in which all citizens enjoy fair representation in 

local and national institutions. This vision, however, remains an 

aspiration. Fear, mistrust, and score-settling still dominate political 

discourse. As a result, Iraqis have sought to supplement the constitutional design with additional political agreements and accommodations. 

I have often been one of the few Americans in the room when 

such agreements were being developed. If confirmed, I pledge my 

utmost efforts to work with leaders from all political blocs, to 

encourage respect for prior agreements, durable compromise, and 

constitutional arrangements that help guarantee meaningful 

power-sharing and partnership. 

These efforts would be guided by the 2008 Strategic Framework 

Agreement, which is now the cornerstone of U.S. policy in Iraq. The 

SFA is unique in that it structures a long-term partnership across 

the fields of defense, energy, economics, diplomacy, education, and 

justice. With respect to the political process, it calls on the United 

States to help strengthen Iraq’s democracy and its democratic institutions as established in the Iraqi Constitution. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

317

If confirmed, my mission is clear: to establish an enduring partnership with a united, federal, and democratic Iraq under the SFA. 

As one of the lead negotiators of the SFA, I would be honored to 

carry out that charge, together with Iraqi leaders and close colleagues from across the U.S. Government, many of whom I have 

worked with over a number of years. 

Going forward, if confirmed, I will seek to organize the mission 

around four mutually reinforcing lines of operation: defense and 

security, political and diplomatic, energy and economics, rule of law 

and human rights. 

In the defense and security area, if confirmed, I look forward to 

working with our Office of Security Cooperation and CENTCOM to 

ensure that we are doing everything possible to deepen our military defense partnership in Iraq. 

In the diplomatic area, if confirmed, I look forward to working 

with our Ambassadors in regional capitals, most of whom I have 

worked with and admired for many years, to ensure close coordination of U.S. policies in Iraq and throughout the region. 

In the political area, Iraq is scheduled to hold elections: provincial elections in 2013 and national elections in 2014. If confirmed, 

it will be a central focus of our mission to work in coordination 

with the U.N. to ensure that these elections are held freely, fairly, 

and on time. 

Energy and economics are now foremost priorities. If confirmed, 

it will be among my highest priorities to connect U.S. businesses 

with emerging opportunities in Iraq and to refocus Iraqi leaders on 

the urgent necessity of diversifying their economy and grappling 

with national hydrocarbons legislation. 

As the United States pursues its interests in Iraq, we must never 

lose sight of our values, including promotion of human rights, 

women, and protection of vulnerable minorities. 

This is an ambitious agenda, but it should not require an 

unsustainable resource base. If confirmed, I pledge to work with 

the Congress to establish a diplomatic presence in Iraq that is 

secure, strategic, effective, and sustainable. A focused U.S. mission 

with prioritized lines of operation organized around the SFA can 

enhance our influence and ensure the agility we will need to 

advance U.S. interests in a constantly changing and dynamic environment. 

I will also ensure, if confirmed, that precious taxpayer resources 

are applied effectively, transparently, and with an eye toward longterm sustainability. 

I have tried to touch upon a number of the issues that I will soon 

confront, if confirmed, as the next U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. For 

me, there is no more important mission in the world. I have served 

across two administrations over 8 years developing U.S. policy in 

Washington or executing U.S. policy in Iraq. 

I was with President Bush when we planned a surge of 30,000 

U.S. troops under a new strategy to turn around a losing war. I 

was with General Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker when 

we worked to implement that strategy against tremendous odds. I 

later helped manage the transition of our Iraq policy to the Obama 

administration under two binding international agreements. Over 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

318

the past 2 years, I have answered repeated calls to return to Iraq 

and public service at times of crisis. 

My eyes are wide open to the risks and challenges ahead. But 

I close from where I started. For every challenge, there is also 

opportunity and obligation: to honor those lost in this war or forever changed by it, we must do everything in our power to build 

a partnership with Iraq and its people that can endure and advance United States interests in this most vital region. If confirmed, that is what I will seek to do. 

Thank you and I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McGurk follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BRETT H. MCGURK

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Risch, members of the committee, it is a tremendous honor to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to become 

United States Ambassador to Iraq. I am deeply grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for the confidence that they have placed in me with this nomination. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with this committee and your colleagues in Congress to advance America’s many important and vital interests in 

Iraq. 

I have had the distinct privilege of serving alongside each of the last five U.S. 

Ambassadors to Iraq. I was with Ambassador John Negroponte in July 2004 when 

he raised the American flag to open a U.S. Embassy in Baghdad for the first time 

since 1991. Nearly 8 years later I was with Ambassador Jim Jeffrey as he led the 

challenging transition from military to civilian lead for the first time since the toppling of Saddam Hussein. 

I have also served alongside our heroic military commanders including Generals 

Petraeus, Odierno, and Austin. The opportunities that are now before us in Iraq 

exist only because of the leadership of these individuals, and the more than 1 million Americans who have served there—including nearly 4,500 who have paid the 

ultimate price. 

Like too many Americans, I have lost friends in Iraq. If confirmed, I will do everything in my power—drawing on all the tools of our foreign policy—to build a lasting 

partnership with Iraq that is worthy of their memory and sacrifice. 

I believe such a partnership is possible. I also believe, however, that we are not 

there yet. There is still much the United States must do to mitigate risks of backsliding and increase prospects for consolidating the many gains that we have seen 

since the worst periods of the war. 

The situation in Iraq today is much different from what I encountered after first 

landing in Baghdad in January 2004. Back then, the road from the airport was 

known as the highway of death. American troops offered the only visible security 

presence. Sovereign authority was vested in an American administrator. Iraqi ministries were looted and abandoned shells. 

Today, Iraqis are securing their own country. Sovereign authority is vested in an 

elected Iraqi Government that serves under a popularly ratified constitution. And 

many key indicators are positive: Iraq’s GDP is forecast to increase by double digits 

over each of the next 3 years. Its oil production recently surpassed levels not seen 

in three decades. Its Parliament recently passed a $100 billion budget, which was 

praised by the IMF for its fiscal prudence. The security situation has remained generally stable. 

Such indicators might point the way to a globally integrated Iraq that is more secure and prosperous than at any time in its history. This future is now possible, 

but not inevitable. 

The positive indicators I just cited should not obscure the sobering situation that 

now confronts Iraq. The country is slowly emerging from decades of war, isolation, 

sanctions, and dictatorship. More recently, it faced down—with American help—a 

sectarian war that left tens of thousands of Iraqis dead and millions displaced. The 

violence threatened to collapse the Iraqi state and reduced many citizens to their 

most basic ethnic and sectarian identities. 

This legacy is felt most acutely in the political process. For the first time in Iraq’s 

modern history, politics is now the primary arena for engagement among all of 

Iraq’s many different sects and ethnicities. That is the good news. The bad news 

is that their vast differences still threaten to overwhelm the nascent institutional 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

319

framework that was established under the Iraqi Constitution. I am deeply concerned 

about this situation. 

Iraq’s Constitution envisions a united, federal, democratic, and pluralistic state, 

in which all citizens enjoy fair representation in local and national institutions. This 

vision, however, remains an aspiration. Fear, mistrust, and score-settling still dominate political discourse. As a result, Iraqis have sought to supplement the constitutional design with additional political accommodations. An example of these included the Erbil agreements, which were negotiated over the course of 5 months in 

2010 to serve as a roadmap for a new government. 

I have often been one of the few Americans in the room when such agreements 

were being developed. If confirmed, I pledge my utmost efforts to work with leaders 

from all political blocs to encourage respect for prior agreements, durable compromise, and arrangements that help guarantee meaningful power-sharing and 

partnership under the Iraqi Constitution. 

This is not simply a policy desire of the United States. It is a central commitment 

under the 2008 Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA), which President Obama has 

established as the cornerstone of U.S. policy toward Iraq. The SFA is unique in that 

it structures a long-term partnership across the fields of defense, energy, economics, 

diplomacy, education, and justice. With respect to the political process, it calls on 

the United States to help ‘‘strengthen [Iraq’s] democracy and its democratic institutions as defined and established in the Iraqi Constitution.’’ 

For Iraqis concerned that the United States might lose interest in supporting the 

political process, they need only look to the SFA and our commitment to its execution. As Secretary Clinton has said, ‘‘The SFA commits our countries to work together on a range of issues, from governance and rule of law, to economics, education, energy, and the environment. And we’re committed to following through.’’ 

Such follow-through will require active and sustained U.S. diplomacy. 

If confirmed, my mission is clear: to establish an enduring partnership with a 

united, federal, and democratic Iraq—under the SFA. As one of the lead negotiators 

of the SFA, I will be honored, if confirmed, to carry out that charge together with 

Iraqi leaders and close colleagues from across the U.S. Government, many of whom 

I have worked with over a number of years. 

Going forward, we should have no illusions. Building an enduring partnership 

with a country that since 1958 defined itself in hostility to the West will be exceedingly hard. But it is no harder than what we have done before—and we now have 

a roadmap. 

The SFA provides a common point of reference with the Iraqis and lends coherence to the U.S. mission in two important ways. First, it prioritizes U.S. objectives 

and thus helps ensure that taxpayer resources are targeted to advance U.S. interests. Second, it institutionalizes state-to-state relations and thus forces long-term 

thinking across U.S. and Iraqi administrations. 

I would like to discuss each of these points in turn, as they will frame my tenure 

as Ambassador, if confirmed. 

PRIORITIZING LINES OF OPERATION

In her introduction to the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, 

Secretary Clinton stated: ‘‘We will eliminate overlap, set priorities, and fund only 

the work that supports those priorities.’’ In Iraq, that means immediately directing 

our precious resources—including time and personnel—toward four priority lines of 

operation. 

1. Defense and Security Cooperation 

The first line of operation is defense and security cooperation. It would be a mistake to view the withdrawal of U.S. military forces as foreclosing a military partnership with Iraq. The SFA—which is a permanent agreement—provides the foundation for enduring defense ties. 

Iraq already has the fourth-largest Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program in the 

region and ninth-largest in the world. Through FMS, the Iraqi Government has chosen U.S. suppliers to build the backbone of its security forces—supporting tens of 

thousands of American jobs. The program is now valued above $10 billion and includes over 400 separate cases that are designed to help build Iraqi self-defense capabilities through ground power (tanks and radars), air power (pilot training, helicopters, F–16s, and air defense), and sea power (patrol boats, support vessels, and 

threat detection). Importantly, Iraq is now funding its defense and security needs. 

Its most recent budget included $15 billion in defense and security spending—twice 

the amount Iraq spent 5 years ago. It is in our mutual interest to ensure that these 

funds are spent wherever possible on U.S. manufactured equipment through our 

FMS program. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

320

Indeed, FMS sales have been the bedrock for U.S. strategic partnerships in the 

region and they can do the same for Iraq. As a staff report from this committee 

noted: ‘‘The sale of military equipment gives us an edge in diplomacy, builds relationships, and fosters interoperability. But perhaps most importantly, it fills a void 

that other countries, including Iran, are more than willing to step into if left 

empty.’’ FMS cases also ensure appropriate congressional scrutiny and end-use monitoring to deter and prevent misuse. Of course, this committee will be called upon 

to provide critical oversight of foreign military sales to Iraq. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with you to protect and advance U.S. interests through our 

FMS program. 

The Office of Security Cooperation (OSC–I) is the primary implementer of U.S. 

security assistance in Iraq. I have worked closely with the leadership of OSC–I, 

Lieutenant General Bob Caslen and Rear Admiral Ed Winters. If confirmed, I look 

forward to working with them to build a streamlined and innovative OSC–I to advance our defense partnership with Iraq. 

This partnership will go beyond arms sales. It might also include joint exercises, 

strategic training and doctrinal development, support for critical infrastructure protection, NATO exchanges, professional military education, and other programs consistent with an enduring defense relationship. Iraq’s regional integration through 

military-to-military partnerships is also an important priority for CENTCOM. This 

will remain a challenge, particularly with some GCC states, but as Iraq’s military 

grows and matures, technical mil-to-mil relationships may precede—and help set 

conditions for—diplomatic progress between Baghdad and GCC capitals. 

Additionally, the United States must work with the Iraqi Government to ensure 

that al-Qaeda never again secures a foothold in Iraq. While Iraq’s Special Forces 

are among the most capable in the region, their effectiveness can be enhanced 

through cooperation with U.S. technical experts and advisors. If confirmed, I will 

work closely with Iraqi leaders to ensure that we are doing all we can to help Iraqi 

forces eliminate al-Qaeda’s leadership and uproot its networks from Iraqi soil. 

2. Diplomatic and Political Cooperation 

The second line of operation is diplomatic and political cooperation. Iraq has made 

diplomatic strides in recent months. It began to settle a series of long-outstanding 

disputes with Kuwait arising from the 1990 invasion. Saudi Arabia named its first 

ambassador to Iraq since 1990. Jordan has begun discussions to enhance energy and 

economic ties. The Arab League summit in Baghdad signaled Iraq’s gradual reemergence on the regional stage. 

But the challenges are immense and growing due to the crisis in Syria. Syria was 

one of the main topics of conversation during my recent assignments in Baghdad. 

Prime Minister Maliki and other Iraqi leaders know that U.S. policy is firm: Bashar 

al-Assad must go. The longer he remains, the greater the danger to the Syrian people, to the region, and to Iraq. We have sought to encourage Iraq to support the 

Arab League consensus on Syria and demanded full adherence to relevant U.N. 

Security Council resolutions. In recent months, the record on these points has 

improved; but this matter will require constant vigilance and resolve. 

Iran has tremendous influence in Iraq, sharing a 3,000-kilometer border, as well 

as interwoven religious, cultural, and economic ties. But Iraqis have also resisted 

Iranian designs. Millions of Iraqis still bear deep scars—visible and invisible—from 

a bitter war with its eastern neighbor. Grand Ayatollah Sistani and the Marjayiya 

in Najaf profess a vision of Shia Islam that undercuts the very legitimacy of the 

Iranian regime. Iraqis complain about a flood of shoddy Iranian goods flooding their 

markets. The vast majority of Iraqis seek to live in a globally integrated nation, 

whereas Iran seeks to further isolate Iraq from the world. 

It is between these competing visions—an Iraq that is globally connected versus 

an Iraq that is isolated and dependent on Iran—that the United States retains substantial advantage and influence. Indeed, our vision for Iraq is one most Iraqis 

share, and it is codified throughout the SFA. To be sure, Iraqi leaders now in power 

have relationships with the Iranian regime. But they also have relationships with 

us. If confirmed, I will seek to enhance a broad range of relationships across government and civil society that can help Iraqis resist undue Iranian influence, increase 

U.S. influence, and advance our own mutual interests as defined in the SFA. 

The relationship with Turkey is increasingly complex. Turkey and Iraq enjoy 

booming economic ties and cooperate on counterterror policies. But recent months 

have seen rising tension between Ankara and Baghdad in line with rising tensions 

in the region. Ankara has also established unprecedented relations with Iraq’s 

Kurdish leadership in Erbil, further raising the ire and suspicions of some in Baghdad. In 2007, I was involved in developing a policy to initiate Ankara-Erbil ties after 

a series of devastating PKK attacks on Turkish territory. At the time, these ties 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

321

were dormant; progress since then shows how rapidly dynamics can change. Going 

forward, the United States must continue to play a mediating role between Ankara, 

Baghdad, and Erbil. 

The greatest threat to Iraq’s regional position comes from within. The divisions 

among Iraq’s political blocs—and increasingly within the blocs themselves—have led 

to a perpetual state of political crisis. Some of this is inevitable. The governing coalition that formed in 2010 includes 98 percent of the elected Parliament—nearly the 

entirety of Iraq’s political spectrum—and naturally gives rise to rivalry, inefficiency, 

and intrigue. But escalating accusations in recent months present a heightened 

image of internal discord and open the door to meddling by outside actors. The withdrawal of U.S. forces—while increasing Iraq’s sense of sovereignty and ownership 

over its internal affairs—may have also increased short-term risks of miscalculation 

and raised the stakes of lingering power-struggles. 

An underlying problem is that Iraq still suffers from a political system driven as 

much by individual personalities as institutions. Our aim, therefore, is to support 

and strengthen Iraq’s democratic institutions wherever possible. There are some encouraging signs. The Parliament has at times asserted its independence and reined 

in the authority of the Prime Minister, most recently by removing from the budget 

a $15 billion investment fund that some believed left too much discretion to the 

Executive. Current debates in Parliament include deliberations over laws to devolve 

powers to provincial capitals, impose term limits on the Speaker and Prime Minister 

posts, and stand up a new Supreme Court. These are the types of quiet but important ‘‘issues-based’’ debates that focus needed attention on what remains an unfinished constitutional design. 

It will also be essential over the next 24 months to help ensure that Iraq holds 

scheduled elections—provincial elections in 2013 and national elections in 2014. 

Elections may require new laws to allocate seats in provincial councils and Parliament as well as a new mandate and membership for Iraq’s electoral commission. 

These matters will be politically charged and we must do everything possible—

working in close coordination with the United Nations—to help Iraqis prepare for 

elections that are free, fair, internationally monitored, and on time. 

In the meantime, we must encourage Iraqi leaders to forge solutions consistent 

with the Iraqi Constitution. This includes achievement of a durable solution to 

Iraq’s disputed internal boundaries in accordance with article 140 of the constitution, and a legal framework for the development, management, and distribution of 

Iraq’s hydrocarbon resources. 

The United States cannot dictate outcomes. But we can nurture processes that 

open channels of dialogue and narrow areas of disagreement. If confirmed, I will engage national, provincial, and regional leaders every day—including regular visits 

to the Kurdistan region—to do just that. 

3. Energy and Economic Cooperation 

The third line of operation is economics and energy cooperation. Secretary Clinton 

has placed ‘‘economic statecraft’’ at the heart of our foreign policy with an emphasis 

on harnessing economic forces to increase our influence abroad and strengthen our 

economy at home. I believe Iraq can be a centerpiece of this agenda. As a staff report from this committee found: ‘‘Given that Iraq’s fate will be decided in large part 

by the economic growth trajectory it realizes, the top priority for the U.S. Embassy 

should be helping American companies do business in Iraq.’’

Some U.S. companies are doing well in Iraq—including Boeing, Ford, General Motors, and General Electric. U.S. exports to Iraq rose 48 percent in 2011 (to nearly 

$2.5 billion) and Iraqi consumers have demonstrated a preference for American 

goods, including American cars, which now account for nearly one-third of all vehicles sold in Iraq. But U.S. exports lag behind China ($4 billion) and the European 

Union ($5 billion). Given all that we have invested, we must do all we can to connect Iraq’s fast-growing market with U.S. businesses. The Commerce Department 

now offers Gold Key services for business-to-business matchmaking. State and 

Treasury offer advice and workshops for U.S. companies. The U.S. Business Council 

in Iraq seeks to promote private sector investment. If confirmed, I will endeavor to 

make such programs central to the Embassy agenda with a focus on driving investment into Iraq and supporting American jobs. 

The Iraqis must do their part. Iraq’s macroeconomic picture is sound with low inflation and sustainable growth projected over the next 3–5 years. But the country 

faces dire economic challenges—including overdependence on oil, weak financial institutions, corruption, and a dated regulatory structure. Its cumbersome legal environment, excessive subsidies, and barriers to entry further discourage growth and 

foreign investment. By helping the Iraqis address these challenges, the United 

States can gain leverage and influence while pursuing mutual goals. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

322

For example, the SFA envisions joint cooperation to help integrate Iraq into the 

global economy, including through accession to the World Trade Organization. WTO 

accession is a long-term process but it can help standardize import and export requirements, protect investors, and signal to the world that Iraq is ready to play by 

international rules. Iraq is also a candidate country for the Extractive Industries 

Transparency Initiative (EITI), which applies international standards of accounting 

and independent audits to deter corruption and boost confidence in a country’s economic standing. Iraq would be the sole Middle Eastern member of the EITI and it 

has asked for U.S. assistance to meet its requirements. 

Iraq must also diversify its economy. While there is growth potential in nonhydrocarbon sectors—including agriculture, housing, fisheries, tourism, and telecommunications—Iraq is one of the most oil-dependent economies in the world. Sixty percent 

of its GDP and ninety percent of government revenues depend on the oil industry. 

Absent diversification, Iraq risks onset of the oil curse with a bloated state crowding 

out private investment and ingenuity. On the positive side, Iraq recently enacted 

a 5-year $186 billion development plan with projects for roads, hospitals, housing, 

sewage, and electricity plants. USAID and Commerce are working with Iraqi ministries to reform Saddam-era legal codes. But serious reform will require a sustained 

focus by Iraqi leaders with assistance from the United States, World Bank, UNDP, 

and the IMF. 

The oil sector is booming. Iraq today is one of the few potential swing producers 

in the world and has helped stabilize global markets. In 2011, Iraq produced an average of 2.7 million barrels per day—a 30-year high—and this year production has 

increased by another 300,000 barrels per day thanks to improvements in offshore 

infrastructure. Under contracts with international oil companies, including Occidental and Exxon-Mobil, Iraq has set a production target of 10 million barrels per 

day by 2020. Key obstacles, however—poor infrastructure, bottlenecks, bureaucracy, 

political infighting, and legal uncertainty—may limit production to half that 

amount. It is in our mutual interest to help Iraq overcome these obstacles, and we 

have begun to do so by linking U.S. and Iraqi expertise to systematically analyze 

immediate problems and think jointly about long-term solutions. If confirmed, this 

will be a core Embassy focus. 

4. Rule of Law and Human Rights 

The fourth line of operation is rule of law and human rights. I have seen Iraqi 

judges welcome U.S. assistance as they seek to build an independent judiciary free 

from political interference. This is extremely hard to do, as it was in the early years 

of our own constitutional experiment. But it is also important, and, as pressure on 

the Iraqi judiciary grows, we must work to deepen and enhance these relationships. 

Standing up a new Supreme Court—a requirement of the constitution that has 

never been acted upon—can also help further define legal boundaries that are intended to check and balance power horizontally (between branches of the federal 

government) and vertically (between the federal government, provinces, and 

regions). 

As the United States pursues its interests in Iraq, we must never lose sight of 

our values, including the promotion of human rights, women, and protection of vulnerable minorities. Iraq recently stood up an independent Human Rights Commission with authority to receive and investigate complaints from any Iraqi citizen. The 

U.S. Embassy is now working with the United Nations and interested Iraqi leaders 

to help ensure this commission lives up to its potential. 

The protection of vulnerable minorities also requires urgent attention. We must 

continue to work with the Iraqi Government and international partners to maintain 

a dialogue with these groups and address their concerns. In particular, the Embassy 

maintains an open dialogue with Iraqi officials and Christian leaders to discuss protection for Christian facilities. This dialogue should continue in earnest and become 

institutionalized over the coming months and years. 

Programs that promote women in Iraq—including assistance through Iraqi ministries to widows and training for emerging women leaders—are low cost and high 

impact. Secretary Clinton has placed these programs at the top of our human rights 

agenda in Iraq. 

Refugee assistance rounds out that agenda. This includes the nearly 1.3 million 

internally displaced (IDPs) since 2006. Iraq has boosted resources to IDPs, including 

a fivefold increase in direct grants. U.S. support includes humanitarian assistance 

and processing refugees who wish to enter the United States. Recent changes in the 

intake criteria should ease processing of these cases—including through the Special 

Immigration Visa program. Iraqis who risked their lives to work with us should feel 

welcomed, even as we uphold essential security checks. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

323

INSTITUTIONALIZING RELATIONS

In Iraq today we confront a newly sovereign and assertive nation. The SFA is 

designed to account for this inevitability by establishing an organized partnership 

centered on high-level Joint Coordinating Committees (JCCs). Standing up these 

committees can establish regular patterns of engagement to widen avenues of cooperation and narrow areas of disagreement. 

Much of this is now underway. In April, the Energy JCC held its inaugural meeting to discuss how best to increase Iraq’s supply of oil to global markets as well as 

its emerging electricity and natural gas sectors. Two weeks ago, the Defense and 

Security JCC began a structured dialogue over the contours of a long-term defense 

partnership. The Education and Culture JCC now oversees the largest Fulbright 

program in the Middle East and the largest International Visitors Leadership Program in the world. 

These JCCs help interconnect our governments, militaries, economies, cultures, 

and educational institutions. They are the institutional foundation for a long-term 

partnership. 

The SFA does not foreclose additional linkages between the United States and 

Iraq. For instance, given the increasingly important role of Parliament as an independent institution, it would be beneficial to develop linkages between the U.S. Congress and Iraqi parliamentarians. 

Additionally, America’s close and historic relationship with Kurdistan and the 

Kurdish people must be sustained and enhanced. The U.S. consulate in Erbil is 

building deep and long-term relationships with Kurdish officials and civil society 

leaders. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing a dialogue with Kurdish officials 

on issues of mutual interest, including easing visa processing for travel to the 

United States, strengthening economic and educational connections, and supporting 

the region’s emerging role as a gateway to the broader Iraqi marketplace. 

INSTITUTIONALIZING OUR PRESENCE

If confirmed, I pledge to work with the Congress to establish a diplomatic presence in Iraq that is secure, strategic, effective, and sustainable. I will welcome your 

guidance and continue a discussion with the Congress on the most appropriate U.S. 

footprint in light of U.S. priorities and conditions on the ground. I will also ensure 

that the use of precious U.S. taxpayer resources is transparent, effective, and targeted to advance U.S. interests. 

In Iraq today, our size often bears little proportion to our influence. In my experience, the opposite can be true. Our large size and contract tail can lead to friction 

with the Iraqi Government and misunderstanding among the Iraqi people, thereby 

depleting diplomatic leverage and capital. A focused U.S. mission with prioritized 

lines of operation—organized around the SFA—can help enhance our influence over 

the long term and ensure the agility we will need to advance U.S. interests in a 

dynamic and constantly changing environment. 

I have tried to touch upon a number of the issues that I would soon confront if 

confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. For me, there is no more important mission 

in the world. I have served across two administrations over 8 years developing and 

implementing U.S. policy in Iraq. 

I was with President Bush when we planned a surge of 30,000 U.S. troops under 

a new strategy to turn around a losing war. I was with General Petraeus and 

Ambassador Ryan Crocker when we worked to implement that strategy against 

tremendous odds. I later helped manage the transition of Iraq policy to the Obama 

administration under two binding international agreements with the Iraqi Government. Over the past 2 years I have answered calls to return to Iraq and public service at times of crisis. 

I have always sought to take an empirical and pragmatic approach to the many 

complexities we confront in Iraq; and I have based my assessments on measurable 

risks to U.S. interests. If confirmed, I pledge to do the same with you. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my eyes are wide open to the risks 

and challenges ahead in Iraq. But I close from where I started. For every challenge, 

there is also opportunity and obligation: to honor those lost in this war, or forever 

changed by it, we must do everything in our power to build a partnership with Iraq 

and its people that can endure and advance U.S. interests in this most vital region.

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Mr. McGurk. 

Ms. Elliott. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

324

STATEMENT OF SUSAN MARSH ELLIOTT, OF FLORIDA, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF TAJIKISTAN 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Risch, 

and Senator Lugar. As the chairman pointed out, I do have strong 

ties to the State of Pennsylvania, having been born there, and my 

son is a student at the University of Pennsylvania. But I also have 

strong ties to Indiana, having been a graduate of Indiana University and lived in Muncie, IN. So it is an honor for me to be here 

in front of you today. 

Senator RISCH. How about Idaho? [Laughter.] 

Ms. ELLIOTT. I do not have any to Idaho. 

Senator RISCH. But you do eat the potatoes. [Laughter.] 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Yes, I do and I love them. 

I am very honored to be President Obama’s nominee to become 

the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tajikistan. I am grateful 

for the trust and confidence that the President and Secretary Clinton have placed in me with this nomination. If confirmed, I will 

work closely with you, the committee, and the entire Congress to 

advance America’s goals and interests in Tajikistan. 

I would also like to thank my wonderful colleagues, friends, and 

family who have supported me over my 22-year career at the State 

Department. 

Since recognizing Tajikistan’s independence and establishing diplomatic relations 20 years ago, the United States has supported 

Tajikistan’s sovereignty and encouraged its development as a more 

prosperous, tolerant, and democratic society. Shortly after its independence, when I first began working on Central Asia policy, 

Tajikistan was in the midst of a civil war. Today, the people of 

Tajikistan enjoy peace and stability. As Deputy Assistant Secretary 

of State for Central Asia over the last 2 years, I often traveled to 

Tajikistan and developed a deeper understanding and appreciation 

for the importance of Tajikistan to U.S. foreign policy interests. 

Tajikistan shares a long border with Afghanistan. Although the 

terrain is mountainous and the infrastructure is not well developed, Tajikistan plays an important role in the Northern Distribution Network that brings vital supplies to U.S. and coalition forces 

in Afghanistan. Tajikistan also provides vital air transit routes for 

U.S. and coalition cargo and military personnel. 

The Government of Tajikistan recently cohosted with the Government of Afghanistan a successful regional economic cooperation 

conference on Afghanistan. The conference achieved consensus on 

a concrete set of achievable projects and reform initiatives that can 

advance regional integration and provide new opportunities for private investment in the region. If confirmed, I will encourage 

Tajikistan to maintain and expand where possible this important 

support. 

Narcotics trafficking and terrorism plague Tajikistan’s neighborhood. Over the years, U.S. cooperation with Tajikistan has grown 

in addressing this and other transnational challenges through engagement, assistance, and training. Currently we are working with 

the Government of Tajikistan to develop expanded counternarcotics 

cooperation with the goal of targeting organized traffickers, bringing them to justice, and reducing the flow of narcotics through 

Tajikistan. If confirmed, I will work to further strengthen our partFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

325

nership with Tajikistan to combat the flow of narcotics and other 

illicit goods. 

Tajikistan is also the poorest country in Central Asia. The people 

and the government, though, are working to improve their economy 

and aspire to become members of the World Trade Organization. 

If confirmed, I will work with Tajikistan to develop its agricultural 

sector and to improve the regulatory environment for foreign investment and trade. If confirmed, I will also continue encouraging 

Tajikistan to take steps necessary to attract U.S. companies to help 

develop and diversify its economy with American goods, expertise, 

and services. 

Secretary Clinton visited Tajikistan in October 2011. During her 

visit, she met with the citizens of Tajikistan from all spectrums of 

society, from human rights activists to religious leaders to members of the media. The Secretary stressed the importance for governments and leaders to provide space necessary for citizens to 

have a voice in their governments, to pursue their aspirations, and 

promote their ideas. She also emphasized the belief that an open, 

democratic, tolerant society provides a firm foundation for a stable, 

secure, and prosperous nation. If confirmed, I will work with the 

Tajik Government to take concrete steps toward continuing the 

development of this kind of society. 

If confirmed, I will also engage the government and people of 

Tajikistan to increase not only our bilateral security and economic 

engagement, but also continue our dialogue on human rights, civil 

society issues, such as allowing freedom of the press and freedom 

of religion or belief. 

I know that success in all aspects of our engagement depends on 

my taking a leadership role in encouraging and supporting a 

strong, dedicated Embassy staff that coordinates closely with the 

administration, Members of Congress, and if confirmed, I look forward to continuing this active dialogue with you as we seek to 

advance America’s interests with the government and people of 

Tajikistan. 

Thank you and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Elliott follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUSAN MARSH ELLIOTT

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you today. I am honored to appear before you today as President 

Obama’s nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tajikistan. I am grateful 

for the trust and confidence that the President and Secretary Clinton have placed 

in me with this nomination. If confirmed, I will work closely with you, the committee, and the entire U.S. Congress to advance America’s goals and interests in 

Tajikistan. 

I would like to thank all of my wonderful colleagues, friends, and family who have 

supported me over my 22-year career at the State Department. My son, Kurt 

Mitman, is here today. My husband, Matthias Mitman, is unable to be here because 

he is a career Foreign Service officer serving as the deputy chief of mission at the 

U.S. Embassy in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. He encouraged me to join the Foreign 

Service and has been my strongest advocate. I would not be here today without his 

love and support. 

Since recognizing Tajikistan’s independence and establishing diplomatic relations 

20 years ago, the United States has supported Tajikistan’s sovereignty and encouraged its development as a more prosperous, tolerant, and democratic society. Shortly 

after its independence, when I first began working on Central Asia policy, Tajikistan 

was in the midst of a civil war. Today, the people of Tajikistan enjoy peace and stability. As Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central Asia for the last 2 years, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

326

I often traveled to Tajikistan and developed a deeper understanding and appreciation for the importance of Tajikistan to U.S. foreign policy interests. 

Tajikistan shares a long border with Afghanistan and has provided assistance to 

its neighbor to the south and to U.S. and coalition efforts to stabilize the security 

situation there. Although the terrain is mountainous and the infrastructure is not 

well developed, Tajikistan plays an important role in the Northern Distribution Network that brings supplies to U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan. It also provides vital air transit routes for U.S. and coalition cargo and military personnel. A 

stable future for Afghanistan depends on continued progress to develop the road, 

rail, and energy linkages with its Central Asian and other neighbors. Tajikistan 

cohosted, with the Government of Afghanistan in late March, the fifth and most 

substantive and successful Regional Economic Cooperation Conference on Afghanistan to date. The conference achieved consensus on a concrete set of achievable 

projects and reform initiatives that can advance regional integration and provide 

new opportunities for private investment in this region. Likewise, greater peace, 

stability, and prosperity in Afghanistan will contribute to stability and prosperity 

in Tajikistan and the other countries of Central Asia. If confirmed, I will encourage 

Tajikistan to maintain and expand, where possible, this important support. 

Narcotics trafficking and terrorism plague Tajikistan’s neighborhood. Over the 

years, U.S. cooperation with Tajikistan has grown in addressing these and other 

transnational challenges through engagement, assistance, and training. Currently 

we are working with the Government of Tajikistan to develop expanded counternarcotics cooperation with the goal of targeting organized traffickers, bringing them 

to justice and reducing the flow of narcotics through Tajikistan. If confirmed, I will 

work to further strengthen our partnership with Tajikistan to combat this flow of 

narcotics, and other illicit goods. 

Tajikistan is the poorest country in Central Asia. The people and the government 

are working to improve their economy and aspire to be members of the World Trade 

Organization. If confirmed, I will encourage Tajikistan to develop its agriculture sector and improve the regulatory environment for foreign investment and trade. If 

confirmed, I will also continue encouraging Tajikistan to take the necessary steps 

to attract U.S. companies to help develop and diversify its economy with American 

expertise, goods, and services. 

My experience in the Foreign Service has taught me that long-term peace and stability are only possible when accompanied by respect for human rights, the rule of 

law, the fostering of transparent and democratic governmental and civic institutions, and an open and free media environment. If confirmed, I will engage the government and people of Tajikistan to increase not only our bilateral security and economic engagement, but also continue our dialogue on human rights and civil society 

issues such as allowing freedom of the press and freedom of religion or belief. 

The Obama administration has established conditions for constructive dialogue 

and trust with the government and people of Tajikistan. Secretary Clinton visited 

Tajikistan in October 2011. During her visit, she met with citizens of Tajikistan 

from all spectrums of society—from human rights activists to religious leaders to 

members of the media, women leaders, students, and educators. While there, the 

Secretary noted that Tajikistan is home to courageous, dedicated, and talented 

people who want to help improve the prospects for Tajikistan’s future. The Secretary 

stressed the importance for governments and leaders to provide the space necessary 

for citizens to have a voice in their governments, to pursue their aspirations, and 

promote their ideas. It is also important to ensure fundamental freedoms, including 

religious and media freedoms for all people—men, women, young, and old. We 

believe that an open, democratic, tolerant society provides a firm foundation for a 

secure, stable, and prosperous nation. If confirmed, I will encourage the Tajik Government to take concrete steps toward continuing the development of that kind of 

society. 

I recently participated in the third Annual Bilateral Consultations with 

Tajikistan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, hosted in Washington, DC, by the State 

Department’s Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs Assistant Secretary, 

Robert Blake. In these consultations we discussed openly and comprehensively a 

wide range of bilateral and multilateral interests, including counternarcotics cooperation, regional security, development assistance, economic development cooperation and human rights. If confirmed, I will continue working with the Government 

of Tajikistan to achieve positive results on these issues and others. 

Finally, I know success in all aspects of our engagement depends on my taking 

a leadership role in encouraging and supporting a strong, dedicated embassy staff 

that coordinates closely with the administration and Members of Congress. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing an active dialogue with you as we seek to 

advance America’s interests with the government and people of Tajikistan.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

327

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Ms. Elliott. 

Before I get to my questions, we are joined by two ranking members: the ranking member of our Foreign Relations Committee, 

Senator Lugar; and the ranking member of our subcommittee, Senator Risch. And I think Senator Risch has a statement. 

Senator RISCH. Why do you not go ahead on the questions? I will 

do it later. 

Senator CASEY. OK. Thanks very much. 

Let me start with Iraq, Mr. McGurk. I just have a couple of questions on this first round. And we will do as many 5-minute rounds 

as we can. 

I wanted to ask you about leadership, which is a central concern 

in any confirmation process, but maybe especially so for the position that you have been nominated for. There will be those who 

say—and I want to have you respond to this—that you have, based 

upon your record, broad experience in Iraq, several time periods 

within which you have served and you have been called back for 

service, as I indicated, under two administrations. But they will 

also say that you have not had the leadership position that would 

lend itself to the kind of experience that would prepare you for 

such a substantial assignment. And I want you to answer that 

question because I think it is an important one in terms of demonstrating your ability to lead not just an embassy but an embassy 

and a mission of this size and consequence. 

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for allowing me to 

address that, and I would like to do it in really three ways. 

First, leadership of the embassy starts at home at the embassy. 

As you noted in your opening statement, I have served with all five 

of our prior Ambassadors to Iraq and I have seen every permutation of the Embassy from the very beginning to where it is today. 

Throughout that process, I have learned and seen and been 

involved in what it takes to lead in Iraq, and to lead in Iraq, you 

need a really fingertip understanding of the operational tempo in 

Iraq, of what it is like day to day, of knowing when something is 

a crisis and when it is not, managing morale and keeping people 

focused on the goals. 

It also takes a team, and if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, I would be inheriting a team of extraordinary talent and 

depth at the embassy. I have been fortunate to have worked with 

every member of the country team in Iraq, one of whom happens 

to be sitting to my left, Ambassador Sison. That team incorporates 

individuals from across the U.S. Government, just a whole-ofgovernment approach from Commerce to Transportation to Treasury to State to the defense community to the intelligence community. I have been fortunate and also gratified to learn that key 

members of that team have volunteered to stay on for another year 

and, if I am confirmed, would serve with me. 

As Ambassador, the buck would stop with me. And as I think I 

said in the opening statement, I have a very clear vision, in coordination with the President and the Secretary, of where we need to 

take this mission. But I would be working with a very strong team. 

Ambassador Steve Becroft, the DCM—I have worked with him for 

a number of years. I think we would make a very unique leadership team in the front office. The Regional Security Officer, Mark 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

328

Hunter, has done an extraordinary job under difficult circumstances. He would be staying on. I have worked with him for a 

number of years. It would be my honor to lead them. 

Leadership also in this context—you have to look at interagency 

experience because you are leading a whole-of-government 

approach. As the senior director for President Bush in the NSC, 

particularly at one of the most intense periods of the war, from the 

time of planning and implementing the surge and through the end 

of his administration, I was at point for organizing a whole-ofgovernment effort to implement the surge. Throughout that process, I developed extremely strong relationships across the entire 

U.S. Government. I was involved in setting goals such as negotiating the Strategic Framework Agreement—that started in March 

2007—organizing the U.S. Government, getting the right team in 

place, getting the right people in place, the right inputs in place, 

and then having an operational plan leading it through to fruition. 

That is just one of many examples of my interagency experience. 

And finally, I think one of the most important criterion for the 

Ambassador is the relationship with the Iraqis. And one of the reasons I have been called back into public service to come back to 

Iraq a number of times over the last 2 years I think is due to my 

unique relationships with the Iraqis. I have worked with these individuals since I first got to Iraq in January 2004. I was involved 

in those early days in the negotiation of Iraq’s interim constitution 

called the Transitional Administrative Law, and I dealt with a lot 

of the same issues we are dealing with now and a lot of the same 

individuals we are dealing with now. I have deep and strong relationships across the board in the Iraqi Government. 

And I was just talking to Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, who just 

returned from Iraq, and we were talking about the leadership question. He said, you know, a lot of it is politics and personal, and one 

of the key jobs for the Ambassador is making sure that the Iraqis—

we are working in a seamless way with the Iraqis so that we can 

run an effective mission, and that requires daily interaction and 

contact at the highest levels of the Iraqi Government. And that is 

something that I have done in Iraq for a number of years. 

Senator CASEY. Thanks very much. I am almost out of time in 

this round, but Madam Ambassador, I will come back to you in a 

couple of minutes to ask especially about what I would assert is a 

lack of progress in Sri Lanka after the LLRC work that was done. 

I will pick up with that. 

Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, let me say that, Mr. McGurk, I do not think anyone 

can question your knowledge and understanding of what has happened in Iraq. You have had an incredible amount of experience 

there. In fact, I would be hard-pressed, I would think, to find someone who would have a resume like you would as far as dealing with 

that is concerned. 

Having said that, Iraq of course is in a volatile, post-conflict situation, and it is in, probably arguably, the most unstable region in 

the world. It is the largest Embassy that we have anywhere in the 

world. Last year, the United States spent about $6.5 billion there 

and this year it will be about $4 billion there, very substantial 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

329

amounts, more than my State had when I was Governor as an 

entire annual budget. 

Also, given the lack of representation that we do not have today 

in both Tehran and Damascus, the Ambassador in Baghdad is 

going to be responsible for, and have the responsibility for, the 

much larger regional context. And the ability to navigate all of 

these issues with the right balance and the right leadership and 

the right management will certainly be critical to the success of our 

Ambassador there. And again, recognizing the experience that you 

have had in Iraq, I appreciate that. I will have to say you are going 

to be challenged, I think, inasmuch as the size and the complexity 

of this operation confronts you, never having been an Ambassador 

before. And I wish you well in that. Certainly the administration 

recognized your understanding and abilities to pick you for the 

Ambassador there, but as Ambassador, obviously, your responsibilities will be substantially larger and much broader than what you 

have done there before. So I wish you well. 

Ms. Elliott, I want to talk briefly about Tajikistan. And one of 

the things you did not mention is the relationship Tajikistan has 

with Iran, and I think that is a concern to all of us, particularly 

when it comes to the purchase of crude oil from Iran. What are 

your thoughts in that regard? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Thank you, Mr. Senator. That is actually a very

important question. 

The people of Tajikistan have close cultural ties with the people 

of Iran, and of course, they are in the same neighborhood. 

I will say, in terms of sanctions, that we have been working very 

closely with the Government of Tajikistan on the recent Iran Sanctions Act. We have discussed with them at high levels and we have 

had an interagency approach. Not only the State Department but 

the Treasury Department has visited Dushanbe to talk with the 

Government of Tajikistan about this. We feel that from our discussions that they are very supportive and will be in compliance with 

the sanctions, and we look forward to continuing that discussion 

with them. 

Senator RISCH. They are not in compliance with the sanctions 

now. Did they give you any timeframe as to when they would comply with the sanctions? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Well, we have been talking with them and they are, 

especially through their banking structure, working on improving 

those. And that will be a priority of mine to work with them to 

make sure that they do stay and become in compliance with them. 

Senator RISCH. Have they given you a timetable? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. I have not received a timetable. 

Senator RISCH. Have you requested a timetable of that? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. I believe that we have, but I can get back to you 

on that on the specifics of the timetable. 

Senator RISCH. I will take that for the record. 

[The written reply for the record follows:]

Despite misleading reports by Iran-based media, we can confirm that Tajikistan 

does not import crude oil from Iran. Relevant Ministries confirmed to our Embassy 

that Tajikistan is not purchasing, and has no plans to purchase, crude oil from Iran 

and that media reporting was incorrect. I would also note that, contrary to the Iranbased media report, there is no rail link to Afghanistan to transport the oil to 

Tajikistan nor does Tajikistan have sufficient capacity to refine significant volumes 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

330

of crude oil in Tajikistan. Tajikistan also does not have any pipelines connecting it 

with Iran. 

Though we can confirm that Tajikistan is in compliance with Iran Sanctions with 

respect to crude oil, we continue to monitor and engage with the Government of 

Tajikistan on other potentially sanctionable activity. The Government of Tajikistan 

has responded swiftly when we have raised activities of concern, including in the 

financial sector, and has taken immediate steps to preclude any re-occurrence.

Senator RISCH. I am going to yield to Senator Lugar at this time. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Risch. 

Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. McGurk, there was considerable discussion in this committee, as well as in our Government as a whole, about the size and 

the scope of our Embassy in Baghdad after the nature of our postwithdrawal presence there was made clear. Iraq was very insecure, 

and we apparently had ambitions that the Embassy might be a fulcrum for activities throughout the area, almost a headquarters for 

the United States ambitions for democracy and human rights and 

so forth throughout the Middle East. However, we still have that 

Embassy. It is still huge and it has been suggested, in addition to 

the diplomatic employees of the United States, maybe as many as 

16,000 people are affiliated with it, in a situation where our troops 

are no longer providing security on the ground there in the numbers they were. 

I am just simply wondering about your reflections, having served 

in all of these capacities through five Ambassadors, just physically 

how do you plan to administer this building, quite apart from the 

people? I appreciate that this is a several-chapter answer. But in 

light of the security predicaments and increased hostility on the 

part of the Iraqis regarding our participation, how do you plan to 

manage this? 

Mr. MCGURK. Senator, thank you very much. I have given a 

great deal of thought to this. On my last assignments in Iraq, I 

participated in almost every internal conversation, both interagency and in Baghdad, about how not only to plan the transition 

after our troops were withdrawing but also how to get the size 

down. Quite frankly, our presence in Iraq right now is too large. 

There is no proportionality also between our size and our influence. 

In fact, we spend a lot of diplomatic capital simply to sustain our 

presence. So there is a process underway now, as you may know, 

to cut our presence by about 25 percent by next fall. I fully agree 

with that approach, and I think we can do more. 

It is important to keep in mind the reason we are so big now is 

that the transition was planned—it was all contingency planning. 

The Department was not quite sure what we would face in the 

early months of this year. And so we planned for every possible 

contingency. But where we are now I think we need to really focus, 

and that is why I had this four-part test. It will be a test for every 

program in Iraq. Are we secure? Are our people safe? Is it strategic? And that means is it a core priority to advance our national 

interests. We need to ask that very directly because we are institutionalizing our long-term presence now. Is it effective? Are our programs getting results? That means do they have adequate buy-in 

from the Iraqis? And is it sustainable, something we can do for the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

331

long term? If I am confirmed as the next Ambassador, I will put 

everything to that test. 

In terms of managing the day-to-day operations of the Embassy, 

I have also been involved in this because what often happens is it 

is not just the internal management. We need to go discuss something with the Iraqi National Security Advisor, with the Prime 

Minister, and I am often doing that shuttling. 

As I mentioned in my earlier answer to Senator Casey, I have 

a very strong team in Iraq. Steve Becroft, who would be the DCM 

and the COO of the shop, I have worked with for a number of 

years. We would sit right next to each other. Offices would be right 

next to each other. The buck would stop with me for every single 

decision, but Steve is a terrific day-to-day manager of the operation, and I think we would make a very strong team. But I cannot 

discount the challenges ahead. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, I appreciate that answer very much and 

the very specific though that you will examine each and every program, that we probably are overrepresented, and that the expense 

of this is enormous. This impact our whole State Department 

budget, as you know. So I appreciate that managerial idea. 

Let me ask how you are going to advise Prime Minister Maliki 

under the current circumstances in which he is not getting along 

well with the opposition, to say the least, and the Kurds are drifting off by themselves. What are the challenges for our diplomacy 

here? 

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Senator. It is a really critically, critically important point. 

I have worked with Prime Minister Maliki for a number of years 

and all the Iraqi leaders. And I have worked with him in his capacity as the Prime Minister. I said in my written statement I would 

try to focus now on dealing with the Iraqis in an institutional way, 

so dealing with Maliki as a Prime Minister now. If there was a new 

Prime Minister tomorrow, I would have the same, I hope, close 

working relationship with him. I have worked with four speakers 

of Parliament, for example, to focus on the institutions. 

When you are in Iraq and dealing with all sides, there are different narratives to the political process. The government, though, 

was put in place in 2010, as you know. It took 8 months to put in 

place. When it finally came together, it represents—98 percent of 

the Council of Representatives are represented in the cabinet. That 

naturally leads to a lot of inefficiency, a lot of rivalries, a lot of intrigue, and that is certainly going on now. Maliki will say that his 

opposition figures who are in his Cabinet will not share responsibility for governing. The opposition figures say Maliki is consolidating power. They are all right. And we need to work with all of 

them to live up to their prior agreements and to work within the 

constitutional system to change the process. 

You mentioned the Kurds, and this is critically important. I 

would plan to visit the Kurdistan region as much as possible. I 

would like to be up there, if I am confirmed, at least once a week 

because it is the personal interaction between the Iraqi leaders and 

the U.S. Ambassador that is so important for keeping everything 

stable and for bridging areas of disagreements. The Kurds are 

having some difficulties with the Baghdad Government right now. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

332

The Baghdad Government is having difficulties with the Kurds. 

The real rivalry is Massoud Barzani and Prime Minister Maliki. 

We have to play an important role in mediating that effort. 

I would just leave it at there is a constitutional system in place 

now. This is the third Iraqi Government. This is the second Parliament. The Iraqis are going to fight through their politics under 

the constitutional rules that they themselves have devised. We cannot direct outcomes through that process. When you try to do that, 

the unintended consequences are quite enormous. But we can help 

bridge differences. We can mediate back and forth and be constantly actively engaged. And that is what I would intend to do if 

I am confirmed. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you for very comprehensive and 

thoughtful answers. I appreciate it. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

Senator Udall. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Chairman Casey and ranking members that are here. Good to see you. 

And thank you for the panel being here. I very much appreciate 

all of your service to our country. 

In April 2012, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction found in his report that there was a record low amount of casualties for the month of March and a drop in violence overall in 

the last few months and specifically reported that 112 Iraqis died 

as a result of violent attacks in the month of March, the lowest toll 

since the United States invaded in 2003. 

Based on such improvements, do you think that the Iraqi Government is on the right track to secure its government, and how 

has the fact that Iraq is accountable for its own security changed 

the security calculus in the country and the U.S. relationship with 

Iraq? 

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Senator. 

At the very top of my mind is the safety of all Americans serving 

in Iraq. I track this extremely closely. Over the course of this year, 

we have had, on average, zero to three attacks a week on the overall U.S. presence, almost entirely 107 millimeter rockets from the 

Naqshbandi group which is remnants from the Baathist Party in 

the north. Fortunately, we have had no casualties from those 

attacks. Zero to three attacks on our presence compared to about 

1,000 a week, which I can remember very well, 5 or 6 years ago. 

So that is positive. We want to make sure that that trend 

continues. 

The reason for that trend is there are really five militant groups 

in Iraq right now. 

First, there is Al Qaeda in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq remains active. 

Their operating tempo—they are able to strike every 30 to 40 days. 

Sometimes those attacks are quite spectacular. Senator Casey mentioned recent attacks just this past week. Al Qaeda in Iraq is now 

striking at a level that is about the same as it was over the course 

of last year. The Iraqi Government has not been able to degrade 

Al Qaeda in Iraq. That is a serious concern and we need to work 

with them on that. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

333

The second group, as I mentioned, is the Naqshbandi group. 

They operate in the north around Nineva and Kirkuk, and they 

primarily only target us. 

Then there are three militant Shia groups. There is Asaib alHaq. There is Kataib Hezbollah and the Promise Day Brigades. 

The Jaish al-Mahdi, which you might remember, Sadr’s army, has 

pretty much—is now part of the political process. 

Those three Shia militant groups since January 1 have really 

gone to ground. And I was just discussing this with General Mattis, 

and it is interesting. We are watching it very closely. Our withdrawal seems to have taken them—their ability to recruit and sustain operations has really been depleted. They have almost stopped 

attacking us. 

However, I would not bank on that. I remember very well when 

the Iraqi Army went into Basra and we took hundreds of rockets 

on the compound from groups that were lying in wait to strike us. 

And I watch this very carefully with all of our assets within the 

U.S. Government. 

In terms of internal security and the Iraqis and being able to 

secure their country, they are not doing a bad job. They secured the 

capital to host an Arab League summit. They secured the capital 

to host the P5+1 talks. That would have been unheard of 3 to 5 

years ago. So they are doing very good internal security. They 

remain weak in external security, and that is where the Office of 

Security Cooperation under the Embassy is working very closely 

with the Iraqis to try to close some of their capability gaps. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. I have another couple of questions, 

but I think it will run over if I pursue those right now. 

Senator CASEY. Senator, we allow an extra minute. 

Senator UDALL. OK, well, that is good. 

I am changing direction here a little bit. I want to ask you about 

the future stability of Iraq and its ability to have a sustainable 

water supply in the Tigris and Euphrates River Basin. This area 

is considered one of the birthplaces, as you know, of human agriculture, and their ability to sustain the ecology of the area has 

been threatened by increased water use upstream. And we are seeing this, I think, in rivers across the region. 

How will you work with Iraq’s neighbors to develop sustainable 

use of water, and how can the United States work to leverage its 

scientific and engineering talents, especially those at the national 

labs, to find a long-term solution to the problem? 

Mr. MCGURK. Senator, it is a really great and overlooked point. 

The water situation in Iraq and the region is very serious. If you 

look at Iraq’s agriculture, it used to be the bread basket of the 

world. Today agriculture is approximately, at best, 20 percent of 

GDP. But agriculture in Iraq uses 90 percent of Iraq’s water. That 

is not sustainable. And it is to the point where if we get their agriculture going again, they are going to have a serious water 

problem. 

Maliki and the Iraqi Government recently hosted a conference to 

discuss this with some of the regional neighbors in Baghdad, and 

Maliki said we face a real crisis. So the Iraqis are now seized of 

it. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

334

We have a common way forward within the Strategic Framework 

Agreement because it calls on cooperation between the United 

States and Iraq to address issues like this to call on the expertise—

I know there is some of it in New Mexico—from within our country 

to help the Iraqis think in a systematized way. Do they need dams? 

Do they need to redirect some water supplies? And to work with 

Turkey in particular to address this problem over the long term. 

All I will say is it has been overlooked. It has been overlooked 

because Iraq has been involved in a fierce sectarian war. Now that 

we are coming out of that phase, these very important issues need 

to rise to the highest priority within our Embassy. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Thank you for your courtesies, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Udall. 

Ambassador Sison, I wanted to ask you about the so-called LLRC 

in Sri Lanka, the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. 

I have a two-part question. For part one, you heard me assert that 

I do not think they have made anywhere near substantial progress. 

How do you assess where Sri Lanka is as it relates to the LLRC, 

the implementation of the results or maybe more pointedly the 

imposition of accountability on individuals for their actions especially at the end of the civil war? No. 2, Why have the United 

States and other countries in the international community not insisted upon an independent investigation, and will they? 

Ambassador SISON. Thank you, Senator. 

The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission recommendations were, of course, front and center as a topic when the Sri 

Lankan Foreign Minister met with Secretary Clinton last month 

here in Washington. We have asked the Government of Sri Lanka 

to provide regular and public updates on the implementation of 

what is the government’s own commission, particularly with regard 

to demilitarization of the north, to setting a date for provincial elections in the north, focus on human rights protections, including 

increased space for civil society to operate, increased focus on 

media freedom. 

I agree we do need to see in more specific terms benchmarks met 

on the recommendations of the action plan set out by the LLRC. 

Senator CASEY. As a result of that meeting, were we enlightened 

by it or were there any indications that there is progress, momentum, results, deadlines? Because it has been 6 months and the concern here is obvious. It is about human nature when you have that 

kind of internal conflict and a winner, in this case the Sinhalese 

side of the debate. They have power and they have set up their 

commission. The question is, Will they ever be able to implement 

recommendations, and should we, in fact, have an international 

independent investigation? 

Ambassador SISON. Senator, not just the United States but many 

international partners, of course, voted in March in Geneva at the 

Human Rights Council on a U.S.-sponsored resolution on reconciliation and accountability. There has been an international call for 

progress on both reconciliation and accountability because one cannot have true reconciliation, genuine reconciliation without that 

accountability. There are credible, serious allegations, I completely 

agree, of crimes committed by both sides in terms of violations, I 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

335

should say, of international human rights law and international 

humanitarian law. 

So we do look for near-term progress, benchmarks to be met, particularly on setting a date for the provincial elections in the north, 

specifically demilitarization in the north. And if confirmed, Senator, I can absolutely commit to you and to your colleagues that 

human rights issues, protection of the ability of civil society and 

the media to do their job, will be on the top of my agenda. I do 

believe that we can have constructive engagement and at the same 

time principled engagement that keeps human rights protections, 

rule of law at the forefront. 

Senator CASEY. Look, I know this has been a priority, but when 

people see almost no progress on the implementation of recommendations, this question of an international investigation is going to 

present itself continually. And I realize it is sensitive. It is a difficult question for the administration. 

But I would say two things. No. 1, it is not going to go away until 

the world sees results. So the question will not go away. And No. 

2, I would urge you, upon confirmation, to use every bit of energy 

and persuasion and cajoling and anything else you can bring to 

bear on the leadership in Sri Lanka to get results because in the 

end people are not going to be satisfied until we see those results, 

meaning progress on the recommendations. 

Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. McGurk, you commented about the Kurds, and I am interested in that and I would like to pursue that a little bit further. 

It seems to me, as an outsider looking at this, the Kurds seem 

to be doing very well on their own. The construction that is going 

on there far outstrips what is being done in Baghdad and other 

parts of Iraq. They just seem to be progressing. 

Having said that, it would seem to me that they are being left 

alone to a degree because of the—for lack of a better word—chaos 

down south. What is your view as to what is going to happen as 

this thing—the rub right now you blamed on personalities I think 

I picked up from your statement. But I think it is going to go 

deeper than that. Once Baghdad gets its act together and they see 

what is happening with the Kurds and the Kurds—as is pointed 

out, they are moving away and are happy to move away and seem 

to be doing very well moving away. I do not think that is going to 

set very well with Baghdad as time moves on. Can I get your 

thoughts on that? 

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Senator. And it is far deeper than personalities, so I do not want to leave that impression. These issues 

are—some of them are centuries in the making and it could take 

centuries to really resolve for good. 

Between the Kurds and the Arabs, there is obviously an issue on 

what the call the disputed internal boundaries. That still remains 

unresolved. You have my commitment, if confirmed, to work 

through the process that is designed through article 140 of the constitution—and the U.N. will play a role in that—to get the sides 

together to begin discussing in a serious way an equitable resolution to the disputed internal boundaries. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

336

Also, nothing could go further to stem these centrifugal forces 

that you are discussing than agreement on national hydrocarbons 

legislation. That is agreement on the management, the distribution 

of their national patrimony. We have made a go at that over the 

years, made some progress in 2007, and had a package of laws that 

were pretty close. 

On my last trip in Baghdad, even in the midst of a political crisis, I found a new urgency among some of the key players to return 

to the table on the issue of national hydrocarbons. If I am confirmed, that will be one of my central priorities to do everything 

we possibly can. Again, we cannot dictate the outcome but we can 

do shuttling and figure out where are the areas of agreement that 

we can build on and where can we narrow areas of disagreement 

because without consensus on how to manage the national hydrocarbon resources, centrifugal forces can accelerate, and I am deeply 

concerned about that. And I think focusing on the 140 process and 

on the hydrocarbons legislation will be very important. 

Senator RISCH. Do you think the parties are amenable to that 

resolution? 

Mr. MCGURK. Some of them are and some of the are not. There 

is a lot of division within the Kurdish region and there is division 

in Baghdad among all of the many parties. And one of the key 

things to do is to try to find the leaders who are in a compromising 

frame of mind to work sometimes behind closed doors to build compromise, and it can be very difficult. I cannot underestimate the 

challenges of this issue. The Kurds want to develop their resources 

in their region, and under the constitution, they have a right to. 

In Baghdad, they want to develop the resources in a national way 

in which the Baghdad Government has a say, and under the constitution, as they read it, they have a right to. What we need to 

do is find a compromise within the constitutional framework. 

My hope is that as Iraq’s oil production is increasing—and it is 

one of the good news stories in Iraq right now. They are producing 

around 3 million barrels a day for the first time really in 30 years. 

Iraq’s own estimates—they want to get up to about 10 million barrels a day by 2017. As I said in my written statement, we do not 

think that they will meet that. Probably it may plateau at about 

five. But still as these resources are being developed, there is a 

new sense that something has to be done with a consensus for how 

these resources are going to be managed and the profits and the 

revenues shared. It is one of the most central issues on the domestic political agenda. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator CASEY. Senator Udall. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

You, with Senator Risch, discussed this whole issue of hydrocarbons. It has been reported that Iraq has the goal of doubling its 

oil output over the next 3 years. And I think in the long term they 

want to reach a total of 12 million barrels per day, which, as you 

know, Mr. McGurk, would be pretty incredible in that region. That 

would put them up there with Saudi Arabia. Do you believe Iraq 

is on track to achieve this goal, and what has helped Iraq improve 

its successful increase of petroleum output over the last year? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

337

And in particular, I am interested in while we were there, there 

were lots of reports that the security was not good enough for oil 

companies from around the world to move in and do the job and 

get the oil back online. But apparently now, I mean, they are going 

up dramatically. I think they are up past what it was from the 

invasion, and they look like they are very aggressive. I know you 

are not an oil expert, but I mean, you are over there talking to 

them and you have been over there a while. Do you have a sense 

of where they are headed on oil output? 

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Senator. We addressed this briefly in 

your office, and I am fortunate for the chance to develop it further 

here. 

There were two key events in 2007 and 2009 that have really led 

to this major increase in oil. In 2007, during the surge period, we 

really convinced the Iraqis that they have a single point of failure 

and a national security problem in how their oil is exported. It is 

really exported through the Basra oil terminal called the ABOT, 

and if you go out there, it is kind of like the movie ‘‘Water World’’ 

or a Mad Max movie. It is very vulnerable and it is old and rusting. 

And were that terminal to fail, Iraq would not be able to export oil 

other than through the north in the Ceyhan pipeline, but about 80 

percent goes through the south. 

So a plan was put in place. And General Petraeus was part of 

this and Ryan Crocker was part of really urging the Iraqis to do 

this with the Oil Minister at the time, Sharastani, to develop new 

offshore infrastructure. And these are called single-point moorings. 

Foster Wheeler had a big role in the engineering feat in actually 

pulling this off. 

The first single-point mooring started delivering oil in February 

and it immediately increased Iraq’s oil by 200,000 barrels a day. 

Other single-point moorings in the gulf are scheduled to open over 

the course of this year. It is a major engineering feat. There will 

be setbacks, but it could increase Iraq’s oil—just those single-point 

moorings—by 2.5 million barrels a day. It is a tremendous story 

from 2007 and getting the Iraqis to where they are now. 

The second piece were the bidding rounds in 2009 where Iraq, for 

the first time, invited international companies in to bid for their 

fields. It was a success. And it was very difficult because I used to 

hear from Iraqis in 2004, 2005, 2006 and say you really got to get 

international companies in here. There was this fear of a kind of 

nationalist backlash if they got companies in to drill and to help 

the Iraqis produce their oil. But it happened in 2009. They drove 

a very hard bargain. But because of those contracts, there is now 

international companies. BP, Exxon Mobil, Occidental, the Chinese 

Lukoil are drilling and helping the Iraqis develop their resources. 

So very briefly, where do we go from here? The Iraqis still are 

not thinking in terms of a system and how to really get their oil 

going. Sometimes they do not have the right pumps in place. They 

do not have the right water pressure to come in and get the oil out 

of some of their older fields. And we have been working closely 

with the Iraqis. And Ambassador Jim Jeffrey has really raised this 

to the top of our embassy priority. He has done an incredible job 

with it through the Joint Coordinating Committee, the SFA. We 

now have very deep ties with the Iraqis. They recently had their 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

338

inaugural meeting here in Washington with our Department of 

Energy with Carlos Pasqual at the State Department and showing 

the Iraqis how to think in terms of a systematized way to develop 

the oil resources. A number of do-outs came from that meeting, and 

we are now following up. 

But it is an important way how under the SFA we can talk to 

the Iraqis about high-level strategic issues and how we can cooperate both whole-of-government and within our private industry. And 

getting our private industry harnessed and into Iraq is going to be 

really critical. And through the oil sector and through the energy 

sector, there is a gateway for doing that. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that answer. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Udall. 

Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. Ms. Elliott, I would like to pursue further just 

for our own knowledge of what is occurring in Tajikistan presently. 

How would you describe the relations of that country with Russia, 

for example, or with China or other countries that may have strategic interests there? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Thank you, Mr. Senator. That is a very good

question. 

Having been a former country of the Soviet Union and also sharing a border with China, Tajikistan I believe shares very good relationships with those countries, but they also share good relationships with us. As I mentioned in my statement, we have good 

cooperation with them on the Northern Distribution Network, and 

they are doing a lot to help their neighbors to the south and also 

to help in fighting crime and narcotics. 

We believe that it is not a zero sum game in Central Asia and 

that the countries of Central Asia need to keep good relations with 

their neighbors and with Russia. We have also had good cooperation. I have served in Embassy Moscow, and our Assistant Secretary Blake, as part of our annual bilateral consultations—we have 

consulted in the region. So I would say that the situation is very 

good, that Tajikistan shares good relations with its neighbors. And 

we look forward to continuing those strong relationships, and if 

confirmed, I will make that a priority. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, you have described in your opening statement a civil war that occurred there, the resolution of that, and the 

beginnings at least of a government that apparently aspired to 

democratic tendencies. But try to describe the evolution of that government. To what extent is there a sharing of power between the 

branches? How active is the legislative branch, and how active are 

persons who are demanding human rights and the recognition of 

minorities and what have you? What is the lay of the land in terms 

of political progress there? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Well, that is also a very good question and one that 

concerns us because I think in the 20 years of its independence, we 

have not perhaps seen the growth of civil society and the growth 

of democracy that we would have liked to have seen. This is something that the Obama administration has engaged on. As I mentioned in my statement, Secretary Clinton visited Tajikistan, and 

part of the reason she visited was to be able to engage with civil 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

339

society but also to engage with the government on the need for 

expanding human rights, expanding freedom of the press, expanding freedom of religion. There is one independent Islamic party 

that participates in the Parliament in Tajikistan. 

However, I would say that we need to do more to open civil society there and to improve the human rights of the people of Tajikistan. And again, if confirmed, this will be one of my top priorities. 

We do have national security interests there, but our interest in 

improving the human rights and the rights of the people of 

Tajikistan are also extremely important. 

Senator LUGAR. The reason I asked these questions in that order 

is that clearly there are influences governmentally from China and 

from Russia, quite apart from historical problems in Tajikistan. We 

have, as you have illustrated, our own ideas about what would be 

ideal for the people of the country and espouse those, and Secretary 

Clinton’s visit is a good, high-profile example. I am just curious in 

terms of the complexity as we weigh in diplomatically with regard 

to our thoughts about their governance, while at the same time 

hoping for support in Afghanistan or elsewhere where they can be 

helpful. This requires diplomacy with really a high degree of tact, 

I suspect, and recognition of the cross currents historically as well 

as presently. 

Has there been a trend, would you say, toward the human rights 

aspect and toward developments that we would find more compatible with our ideas of governance? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Well, as I mentioned, I do not think that the trends 

have been perhaps as extensive as we would have liked in the 20 

years of Tajikistan’s independence. I think one thing we have to remember is they do not share the same history of democracy that 

we do. They are a young country, and I believe that they are working toward improving the human rights situation there. They just 

recently passed a law that would get rid of the laws that make 

criminalization of libel which will help journalists there. So we 

have seen some progress. Some journalists who had been arrested 

have been released, but there is still a lot of work to be done. 

And I would say that Russia does have interests in Tajikistan. 

They have a military base there. Their concern, I think, is for security and for stemming the flow of narcotics from Afghanistan. 

So if confirmed, I think we will continue to work on that and 

make it a priority and to work not only with Tajikistan but with 

the neighbors to make sure that we are all moving and helping 

them to move in the right direction. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, I thank you for your answers and likewise 

for your experience in that area. 

Thank you. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

I will go another round and others may as well, but I know we 

are coming to the end of our hearing. 

Ms. Elliott, I wanted to ask you about the Northern Distribution 

Network, and I will hold that in abeyance just for a moment to get 

to Mr. McGurk on special immigrant visas. If a citizen of Iraq has 

helped American forces in ways that put him or her at substantial 

risk, we expedite their visas pursuant to the Special Immigrant 

Visa program. And as I said, these are individuals that live under 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

340

threat today. I know that the process has been expedited and that 

the United States has admitted as many applicants in fiscal year 

2012 as it did in all of 2011. So there is progress. But there is still 

a backlog. 

And the question I have for you—I do not know if you have a 

number, but if you do not, if you can get it to us. The number of 

cases of special immigrant visas—how many of those are in the 

pipeline for the so-called principal applicants? And No. 2, how 

many cases are pending for applicants through the direct access 

visa process? 

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Senator. This issue is very important 

to me and it is a very personal issue to me. I had the opportunity 

to discuss it in some depth with Senator Cardin when I visited him 

in his office. 

I have known Iraqis in Iraq who have worked with us and lost 

their lives. I have known Iraqis who have got into this program 

and never came out of it or were never able to get a visa. And I 

have known Iraqis who have resettled in the United States. It is 

very personal to me. 

As you may know, we also have to have security checks to make 

sure that the American people are protected. That is also first and 

foremost. 

There is a substantial backlog, which as you said in your statement—it is absolutely right. We have now over the first half of this 

year admitted more SIV cases into the United States than we did 

all of last year, and I have been told that the numbers for the third 

quarter look to be substantially higher. I think this year so far the 

number is about 850. 

Senator, I will get you the exact figures on the number of cases 

that are being processed now and the backlog. 

[The written reply for the record follows:]

This issue is very important to me and it’s a very personal issue to me. While 

serving in Iraq I have known Iraqis who have worked with us and lost their lives. 

I have known Iraqis who have got into this program and never came out of it. They 

were never able to get a visa and I have known Iraqis who have resettled in the 

United States. 

As you may know, we have security checks to make sure that the American people are protected; that’s first and foremost. There was a substantial backlog which, 

as you’ve said in your statement, is absolutely right. We have now over the first 

half of this year admitted more SIV cases into the United States than we did all 

of last year, and I have been told that the numbers for the third quarter look to 

be substantially higher. Through the end of March 2012, the Department had already issued 865 SIVs to Iraqis, up from a total of 706 such visas issued to Iraqi 

citizens in FY 2011. Preliminary counts for April and May of this year show 1,733 

additional SIVs have been issued. If confirmed, I pledge to continue working to 

increase these numbers as much as possible.

Mr. MCGURK. Since I saw Senator Cardin, I visited with 

Samantha Power at the National Security Council, the national 

security staff, who has done a terrific job in streamlining the processing of these cases and making sure that we have the personnel 

and the right resources directed to process them effectively and 

efficiently. The Embassy plays a key role in that, and we have 

increased our staff there to make sure that these cases can be processed from the initial point of entry at the Embassy. And if I am 

confirmed, I pledge to you I will do everything I possibly can to 

make sure that these cases are processed efficiently, with reasonFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

341

able security checks to make sure that the American people are 

protected, but that Iraqis who have worked with us who wish to 

come to our country feel welcomed, that they know where they 

stand in the process, and that they know they are taken care of. 

I will do everything I possibly can to make this program effective. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Elliott, I wanted to ask you about the Northern Distribution 

Network on two levels. No. 1, the importance of it is so apparent 

as we draw down in Afghanistan and need to get supplies, equipment, and so much else through that network. Can you assess 

where we are as it relates to the role played by Tajikistan? No. 2, 

How will you, upon confirmation, prioritize and focus on the importance of Tajikistan’s help for us in the Northern Distribution 

Network? 

Ms. ELLIOTT. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Tajikistan has played a very important role in the Northern Distribution Network which, as you rightfully mentioned, has become 

extremely important in getting vital supplies to our troops in 

Afghanistan. Likewise, it will play an extremely important role in 

taking equipment out of Afghanistan as we begin to lessen our 

military presence there. 

I have worked closely with the Government of Tajikistan on 

these issues. While Tajikistan does not have a developed rail network like some of the other countries in Central Asia, they have 

been very supportive and played a vital role in the part of the 

Northern Distribution Network that I would call the KKT route. It 

is Kazakhstan, Kyrgzstan, and Tajikistan. The capacity is not great 

because we have to truck things through the mountains of 

Tajikistan. However, we have had a very good success rate with 

very low loss of cargo, no pilferage, and we have gotten a lot of 

cooperation from the Government of Tajikistan on that. And President Rahmon indicated to Secretary Clinton when she met with 

him that he wants to continue to support us in that area because, 

as I think the Government of Tajikistan and the people of 

Tajikistan realize, in order to have a safe and prosperous Tajikistan, we need to have a safe and stable and prosperous Afghanistan. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you very much. 

My time is up for this round. Senator Udall, Senator Risch, Senator Lugar, anything? 

Senator Udall. 

Senator UDALL. I would just ask one final question here. 

Since the invasion displaced Saddam Hussein’s Sunni governing 

structure, or whatever you want to call it there, one of the major 

issues has been this divisive conflict between Sunni and Shia. And 

we have seen it in terms of talk of a civil war and all the various 

bombings and suicide bombings that have gone on. 

What is your assessment of how the current government is moving to integrate Sunnis into the government at all levels, whether 

it is high positions in the government or people that held kind of 

bureaucratic positions and were not necessarily involved in all the 

atrocities and things? What is your assessment about how they are 

performing on the integration? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

342

Mr. MCGURK. Thank you, Senator. Senator Casey referenced an 

NDI poll which shows that there is still this vast gap in perceptions of the government between Shia and Sunnis. Among Sunnis, 

according to this poll, it has increased in recent months, but it has 

increased from about 10 percent to only 30 percent of Sunnis would 

see this government favorably. 

The current government has a lot of work to do in this area. We 

can track it through the percentages of military officers. The last 

order of battle I saw, Sunni officers were about 13 percent overall. 

That is below the population figure. 

In this current round of political negotiation and debate, it has 

been very interesting because there has been a real shakeup in different alliances. So Muqtada Sadr, for example, who was seen as 

the face of the Shia Jaish al-Mahdi group which was involved in 

a lot of atrocities during the sectarian war, is now aligning with 

a lot of Sunnis in kind of an Iraqi nationalist view, and that is 

interesting and something to watch. 

The Sons of Iraq is also something we need to watch very closely. 

So far, about 70,000 have been incorporated into government positions. About 30,000 Sons of Iraq are still manning checkpoints. 

They are getting paid under the current budget. I have been told 

under the current budget, they get paid about $300 a month, which 

is slightly below the per capita GDP. But that needs to continue 

because one of the indicators, if you look at academic studies of 

precursors of renewed or reignited civil war, is militant insurgent 

groups beginning to coalesce and reform. And I think making sure 

the Sons of Iraq are continued to be taken care of will be very 

important. So far the government has kept most of its promises on 

that, but we need to watch it. 

So obviously, Senator, these Sunni-Shia cleavages are extremely 

deep. There is the overhang now of a very bitter sectarian war 

which the Iraqis are still overcoming. We need to help them overcome it, and we need to remind the current government every day 

that they need to do what they can to make Sunnis feel like they 

are a full part of the process. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Udall. 

Mr. McGurk, Ambassador Sison, Ms. Elliott, we thank you for 

your testimony, for your prior service, and for your willingness to 

serve yet again in tough assignments. 

And I want to make sure for the record I say this, that we are 

going to keep the record open—and I know I and others will have 

more questions—for 48 hours for questions. That is a short window, but I want to make sure that members of the committee knew 

that. 

We are grateful for your presence here and for your testimony. 

And we are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

343

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF MICHELE JEANNE SISSON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 imposes restrictions 

on assistance to any unit of a foreign country’s security forces for which there is 

credible evidence that the unit has committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. 

embassies are heavily involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement. 

If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively implements section 620M? In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a 

case in which there is credible evidence that a gross violation of human rights has 

been committed, that assistance will not be provided to units that committed the 

violation? What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust capacity to gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of human 

rights by units of security forces?

Answer. Our current engagement with Sri Lanka takes many forms—economic, 

humanitarian, cultural, and military—and helps us move forward our agenda of 

fostering a peaceful and stable Sri Lanka by improving human rights, democratic 

governance, reconciliation, and accountability. We take very seriously credible allegations of abuses of international human rights law and violations of international 

humanitarian law at the end of the conflict, as well as ongoing abuses. If confirmed, 

I will continue to urge full accountability for individuals on both sides of the conflict 

alleged to be responsible for those violations and a demilitarization of civilian 

affairs. Mindful of human rights concerns, the administration is pursuing measured 

military engagement with the Sri Lankan Government commensurate with our 

security interests in the region. This engagement includes human rights or humanitarian components and is in accordance with Leahy vetting policy and law. Assistance and engagement is not now, nor will it be, undertaken with units or individuals associated with credible allegations of abuses of international human rights law 

or violations of international humanitarian law. As always, adequate resources, 

along with Embassy Colombo and State Department staff, will be assigned to undertake the full Leahy vetting procedures in all applicable cases.

Question. If confirmed, what specific steps will you take to encourage the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learned and 

Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) report, given the Sri Lankan Government’s apparent intransigence in pursuing national reconciliation and reducing human rights 

violations over the past 3 years? If Sri Lanka continues to ignore international calls 

to seriously pursue reconciliation and accountability, what steps would you recommend for U.S. policy toward Sri Lanka?

Answer. The United States successfully sponsored a United Nations Human 

Rights Council Resolution in March 2012 that calls on the Sri Lankan Government 

to take concrete steps toward reconciliation and to address alleged human rights 

violations during the final stages of the country’s conflict. Secretary Clinton invited 

Foreign Minister Peiris to Washington May 18 to discuss the way forward on 

reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka in the post-UNHRC resolution environment. The Secretary stressed the importance of making progress on the recommendations made by Sri Lanka’s own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission and the importance of providing regular and public updates to all Sri 

Lankans and to the international community. 

We now look to Sri Lanka to take the necessary steps to achieve reconciliation 

and accountability for the alleged abuses that occurred in the final months of the 

conflict, while ensuring respect for human rights and institutionalizing democratic 

governance. If sufficient progress is not made, however, there will be pressure to 

look at international mechanisms. 

An important opportunity to review progress will come this fall, when Sri Lanka 

is scheduled for its Universal Periodic Review before the U.N. Human Rights Council on the status of human rights in Sri Lanka, then again next March, when the 

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights will brief the Council on Sri Lanka’s 

progress on reconciliation, accountability for human rights abuses, and implementation of the recommendations from Sri Lanka’s LLRC. In the time preceding these 

two critical review opportunities, we will continue our vigorous engagement with the 

Government of Sri Lanka, as well as India and other international partners, to foster true democracy, reconciliation, and accountability in Sri Lanka.

Question. How do you assess the state of democracy in Sri Lanka, given increasing threats against journalists and limited press freedoms, limited provincial powers 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

344

and no timetable for provincial elections in the north, ongoing disappearances of individuals with impunity, continued military presence in the north, and ongoing 

human rights concerns and violations? What future actions might the United States 

take bilaterally and multilaterally to push Colombo on these issues? Are there any 

economic or trade measures you would favor employing?

Answer. We are deeply concerned by reports of ongoing human rights abuses and 

an erosion of democratic institutions and practices, and continuing to engage the 

Government of Sri Lanka on these issues would be one of my highest priorities. 

There has been progress in some discrete areas, particularly in regards to the return of people displaced by the conflict to their homes, demining of the former conflict regions, building of transport infrastructure, schools and hospitals, and in the 

reintegration of former combatants. 

There are, however, ongoing issues that concern us, such as the shrinking space 

for civil society, military involvement in civilian affairs and restrictions on freedom 

of expression and other fundamental rights. There is also much that remains to be 

done to achieve genuine reconciliation, democratic governance, and accountability. 

Sri Lanka’s Universal Periodic Review of its human rights situation will occur in 

November under the auspices of the U.N. Human Rights Council. This should be 

an excellent opportunity to evaluate Sri Lanka’s current human rights record and 

progress towards achieving reconciliation and accountability. 

Solutions that come from the Sri Lankans themselves are most likely to have the 

greatest impact and also help strengthen Sri Lanka’s democratic institutions, including defending space for its long-established civil society. We would, therefore, 

first like to see the Sri Lankans implement the LLRC’s recommendations, and 

establish an independent mechanism to investigate the credible allegations that the 

LLRC failed to address, both of which could directly help achieve lasting reconciliation and democratic governance. We are looking to Sri Lanka to take the necessary 

steps to achieve reconciliation, accountability and respect for human rights and 

democratic processes, and are not considering economic or trade measures at this 

time. If sufficient progress is not made, however, there will be pressure to look at 

international mechanisms. 

RESPONSE OF MICHELE JEANNE SISSON TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BENJAMIN L. CARDIN

Question. What bilateral measures has the United States taken to highlight its 

concerns about the human rights situation on Sri Lanka? Given a sense that existing measures have not been effective, what future actions might the United States 

take bilaterally to push the Colombo to resolve its domestic conflict? Are there any 

economic or trade measures you would favor employing?

Answer. The United States successfully sponsored a United Nations Human 

Rights Council Resolution in March 2012 that calls on the Sri Lankan Government 

to take concrete steps toward reconciliation and investigate alleged human rights 

violations during the final stages of the country’s civil conflict. Secretary Clinton invited Foreign Minister Peiris to Washington on May 18 to discuss the way forward 

on reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka in the post-UNHRC resolution environment. The Secretary stressed the importance of making progress on the recommendations made by Sri Lanka’s own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission and the importance of providing regular and public progress updates to all 

Sri Lankans and to the international community. 

We are looking to Sri Lanka to take the necessary steps to achieve reconciliation, 

accountability and respect for human rights and democratic processes, and are not 

considering economic or trade measures at this time. If sufficient progress is not 

made, however, there will be pressure to look at international mechanisms. 

An important opportunity to review progress will come this fall, when Sri Lanka 

is scheduled for its Universal Periodic Review on the status of human rights, then 

again next March, when the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights will brief 

the Human Rights Council on Sri Lanka’s progress on reconciliation and implementation of the recommendations from the LLRC. 

Biographic note: I have been a resident of the State of Maryland since 1962, and 

I appreciate your interest in this matter. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

345

RESPONSES OF MICHELE JEANNE SISSON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. The United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution passed a resolution in March 2012 that calls on the Sri Lankan Government to investigate alleged 

human rights violations during the final stages of the country’s civil war. The 

United States strongly supported this resolution, which was a positive step toward 

greater accountability for perpetrators of abuses. 

What is the United States strategy for further action on accountability in international bodies, particularly at the Human Rights Council? How is the administration using the resolution to push further action on LLRC recommendations and 

wider accountability? How are you planning to engage with India to build on its important vote for the resolution?

Answer. Secretary Clinton invited Foreign Minister Peiris to Washington May 18 

to discuss the way forward on reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka in the 

post-UNHRC resolution environment. The Secretary stressed the importance of 

making progress on the recommendations made by Sri Lanka’s own Lessons Learnt 

and Reconciliation Commission and the importance of providing regular and public 

progress updates to all Sri Lankans and to the international community. We are 

looking to Sri Lanka to take the necessary steps to achieve reconciliation and accountability for past abuses while ensuring democratic governance and respect for 

human rights now. If sufficient progress is not made, however, there will be pressure to look at international mechanisms. 

An important opportunity to review progress will come this fall, when Sri Lanka 

is scheduled for its Universal Periodic Review on the status of human rights, then 

again next March, when the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights will brief 

the Human Rights Council on Sri Lanka’s progress on reconciliation and implementation of the recommendations from Sri Lanka’s Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation 

Commission Report. In the time preceding these two critical review opportunities, 

we will continue to coordinate with India and other international partners to encourage, reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka.

Question. The United States and the Maldives enjoy a strong bilateral relationship. However, the small country faces several significant challenges, including serious environmental concerns and recent political unrest that has threatened to upset 

the country’s democratic progress. 

What do you consider the most pressing issues facing the Maldives at this time? 

Apart from participating in global climate change initiatives, what might the United 

States do to help support Maldivians? Do you view recent regime change in 

Maldives as having been a coup d’etat, as described by former President Nasheed 

or as a self-initiated resignation, as claimed by his opponents? How should the 

United States respond to former President Nasheed’s call for more U.S. pressure in 

support of democratic institutions in Maldives?

Answer. Former President Nasheed resigned from office under murky circumstances. He was succeeded by his own Vice President, Mohamed Waheed. 

Maldives’ Parliament continues to function and a civilian, democratic government 

continues. Former President Nasheed, current President Waheed and others have 

agreed to a Commission of National Inquiry to look into the circumstances surrounding the transfer of power. The United States, India, U.N., Commonwealth and 

others are supportive of Maldives’ own efforts to resolve questions about the transfer of power through this mechanism. 

Our Embassy in Colombo is engaged with all the parties in Maldives to foster dialogue, respect for democratic procedures and the rule of law. Assistant Secretary 

Blake, who was formerly Ambassador to Sri Lanka and Maldives, is also personally 

engaged. In addition, State currently has one person from our Conflict and Stabilization Operations Bureau on the ground in Maldives, working across political 

divisions. USAID has committed funding to assist Maldives in ensuring that the 

next round of Presidential elections is free and fair and we are working with 

Maldives to find additional ways to support its rule of law and justice sector. 

RESPONSES OF MICHELE JEANNE SISSON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. In December 2009, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee released a 

bipartisan staff report entitled ‘‘Sri Lanka: Recharting U.S. Strategy after the War.’’ 

The report contained eight recommended action points for the Obama administration related to Sri Lanka. What is the status of the administration’s response to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

346

each of the points of recommendation? http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT111SPRT53866/pdf/CPRT-111SPRT53866.pdf

Answer. The administration’s policies toward Sri Lanka seek to balance U.S. 

interests in reconciliation and accountability with economic, security, and strategic 

interests. Since the end of the conflict in 2009, we have provided robust demining 

assistance, worked with the U.N. and other international organizations to support 

the Sri Lankan Government’s resettlement of more than 300,000 displaced persons, 

designed many USAID-sponsored democracy and governance programs and public 

diplomacy programs to create and enhance people-to-people links across Sri Lanka, 

and worked to provide needed training for Sri Lanka’s judicial sector. The administration, of course, vigorously enforces existing laws concerning visa applications and 

loss of citizenship. We are continuing to work with the Peace Corps in the hope that 

the Peace Corps can return to Sri Lanka in the future and resume its invaluable 

work.

Question. If confirmed, how will you most effectively deal with Sri Lankan officials 

representing U.S. geostrategic interests while advocating accountability for the wide 

range of human rights violations for which the Sri Lankan Government is allegedly 

responsible?

Answer. Our unwavering support for human rights, democratic governance, reconciliation, and accountability informs our principled engagement with Sri Lanka in 

all areas. However, we remain cognizant of our security interests, which include the 

security of the Sea Lines of Communication and counterterrorism, for which Sri 

Lanka is an important regional partner. If confirmed, I will continue to press Sri 

Lanka to address issues related to reconciliation and accountability, including those 

highlighted in the 2009 Senate Foreign Relations Committee bipartisan staff report 

‘‘Sri Lanka: Recharting U.S. Strategy after the War’’ while seeking areas of common 

ground on U.S. geostrategic interest.

Question. Please inform the committee as to the use of the American Center in 

Sri Lanka. What is the volume of activity during the past year and how does that 

compare to the preceding 4 years? In addition, what is the range of activities occurring through the Center and what are the priorities of the Center’s focus?

Answer. The American Corners in Kandy and the post-conflict area of Jaffna, Sri 

Lanka, were opened in 2005 and 2011, respectively. The U.S. Embassy in Colombo 

reports they have both enjoyed a noticeable increase in activities and visitors over 

the past several years and particularly throughout 2011. 

The American Corner in Kandy focuses on programs for youth and education. 

Over 5,500 people visited the Corner in Kandy this past year, a marked increase 

from 3,200 visitors in 2010, for student advising, film screenings, book readings, and 

video conferences with the Embassy featuring monthly public lectures from 

Colombo. In 2011 the American Corner in Kandy organized an environment program for students in collaboration with the Ministry of Education, social media 

training for our newly created Youth Forum, HIV/AIDS awareness program in collaboration with educational authorities, and a discussion series on current affairs 

for teachers. The number of programs increased from 16 in 2010 to 40 in 2011. 

The American Corner in Jaffna opened in January 2011 and also focuses thematically on programs that help rebuild communities in the post-conflict environment. 

Entrepreneurship and education programs are targeted at vulnerable populations, 

such as war widows and youth whose education has been interrupted by the civil 

conflict. Over 6,500 people have visited the American Corner in Jaffna. The American Corner hosts school orientation programs, public lectures by visiting Embassy 

staff and U.S. citizens, and a summer camp program for children of orphanages. The 

American Corner organized an outreach program with ‘‘Shadows of Change’’ visual 

theater for over 3,000 students from nine Jaffna schools. The program included a 

workshop for students that led to the formation of the Jaffna Youth Forum, which 

now meets at the Corner every month to discuss community issues. Future programming includes English teaching, entrepreneurship workshops for rural young 

women seeking self-employment, and psychosocial training for youth. 

The American Center at the U.S. Embassy in Colombo aims to educate Sri 

Lankans about the United States through its ample library and film offerings, and 

to bring to Sri Lanka timely and topical subjects of importance to the United States. 

The American Center in Colombo recently commemorated World Press Freedom Day 

by hosting a panel discussion in which journalists, editors, and activists discussed 

the Sri Lankan perspective on the emergence of citizen journalism and how inadequate access to quality information undermines media freedom. The Center also 

hosted an American water specialist to discuss water management and a local attorney to raise children’s awareness of intellectual property rights. Upcoming events 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

347

will include a celebration of World Environment Day, a presentation on implementing international conventions on women’s issues, and a monthly storytelling 

program.

Question. During the war, what countries or political and other entities were 

providing material or other support to the LTTE and what was the nature of their 

respective support?

Answer. To best address your question, I respectfully offer to arrange a classified 

briefing on this subject, with the appropriate Department officials.

Question. What is the status of the military relationship between the United 

States and Sri Lanka? Do you see opportunities for expanding that relationship and 

if so, under what circumstances or conditions?

Answer. Our current engagement with Sri Lanka takes many forms—economic, 

humanitarian, cultural, and military—and helps us move forward our agenda to foster a peaceful and stable Sri Lanka by improving human rights, democratic governance, reconciliation, and accountability. Mindful of human rights concerns, the 

administration is taking measured steps to maintain military engagement with the 

Sri Lankan Government commensurate with our security interests in the region, 

and engagement is in accordance with Leahy vetting policy and law. These include 

demining, disaster assistance, sea-lane security, and antipiracy. We take very seriously credible allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law at the end of the conflict. We continue to urge full accountability for individuals on both sides of the conflict alleged to be responsible for 

those violations. We also continue to urge demilitarization of civilian affairs. Any 

consideration of an expansion of our military relationship could only be undertaken 

in response to demonstrable improvements in the protection of human rights, democratic governance, and accountability.

Question. From your perspective, what is going particularly well with the reconciliation process after the war? What are two specific concerns related to the status of reconciliation and what do you envision as your role, if any, related to these 

challenges?

Answer. There has been significant progress in several areas in the aftermath of 

Sri Lanka’s long conflict, chief among them the resettlement of the majority of internally displaced persons and the rehabilitation and reintegration into civilian life of 

thousands of former LTTE combatants. Much still remains to be done, however. As 

Secretary Clinton and other senior State officials have urged, we would like to see 

progress on further demilitarization in the former conflict zones in the North and 

East, the provision of basic services to returnees, provincial elections before the end 

of the year, answers regarding the fate of the missing for their loved ones, and further progress in implementation of the recommendations of Sri Lanka’s own Lessons 

Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. If confirmed, my role, like that of Ambassador Butenis and other senior State Department officials such as Assistant Secretary Robert Blake, would be to continue to press vigorously to achieve these goals.

Question. If confirmed, will you meet with Sri Lankan journalists to receive an 

update on the status of intimidation and challenges confronting journalists?

Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will engage directly with journalists, civil society, and 

NGOs to listen to their concerns and monitor trends affecting fundamental rights 

including freedom of expression in all its forms. Our deep concern over this issue 

is why we highlighted the disappearance of political reporter and cartoonist 

Prageeth Ekneligoda during World Press Freedom Day. We have called on the Government of Sri Lanka to credibly investigate his disappearance and call on the Government of Sri Lanka to take the steps necessary to create space for journalists to 

work without fear of violence or persecution, including by ending impunity for 

attacks and intimidation against journalists.

Question. What other countries do you view as ‘‘like-minded’’ with the overall U.S. 

foreign policy emphasis related to Sri Lanka and Maldives?

Answer. We have been working closely with a number of international partners 

to achieve our policy goals both in Maldives and Sri Lanka. For example, the U.S.-

sponsored resolution promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka that 

passed with 24 votes in favor, 15 against, and 8 abstentions during the March 2012 

session of the United Nations Human Rights Council had 39 cosponsors in addition 

to the United States (cosponsors need not be voting members of the Council). Notably, India voted in favor of the resolution, a departure from its usual policy of 

abstaining on country-specific resolutions and a strong statement of support for increased action by Sri Lanka to achieve reconciliation and a lasting peace. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

348

We coordinate closely with the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group and the 

United Nations to resolve the ongoing political stalemate Maldives.

Question. What countries are presently contributing resources to demining operations in Sri Lanka and what would you project to be the total dollar value of international contributions toward this effort?

Answer. Demining in Sri Lanka is an important initiative for the Department of 

State, as it enables the timely resettlement of internally displaced persons and 

provides the foundation for the reconstruction and rehabilitation process. Funding 

provided by the Department of State is directly contributed to international nongovernmental agencies. This funding is augmented by several international donors, 

including contributions from the Government of Japan, the United Kingdom’s 

Department for International Development, and the Australian Government. The 

Department of State does not track the total dollar value of international contributions. However, since FY 2003 the State Department has contributed $27,962,000 

to demining efforts in Sri Lanka.

Question. What is the status of U.S. exports to Sri Lanka and in what sectors do 

you envision opportunity for future export growth?

Answer. Sri Lanka is currently the 80th-largest goods trading partner of the United States with $2.4 billion in two-way goods trade in 2011. Sri Lanka was the 

United States 114th-largest goods export market in 2011. U.S. goods exports to Sri 

Lanka were $302 million in 2011, up 72 percent ($128 million) from 2010. U.S. exports to Sri Lanka consist primarily of wheat, civilian aircrafts, machinery and mechanical appliances, medical and scientific equipment, electrical apparatus, plastics, 

and paper. If confirmed, I will work to increase U.S. exports to Sri Lanka and 

Maldives under President Obama’s National Export Initiative. The tourism, infrastructure, transportation, and energy sectors of Sri Lanka’s economy currently hold 

the most opportunity for growth, and Embassy Colombo is actively advocating for 

several U.S.-based bids in these sectors. I have a strong track record in economic 

initiatives and received an Honorable Mention in 2008 for the Charles E. Cobb 

Award for Initiative and Success in Trade Development for my work as chief of mission in the United Arab Emirates.

Question. According to the Congressional Research Service, U.S. exports to Maldives ‘‘more than doubled from $20 million in 2008 to $45 million in 2011.’’ 

What is the basis for the doubling of exports in a short time period? What are future 

best sector prospects for U.S. exports to Maldives?

Answer. U.S. exports to the Maldives received a boost in October 2009 when the 

United States and Maldives signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement 

(TIFA). Maldives was subsequently granted Generalized System of Preferences 

(GSP) trade benefits in December 2009. The economic team at our Embassy in 

Colombo has worked vigorously to support the National Export Initiative, and has 

adopted a three pronged strategy to increase market access, outreach to encourage 

U.S. exports, and commercial advocacy. U.S. exports to Maldives increased by 58 

percent in 2011. Areas of opportunity for U.S. businesses in the Maldives include 

tourism, construction, and simple export-oriented manufacturing, such as garments 

and electrical appliance assembly. If confirmed, I will work to increase U.S. exports 

to Sri Lanka and Maldives under President Obama’s National Export Initiative. I 

have a strong track record in economic initiatives and received an Honorable 

Mention in 2008 for the Charles E. Cobb Award for Initiative and Success in Trade 

Development for my work as chief of mission in the United Arab Emirates.

Question. Please provide details/quantify the Maldives challenge with rising sea 

levels.

Answer. As an island nation as well as a developing country, Maldives faces significant challenges related to climate change. The islands of the Maldives lie primarily between 1 and 1.5 meters above mean sea level. The IPCC fourth assessment 

report, the leading international assessment on climate change, in 2007 estimated 

average global sea level rise at between 0.18 and 0.59 meters by 2090–2099. Many 

peer-reviewed studies since then have raised these estimates. Any of these scenarios 

threaten damage from storm surges, land erosion, and salt water intrusion in the 

coming decades. Of particular concern are the likely impacts associated with saltwater intrusion on freshwater supplies, increasingly damaging extreme weather 

events, and sea level rise and related land erosion negatively impacting infrastructure, livelihoods, and key economic sectors, including tourism. 

To address this vulnerability, the United States invested $3 million in FY11 

through USAID to support an adaptation program that aims to improve access to 

drinking water supplies and enhance resilience to climate change. The program proFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

349

vides assistance to the Maldives on climate change adaptation strategies, with special emphasis on integrated water resources management. Future USAID assistance 

will focus on climate resilience and water security in support of the Maldives’ ongoing work related to water and sanitation service delivery to the islands. 

RESPONSES OF MICHELE JEANNE SISSON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. According to the State Department’s 2011 Trafficking in Persons Report, 

Sri Lanka is a Tier 2 country for trafficking. There was evidence of government 

complicity in trafficking through bribes and political connections for brothels. 

If confirmed, how will you engage government officials to confront corruption in 

combat trafficking crimes? How will you encourage the government to investigate 

and prosecute government officials who are complicit in human trafficking offenses?

Answer. We have been working closely with the Government of Sri Lanka on sex 

trafficking and labor trafficking issues. The Government of Sri Lanka takes these 

issues seriously and has taken steps to address their trafficking problems. Most notably, the government is working with International Organization for Migration to 

develop victim identification procedures. We have directly engaged with the Government of Sri Lanka on their Trafficking in Person’s Action Plan and the government 

has already begun to implement the plan. Even with this progress, trafficking in 

persons remains an issue of great concern. I have considerable experience in this 

area and was named 2005 Trafficking in Persons Ambassador of the Year for my 

work to combat human trafficking in United Arab Emirates. If confirmed, I will ensure that it remains a priority for U.S. Mission Colombo.

Question. A 2011 Human Rights Watch Report noted that over one-third of Sri 

Lankan domestic workers in Jordan are physically abused by their employer, 11 

percent were sexually assaulted, 60 percent not paid any wages and over 60 percent 

had their passports confinement. These are abuses which indicate trafficking for 

forced labor. 

If confirmed, how will you assist the Sri Lankan Government in monitoring the 

foreign labor recruiting agencies which employ Sri Lankans abroad?

Answer. I share your concerns on trafficking in persons and forced labor in Sri 

Lanka, where over 1.7 million citizens are employed outside their country. The Government of Sri Lanka has taken steps to monitor labor recruiting agencies which 

employ Sri Lankans abroad, most notably, by recently convicting two labor recruiters for fraudulent recruitment—a key contributor to forced labor. Our Embassy in 

Colombo has coordinated with other U.S. Missions and the Department to provide 

information and assistance to the Government of Sri Lanka to respond to specific 

cases and to help the Government of Sri Lanka address the trafficking issue generally. I have considerable experience in this area and was named 2005 Trafficking 

in Persons Ambassador of the Year for my work to combat human trafficking in 

United Arab Emirates. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of Sri 

Lanka, The International Organization for Migration, civil society, and other interested parties to increase protection for their citizens from domestic and international labor abuse. 

RESPONSES OF BRETT H. MCGURK TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BENJAMIN L. CARDIN

Question. Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for Iraqi employees of the United State: 

As you know from our earlier conversations, I am very concerned about delays in 

the processing of Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for those Iraqis who risked their 

lives to work for us in Iraq—particularly those who were living and working on our 

bases and have been ‘‘cut loose’’ since our withdrawal last December. How can SIV 

processing be expedited? What can be done to offer protection to those who are literally in hiding and on the run inside Iraq as they await issuance of their visas?

Answer. This issue is very important and personal to me. It will receive my close 

attention, if confirmed. Since we met in your office, I have spoken with the leading 

U.S. officials who have been working to address delays in processing of Special 

Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for Iraqis who have risked their lives to work with us. The 

State Department is working closely with our interagency colleagues to streamline 

the SIV application process, eliminate redundant requirements, and accept electronic submissions wherever possible. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the 

Embassy is staffed to manage applications efficiently and in a manner that provides 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

350

fair process to our Iraqi partners while also ensuring necessary background and 

security checks to protect the American people. In recent months, strides have been 

made in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases pending security screening. Over 

the first half of this year, the State Department issued more SIVs to Iraqis than 

during all of FY 2011. In FY 2011, the Department issued 706 SIVs to Iraqi citizens. 

By the end of March 2012, the Department already had issued 865 SIVs to Iraqis. 

During April and May 2012 alone, it issued an additional 1,733 SIVs to Iraqis, 

based on preliminary data. Thus, the trend appears to be a positive one, and now 

we must ensure it continues. If confirmed, I am committed to working diligently 

with our interagency partners to balance the safety of American citizens with the 

aspirations of Iraqis who risked their lives to work with us, and now wish to resettle 

in our country.

Question. Iraq and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI): 

According to the World Bank, Iraq possesses a proven 143 billion barrels of oil, and 

high oil prices and increasing exports should enable Iraq’s GDP to grow by about 

12 percent in 2012. It is therefore critical that the Government of Iraq implement 

an effective and transparent process for handling and accounting for these rapidly 

increasing revenues. Iraq has been an Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative 

(EITI) candidate country since 2010 and is supposed to complete the requirements 

to become a ‘‘compliant’’ country later this year. What are the prospects for this 

happening?

Answer. The Board of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) 

accepted Iraq as a candidate country on February 10, 2010. Iraq has until August 

9, 2012, to undergo EITI validation to determine whether the country is compliant. 

Iraq issued its first EITI report in December 2011, reporting $41 billion in revenues 

from oil and gas exports in 2009. Iraq’s second report, covering 2010, is expected 

on schedule by the end of the year. Iraq has hired one of the approved international 

validation companies to conduct its validation exercise, a highly detailed procedure 

to reconcile national revenue and company payment figures for extractive industries. We believe the Iraqi authorities are committed to the EITI process. 

The United States strongly supports Iraq’s efforts to become EITI compliant. Iraq 

is one of only two countries in the Middle East to have sought EITI compliant status 

and holds the largest reserves of any country seeking this status. 

Revenues from crude oil exports account for approximately 95 percent of Iraqi 

Government revenues, so the EITI reconciliation exercise is tightly tied to the overall transparency of Iraqi Government revenues. All Iraqi oil export revenues flow 

through the accounts of the Development Fund for Iraq at the New York Federal 

Reserve and are subject to audit by Iraq’s governmental auditing and internal control body, the Committee of Financial Experts. Iraq publishes its annual budget. 

The 2012 budget was reviewed by experts from the International Monetary Fund. 

In September 2011, the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs 

awarded a $1million grant to Revenue Watch Institute to broaden and strengthen 

Iraqi civil society working on EITI issues and to support a more robust implementation process. As stated in my written testimony, helping the Iraqis to meet the 

requirements of the EITI would be among my top priorities if confirmed. ‘‘By helping the Iraqis address these challenges, the United States can gain leverage and influence while pursuing mutual goals.’’ 

RESPONSES OF BRETT H. MCGURK TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. The State Department has long promised faster action to resolve the 

issues surrounding the delays in approving Special Immigrant Visas for Iraqis who 

supported the U.S. effort in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.

• (a) How many SIVs have been issued, by fiscal year, since the inception of the 

program?

Answer. The chart below details how many Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) the 

Department of State has issued to Iraqi applicants under both the Section 1059 and 

Section 1244 programs since implementation in FY 2007. FY 2012 numbers are 

preliminary:

Principal Derivatives Totals 

2007 ............................................................................................................ 431 383 814

2008 ............................................................................................................ 518 449 967

2009 ............................................................................................................ 1,448 1,385 2,833

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

351

Principal Derivatives Totals 

2010 ............................................................................................................ 951 1,091 2,042

2011 ............................................................................................................ 322 384 706

2012* .......................................................................................................... 1,137 1,461 2,598

Totals ............................................................................................. 4,807 5,153 9,960

* Applications through May 31, 2012. 

• (b) How many applications have there been, by fiscal year?

Answer. The chart below details the number of approved I–360 immigrant visa 

petitions received by the State Department’s National Visa Center (NVC) from 

USCIS for Iraqis applying for the Section 1059 and Section 1244 SIV Programs. FY 

2012 numbers are preliminary:

Iraqi section 

1059 approved

I-360s 

Iraqi section 

1244 approved

I-360s 

Combined total 

FY 2007 ....................................................................................................... 650 0 650

FY 2008 ....................................................................................................... 149 48 197

FY 2009 ....................................................................................................... 139 1,614 1,753

FY 2010 ....................................................................................................... 10 1,025 1,035

FY 2011 ....................................................................................................... 2 2,398 2,400

FY 2012* ..................................................................................................... 0 659 659

Totals ............................................................................................. 950 5,744 6,694

* Applications through May 31, 2012. 

• (c) How long is the average processing time (as measured by application filing 

date until the date visa issuance or notice of denial) for such applications, by 

fiscal year?

Answer. Processing SIVs involves a number of different steps, many of which are 

outside the control of the State Department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs. As a result, I understand that the Department does not have general statistics on processing times for SIVs. I understand there were significant delays in returning clearances on SIV cases in FY 2011, but there has been improvement on processing times 

in FY 2012. The State Department’s internal standards require scheduling interviews 60 days from the receipt of the application. As the numbers of SIVs issued 

to Iraqis in FY 2012 indicate above, our interagency partners have made significant 

strides in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases pending security screening. 

This progress allowed us to cut the backlog of Iraqi SIVs pending final action 

(issuance or refusal of the visa application) by 50 percent since March. In late February, 2,832 Iraqi SIV applications were pending security vetting. A little over 3 

months later, that number has fallen to 1,388. 

We owe it to those Iraqis who have worked with us to ensure that this program 

runs as transparently as possible while also maintaining essential security checks 

to protect the American people.

• (d) How many are pending as of June 1, 2012?

Answer. As of June 6, 2012, there were 1,388 Iraqi SIV applications pending security clearances.

• (e) How many have been denied by fiscal year? Please list the reasons for denial 

and the corresponding number of visas denied for each reason, by fiscal year.

Answer. In order to provide this detailed information that you have requested on 

refusals, we are currently running a customized query through our files. The query 

will take several days to complete and will provide a detailed response as soon as 

possible.

Question. The Police Development Program in Iraq has been the subject of continued revision and reduction since the State Department took control of the program 

in late 2011. What type of information did the Defense Department provide to the 

State Department when it turned the program over? How many Iraqi Police have 

been successfully trained under State Department control? In which cities are U.S.-

trained Iraqi Police located and what are the metrics for evaluating their abilities? 

How has the prevalence of crime and violence changed in those cities as a result 

of the presence of U.S.-trained Iraqi Police?

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

352

1 Basrah hub of the program will be closed by the end of June following the mutual agreement 

of the U.S. and Iraqi Governments. 

Answer. As noted in my testimony, if confirmed, I will work with the State 

Department and the Congress to ensure that our diplomatic presence in Iraq is secure, strategic, effective, and sustainable. This same rubric will apply to individual 

programs, including the Police Development Program (PDP). If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the Congress and the State Department to revise and 

restructure any program that does not meet this test. I understand the PDP is currently undergoing a review in light of present conditions in Iraq. I strongly support 

this and another initiative as we work to streamline our overall mission and presence in the country. 

I was not involved in the planning or development of the PDP. But I have been 

informed that the Department of Defense (DOD) and the State Department consulted closely during the transition period on an informal basis, and that DOD provided some operational readiness assessments to the State Department prior to closing out its programs. 

I have also been informed that the PDP was designed to provide senior levels of 

the Iraqi Police Services and Ministry of Interior with the management, leadership, 

and technical skills necessary to manage and maintain Iraq’s internal security and 

support the rule of law. With a focus on mentoring and advising, the program does 

not train large numbers of Iraqi Police as the DOD-led mission had since 2004. 

The DOD police training program trained Iraqi Police throughout the country. 

The PDP is focused on Ministry of Interior (MOI) and police leadership based in 

Baghdad and Erbil,1 and our advisors have traveled on occasion to other provinces. 

The PDP seeks to provide the necessary tools for the MOI to build an effective 

police force that supports the rule of law through a set of nine goals that complement the MOI’s strategic goals. To pursue these goals the PDP developed an approach based on police functions, such as investigations, criminal intelligence, and 

border security, each of which has supporting objectives and indicators that guide 

advisors in their engagements. The program is linked to a Performance Monitoring 

Plan, which is implemented through a monitoring and evaluation staff. 

While the security situation in Iraq has generally improved, I have been informed 

that the Department does not have records of individual police who were trained 

by DOD, and it is difficult to identify a causal link between the training and levels 

of crime and violence. Unlike the DOD program, the PDP was never intended to 

provide training in basic skills to large numbers of police, including the individual 

responders whose presence may deter criminal activity. The program is intended, 

instead, to help Iraqis advance strategic institutional capacity to, and senior management of, key institutions. For example, our advisors helped establish an Iraqi 

interagency executive development committee, and work with the Iraqi Police leadership to address the ongoing problem of determining jurisdiction at crime scenes. 

As noted above, if confirmed I look forward to participating in the ongoing review 

of this program to ensure that it is structured to advance U.S. interests on a sustainable basis.

Question. The Lebanese Hezbollah-associated militant Ali Musa Daq-Duq was 

transferred to Iraqi custody in late 2011 and released shortly thereafter. What were 

the legal provisions that prevented the United States from transferring Daq-Duq to 

another detention facility outside of Iraq? Does the United States have any credible 

information that Daq-Duq is now involved with or materially supporting any U.S.-

designated Foreign Terrorist Organization?

Answer. I was not responsible for this case during my time in Iraq in 2011 and 

I was not involved in deliberations internally or with the Iraqi Government on 

whether and how to transfer Daqduq to another detention facility outside of Iraq. 

However, I have been informed that Daqduq was transferred to Iraqi custody in 

December due to the expiration (on December 31, 2011) of the 2008 Security Agreement. Under that agreement, the Iraqi Government had legal custody of Daqduq 

and we were physically holding him at their request and in accordance with Iraqi 

law. Per the expiration of the agreement, we had no legal basis for holding Daqduq 

and his transfer out of Iraq required the full consent of the Iraqi Government pursuant to existing laws. 

It is my understanding that Daqduq currently remains in Iraqi custody. As the 

Secretary has stated, Daqduq is a dangerous individual and his release could have 

a detrimental effect on U.S. interests. I believe strongly that Daqduq should be held 

accountable for his crimes and, if confirmed, I will work closely with Iraqi leaders 

to explore all legal options to pursue justice in this case.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

353

Question. The Iraqi Government has recently threatened U.S. oil and gas companies who have attempted to develop fields in the Kurdish region and in southern 

Iraq.

• (a) How is the U.S. Embassy facilitating the exposure of U.S. companies to opportunities in Iraq?

Answer. The State Department and the U.S. mission in Iraq are engaging in a 

vigorous outreach effort to help US firms identify opportunities in Iraq. These opportunities are significant and growing. While the obstacles to doing business in 

Iraq remain very challenging, one private consulting firm has reported that during 

2011, U.S. companies concluded investment and commercial deals worth $6.9 billion 

USD, up from $2 billion in 2010. Moreover, U.S. exports to Iraq increased by nearly 

50 percent from 2010 to 2011. 

The State and Commerce Departments and the U.S. mission in Iraq are working 

hard with our partners to help U.S. businesses overcome key entry barriers, such 

as identifying Iraqi Government procurement opportunities, screened Iraqi business 

partners, and vetted security firms to operate in a safe and effective manner on the 

ground in Iraq. 

Last November, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad hosted 83 U.S. firms and universities at the U.S. pavilion at the Baghdad Trade Fair, the first official U.S. presence 

at Iraq’s flagship trade fair in more than 30 years. In March, the State Department—with participation via videoconference by our Embassy in Baghdad and consulates in Erbil and Basrah—hosted an event for over 100 companies to explain how 

to address the challenges of doing business in Iraq. Looking forward, I understand 

the Embassy plans activities that will highlight opportunities for U.S. firms in areas 

such as housing, electricity, and water infrastructure. 

Boosting trade and investment ties between the United States and Iraq is in the 

interests of both countries. If confirmed, one of my highest priorities will be to 

ensure that U.S. companies have every opportunity to benefit from this new and 

potentially very wealthy market.

• (b) How does the U.S. Embassy ensure that U.S. oil and gas companies are protected under international conventions on investments?

Answer. Iraq is not yet a signatory to major conventions on the protection of international investment, such as the New York Convention of 1958 on the Recognition 

and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Our Embassy continues to press the 

Government of Iraq to participate in these conventions. Indeed, such participation 

is very much in Iraq’s interests and is essential to attract the foreign direct investment that Iraq so badly needs. If confirmed, I will certainly take every opportunity 

to encourage the Iraqi Government to join appropriate international investment protection agreements like the New York Convention. With respect to investment protection in the energy sector, in the case of irreconcilable disputes, Iraq’s oil contracts 

typically have provisions for international arbitration. 

The Embassy, in cooperation with the Department of Commerce’s Commercial 

Law Development Program, is working also to strengthen investment protection 

under Iraqi law by assisting Iraq to develop specialized commercial courts. The first 

such court opened in 2010 and others are planned. 

I believe that harnessing the U.S. private sector can be one of our strongest levers 

of influence in Iraq over the months and years to come. This is why, as noted in 

my testimony, outreach to, and facilitation for, U.S. businesses in Iraq will be one 

of the top mission priorities, if confirmed.

Question. There have been allegations in the press regarding e-mail exchanges 

between you and Gina Chon, a reporter for the Wall Street Journal. (http://

cryptome.org/2012/06/mcgurk-chon/mcgurk-chon.htm) Please explain the nature of 

your e-mail exchanges with Ms. Chon using your State Department e-mail address.

Answer. On the morning of June 5, 2012, the day before my confirmation hearing, 

personal e-mails between me and my now beloved wife, Gina, were made public by 

others without authorization. They appear to be a printed copy of an e-mail exchange that took place 4 years ago. The State Department has not authenticated 

the e-mails. I do not recall sending some of the statements that have been quoted 

in the media. My wife does not recall receiving them. But I take full responsibility 

for my relationship with Gina and for our exchange of personal messages. 

These e-mails appear to have been sent from my State Department blackberry, 

the only reliable way to communicate at the time in Iraq. Personal e-mail accounts 

were not available on handheld devices and incidental personal use from an official 

account is authorized under State Department regulations (5 FAM 723). 

The printed exchanges reflect a series of personal messages from shortly after we 

first met. At times, they contain flirtatious banter, but also my adherence to profesFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

354

sional boundaries. I did not share sensitive information with Gina. I was a source 

for her stories only when formally briefing media organizations as I did often over 

the course of 2008. As an investigation by the Wall Street Journal found, there is 

‘‘no evidence that her coverage was tainted’’ by our relationship, which was then in 

its earliest stages. 

Regarding my relationship with Gina, I take full responsibility for my conduct. By 

the summer of 2008, I had been in and out of Iraq regularly for 4 years. I had a 

difficult time when home connecting with those who had not served there. My marriage fell apart and friendships suffered. Gina, who had also been in and out of Iraq 

since 2004, became the love of my life, is now my wife, and I would not be here 

without her. 

Media coverage of the e-mails rests on inaccurate assumptions. For example, one 

oft-cited exchange refers to a dinner at the home of an Iraqi official. This official 

often hosted large gatherings, attended by political leaders, journalists, and civil society figures. When I determined that this particular dinner was invite only, I made 

clear that Gina’s attendance was ‘‘no go.’’ Another oft-quoted statement of mine 

says: ‘‘If treated to many glasses of wine, you could be the chosen vultures’’ (plural). 

This was a joke, written in response to Gina’s description of an evening with her 

colleagues from multiple news organizations involving ‘‘many glasses of wine’’—

something that was rare in Baghdad at that time. 

When it came to official activities or information, I wrote clearly: ‘‘Can’t tell you 

about it, of course.’’ In short, when read in context, the e-mails contain instances 

of inside humor and sarcasm but also observed professional boundaries. 

At the time of these personal messages, my assignment was to secure follow-on 

security arrangements with the Iraqi Government and a broader strategic framework for U.S. relations with Iraq. That mission was not compromised and was 

achieved under extremely difficult circumstances and immense pressure. As the last 

three Ambassadors shared with the committee last week, my professional experience makes me ‘‘uniquely positioned to build on all that America has sacrificed over 

this past decade and to establish the strongest possible relationship between our 

two countries.’’

Four years have passed since the date of these leaked e-mails. I am now happily 

married and have spent much of this period either in Iraq or in New York where 

I was working on Iraq issues in academia. I am grateful that the current and two 

former Ambassadors believe I have ‘‘the right vision for leading the mission and 

[that I] enjoy the full trust and confidence of the current leadership team at the 

Embassy.’’ As I shared with the committee in my testimony, I have a coherent plan 

for leading the mission and I look forward to the committee judging my candidacy 

on the merits.

Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 imposes restrictions 

on assistance to any unit of a foreign country’s security forces for which there is 

credible evidence that the unit has committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. 

embassies are heavily involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement. If 

confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively implements section 620M? In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a case 

in which there is credible evidence that a gross violation of human rights has been 

committed, that assistance will not be provided to units that committed the violation? What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust capacity 

to gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of human rights 

by units of security forces?

Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Embassy fully complies with the 

State Department’s legal obligations pursuant to the Section 620M of the Foreign 

Assistance Act of 1961, also known as the Leahy law, for its programs in Iraq. The 

State Department screens all candidates for Department-funded training courses 

and other assistance for gross human rights violations pursuant to standard Leahy 

vetting procedures. Specifically, I will ensure that Embassy Baghdad continues 

vetting recipients of U.S. security assistance through the INVEST (International 

Vetting and Security Tracking) system, which is used for all countries whose security forces are proposed for assistance from the United States 

I will also, if confirmed, engage with the Government of Iraq when human rights 

concerns related to Iraqi security force units arise, and will inform the Iraqi Government if funds are withheld from any units pursuant to the Leahy law. The U.S. 

Embassy will continue working with the Iraqi Government and promoting the 

importance of respecting human rights through diplomatic means. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

355

RESPONSES OF BRETT H. MCGURK TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Hopes for a stable power-sharing government in Iraq in the wake of the 

U.S. troop withdrawal last year have faded. Prime Minister Maliki gives every appearance of a man seeking absolute power—levying charges against his main Sunni 

rival and refusing to implement power-sharing agreements.

• What is your plan for engaging opposition parties effectively to ensure U.S. influence remains strong in a post-Maliki Iraq?

Answer. To help ensure that Iraq remains on the course envisioned in its own 

constitution—a united, federal, democratic, and pluralistic state—we must work to 

engage with and strengthen Iraq’s institutions. As explained in my written testimony, there are examples of the Parliament acting as an independent check on executive authority. The United States can work to encourage ‘‘issues based’’ alliances 

within Parliament, which can help Iraq transcend a political culture dominated by 

ethnosectarian blocs. The most recent political dispute has seen interesting crosssectarian alliances. The Sadrist bloc, for example, has joined with members of 

Iraqiyya and the Kurdish alliance to pressure the Prime Minister. At the same time, 

the Prime Minister has built alliances with key Sunni constituencies from within 

Iraqiyya to pressure his opponents. If confirmed, I will plan to engage every political 

bloc on a neutral basis and seek to build on areas of agreement and narrow areas 

of disagreement. It will be important to ensure that channels of communication remain open between all parties—especially between Baghdad and Irbil. My approach, 

if confirmed, will be active personal engagement. We cannot dictate outcomes but 

we can and must facilitate dialogue, search for opportunities for compromise, and 

then seize on those opportunities. Finally, if confirmed, I will encourage the Iraqis 

to remain focused on their scheduled elections—local elections next year and national elections in 2014. It will be essential for Iraq’s democratic trajectory to ensure 

that these elections take place freely, fairly, and on time.

Question. One of the challenges to stability in Iraq remains the stalled process to 

settle territorial disputes between the Kurds and Iraq’s Arabs. What more can the 

United States do to play a constructive role in helping the parties get beyond this 

impasse?

Answer. We continue to support a durable solution to Iraq’s disputed internal 

boundaries (DIBs). This includes supporting the United Nations Assistance Mission 

for Iraq’s (UNAMI) efforts to reconvene the High Level Task Force or any other 

mechanism that will bring national and provincial leaders together to look for a 

long-term resolution to Iraq’s disputed internal borders. We continue to make clear 

(and UNAMI agrees) that a referendum regarding resolution of DIBs, including ultimate administrative control over the province of Kirkuk, should confirm a political 

settlement negotiated by stakeholders before a vote can take place. The proposed 

census, which article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution also calls for, remains on hold 

primarily due to disagreements among parties in the north on codifying ethnicity 

in disputed areas. We also encourage a potential UNAMI role in mediating these 

disagreements to find common ground. As noted in my testimony, I believe article 

140 continues to provide the roadmap for a durable solution but the United States 

must remain actively engaged to build compromises around the many questions that 

article 140 does not answer, or (in most cases) leaves to resolution at a later date. 

Security in the DIBs region is the responsibility of the Iraqis. However, we will 

continue to play a mediation role when asked to ensure relevant national and provincial leaders find a diplomatic solution to any territorial or other security-related 

disputes in the DIBs. We will also continue to provide security training and rule 

of law programs to complement the high-level dialogue. Our Office of Security 

Cooperation and its relationships with top Iraqi security officials will also have a 

central role to play in maintaining a peaceful settlement in these areas. 

As noted in my testimony, if confirmed, I also will visit the Kurdistan region regularly to ensure face-to-face interaction and to strengthen regular bridges of dialogue 

between Baghdad and Erbil. I have been personally involved in helping to resolve 

flashpoint disputes in the DIBs and it will remain a central priority of mine, if confirmed, to ensure that our engagement is regular and continuous to dampen any potential conflicts far before they can begin.

Question. The drawdown of U.S. forces challenges our ability to confront the terrorist threat posed by al-Qaeda in Iraq. How effective are the Iraqi Security Forces 

in meeting this threat and what role is the United States prepared to play in 

strengthening their capabilities?

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

356

Answer. As I noted in my testimony, al-Qaeda in Iraq retains the capacity to 

launch attacks—mostly directed at Iraqi civilians and Iraqi security forces—approximately every 30–40 days and the level of attacks this year are consistent with those 

in the first half of 2011. Since the U.S. withdrawal, Iraqi Special Forces have demonstrated the capacity to locate and take down AQI cells, as seen earlier this year 

following a series of AQI attacks in Anbar province (focused in the Haditha area). 

While Iraq’s Special Forces are among the most capable in the region, their effectiveness can be enhanced through cooperation with U.S. assistance. If confirmed, I 

will work closely with Iraqi leaders to ensure that we are doing all we can to help 

Iraqi forces eliminate al-Qaeda’s leadership and uproot its networks from Iraqi soil.

Question. Iran’s influence in Iraqi affairs remains a significant concern, and Iran’s 

support for Shiite factions in Iraq has been long established. As Ambassador to Iraq 

you must be able to represent U.S. strategic regional objectives amidst this volatile 

relationship.

• How will you leverage your relationships with Iraq’s leaders to forward key U.S. 

objectives on Iran, such as nonproliferation, sanctions, state-sponsorship of terrorism, and human rights?

Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that our key objectives on Iran, such as those 

related to nonproliferation, sanctions, state-sponsored terrorism, and human rights, 

are part of our dialogue with the senior leaders of the Iraqi Government as well 

as with leaders across the political spectrum. The United States also will continue 

to support the development of democratic institutions in Iraq that serve the needs 

of the Iraqi people and withstand Iranian political influence. In addition, Iraqi outreach to neighboring states and with other countries in the region will keep Iraq 

oriented toward its Arab neighbors through improved diplomatic and commercial 

ties, as opposed to relying on Iran to make progress in these areas. I will also ensure open and regular channels of communication between my office in Baghdad 

and our ambassadors in regional capitals, most of whom I have worked with for 

many years. I’ve found that such regular communication can be essential to identifying opportunities and advancing U.S. interests in the region. 

As I noted in my testimony, Iranian efforts to influence Iraq in a negative manner 

are balanced by the simple fact that Iraqis vigorously defend their independence 

and sovereignty. Years of conflict during the Iraq-Iran war have led the Iraqi people 

to be deeply distrustful of Iranian intentions. Also, followers of Shia Islam in Iraq, 

led by Grand Ayatollah Sistani, maintain different views from those in Iran with 

regard to the appropriate role for religious figures to play in politics. If confirmed, 

I will make clear that the U.S. Embassy is open to engagement and dialogue with 

all Iraqis of good will to include, in particular, the Shia religious leadership in 

Najaf. 

In 2007 and 2008, I was involved in planning and preparing for trilateral talks 

with Iranian diplomats in Baghdad. I was also an active participant in regional engagement efforts, to include the U.N.-sponsored neighbors conferences between 2006 

and 2008, which included Iran. I have learned first-hand Iran’s tactics and levers 

of influence within Iraq and I will align the mission, if confirmed, in a manner that 

helps our Iraqi partners build an independent state free of such interference. The 

centerpiece of this will be the Strategic Framework Agreement, which envisions a 

globally integrated Iraq—precisely the opposite of what Iran desires. 

As noted in my testimony, helping the Iraqis expand their oil sector will be essential to Iraq’s development, stabilizing global markets, and retaining pressure on the 

Iranian regime. This will also be a top priority, if confirmed. 

Furthermore, we must harness the power of U.S. private industry, one of our 

strongest levers of influence that remains yet undeveloped. The demonstrated Iraqi 

desire for U.S. firms to help build the backbone of their security forces, airlines, and 

energy sector gives us a good foundation for this effort. 

On the specific issues of sanctions and state sponsorship of terrorism, I plan to 

continue working with Iraq’s key politicians and leaders not only to preserve the 

hard-won security and political progress for which I saw Iraqis sacrifice their lives, 

but also to push for more progress in developing a sound and independent political 

system that can successfully counter Iran’s nefarious influence and meddling. It is 

worth noting the role of the Iraqis as host for the May 23 P5+1 talks in Baghdad. 

The Iraqis demonstrated a clear interest in a peaceful, diplomatic resolution to 

international concerns about Iran’s failure to meet its obligations with respect to its 

nuclear program. This is an important step for the Iraqis as they resume their place 

in the international community and learn to conduct their own foreign policy. 

Finally, I remain committed to incorporating human rights into my engagements 

with all Iraqi politicians and throughout the various spheres of Iraqi society—relying on Iraq’s own constitution as the centerpiece of my argument. It is not enough 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

357

to have security and prosperity. For Iraq to reach its full potential, all Iraqis must 

enjoy the right to freedom of expression, worship, and the right to political participation. We saw Iraqi exercise their political will at the ballot box in March 2010. 

The time will come for them to return to the polls. As I emphasized in my testimony, ensuring that these future elections happen freely, fairly, and on time, will 

be essential to securing Iraq’s democratic gains.

Question. The crisis in Syria continues to dominate the region. As we look to the 

Arab League and other regional partners to play a stronger role in pressing Bashar 

al-Assad to cease the violence, what is your assessment of the role that Iraq’s leadership can play in this regard and in stopping spill-over effects from further destabilizing Iraq?

Answer. The Iraqi Government follows a general foreign policy of nonintervention 

in the affairs of neighboring countries. When it comes to Syria, however, Iraq has 

a mixed record. In August 2009, the Iraqi Government blamed Syria for a series 

of bombings and sought Arab League and U.N. Security Council assistance for an 

investigation. More recently, the Iraqi Government has acted hesitatingly in the 

wake of unfolding events in Syria. After at first retaining a neutral stance, the Iraqi 

Government has more recently said publicly that the Syrian President’s dictatorship 

must come to an end and that the days of one party rule in Syria are over. On June 

2, Iraq joined the Arab League in its most recent condemnation of the Syrian Government’s continued violence against civilians, including the massacre in Houla. 

Iraq’s concern regarding the situation in Syria is driven by fear among Iraqi leaders 

that a sudden collapse of the Assad regime could lead to a sectarian upheaval that 

could spill over Iraq’s western border. The United States will continue to urge Iraq 

to call for the immediate departure of Assad, and to support a political solution to 

the crisis in Syria, as outlined by U.N.—Arab League Joint Special Envoy Annan’s 

six point plan and UNSCRs 2042 and 2043. 

As for what I can do from Baghdad: if confirmed, I will (1) remain constantly engaged with U.S. ambassadors in regional capitals and at the highest levels of the 

White House and State Department and (2) ensure the Syria situation is assessed 

and approached multidimensionally within Iraq: with the Central Government, with 

the Kurdistan Regional Government, and with the tribes of western Iraq. It will be 

essential to seize opportunities where they exist and to ensure that the Iraqi Government both adheres to its Security Council obligations and remains within the 

Arab League consensus on the Syria situation. As I stated in my testimony, all 

Iraqis must know: ‘‘U.S. policy is firm: Bashar al-Assad must go. The longer he remains, the greater the threat to the Syrian people, to the region, and to Iraq.’’

Question. Our Embassy in Baghdad is our largest. How sustainable is that posture and what is your assessment of plans to reduce U.S. civilian staff in the wake 

of the military withdrawal?

• Absent attractive incentive packages (such as ‘‘linked assignments’’) what steps 

would you take to ensure that you get the best people to take assignments in 

Iraq?

Answer. As I noted in my testimony, the current size of the Embassy reflects an 

‘‘all contingency’’ plan that was developed in light of the uncertainties facing our 

mission over the early part of this year. Now that we are 6 months into the first 

year without a substantial U.S. military presence, we are able to plan for a more 

institutionalized and sustainable presence. If confirmed, my aim will be to build a 

mission that is secure, strategic, effective, and sustainable. This will require a consolidation of our footprint and a reduction in personnel. We are also moving to a 

posture that allows us as much as possible to live off the local economy, decreasing 

dependence on offshore contract firms. I believe the current planned reductions are 

a good start in this regard. 

Iraq remains a difficult environment for American employees of all agencies. The 

Department of State expects a full package of incentives to remain in place for the 

next several years, although there may be some alterations. If confirmed, I will 

work with the Department to ensure that service in Iraq produces a record of 

achievement that is not overlooked in promotions, awards, and assignments. I will 

also endeavor to recruit those who have served Iraq in the past to draw on the 

nearly decade of experience our Foreign Service professionals have in the country. 

To succeed in Iraq we will need the best people, with the most experience, operating 

on the ground.

Question. Please respond to the following questions with regard to the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) Program for Iraq:

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

358

• (a) Please provide the number of Iraqi SIVs that have been issued, by fiscal 

year, since the inception of the program;

Answer. The chart below details how many Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) the 

Department of State has issued to Iraqi applicants under both the Section 1059 and 

Section 1244 programs since implementation in FY 2007. FY 2012 numbers are 

preliminary:

Principal Derivatives Totals 

2007 ............................................................................................................ 431 383 814

2008 ............................................................................................................ 518 449 967

2009 ............................................................................................................ 1,448 1,385 2,833

2010 ............................................................................................................ 951 1,091 2,042

2011 ............................................................................................................ 322 384 706

2012* .......................................................................................................... 1,137 1,461 2,598

Totals ............................................................................................. 4,807 5,153 9,960

* Applications through May 31, 2012. 

• (b) Please list the number of applications, by fiscal year, since the inception;

Answer. The chart below details the number of approved I–360 immigrant visa 

petitions received by the State Department’s National Visa Center (NVC) from 

USCIS for Iraqis applying for the Section 1059 and Section 1244 SIV Programs. FY 

2012 numbers are preliminary:

Iraqi section 

1059 approved

I-360s 

Iraqi section 

1244 approved

I-360s 

Combined total 

FY 2007 ....................................................................................................... 650 0 650

FY 2008 ....................................................................................................... 149 48 197

FY 2009 ....................................................................................................... 139 1,614 1,753

FY 2010 ....................................................................................................... 10 1,025 1,035

FY 2011 ....................................................................................................... 2 2,398 2,400

FY 2012* ..................................................................................................... 0 659 659

Totals ............................................................................................. 950 5,744 6,694

* Applications through May 31, 2012. 

• (c) Please list the average processing time for an SIV, by fiscal year.

Answer. Processing SIVs involves a number of different steps, many of which are 

outside the control of the State Department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs. As a result, I understand that the Department does not have general statistics on processing times for SIVs. I understand there were significant delays in returning clearances on SIV cases in FY 2011, but there has been improvement on processing times 

in FY 2012. The State Department’s internal standards require scheduling interviews 60 days from the receipt of the application. As the numbers of SIVs issued 

to Iraqis in FY 2012 indicate above, our interagency partners have made significant 

strides in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases pending security screening. 

This progress allowed us to cut the backlog of Iraqi SIVs pending final action 

(issuance or refusal of the visa application) by 50 percent since March. In late February, 2,832 Iraqi SIV applications were pending security vetting. A little over 3 

months later, that number has fallen to 1,388. 

We owe it to those Iraqis who have worked with us to ensure that this program 

runs as transparently as possible while also maintaining essential security checks 

to protect the American people.

• (d) Please list the total number of pending SIV applications as of June 1, 2012.

Answer As of June 6, 2012, there were 1,388 Iraqi SIV applications pending security clearances. 

RESPONSES OF BRETT H. MCGURK TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BENJAMIN L. CARDIN

Question. Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for Iraqi employees of the United 

States: As you know from our earlier conversations, I am very concerned about 

delays in the processing of Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for those Iraqis who 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

359

risked their lives to work for us in Iraq—particularly those who were living and 

working on our bases and have been ‘‘cut loose’’ since our withdrawal last December. 

How can SIV processing be expedited? What can be done to offer protection to those 

who are literally in hiding and on the run inside Iraq as they await issuance of their 

visas?

Answer. This issue is very important and personal to me. It will receive my close 

attention, if confirmed. Since we met in your office, I have spoken with the leading 

U.S. officials who have been working to address delays in processing of Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for Iraqis who have risked their lives to work with us. The 

State Department is working closely with our interagency colleagues to streamline 

the SIV application process, eliminate redundant requirements, and accept electronic submissions wherever possible. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the 

Embassy is staffed to manage applications efficiently and in a manner that provides 

fair process to our Iraqi partners while also ensuring necessary background and security checks to protect the American people. In recent months, strides have been 

made in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases pending security screening. Over 

the first half of this year, the State Department issued more SIVs to Iraqis than 

during all of FY 2011. In FY 2011, the Department issued 706 SIVs to Iraqi citizens. 

By the end of March 2012, the Department already had issued 865 SIVs to Iraqis. 

During April and May 2012 alone, it issued an additional 1,733 SIVs to Iraqis, 

based on preliminary data. Thus, the trend appears to be a positive one, and now 

we must ensure it continues. If confirmed, I am committed to working diligently 

with our interagency partners to balance the safety of American citizens with the 

aspirations of Iraqis who risked their lives to work with us, and now wish to resettle 

in our country.

Question. Iraq and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI): 

According to the World Bank, Iraq possesses a proven 143 billion barrels of oil, and 

high oil prices and increasing exports should enable Iraq’s GDP to grow by about 

12 percent in 2012. It is therefore critical that the Government of Iraq implement 

an effective and transparent process for handling and accounting for these rapidly 

increasing revenues. Iraq has been an Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative 

(EITI) candidate country since 2010 and is supposed to complete the requirements 

to become a ‘‘compliant’’ country later this year. What are the prospects for this 

happening?

Answer. The Board of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) accepted Iraq as a candidate country on February 10, 2010. Iraq has until August 9, 

2012, to undergo EITI validation to determine whether the country is compliant. 

Iraq issued its first EITI report in December 2011, reporting $41 billion in revenues 

from oil and gas exports in 2009. Iraq’s second report, covering 2010, is expected 

on schedule by the end of the year. Iraq has hired one of the approved international 

validation companies to conduct its validation exercise, a highly detailed procedure 

to reconcile national revenue and company payment figures for extractive industries. We believe the Iraqi authorities are committed to the EITI process. 

The United States strongly supports Iraq’s efforts to become EITI compliant. Iraq 

is one of only two countries in the Middle East to have sought EITI compliant status 

and holds the largest reserves of any country seeking this status. 

Revenues from crude oil exports account for approximately 95 percent of Iraqi 

Government revenues, so the EITI reconciliation exercise is tightly tied to the overall transparency of Iraqi Government revenues. All Iraqi oil export revenues flow 

through the accounts of the Development Fund for Iraq at the New York Federal 

Reserve and are subject to audit by Iraq’s Governmental auditing and internal control body, the Committee of Financial Experts. Iraq publishes its annual budget. 

The 2012 budget was reviewed by experts from the International Monetary Fund. 

In September 2011, the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs 

awarded a $1million grant to Revenue Watch Institute to broaden and strengthen 

Iraqi civil society working on EITI issues and to support a more robust implementation process. As stated in my written testimony, helping the Iraqis to meet the requirements of the EITI would be among my top priorities if confirmed. ‘‘By helping 

the Iraqis address these challenges, the United States can gain leverage and influence while pursuing mutual goals.’’ 

RESPONSES OF BRETT H. MCGURK TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. In July 2010, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Jim Jeffrey said the following 

on Iran’s role in Iraq during his confirmation hearing ‘‘Iran attempts to exert its 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

360

influence through financial and political backing for political parties, high-level engagement with Iraqi leaders, and support for Shia militant groups. But, we should 

recognize that Iran’s efforts continue to run into the natural independence of 

Iraqis.’’

• (a) Do you believe that this analysis still holds? How does Iran exert its influence in Iraq today?

Answer. Yes, this analysis still holds. As noted in my written testimony, ‘‘Iran has 

tremendous influence in Iraq, sharing a 3,000 kilometer border, as well as interwoven religious, cultural, and economic ties.’’ Iran largely failed, however, in its efforts to create Iraqi Shia extremist militia groups capable of driving U.S. forces from 

Iraq, as these groups publicly pledged to do time and time again. Over the course 

of this year, the three primary Shia extremist groups have largely gone to ground—

although we must retain a vigilant eye on their activities. Iran’s influence is now 

primarily economic and political; and this is where we must focus our efforts to push 

back: through active political engagement, strengthening our economic and commercial ties with Iraq (including private sector engagement), and deepening our permanent ties—in education, defense, culture, commerce—under the Strategic Framework Agreement.

• (b) How has Iraq recently exhibited its natural independence against influence 

from Iran? What can we do to help support that ‘‘natural independence’’?

Answer. I have been involved in a number of conversations with Iraqi leaders to 

push back against nefarious Iranian influence. Last summer, when U.S. troops were 

coming under fire from Iranian-backed extremist groups, Embassy Baghdad pushed 

for Iraqi Security Forces to move into Maysan province to protect our people and 

detain those responsible. The Iraqi security forces did and the attacks nearly ceased. 

Iraqi leaders have also sought to ensure a growing supply of oil to international 

markets which is not in Iran’s interest. The Shia religious leadership in Najaf professes a vision of Shia Islam that undercuts the legitimacy of the Iranian regime. 

And, of course, Iraqi security forces (with our help) defeated Iranian-backed militia 

groups that had been controlling much of Basrah in the spring of 2008. This was 

a major turning point in Iraq’s trajectory. Furthermore, as I noted in my testimony, 

‘‘The vast majority of Iraqis seek to live in a globally integrated nation, whereas 

Iran seeks to further isolate Iraq from the world. It is between these competing 

visions—an Iraq that is globally integrated versus an Iraq that is isolated and 

dependent on Iran—that the United States retains substantial advantage and 

influence.’’ Our vision for Iraq is one that most Iraqis share and it is codified in the 

Strategic Framework Agreement. 

Having stronger, effective government institutions will also support Iraq’s ability 

to withstand Iranian political influence. We continue to support the development of 

democratic institutions in Iraq that serve the will and needs of the Iraqi people. In 

addition, developing stronger ties with other neighbors and the larger Middle East 

region will temper Iraqi ties to Iran. We are urging all of the regional players to 

engage directly with the Iraqi Government. Iraq’s hosting of the Arab League summit in Baghdad was a significant and positive step in Iraq’s integration into the region. Iraq is resolving longstanding issues with Kuwait and also building political 

ties as well as exploring economic/energy cooperation with other GCC states and 

Jordan. Finally, encouraging military-to-military engagements between Iraq and 

GCC states will be one of my top priorities at the Embassy, if confirmed.

Question. Iraq has unique concerns with respect to the unrest in Syria. The ongoing violence and apparent failure of Annan’s peace plan has increased calls for 

greater regional efforts to remove Assad from power and support a democratic transition in Syria.

• What do you make of the Iraqi relationship with Syria and how will you use 

your position to urge the Iraqi Government to play a more constructive role 

bilaterally and through the Arab League to bring about a democratic transition 

in Syria?

Answer. The Iraqi Government follows a general foreign policy of nonintervention 

in the affairs of neighboring countries. When it comes to Syria, however, Iraq has 

a mixed record. In August 2009, the Iraqi Government blamed Syria for a series 

of bombings and sought Arab League and U.N. Security Council assistance for an 

investigation. More recently, the Iraqi Government has acted hesitantly to unfolding 

events in Syria. After at first retaining a neutral stance, the Iraqi Government has 

more recently said publicly that the Syrian President’s dictatorship must come to 

an end and that the days of one party rule in Syria are over. On June 2, Iraq joined 

the Arab League in its most recent condemnation of the Syrian Government’s continued violence against civilians, including the massacre in Houla. Iraq’s concern reFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

361

garding the situation in Syria is driven by fear among Iraqi leaders that a sudden 

collapse of the Assad regime could lead to a sectarian upheaval that could spill over 

Iraq’s western border. The United States will continue to urge Iraq to call for the 

immediate departure of Assad, and to support a political solution to the crisis in 

Syria, as outlined by U.N.-Arab League Joint Special Envoy Annan’s six point plan 

and UNSCRs 2042 and 2043. 

As for what I can do from Baghdad: if confirmed, I will (1) remain constantly engaged with U.S. ambassadors in regional capitals and the Iraq and Syria policy 

teams at the State Department and (2) ensure the Syria situation is assessed and 

approached multidimensionally within Iraq. It will be essential to seize opportunities where they exist and to ensure that the Iraqi Government both adheres to its 

Security Council obligations and remains within the Arab League consensus on the 

Syria situation. As I stated in my testimony, all Iraqis must know that ‘‘U.S. policy 

is firm: Bashar al-Assad must go. The longer he remains, the greater the threat to 

the Syrian people and to the region, and to Iraq.’’

Question. Despite efforts to expedite processing of Special Immigrant Visas (SIV) 

for Iraqis who assisted the United States Government during the war, there continues to be a significant backlog of visas. In the meantime, applicants are under 

threat and some have been killed for their work with U.S. forces.

• (a) How many cases of SIV principal applicants are currently in the pipeline? 

How many principal applicants have been granted SIVs since the beginning of 

2012?

Answer. As I noted in my testimony, addressing the delays in security vetting of 

Iraqi SIV applications is an issue I take personally. I have known Iraqis who lost 

their lives after cooperating with us and others who have either resettled in the 

United States or never had an application processed. It is my understanding that 

in recent months, the United States has streamlined the application process to conform with existing laws and ensure reasonable security checks while also eliminating redundant requirements and accepting electronic submissions wherever possible. We are seeing some progress in eliminating the backlog of Iraqi SIV cases 

pending security screening. As of June 6, there were 1,388 Iraqi SIVs applicants 

whose visas were pending security clearances. Over the first half of this year, the 

State Department issued more SIVs to Iraqis than during all of FY 2011. In FY 

2011, the Department issued 706 SIVs to Iraqi citizens. By the end of March 2012, 

the Department already had issued 865 SIVs to Iraqis. During April and May 2012 

alone, the Department issued an additional 1,733 SIVs to Iraqis, based on preliminary data. If confirmed, I pledge my utmost efforts to ensure that the Embassy is 

appropriately staffed to efficiently process SIV applications, and to ensure as much 

as possible that Iraqis who have worked with us and wish to resettle in the United 

States undergo a fair process with reasonable security checks.

• (b) How many cases are pending for applicants through the direct access visa 

process? How many direct access visas have been granted since the beginning 

of 2012?

Answer. Approximately 40,000 Iraqis have pending applications for the direct 

access in-country refugee resettlement program in Iraq. Of that number, more than 

25,000 Iraqis are pending case prescreening and their required in-person interviews 

with the Department of Homeland Security. Since FY 2007, we have admitted more 

than 8,200 direct-access Iraqi applicants to the United States from Iraq. Of that 

number, we admitted more than 530 from Iraq in FY 2012. If confirmed, I will ensure close cooperation from the Embassy and through the interagency to process 

these cases as rapidly as possible while maintaining reasonable security checks. It 

will be a priority to ensure that Iraqis who worked with us feel welcomed not only 

at the U.S. Embassy in their capital city but also in the United States.

• (c) What is your plan to recognize the bravery of these individuals by further 

expediting this backlog of applicants?

Answer. The SIV program was implemented in Iraq as a means to both recognize 

and provide protection for those Iraqis who risked their lives, and the lives of their 

families, to further U.S. goals in Iraq. The best solution for helping those in danger 

awaiting SIV and refugee processing is continued swift processing of their applications, including the security vetting process. Ensuring the success of these programs 

will be a top priority, if confirmed. As I stated in my written testimony: ‘‘Iraqis who 

risked their lives to work with us should feel welcomed, even as we uphold essential 

security checks.’’

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

362

RESPONSES OF SUSAN MARSH ELLIOTT TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 imposes restrictions 

on assistance to any unit of a foreign country’s security forces for which there is 

credible evidence that the unit has committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. 

embassies are heavily involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement.

• If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively 

implements section 620M? • In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a case in which there 

is credible evidence that a gross violation of human rights has been committed, 

that assistance will not be provided to units that committed the violation? • What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust capacity to 

gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of human 

rights by units of security forces?

Answer. Urging the Government of Tajikistan to improve its human rights performance will be one of my top priorities, if confirmed as Ambassador to Tajikistan. 

Embassy Dushanbe already routinely conducts Leahy vetting in accordance with the 

requirements of section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. Still, given the 

importance of human rights monitoring, I would lead a review of our Leahy vetting 

procedures to ensure we are conducting these reviews based on the most complete 

information. Such efforts could include leveraging the growing reach of the Internet; 

maintaining steady contact with activists, NGOs, journalists, and others; increasing 

outreach to local police and government contacts; and encouraging victims and their 

families to come forward. If confirmed, I will continue our coordinated work with 

the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor in Washington and maintain 

use of the International Vetting and Security Tracking (INVEST) system to maximize the breadth and depth of our vetting activities. 

I cannot speculate broadly on hypothetical cases of gross violations of human 

rights, as each case is unique, but I can pledge to follow U.S. law: If our coordinated 

vetting processes reveals credible information that a member or unit of the security 

forces is responsible for gross violations of human rights, the Embassy will prohibit 

that unit or individual from receiving assistance. We will use the tools at our disposal, including end use monitoring and our bilateral security agreements, to ensure 

U.S. assistance is never provided to those committing such violations.

Question. Does Russia have plans to redeploy its troops to the Tajikistan-Afghanistan border following NATO’s post-2014 withdrawal from Afghanistan? If so, what 

implications does that have for U.S. policy in the region? Would the United States 

support such a Russian deployment?

Answer. I cannot speak to Russia’s long-term intentions with regard to border 

guard deployments on the border between Tajikistan and Afghanistan following 

NATO’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. It is conceivable that Russia may desire to 

redeploy troops to the border given Russian concerns over the large volume of 

Afghan origin narcotics that transit Tajikistan en route to Russia. Russia has had 

a Border Advisory Group in Tajikistan ever since their main forces left in 2005, but 

neither country characterized these advisers as ‘‘troops.’’

Any potential deployment must take into account the sensitivities of Tajikistan. 

On a number of occasions in the past, Tajikistan has refused to permit Russian 

troops along the border. While I cannot speculate on the potential U.S. reaction to 

Russian deployments, we fully respect Tajikistan’s sovereign right to determine the 

best course forward on foreign policy matters. 

RESPONSE OF SUSAN MARSH ELLIOTT TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. While U.S. operations in Afghanistan continue, we must rely on close 

cooperation with Tajikistan in order to manage the flow of goods and people in and 

out of Afghanistan. However, we must balance this strategic imperative with our 

serious concerns about human rights in the country, including the repression of 

media freedom and political opposition and restrictions on the rights of women and 

ethnic and religious minorities.

• How are we pushing the Government of Tajikistan to rectify these abuses? Are 

discussions of human rights with Tajik officials effective in producing positive 

change? If not, what else could we be doing?

Answer. Promoting and protecting freedom of the press, the rights of women, religious and ethnic minorities is an integral part of our engagement with the GovernFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

363

ment of Tajikistan. We consistently raise these and other human rights issues with 

all levels of the government. 

In May 2012, Assistant Secretary Robert O. Blake, Jr., hosted the third round of 

U.S.-Tajikistan Annual Bilateral Consultations (ABC), which served as a vehicle to 

frankly discuss our wide range of bilateral issues. Our delegations to the ABCs regularly include representatives of the Department of State’s Bureau of Democracy, 

Human Rights and Labor, Office of Central Asian Affairs, and Office of International Religious Freedom, the Office of Central Asia in the Office of the Secretary 

of Defense, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. In addition to meetings with officials of the Government of Tajikistan, when in-country, Assistant Secretary Blake and I regularly meet with civil society, including human rights, business, and political leaders to discuss these issues. 

The goal of the ABCs is to increase the level of our engagement. We see opportunities for progress in all areas of our dialogue over the coming year, including 

strengthening respect for human rights and religious freedom, promoting democratic 

governance, and enhancing the rule of law. In our interactions with the Government 

and people of Tajikistan, we seek to ensure Tajikistan continues to be a stable country with secure borders and an improving economic climate. 

When Secretary Clinton visited Tajikistan, she stressed the importance for the 

governments and leaders to provide the space necessary for citizens to have a voice 

in their government, to pursue their aspirations, and promote their ideas. If confirmed, I will work hard to convey to the Government of Tajikistan the importance 

of an open, democratic, tolerant society which can provide a firm foundation for a 

secure, stable, and prosperous nation. 

RESPONSE OF SUSAN MARSH ELLIOTT TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BENJAMIN L. CARDIN

Question. Does the Tajik Government respect human rights, in your view? Has 

trafficking in persons decreased? Are there political prisoners in Tajikistan? How 

should the United States address human rights problems in Tajikistan?

Answer. The Government of Tajikistan has a great deal of work to do on the 

human rights front but their engagement on this issue has recently increased. The 

most significant human rights problems included torture and abuse of detainees, restrictions on freedoms of expression and religion (especially regarding the prosecution of journalists and repression of faith groups), and violence and discrimination 

against women. We continue to remind Government officials that a free and open 

exchange with the public is in the government’s interest and a sign of a modern 

state. 

During the 2011 Trafficking in Persons reporting period, encompassing the 2010 

cotton harvest, the Government of Tajikistan took strong measures to prevent forced 

child labor in the cotton harvest, including disseminating widely a directive that ordered the enforcement of existing prohibitions against forced labor and accrediting 

and assisting NGOs to monitor the cotton harvest. These actions in part resulted 

in Tajikistan’s upgrade from Tier Two Watch List to Tier Two in the 2011 (and most 

recent) TIP Report. During the last cotton harvest, the government continued these 

efforts, fulfilling the first recommendations in the 2011 TIP Report. 

We have repeatedly recommended that the Government of Tajikistan vigorously 

investigate and prosecute suspected trafficking offenses, especially those involving 

forced labor, and convict and punish trafficking offenders, including local officials 

who force individuals to participate in the cotton harvest. We also raise frequently 

the need for the Government of Tajikistan to continue to educate school administrators and teachers about Tajik laws against forced labor of children. 

On the issue of political prisoners, according to the State Department’s 2011 

Human Rights Report, Tajik authorities claimed that there were no political prisoners and that they did not make any politically motivated arrests. Opposition parties and local observers claimed, however, that the government selectively prosecuted political opponents. Due to lack of transparency there is no reliable estimate 

of the number of political prisoners. 

Promoting and protecting basic freedom is a key USG interest. In May 2012, I 

participated in the third U.S.-Tajikistan Annual Bilateral Consultations, hosted by 

Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia Robert O Blake, Jr., which served 

as an additional vehicle to frankly discuss the wide range of bilateral issues—

including human rights. During the discussions, we expressed concern about restrictions on religious freedom such as the Parental Responsibility Law and reiterated 

continued need for the Government of Tajikistan to improve its human rights 

record. At the ABC and in other settings, we encourage the Government of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

364

Tajikistan to explore ways to combat violent extremism through the promotion of 

human rights—including religious freedom—in Tajikistan. 

I can assure you that I will continue to raise these issues as a top priority in 

Tajikistan, if I am confirmed as Ambassador. 

RESPONSES OF SUSAN MARSH ELLIOTT TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. (1) According to the State Department’s 2011 Trafficking in Persons 

Report, Tajikistan is a Tier 2 country for human trafficking. Tajikistan serves as 

a source country for sexual exploitation and forced labor. The annual cotton harvest 

has been a concerning event where numerous instances of forced labor of children 

occurs.

• If confirmed, what is your strategy to combat the use of forced labor during the 

annual cotton harvest?

(2) There have been reports where school aged children were forced to pick cotton 

during the harvest but government officials did not prosecute the teachers and 

farmers involved.

• If confirmed, how do you plan on addressing the issue of enforcement of 

antihuman trafficking laws, particularly in cases of forced labor during the cotton harvest?

Answer. During the 2011 Trafficking in Persons reporting period, encompassing 

the 2010 and 2011 cotton harvests, the Government of Tajikistan took strong measures to prevent forced child labor in the cotton harvest, including disseminating 

widely a directive that ordered the enforcement of existing prohibitions against 

forced labor and accrediting and assisting NGOs to monitor the cotton harvest. 

These actions in part resulted in Tajikistan’s upgrade from Tier Two Watch List to 

Tier Two. During the last cotton harvest, the government continued these efforts, 

fulfilling the first recommendations in the 2011 TIP Report. The International Organization on Migration’s (IOM) 2012 ‘‘Report on the 2011 Tajik Cotton Harvest,’’ 

which was released in March 2012 and funded by the Department of State’s International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Bureau, noted that the Tajik Government 

took action on reported cases of forced child labor during the cotton harvest. 

We have repeatedly recommended that the Government of Tajikistan vigorously 

investigate and prosecute suspected trafficking offenses, especially those involving 

forced labor, and convict and punish trafficking offenders, including local officials 

who force individuals to participate in the cotton harvest. We also raise frequently 

the need for the Government of Tajikistan to continue to educate school administrators and teachers about Tajik laws against forced labor of children. 

If confirmed, I will vigorously raise with the Government of Tajikistan the issue 

of enforcement of antihuman trafficking laws, particularly in cases of forced labor 

during the cotton harvest. Also, I will follow closely our assistance in this area to 

ensure that it is achieving the intended results. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(365)

NOMINATIONS OF RICHARD MORNINGSTAR, 

TIMOTHY BROAS, AND JAY ANANIA 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Richard L. Morningstar, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador 

to the Republic of Azerbaijan 

Timothy M. Broas, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom 

of the Netherlands 

Jay Nicholas Anania, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Suriname 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:49 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Kerry, Shaheen, Menendez, Cardin, Lugar, 

and Barrasso. 

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. I am going to

exercise the prerogative of being the Chair with the ranking member’s consent and start the hearing, even though I have asked Senator Shaheen, who is now here, to chair the hearing. And what I 

will do is recognize Senator Shaheen to formally open the proceedings, and then we will go from there. 

Senator SHAHEEN [presiding]. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Since it is your committee, you can start whenever you are ready, 

and I appreciate that and apologize for being late. 

We are here today to consider the nominations of Richard 

Morningstar to be United States Ambassador to Azerbaijan, Mr. 

Timothy Broad to be the United States Ambassador to the Netherlands, and Mr. Jay Nicholas Anania to be the United States 

Ambassador to the Republic of Suriname. 

And, Mr. Chairman, I do not know if you would like to go ahead 

and do the introductions, and then I have an opening statement 

since I know you have to go on. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS 

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate that. I have to go on to another 

meeting and appreciate that enormously. 

First of all, thank you for letting me say a few words and for 

chairing this. I really appreciate it. And I am very pleased that the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

366

President has nominated such strong candidates to serve as 

Ambassador to Azerbaijan, the Netherlands, and Suriname. 

Jay Anania has served as a career Foreign Service officer, which 

we always welcome here, to take on chief of mission roles. He 

served in a variety of important and challenging posts, most 

recently at our Embassy in Baghdad. And he is a highly qualified 

nominee, and I know he is going to be an excellent Ambassador in 

Suriname. We look forward to confirming you. 

Tim Broas comes to us from a long and very distinguished career 

in the private practice of law. For the last 3 years, various legal 

associations have listed him as one of the best lawyers in America, 

and some even have given him the super lawyer’s award. No doubt 

this experience will be put to good use as he takes the post in The 

Hague because the Dutch proudly refer to themselves as the international legal capital of the world. We are very fortunate that he 

has agreed to serve on behalf of our country. 

I have known Tim for many years, and I can tell you that he is 

as decent and humble as he is passionate about serving his country. He embodies not just the accomplishments to which every 

American should aspire, but he is a living example of the kind

of compassion and strength that we expect from our Nation’s 

diplomats. 

I will say on a personal note I know he is a quintessential family 

man. This September he will celebrate his 27th wedding anniversary with his wife, Julie, herself an accomplished lawyer. And together they have raised three extraordinary children: Emily, Allison, and Mattie, who are here today with him. I got to know Emily 

when she was an intern in my Washington office and during her 

years at Dartmouth College. It is a testament to things unseen that 

Emily is still here with us today. As a freshman when many of the 

rest of the freshman classes were agonizing over what courses to 

take or clubs to join, she was diagnosed with leukemia, and anyone 

who knows her will understand that she is a fighter. Through courage, grit, and sheer determination she stared down adversity and 

keep her dreams afloat. And Tim never let go during that process. 

He was there every step of the way with compassion and grace and 

a unique sense of humor that is always leavening in those stressful 

moments. 

Tim and I share a mutual appreciation for Bruce Springsteen. 

Back in 2004 when my Presidential campaign was in full swing, 

‘‘the Boss,’’ who campaigned with me, wrote an op-ed that I think 

sums what is best about Tim. This may be the first confirmation 

hearing at which ‘‘the Boss’’ is quoted on behalf of the nominee, he 

wrote, ‘‘It’s through the truthful exercise of the best of human 

qualities, respect for others, honesty about ourselves, faith in our 

ideals, that we come to life in God’s eyes. It is how our soul as a 

nation and as individuals is revealed.’’

So I can tell you that in him I think the President has nominated 

a man of the highest integrity who will represent this Nation with 

honesty, with respect for other people, and an unwavering faith in 

our ideals. 

Finally, I am delighted to introduce an old friend from Massachusetts, Richard Morningstar, to serve as our Ambassador to 

Azerbaijan. I have known Dick Morningstar since I entered politics 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

367

in Massachusetts, and I have worked with him now for decades. 

Many times he has answered the call to serve our country in various posts, and he is now doing so once again in a post where I 

believe our country, and the President need his skills far more than 

he needs the job. He will bring the right intelligence, commitment, 

and broad experience, including profound regional experience to 

this task. 

Ambassador Morningstar currently serves as special envoy for 

Eurasian energy at the State Department, where he has worked 

tirelessly and with great skill to enhance Europe’s energy security 

and assist the Caspian and Central Asian countries to find new 

routes to the market. It is a position of strategic importance to the 

United States, and it is the kind of position that Dick has excelled 

in. 

In the interest of time, I am not going to detail his long list of 

previous accomplishments, but I will say for the record that he has 

served as Ambassador to the European Union, a Special Advisor to 

the President and Secretary of State for Caspian Basin energy 

diplomacy, Ambassador and Special Advisor to the President and 

Secretary of State for the newly independent states of the former 

Soviet Union, and, above all, he had the good sense to be born and 

educated in Massachusetts. 

It is a pleasure to welcome him here today. And I understand 

that his wife, Faith, and his daughter, Jill, and son-in-law, Al 

Fitzpayne, are also in attendance. So we welcome all them here 

this afternoon. And a quick shout out to Dick’s son, Tim, and his 

wife, Liz, who also did a terrific job of helping me back in 2004. 

Before I wrap up, I just want to underscore that really no issue 

may be more important to us than stability in the south Caucasus 

than a lasting and peaceful resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh 

conflict. And as cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United 

States is committed to a comprehensive peace settlement that is 

going to require sustained engagement and political will. And I 

know Secretary Clinton’s recent travel to the region underscores 

our determination to move forward on this issue. 

So, Ambassador Morningstar, your nomination could not be more 

timely, and I want to say personally that I am grateful for your 

continued dedication to public service, and grateful for your friendship and support. 

I urge my colleagues to support all three of these nominees and 

hope we can move them as expeditiously as possible. Thank you, 

Madam Chairman, very much. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much, Senator Kerry. We 

very much appreciate the fact that you are able to be here at the 

start of this hearing. And I also want to recognize Ranking Member Lugar, who is the ranking member on the full committee, and 

thank him for being here as well. Would you like to make any kind 

of a statement following the Chair? 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA 

Senator LUGAR. My statement would simply be that I am

delighted with the remarkable quality of the candidates that are in 

front of us today. I have had the special privilege to work with 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

368

Ambassador Morningstar and look forward to his testimony. And 

we will have questions for him in due course. 

We are grateful to all three of you for coming to our hearing and 

for your public service. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much, Senator Lugar. 

I have a very brief statement that I will make before turning it 

over to the ranking member of this subcommittee, Senator 

Barrasso, for his statement before we finally turn it over to you all. 

So you have a brief reprieve before we begin asking you questions. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator SHAHEEN. I want to start by congratulating each of you 

on your nominations. We all thank you for taking on these very important jobs and look forward to hearing from you this afternoon. 

I also want to just make sure that you take the opportunity, if 

you would like, to introduce any family or friends that you have 

here with you. I see a big crowd, so that says to me you must have 

lots of people who care about you and this nomination here with 

you. So feel free to do that. We ask a lot of our diplomats and their 

families, and we know that service abroad is sometimes very 

challenging, and it is very important to have the support of your 

families. 

First on the agenda today, the committee will examine our relationship with Azerbaijan, a critical partner for the United States 

in the strategically vital Caspian region. This year marks the 20th 

anniversary of diplomatic relations between the United States and 

Azerbaijan. 

Azerbaijan is currently a U.N. Security Council member, and, as 

such, recently attended the NATO summit in Chicago. It has made 

important contributions as a NATO partner for peace country in 

Iraq, in Kosovo, and in Afghanistan. And today it remains a key 

point for the transport of troops and supplies into and out of 

Afghanistan. And, of course, as Senator Kerry mentioned earlier, it 

has massive energy supplies. Azerbaijan is also a crucial component of the Southern Corridor with those energy supplies to bolster 

our energy security in Europe. 

Human rights remain a concern in Azerbaijan, and I was pleased 

to see that this was a point that Secretary Clinton made when she 

visited there recently. It was also encouraging to see a prominent 

opposition activist who was released from prison prior to the Secretary’s visit. And I hope that others who are being detained there 

for simply expressing their views will be released soon as well. 

Unfortunately, violence has once again flared up over the conflict 

in Nagorno-Karabakh in recent weeks. I am concerned about the 

escalating tension in this region and call on all sides to peacefully 

resolve the dispute and comply with the 1994 cease-fire agreement. 

There is no military solution to this conflict, and continued violence 

could be a disaster for both sides. Diplomacy, under the auspices 

of the Minsk Group, will be key to any peaceful and sustainable 

resolution that turns the page on the violence of the past. 

Our second nominee and the second issue that we will consider 

this afternoon is United States policies with respect to the Netherlands. And I understand that there are some representatives here 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

369

from the Dutch Embassy. We do apologize for the timing of the 

hearing because it is coming in a direct conflict with the soccer 

championship game against Germany, so we are impressed that 

you are here. And, Mr. Broas, we are going to have to ask you 

about this game before this hearing ends. 

But as a founding member of NATO and a strong member of the 

European Union, the Netherlands is obviously a critical and important ally that shares wide-ranging interests and values with the 

United States. Dutch troops have been very valuable contributors 

to the engagement in Afghanistan where they fought in some of the 

toughest southern provinces of that country. Today Dutch troops 

provide support to the police training programs that are run by the 

EU and NATO, and they are one of the strong active participants 

in the joint development of the F–35 fighter program. And they 

were the first non-U.S. NATO ally to offer a contribution for the 

European phased adaptive approach missile defense plan. 

Netherlands, like so much of Europe, has been hit hard by the 

global downturn and the ongoing debt crisis in Europe. And as a 

member of the eurozone and one of the few AAA credit rating countries left in Europe, the Dutch will need to play an important role 

in working toward a resolution in Europe that addresses both debt 

and growth throughout the continent. 

Finally today we will be assessing U.S. relations with the Republic of Suriname, a young South American country which gained its 

independence from the Netherlands in 1975. Suriname is a constitutional democracy with two decades of continuous democratically 

elected civilian governments. With an economy dominated by mineral and energy deposits, a number of U.S. mining companies have 

a strong presence and an interest in the country. 

Perhaps one of the biggest challenges for the United States and 

Suriname remains drug trafficking. The country is a transit point 

for cocaine and other illegal narcotics, and the United States will 

need to deepen relations with Suriname if we are to curb illicit 

trafficking and strengthen rule of law in this region of the world. 

I will not do any more to introduce our three nominees as Senator Kerry did that very eloquently. So I will now call on Senator 

Barrasso for his opening remarks. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and I would like to also congratulate each of the nominees 

who are before us today. These are very important nominations for 

our country and for our future. Each of these positions is important 

to fostering vital relationships and promoting U.S. national interests. There are some real challenges ahead. It is important that the 

United States continue to be a strong leader across the globe. 

Should you represent our Nation as a U.S. ambassador, it is important for each of you to provide strong stewardship of American 

taxpayer dollars, demonstrate professionalism, and good judgment, 

and vigorously advocate for the priorities of the United States. So 

I look forward, Madam Chairman, to hearing the goals from each 

of these individuals with regard to the countries that they will be 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

370

moving to, and for whom they will be representing the United 

States, and then all of your plans for achieving those goals. 

So I join you, Madam Chairman, in congratulating each of you 

on your nomination, and would like to extend, as you did, a warm 

welcome to all of the families, and congratulate them as well. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. I will ask each of you 

to give us your testimony before we open it up for questions. And 

we will start with Ambassador Morningstar and just go right down 

the table. So, Ambassador. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD L. MORNINGSTAR, OF MASSACHUSETTS, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF 

AZERBAIJAN 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Thank you very much, Madam 

Chairman, and thank you for your comments, with which I fully, 

fully agree. And also thank you to the other distinguished members 

of the committee for the privilege of appearing before you today as 

President Obama’s nominee as the United States Ambassador to 

Azerbaijan. I am grateful for the opportunity to testify. 

I would like to particularly thank Senator Kerry and Senator 

Lugar for their very kind comments. And, Senator Lugar, I truly 

appreciate your support over the years. And I think that even 

going back to the 1990s when we were working on the BakuTbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, that our policy in the Caspian and in the 

Caucasus region has been truly bipartisan. And because of that, I 

think we have been able to achieve a lot over the years. 

I am also humbled by the confidence that the President and 

Secretary Clinton have placed in me, and if confirmed I look forward to working with this committee, other Members of Congress, 

and your staffs to advance the interests of the United States in 

Azerbaijan. 

I would like to briefly introduce my wife, Faith, who has been 

such a strong support during all of my government wanderings—

and my daughter, Jill, who actually has served very capably as the 

recipient of my wife’s vents during all of my government wanderings, and my son-in-law, Al Fitzpayne, whom some of you may 

know well because he is now the Assistant Secretary for Legislative 

Affairs at the Treasury Department. And also our three oldest 

friends are here today, and that is Sally Fowler, Dr. Jay Kaufman 

and Susie Kaufman. And we are certainly glad that they are here 

as well. 

Long before my current position as the Secretary’s Special Envoy 

for Eurasian Energy, and before my appointment as the United 

States Ambassador to the European Union, I served as special 

advisor to the President and Secretary of State for assistance to 

what were then called the newly independent states of the former 

Soviet Union. One of the primary goals during that time was the 

stabilization and development of the entire south Caucasus region, 

a goal that we continue to pursue today. 

I have vivid memories during the 1990s of working through my 

office to supply fuel oil and wheat to Georgia and Armenia to help 

them through some very difficult winters. And over the years, I 

have made several trips to all three Caucasus countries. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

371

This year, the United States and Azerbaijan celebrated the 20th 

anniversary of the establishment of our diplomatic relationship. 

This milestone is an opportunity to take stock of how far we have 

come in the three core areas of importance to the relationship: 

security, which also includes the Nagorno-Karabakh situation, energy and other economic issues, and democratic and economic 

reform. 

The United States has long recognized Azerbaijan as a stalwart 

partner on international security. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, then Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev was 

among the first to extend a hand of support in our time of need 

and to offer close cooperation in our efforts to combat terrorism. 

That cooperation continues to this day. American and Azerbaijani 

soldiers have served together in Kosovo and Iraq, and they now 

serve together in Afghanistan. Azerbaijan has shown a continued 

commitment to the allied effort in Afghanistan, including its vital 

role as a transportation route in the Northern Distribution Network for supporting NATO’s operations in Afghanistan. 

The United States and Azerbaijan have also enjoyed 20 years of 

cooperation on energy security, as has already been mentioned. The 

Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which I worked on in the past, and 

the development today of the Southern Corridor for gas, represent 

powerful symbols of Azerbaijan’s pursuit of closer Euro-Atlantic 

integration and global commitment to energy security, a key part 

of our strategy to diversify energy routes and sources for European 

markets. 

But Azerbaijan’s integration into the West can and must expand 

well beyond pipelines. The United States must also continue to 

work with Azerbaijan on advancing democratic and economic reforms, including promoting respect for the rule of law, transparency, and fundamental freedoms. There is no question that Azerbaijan is located in a tough neighborhood, facing real pressures. 

However, democratic reforms are essential to Azerbaijan’s longterm security and prosperity. It is in Azerbaijan’s own interest to 

undertake these reforms, both to ensure long-term stability and to 

unleash the full potential of its people. As Azerbaijan advances 

along this path, our bilateral relationship will become even 

stronger. 

As Madam Chairman has said, the Secretary of State last week, 

while in Baku, made a strong statement affirming our commitment 

to working with Azerbaijan to advance respect for human rights 

and fundamental freedoms, and how important those issues are. 

And if confirmed, I will do everything in my power to help Azerbaijan succeed in developing as a strong, independent, and modern 

democracy. 

To achieve a more secure and prosperous future for the region, 

there is no higher priority for the United States than the peaceful 

settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. As a cochair of the 

OSCE Minsk Group, the United States continues to assist the sides 

to achieve a peaceful, lasting, negotiated settlement of the conflict 

based on the principles of the Helsinki Final Act, including the 

nonuse of force or threat of force, territorial integrity, and the 

equal rights and self-determination of peoples. If confirmed, I will 

support the administration’s commitment at the highest levels to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

372

achieve this goal. I will also support the efforts of the U.S. cochair, 

Ambassador Robert Bradtke, as we work closely with the sides to 

reach a settlement. Only a negotiated settlement can lead to longterm peace and stability in the region. 

Finally, Madam Chairman, our wide range of shared interests 

intersects with many of the United States highest foreign policy 

priorities, but there is still much that we can do to bring our governments, our societies, and our people even closer together. 

Madam Chairman, thank you very much for considering my nomination, and I look forward to getting into a lot more detail on the 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Morningstar follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD MORNINGSTAR

Thank you, Madam Chairman, and distinguished members of the committee, for 

the privilege of appearing before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the 

next United States Ambassador to Azerbaijan. I am grateful for the opportunity to 

testify this afternoon, and I am humbled by the confidence that President Obama 

and Secretary Clinton have placed in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working 

with this committee, other Members of Congress, and your staffs to advance the interests of the United States in Azerbaijan. 

I would like to introduce my wife, Faith, who has joined me here today, along 

with my daughter, Jill Morningstar, and son-in-law, Al Fitzpayne. 

Long before my current position as the Secretary’s Special Envoy for Eurasian 

Energy, and before my appointment as U.S. Ambassador to the European Union, 

I served as Special Advisor to the President and Secretary of State on Assistance 

for the Newly Independent States of the Former Soviet Union. One of the primary 

goals during that time was the stabilization and the development of the entire 

South Caucasus region—a goal that we continue to pursue today. I have vivid 

memories during the 1990s of working through my office to supply fuel oil and 

wheat to Georgia and Armenia to help them get through some difficult winters. 

Over the years, I made several trips to all three Caucasus countries. 

The United States stands only to gain—and to reap benefits well into the future—

from an Azerbaijan that is peaceful, democratic, prosperous, and strategically linked 

to the United States and our European allies. Azerbaijan has enormous potential. 

This year, the United States and Azerbaijan celebrated the 20th anniversary of 

the establishment of our diplomatic relationship. This milestone is an opportunity 

not only to appreciate the depth of our cooperation, but also to take stock of how 

far we’ve come in the three core areas of importance to the relationship: security, 

energy, and democratic and economic reform. The administration believes we must 

intensify our cooperation in these areas and work together to resolve the ongoing 

challenges that the region continues to face. 

The United States has long recognized Azerbaijan as a stalwart partner on international security. We remember that following the attacks of September 11, 2001, 

then-Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev was among the first to extend a hand of 

support in our time of need and to offer his country’s close cooperation in our efforts 

to combat terrorism. That cooperation continues to this day. American and Azerbaijani soldiers have served together in Kosovo and Iraq, and they now serve together in Afghanistan. Azerbaijan has shown a sustained commitment to the allied 

effort in Afghanistan, including its vital role as a transportation route in the Northern Distribution Network for supporting NATO’s operations in Afghanistan. Thousands of flights have crossed Azerbaijan’s airspace en route to Afghanistan, and 

thousands of containers have departed Baku in support of the International Security 

Assistance Force. The United States works closely and productively with Azerbaijan 

on the U.N. Security Council, where this year Azerbaijan began its first-ever term 

as a nonpermanent member. 

The United States and Azerbaijan have also enjoyed 20 years of cooperation on 

energy security. In my current position as Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy, I 

work closely with Azerbaijan. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which I worked on 

in the past, and the development today of the Southern Corridor for gas represent 

powerful symbols of Azerbaijan’s pursuit of closer Euro-Atlantic integration and 

global commitment to energy security—a key part of our strategy to diversify energy 

routes and sources for European markets. If confirmed, I will continue to work with 

Azerbaijan to diversify its energy routes and bolster its critical energy infrastructure 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

373

protection. But Azerbaijan’s integration with the West can and must span well beyond pipelines. 

The United States must also continue work with Azerbaijan on advancing democratic and economic reforms, including promoting respect for the rule of law, transparency, and fundamental freedoms. There is no question that Azerbaijan is located 

in a tough neighborhood, facing real pressures. However, democratic reforms are 

essential to Azerbaijan’s long-term security and prosperity. It is in Azerbaijan’s own 

interest to undertake these reforms, both to ensure long-term stability and to 

unleash the full potential of its people. And as Azerbaijan advances along this path, 

our bilateral relationship will become even stronger. An independent judiciary, a 

free media, a vibrant civil society, political pluralism, competition through free and 

fair elections, and respect for fundamental freedoms are essential components of any 

democracy, and we need to work together to increase the pace of Azerbaijan’s development in these areas. The Secretary of State last week, while in Baku, made a 

strong statement on these issues. If confirmed, I will do everything in my power to 

help Azerbaijan succeed in developing as a strong, independent, and modern 

democracy. 

To achieve a more secure and prosperous future for the region, there is no higher 

immediate priority for the United States than the peaceful settlement of the 

Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. As a cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United 

States continues to assist the sides to achieve a peaceful, lasting negotiated settlement of the conflict based on the principles of the Helsinki Final Act, including the 

Non-Use of Force or Threat of Force, Territorial Integrity, and the Equal Rights and 

Self-Determination of Peoples. If confirmed, I will support the administration’s commitment, at the highest levels, to achieving this goal. I will also support the efforts 

of the U.S. cochair, Ambassador Robert Bradtke, as we work closely with the sides 

to reach a settlement. The President, Secretary of State, and Ambassador Bradtke 

have made major efforts to facilitate a settlement. We must continue these efforts. 

Only a negotiated settlement can lead to long-term peace and stability in the region. 

Madam Chairman, if I am confirmed, I will have the great honor of advancing 

a relationship that has progressed, steadily and uninterrupted, for the 20 years 

since Azerbaijan declared its independence. Our wide range of shared interests 

intersects with many of the United States highest foreign policy priorities. But there 

is still much we can do to bring our governments, our societies, and our people even 

closer together.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Anania. 

STATEMENT OF JAY NICHOLAS ANANIA, OF MARYLAND, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF SURINAME 

Mr. ANANIA. Madam Chairman and members of the committee, 

I am pleased to appear before you today. I am grateful for the confidence Secretary Clinton placed in me and deeply honored by 

President Obama’s nomination to serve as United States Ambassador to the Republic of Suriname. 

I am extremely pleased that my wife, Lourdes, and parents, Joan 

and Edward Anania, are with me here today. Lourdes and I have 

shared the challenges and pleasures of the Foreign Service since 

1984, and we have served together during six overseas postings. I 

could not have reached this stage in my career without her love 

and support. 

I would also like to recognize my mother, Joan, whose own foreign affairs career was cut short by the discriminatory policies that 

applied to women in the 1950s. Thankfully women no longer have 

to resign if they decide to marry. She first inspired me to consider 

a Foreign Service career. 

My father, who was born and raised in Portsmouth, NH, also set 

a positive example of public service with his U.S. Army and 

Department of Defense civilian career. 

While representing the United States abroad in such diverse 

places as Mexico, Jordan, Cuba, the United Arab Emirates, GerFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

374

many, Hong Kong, and currently in Iraq, I have drawn on my experience as an American to encourage people to see that working 

together helps make progress possible. Although countries cannot 

immediately change the legacy of centuries, a commitment to 

human rights, decency, and a shared future by all sectors of society, without regard to ethnicity or religion, can help a nation in its 

efforts to overcome legacies of the past. 

If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United States in 

Suriname, one of the most ethnically and religiously diverse countries in the world. The ancestors of Suriname’s people hail from 

various regions, including some where I have served, and their customs and religious beliefs reflect the world’s diversity. If confirmed, 

I look forward to working with the many communities of this 

remarkable nation. 

My first priority would be protecting the safety and welfare of 

Americans in Suriname, both private citizens and the official community. If confirmed, I will work with the Suriname Government 

to adopt policies and promote development that increases American 

investment and tourism between our two countries. 

If confirmed, I also plan to work to strengthen democracy and 

transparency in government. Suriname has made real progress in 

the 21 years since the reestablishment of civilian rule, and in 2010, 

Suriname held its fifth consecutive free and fair national election. 

It is very much in the United States interests that Suriname 

remains a stable democratic partner, and if I am granted the 

opportunity to serve there, one of my highest priorities will be to 

advance that goal. 

The United States, Suriname, and other nations in the region 

share a vital interest in protecting the rule of law. People cannot 

feel secure if they do not have a legal system they can count on. 

Close cooperation between duly constituted law enforcement institutions in both countries and strengthened law enforcement capabilities are important shared interests. Suriname has made progress in its battle to stop trafficking in persons, arms, and narcotics, 

and stands to benefit greatly from bilateral and regional assistance 

under several U.S.-sponsored programs, including the Caribbean 

Basin Security Initiative. 

Under our CBSI partnership, Suriname will receive significant 

assistance to improve port security, provide technical training to its 

law enforcement officers, combat money laundering and financial 

crimes, and develop biometric screening measures for its ports of 

entry. 

Suriname remains a key partner for the United States in our 

efforts to promote citizen security in the Caribbean. The administration is working with partner countries to protect the global environment, and to combat the dangers posed by pollution, and the 

risks of climate change. Some of the people of Suriname, heirs to 

a wonderful rain forest and other natural areas, see ecotourism as 

one way to demonstrate that these environments are worth protecting from destruction by clear cutting, or illegal logging, or mining. If confirmed, I will work hard with the Surinamese to help 

protect their wonderful natural environment, a goal I firmly believe 

is in both the interests of the United States and of the people of 

Suriname. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

375

Suriname is a land of significant natural resources from bauxite 

and gold to untapped petroleum reserves. Free trade is a key part 

of the economic engine that drives progress and growth, and it

is in our interest to increase our trade and economic ties with 

Suriname. 

If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United States in 

Suriname, working with you, and your colleagues in Congress on 

behalf of the administration, while also working closely with the 

government and people of Suriname in a genuine spirit of cooperation and mutual respect. 

I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Anania follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAY ANANIA

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, I am pleased to appear before 

you today. I am grateful for the confidence that Secretary Clinton has placed in me, 

and I am deeply honored by President Obama’s nomination to serve as United 

States Ambassador to the Republic of Suriname. 

I am extremely pleased that my wife, Lourdes, and parents, Joan and Edward, 

are with me here today. Lourdes and I have shared the challenges and pleasures 

of the Foreign Service since 1984, and we served together during six overseas postings. I could not have reached this stage in my career without her love and support. 

I would also like to recognize my mother, Joan, whose own foreign affairs career 

was cut short by the discriminatory policies that applied to women in the 1950s. 

Thankfully, this particular policy no longer exists, and women no longer have to 

resign from the Foreign Service if they decide to marry. She first inspired me to 

consider a Foreign Service career. My father also set a positive example of public 

service with his U.S. Army and Department of Defense civilian career. 

While representing the United States abroad in such diverse places as Mexico, 

Jordan, Cuba, the United Arab Emirates, Germany, Hong Kong, and currently in 

Iraq, I have drawn on my experiences as an American to encourage people to see 

that working together helps make progress possible. Although countries cannot immediately change the legacy of centuries, a commitment to human rights, decency, 

and a shared future by all sectors of society without regard to ethnicity or religion 

can help a nation in its efforts to overcome legacies of the past. 

If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United States in Suriname—one 

of the most ethnically and religiously diverse countries in the world. The ancestors 

of Suriname’s people hail from various regions, including some where I have served, 

and their religious beliefs also reflect much of the world—Christianity, Hinduism, 

Islam, and the oldest continuous Jewish community in the Americas. If confirmed, 

I look forward to working with the many communities of this remarkable nation. 

My first priority would be protecting the safety and welfare of Americans in 

Suriname—both private citizens and the official community. If confirmed, I will 

work with the Suriname Government to adopt policies and promote development 

that increases American investment and tourism between our two countries. 

If confirmed, I also plan to work to strengthen democracy and transparency in 

government. Suriname has made real progress in the 21 years since the reestablishment of civilian rule, and in 2010 Suriname held its fifth consecutive free and fair 

national election. It is very much in the United States interest that Suriname 

remains a stable democratic partner, and if I am granted the opportunity to serve 

there, one of my highest priorities will be to advance that goal. 

The United States, Suriname, and other nations in the region share a vital interest in protecting the rule of law. People cannot feel secure if they do not have a 

legal system they can count on. Close cooperation between duly constituted law 

enforcement in both countries, and strengthened law enforcement capabilities, are 

important shared interests. Suriname has made progress in its battle to stop trafficking in persons, arms, and narcotics. Suriname stands to benefit greatly from 

bilateral and regional assistance under several U.S.-sponsored programs, including 

the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI)—a multiyear, multifaceted initiative 

that complements the Central American Regional Security Initiative and the Merida 

Initiative in Central America and Mexico. Under our CBSI partnership with Government of Suriname and other Caribbean neighbors, Suriname will receive significant assistance to improve port security, provide technical training to its law enFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

376

forcement officers, combat money-laundering and financial crimes, and develop biometric screening measures for its ports of entry. Suriname remains a key partner 

for the United States in our efforts to promote citizen security in the Caribbean. 

The administration is working to protect the global environment and to combat 

the dangers posed by pollution and the risks of climate change. An important part 

of this effort is working cooperatively with other countries around the world. Some 

of the people of Suriname, heirs to a wonderful rainforest and other natural areas, 

see eco-tourism as one way to demonstrate that these environments are worth protecting from destruction by clear-cutting or illegal logging or mining. If confirmed, 

I will work hard with the Surinamese to help protect their wonderful natural environment, a goal that I firmly believe is in both the interest of the United States 

and of the people of Suriname. 

Suriname is a land of significant natural resources, from bauxite and gold to untapped petroleum reserves. Free trade is a key part of the economic engine that 

drives progress and growth, and it is in our interest to increase our trade and economic ties with Suriname. 

If confirmed, I look forward to representing the United States in Suriname, working with you and your colleagues in Congress on behalf of the administration, while 

also working closely with the government and the people of Suriname in a genuine 

spirit of cooperation and mutual respect.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Anania. I am pleased to hear 

about your New Hampshire roots, too. 

Mr. Broas. 

STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY M. BROAS, OF MARYLAND, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS 

Mr. BROAS. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and 

distinguished members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 

thank you for the privilege of appearing before you today. I am 

deeply grateful to President Obama and to Secretary Clinton for 

their support and confidence in nominating me to be U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. If confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to devote all my energy to represent the United States 

to the best of my ability. 

If you will permit me, I would like to introduce the members of 

my family who are here: my wife, Julie Broas, who is from Indiana 

and worked for Senator Lugar as an intern many years ago; my 

daughter, Emily Broas, who recently graduated from Dartmouth 

College; my daughter, Allison Broas, a senior at Boston College; 

and my daughter—my youngest daughter, Madeline Broas, fresh 

from her high school graduation this weekend, and bound for Hanover, NH, to follow in her sister’s footsteps to Dartmouth. I am 

happy they could join me today. They have been patient, steadfast, 

and loving supporters of me throughout this process for which I am 

forever grateful. 

I would also like to thank Senator Kerry for his kind words and 

his gracious introduction. He is right about the Springsteen connection, and it is something I will never live down, proudly. 

Madam Chairman and fellow Senators, all of you know well of 

the United States long and strong relationship of the Netherlands. 

The United Provinces of the Netherlands was the second nation to 

officially recognize the United States when the Dutch Government 

accepted the credentials of U.S. Minster John Adams on April 19, 

1782. Since then, the Netherlands has remained one of our oldest 

and most reliable diplomatic partners. 

More recently, the Dutch have become one of our strongest economic and trade partners, as well as one of the world’s most generous development and donor nations. They are our ninth-largest 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

377

trading partner and the third-largest foreign direct investor in the 

United States. 

From 2000 through 2010, the Netherlands was the No. 1 destination in the world for U.S. direct investment, far ahead of Canada, 

Mexico, Singapore, and Japan. Clearly for a country barely the size 

of Rhode Island with only 16 million people, the Netherlands 

punches well above its weight. If I am confirmed, I will work tirelessly to maintain and improve our strong economic and trade relations with the Netherlands, consistent with the administration’s 

goal to increase exports and create new jobs. 

Our strong relations find harmony on many levels beyond the 

economic and diplomatic. The Netherlands works closely with the 

United States to promote security, stability, and justice throughout 

the world through military support and development aid, support 

of our strongest allies, and condemnation of our most threatening 

enemies, and hosting the international tribunals to litigate and 

resolve the world’s most complex and difficult legal conflicts. 

Indeed I had occasion to invoke the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in The Hague during my legal career on 

behalf of an American client seeking to recover property and funds 

confiscated in 1979 by the Iranian regime. That same Iranian 

regime is now threatening to upend worldwide peace and stability 

in an attempt to obtain nuclear weapons and threaten the security 

of its neighbors. The international community is united to impose 

sanctions on the Iranian Government, and our European partners 

are crucial to this effort. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to 

ensure that our Dutch allies remain shoulder to shoulder with us 

as we strive to hold Iran to its international obligations. 

The Netherlands has risen to the global security challenges of 

our time and join with the United States and other countries as an 

active contributor to international security missions. As Senator 

Shaheen said, the Netherlands contributes to the NATO mission in 

Afghanistan, and it currently provides the flagship for NATO’s 

counterpiracy mission off the Horn of Africa. The Netherlands has 

also participated in the alliance’s Libya mission. We remain thankful for Dutch commitment to these missions. 

The United States and Netherlands are committed to combating 

terrorism and preventing violent extremism. The Dutch counterterror program, which they published in 2011, follows closely plans 

developed in the United States and the United Kingdom. The 

Dutch agree that we must never lower our vigilance against the 

grave threat of terrorism, and that it is important to work with atrisk populations to make sure that young people do not become 

alienated and susceptible to radicalism. If I am confirmed, I will 

use the Embassy’s resources to reach out to key populations in the 

Netherlands along these lines. 

The Netherlands and the United States also share a strong commitment to the political participation of women. The Netherlands 

supports President Obama’s Presidential challenge on women’s 

political and economic participation. If confirmed, I pledge to advance our collaboration with the Netherlands to promote women in 

politics and business. 

The United States and the Netherlands also share an important 

commitment to green energy. If confirmed, I will build on the close 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

378

cooperation our Embassy has forged with the Netherlands on alternative energy and environmental sustainability. 

Madam Chairman, I have spent over 30 years representing clients in a wide variety of complex criminal and civil disputes. While 

some involved only money and sums small and large, others involved my clients’ liberty and freedom and often his or her livelihood. I have managed teams of lawyers, clients, and consultant on 

cases both large and small, all with the goal of reaching the most 

favorable result for my client. Along the way, I have encountered 

legal, factual, and managerial minefields of every possible type, 

some predictable and some from out of nowhere. 

In all of these cases, I was called upon to make critical decisions 

and manage diverse personalities and points of view. If I am confirmed, I will draw upon this management experience when I 

assume leadership of the team at the Embassy in The Hague. 

Let me close with a personal story. I am one of nine children 

born to the late William Broas and Anita St. Germain. My only 

regret here today is that neither of my parents is here to see their 

son appear before your committee to seek confirmation as an ambassador. They would have been very proud. 

My father, of Dutch descent, served honorably in the Marines in 

the Pacific theater during World War II. My mother lived in Paris 

until her father, confronted like all French citizens by the Nazi invasion and occupation of France, put her, along with her mother 

and her five siblings, on a small boat to New York. She eventually 

met my father after the war, and one of the many things that 

bound them together was their profound love for the freedom they 

found in the United States. 

The experience of my parents and the love they felt for and 

showered on this country left a lasting lesson with me. I always believed that if I ever had the chance to serve our country, I would 

do so whenever the call came. When President Obama asked me 

to be our next Ambassador to the Netherlands, the country of my 

father’s ancestors, I could almost hear my parents echoing my 

affirmative reply. If I am confirmed, I will be guided at all times 

by the pride and love of country that my parents instilled in me 

from a young age. 

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to answering any 

of your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Broas follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY BROAS

Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and distinguished members of the 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee, thank you for the privilege of appearing before 

you today. I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their 

support and confidence in nominating me to be United States Ambassador to the 

Kingdom of the Netherlands. If confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to devote all my 

energy to represent the United States to the best of my ability. 

If you will permit me, I would like to introduce the members of my family who 

are here today. My wife, Julie Broas; my daughter, Emily Broas, who recently graduated from Dartmouth College; my daughter, Allison Broas, a senior at Boston 

College; and my youngest daughter, Madeline Broas, fresh from her high school 

graduation this past weekend and bound for Hanover, New Hampshire to follow her 

older sister’s footsteps at Dartmouth. I am happy they could join me today. They 

have been patient, steadfast, and loving supporters of me throughout this process, 

for which I am forever grateful. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

379

Madam Chairman and fellow Senators, all of you know well of the United States 

long and strong relationship with the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The United 

Provinces of the Netherlands was the second nation to officially recognize the 

United States when the Dutch Government accepted the credentials of U.S. Minister 

John Adams on April 19, 1782. Since then, the Netherlands has remained one of 

our oldest and most reliable diplomatic partners. More recently, the Dutch have become one of our strongest economic and trade partners, as well as one of the world’s 

most generous development aid donor nations. They are our ninth-largest trading 

partner and the third-largest foreign direct investor in the Unites States. From 2000 

through 2010, the Netherlands was the number one destination in the world for U.S 

direct investment, far ahead of Canada, Mexico, Singapore, and Japan. Clearly, for 

a country barely the size of Rhode Island with only 16 million people, the Netherlands punches well above its weight. If I am confirmed, I will work tirelessly to 

maintain and improve our strong economic and trade relations with the Netherlands, consistent with the administration’s goals to increase exports and create new 

jobs. 

Our strong relations find harmony on many levels beyond the economic and diplomatic. The Netherlands works closely with the United States to promote security, 

stability, and justice throughout the world through military support and development aid, support of our strongest allies and condemnation of our most threatening 

enemies, and hosting the international tribunals to litigate and resolve the world’s 

most complex and difficult legal conflicts. 

Indeed, I had occasion to invoke the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in The Hague during my legal career on behalf of American clients seeking to 

recover property and funds confiscated in 1979 by the Iranian regime. That same 

Iranian regime is now threatening to upend worldwide peace and stability in its attempt to obtain nuclear weapons and threaten the security of its neighbors. The 

international community has united to impose sanctions on the Iranian Government 

and our European partners are crucial to this effort. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to ensure that our Dutch allies remain shoulder to shoulder with us as we 

strive to hold Iran to its international obligations. 

The Netherlands has risen to the global security challenges of our time and joined 

with the United States and other countries as an active contributor to international 

security missions. For example, the Netherlands contributes to the NATO mission 

in Afghanistan and currently provides the flagship for NATO’s counterpiracy mission off the Horn of Africa. The Netherlands has also participated in the alliance’s 

Libya mission. We remain thankful for Dutch commitment to these missions. 

The United States and the Netherlands are committed to combating terrorism and 

preventing violent extremism. The Dutch counterterror program, which they published in 2011, follows closely plans developed in the United States and the United 

Kingdom. The Dutch agree that we must never lower our vigilance against the 

grave threat of terrorism and that it is important to work with at-risk populations 

to make sure that young people do not become alienated and susceptible to radicalism. If I am confirmed, I will use the Embassy’s resources to reach out to key 

populations in the Netherlands along these lines. 

The United States and the Netherlands also share a strong commitment to political participation of women. The Netherlands supports President Obama’s Presidential Challenge on Women’s Political and Economic Participation. If confirmed, I 

pledge to advance our collaboration with the Netherlands to promote women in politics and business. 

Additionally, the United States and the Netherlands share an important commitment to green energy. If confirmed, I will build on the close cooperation our 

Embassy has forged with the Netherlands on alternative energy and environmental 

sustainability. 

Madam Chairman, I have spent over 30 years representing clients in a wide variety of complex criminal and civil disputes. While some involved only money, in sums 

small and large, others involved my client’s liberty and freedom and often his or her 

livelihood. I have managed teams of lawyers, clients, and consultants on cases both 

large and small—all with the goal of reaching the most favorable result for my client. Along the way I have encountered legal, factual, and managerial minefields of 

every possible type, some predictable and others from out of nowhere. In all of these 

cases I was called upon to make critical decisions and manage diverse personalities 

and points of view. If I am confirmed, I will draw upon this management experience 

when I assume leadership of the team at the Embassy in The Hague. 

I have also had the pleasure of serving as a board member on a number of nonprofit institutions, including Partners in Health and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. If confirmed, I will draw upon these experiences in my 

work in the Netherlands, which is such an important partner in promoting democFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

380

racy, human rights, developmental aid, and economic growth around the world. The 

Netherlands understands, as does the United States, that military and diplomatic 

efforts are not the only tools for combating instability; development plays a very important role. If confirmed, I pledge to advance U.S.-Dutch cooperation on democratic 

development, from Belarus and Ukraine, to the Middle East, and North Africa. 

Let me close with a personal story. I am one of nine children born to the late William Broas and Anita St. Germain. My only regret here today is that neither of my 

parents is here to see their son appear before your committee to seek confirmation 

as an ambassador. They would have been very proud. My father, fittingly of Dutch 

descent, served honorably in the Marines in the Pacific theatre during World War 

II. My mother lived in Paris, France, until her father, confronted like all French citizens by the Nazi invasion and occupation of France, put her—along with her mother 

and her siblings—on a small boat to New York. She eventually met my father after 

the war and one of the many things that bound them together was a profound love 

for the freedom they found in the United States. The experiences of my parents and 

the love they felt for and showered on this country left a lasting lesson with me. 

I always believed that, if I ever had the chance to serve our country, I would do 

so whenever the call came. When President Obama asked me to be our next Ambassador to the Netherlands, the country of my father’s ancestors, I could almost hear 

my parents echoing my affirmative reply. If I am confirmed, I will be guided at all 

times by the pride and love of country that my parents instilled in me from a young 

age.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much. Thank you all for your 

testimony. 

I would like to begin with you, Ambassador Morningstar. 

Senator Kerry, you, and I all mentioned Secretary Clinton’s 

recent trip to Azerbaijan, and her concerns that she raised about 

human rights abuses there. And, as you point out, that is not a 

new development in the country. It stretches back to at least 2005 

when two brothers—Aliyev brothers—were jailed for political reasons, and they remain in prison there, despite two decisions from 

the European Court of Human Rights that their arrests were 

unlawful, and their trials were procedurally deficient. And this is 

just one example of the troubling abuses of human rights that have 

come out of Azerbaijan. 

Can you talk about whether you think conditions there are getting better or worse, and then the opportunities you would have as 

Ambassador to address these kinds of abuses? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. It is hard to gauge and measure improvements. There have been changes in the laws. Those laws have 

to be implemented, and we have to work closely with them with 

respect to that. 

The case that you mentioned is something that has been of concern to us, and, as I understand it, has been raised on a continuing 

basis since 2005. It was positive that Bakhtiyar Hajiyev, another 

prisoner who was released just prior to the visit of Secretary Clinton, is on parole right now. We have to continue to watch that case. 

And Secretary Clinton actually met with her during her visit, 

which was very positive and emphasized her concern for the issues. 

We have to deal with these cases on a case-by-case basis. We will. 

That will be one of my prime responsibilities if I am confirmed. 

I also think that it is very important that we not just say, hey, 

you know, you ought to do better in this and it is important. We 

have to be able to convey how much it is in their interest to make 

changes, and to open up society, and to create, hopefully, greater 

stability within the society. 

One final point is, and that I will be very much involved in, during the work that I did in the 1990s coordinating our programs in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

381

the former Soviet Union, I spent a lot of time, and, in fact, tried 

to reshape our programs to emphasize more building civil society 

from the bottom up. And I think that is going to be the, in the 

longer term, the best way that we are going to see improvement 

in Azerbaijan. 

And one of the things that I am committed to do if I am confirmed is to look at every program that we have there and to work 

with USAID and other agencies, and with the our Embassy to try 

to determine what really helps and what does not. What can we 

do to improve the situation? And try to use some of the experience 

that I have had from the past to help bring that about. 

Senator SHAHEEN. I think that is terrific, the kind of thing we 

ought to be doing everywhere. You talked about helping or trying 

to help convey the message that it is in the interest of Azerbaijan 

to open up and to understand why supporting institutions, rule of 

law, human rights is good for them. That is one specific way that 

you can help do that, looking at those programs and what works. 

Are there other ways beyond just kind of job owning that you will 

have the opportunity to do as Ambassador that can help convey 

those messages? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. I think it is important to convey the 

message that the relationship between Azerbaijan and the United 

States and Azerbaijan and Europe, for example, will be even 

stronger if we recognize these things. I know that Senator Cardin, 

who was here a moment ago, is very interested in the whole transparency issue. 

There has been some progress in Azerbaijan in that area. They 

are a member of EITI, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. That can work hand in hand with the Cardin-Lugar bill, 

which would require the disclosure of project payments and so on. 

And I think these kinds of activities are going to make it even 

more possible for Western companies, international companies, to 

be involved in Azerbaijan, to be able to do so without threat of corruption and the like, and will help over a period of time to pull 

Azerbaijan further toward models and values that we consider to 

be important. And we have to just keep being imaginative and 

working in every area that we possibly can in a constructive way 

to make progress. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. I am going to come back to this 

because I am running out of town. But on Nagorno-Karabakh, we 

are seeing tensions flare there again. Can you talk about what the 

resolution of this dispute would mean and how some of the other 

players in the region might be either helping or trying to disrupt 

an effort to resolve the dispute? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. I cannot imagine any specific thing 

that could help create more stability within the whole Caucasus 

region than resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. From the 

standpoint of creating regional growth, from the standpoint of creating more political stability, it is extremely important. 

I will give you an example in a very specific way. I get asked the 

question all the time, why cannot Armenia participate in the 

Southern Energy Corridor? Well, the fact of life is that it is impractical because of the dispute with Azerbaijan. If Nagorno-Karabakh 

were ever settled or resolved, Armenia could become a full-fledged 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

382

member working on energy infrastructure, on energy transit, and 

the like to its great benefit, and to Azerbaijan’s great benefit and 

to the region’s great benefit. That would be one example. 

Another example. I have to believe that Nagorno-Karabakh is a 

huge distraction when there are other critical security issues within the region that Azerbaijan faces. The issue of Iran becomes 

greater every day with respect to Azerbaijan, the whole Caspian 

Sea area. There are any number of issues. And resolution of 

Nagorno-Karabakh would allow Azerbaijan to focus even more on 

some of the other political and security issues that are critically 

important. I could go on and on. I will stop there, but obviously it 

would be a very good thing. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. I am out of time. 

Senator Lugar. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I 

thank you, and I thank my colleague, Senator Barrasso, for yielding this time. 

Ambassador Morningstar, just last week President Obama made 

the rare step of endorsing the trans-Anatolian gas pipeline known 

as TANAP. TANAP would be a major new gas pipeline transiting 

Turkey and would be largely financed by Azerbaijan. TANAP 

would replace the need for the proposed Nabucco trunkline section 

within Turkey, but it would require pipelines to carry gas from 

Turkey’s Bulgarian border onward to Europe, such as through a 

scaled-down version of Nabucco. 

There are several rival pipeline proposals to carry Caspian gas 

to Europe, and each may have some economic credibility. But they 

vary greatly in strategic benefit and whether they warrant U.S. 

Government backing. Specifically, our first priority must be to help 

relieve our Eastern European allies from their overdependence on 

Russian gas, and, in doing so, not subject them to European energy 

companies heavily influenced by Russian-state controlled companies. 

Transit decisions made by a BP-led consortium developing Shah 

Deniz gas and the Government of Azerbaijan will directly impact 

U.S. policy, including the extent to which projects in the Caspian 

warrant consideration as strategically important to the United 

States, vis-a-vis our sanctions regime on Iran. 

Could you please clarify the administration’s position following 

the President’s comments on TANAP, and describe what have been 

the primary delays in gas projects advancing in the years since you 

and I attended the Nabucco treaty signing in Ankara? In short, has 

the United States endorsed TANAP? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Thank you very much for the question, Senator Lugar. First of all, let me briefly outline what our policy has been over the last couple of years. 

It became apparent to us that, at least in the first instance, there 

is probably not enough gas to make a full 31 bcm Nabucco pipeline 

commercially viable. The Shah Deniz consortium as a result of that 

is looking at three alternatives. And by the way, I might add that 

there will ultimately be plenty of gas, but not in the first instance. 

So they are looking at two possible smaller pipelines with respect 

to Central and Eastern Europe, the so-called southeast Europe 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

383

pipeline and a scalable Nabucco pipeline, and then one of the pipeline projects to Italy, the trans-Adriatic pipeline. 

Our position is that any of those pipelines—the administration’s 

position has been that any of those pipelines can work and would 

be acceptable with two conditions—one that gas be supplied to the 

vulnerable countries in the Balkans, and second, that there be concrete guarantees that any such pipeline could be expanded, which 

will absolutely be necessary as more gas becomes available. 

I think that the TANAP pipeline could be very helpful in this 

way. A final decision will not be made until mid-2013 as to the 

actual size of the pipeline, but by having a dedicated pipeline 

across Turkey, that will make it more possible to be flexible and 

to be able to adjust the size of what can then be taken into Central 

and Eastern Europe. So I see it as very positive. 

There is a commitment on the part of Turkey and Azerbaijan to 

get an agreement completed by the end of June. You know what 

that has been like over the last few years, and hopefully that will 

happen. But it will happen certainly at some point, and I think we 

should support it strongly. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, I thank you for that expert testimony 

based on years of working through those problems. 

Another priority issue. As you know, the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program has been involved in Azerbaijan for 

a number of years. And recently the focus has been on Caspian energy security and biothreat discussions. I would simply like to ask 

that you make this work a priority in Azerbaijan when you assume 

your new responsibilities in Baku, and would ask if you have any 

thoughts as to how to advance this cooperation when you arrive in 

Baku. 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Excuse me. The first few words? 

Senator LUGAR. The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction 

Program and the bioweapons threat. 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. It is something that I would, if confirmed, certainly want to look at. And it relates to, I think, a very 

interesting policy issue that we have with respect to Azerbaijan, 

which is how to work through our security assistance to Azerbaijan 

without in any way—and I emphasize: without in any way—affecting the balance with respect to Nagorno-Karabakh and giving any 

advantage to Azerbaijan with respect to that situation. 

And I think that we need to work very carefully to determine in 

what areas we can help, including areas relating to things like 

maritime security, counterterrorism, and training in various ways. 

And we have to do it in a way in which we are extremely careful. 

But given the security situation in that area, as you so well know, 

we have to look at all these issues, and I will if confirmed. 

Senator LUGAR. I would like to commend your efforts to advance 

many critical initiatives as the special envoy for Eurasian energy. 

Key initiatives such as the Unconventional Gas Technical Engagement Program and opening the Southern Corridor from the Caspian in Eastern Europe, offer opportunities to promote economic 

growth and shift power dynamics in energy markets in favor of the 

United States and our allies. 

The special envoy position was created by Secretary Rice at the 

urging of Vice President Biden and myself, and it was propelled 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

384

with the strong support of Secretary Clinton. Several former Soviet 

states will come under tremendous pressure from Russia, and 

energy is a primary point of leverage. 

I am hopeful you will join me today and encourage the continuation of the special envoy role following your departure to Baku. 

But more to the point, will the special envoy for Eurasian energy 

continue to report directly to the Secretary of State given the creation of the new Energy Bureau? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. You have touched upon an issue that 

is obviously being discussed within the State Department right 

now. I can promise you that the functions of our office, my present 

office, will continue, and we are working to determine what that 

structure should be. And obviously your points, as always in the 

energy area, will be very important, and we will continue to work 

with you and your staff with respect to that issue. 

Senator LUGAR. I thank you for your assurance. 

Madam Chairman, I have four more questions I would like to 

submit for the record, if possible. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Absolutely, without objection. 

Senator LUGAR. Senator Barrasso. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

If I could, Ambassador Morningstar, just to continue—a continuation on the line of questioning from Senator Lugar in terms of energy as a point of leverage. Increased development of gas supplies 

in Azerbaijan can play an important role in helping to diversify 

European gas supplies. However, it is going to be vital that the development of energy resources not benefit Iran. In Baku, you are 

going to be about 100 miles from the border with Iran. When you 

take a look at the map of Azerbaijan and Iran, there is about 100 

miles of border between the two. 

So can you give a little bit about how Iran is involved in Azerbaijan’s gas supply, energy sector, and what we can do to try to 

prevent Iran in terms of gaining technical or financial benefit from 

any projects that may be going on? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. First of all, the best thing that we 

can do is develop a Southern Corridor and to develop routes that 

to go to Europe, because if we are not successful in developing 

those routes, then Azerbaijan will find other options as to where 

that gas may go, which one theoretical option or possible option is 

obviously Iran. 

There is right now, I would say, a minor relationship between 

Iran and Azerbaijan with respect to gas. That includes the fact that 

gas cannot be supplied directly to the separated Azeri province of 

Nakhchivan. Basically the gas has to get there through Iran, and 

there is a swap arrangement with Iran that allows that to happen. 

And at least at this point—at least I am not aware of any alternatives. 

You may be referring also to the fact that in the original Shah 

Deniz I project, since its inception in 1996, there is a 10-percent 

ownership interest, and I might say, passive ownership interest, by 

NICO, which is a subsidiary of the National Iranian Oil Company. 

And our position on that—it presents frankly a very difficult 

policy issue. The Shah Deniz project is a critical project because

it is what will allow Azeri gas to get to Europe, but yet there is 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

385

a 10-percent ownership interest by an Iranian company. But we believe that if that project were not able to go forward because of that 

10-percent passive interest, that the ramifications would be a lot 

worse than Shah Deniz moving forward, because what it would 

mean is that the project would be left with partners who would not 

be particularly friendly, and that that gas would end up going to 

different places, which we would obviously want to avoid. 

I know it is now being considered in legislation as to how to take 

this into account. I do not discount for a second what a difficult policy issue that is, but, you know, we are certainly hopeful that we 

will not find ourselves in a situation in which we shoot ourselves 

in the foot. And in the meantime, we will do everything we can to 

minimize the participation of the Iranian company in this project, 

which is now a very passive investment. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Broas, I want to start off. I enjoyed the story of your parents. 

My dad would have been 95 today. He would have been shocked, 

surprised, and very pleased, and I know your father would be not 

shocked, but very pleased to see you here today in front of this 

committee. So thank you for mentioning that. 

I did want to ask you, historically the Dutch have been strong 

supporters, I always thought, of European integration. But they 

voted 2005 against a European Union constitutional treaty. Can 

you just give us your overview, your thoughts, and understanding 

of the view today of the people in the Netherlands regarding the 

European Union? 

Mr. BROAS. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for your comments. 

Is that good? 

Senator BARRASSO. Much better. 

Mr. BROAS. OK, sorry. As you know, the Dutch were one of the 

founding members of the EU, and they are strong supporters of the 

EU, and I do not doubt for a minute that they will continue to be 

a strong supporter of the EU. And if confirmed, as an ambassador, 

I will certainly advocate the administration’s position that they 

should continue to be a part of the EU. 

You are right that lately there have been some political dustups 

and some disagreements. And, in fact, we all know that there is a 

caretaker government in charge right now, and they are waiting for 

elections in September to see whether they can form a new government. And all I can say, Senator, is that if confirmed, I will advocate the administration’s position, and do my best to see that the 

Dutch remain a part of the EU and a supporting member of the 

EU. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, I appreciate it. 

And then, Mr. Anania, your father is here. And, you know, looking at your parents while you were talking about them, your mom 

was looking on with skepticism, but your dad, that was one of the 

proudest fathers I have ever seen, and it was great to watch him 

watch you talking. So thank you, and congratulations. 

I want to talk about the relationship with Venezuela and how 

would you characterize Suriname’s relationship with Venezuela? 

What type of influence does Venezuela have in Suriname? 

Mr. ANANIA. Yes, thank you, Senator. That relationship is of 

great interest to the administration, and President Bouterse has, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

386

in fact, at times made some rhetorical statements in favor of joining the Venezuelan-led ALBA Union. However, the rhetoric fortunately has been quite different than the actions of the government, 

and so far they have taken no steps to join ALBA. 

On the other hand, Suriname is the recipient of some modest 

quantities of oil via the PetroCaribe program that Venezuela runs. 

So we continue to watch that relationship very carefully. It is a 

friendly relationship between the two countries. There is a Venezuelan Embassy in Suriname. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. My time has expired. Thank you, 

Madam Chairman. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair. And congratulations to all of the nominees on their nominations. 

The focus of my questions are with you, Ambassador Morningstar, as you might guess. I appreciate the fact that this is probably 

not the assignment you were looking for and that you were happy 

doing what you were doing. This is something that the Secretary 

has asked you to do, so I understand that. But it is also an opportunity to discuss policy issues vis-a-vis your nomination here. 

Last week, Secretary Clinton was touring the South Caucasus, 

and her visit to the region coincided with an escalation of ceasefire violations by Azeri forces, including a cross-border incursion 

that killed three Armenian soldiers and wounded five others, as 

well as a breach along the Nagorno-Karabakh line of contact. These 

actions confirm, in my view, the threat by the President of 

Azerbiajan that Armenia will live in fear. 

I look at that statement, ‘‘Armenia will live in fear,’’ and I look 

at the speech that was given in an official state address to his people, in which Azerbaijan’s President, Aliyev, stated that, ‘‘Our main 

enemies are Armenians of the world.’’

Now if confirmed, what steps will you take to address this ongoing problem along the line of contact? And do you think that, based 

upon those types of statements, that proposed sales of military 

hardware to be used in conjunction with the Azerbaijan’s military 

helicopter fleet is really in the national interests of the United 

States? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Well, first of all, let me just preface 

my comments with just one thing. I want to make very clear that 

I am very happy and excited to go to Azerbaijan, and it is a country 

that is extremely important to our national interests. And so I am 

looking forward to being there. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Duly noted. 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Second, when I am in Baku, if I am 

confirmed, and when I deal at the highest levels of the government, 

whether it be with the President or the Foreign Minister, or the 

like, I will follow administration policy and work also with Bob 

Bradtke, our Nagorno-Karabakh negotiator, very closely. 

I think it is fair to say that, and I will say, that any language 

that is counterproductive, you know, such as the language that you 

have said, that any actions by any party that bring about loss of 

life, as the Secretary of State said last week, create increased 

tension, can create escalation that can have unpredictable and unFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

387

foreseeable consequences and make even more difficult the task of 

achieving a settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh. 

I will do everything that I can, looking at it from the Azerbaijan 

side of things, if confirmed, to discourage that and talk about how 

unacceptable that is. And I think that goes without saying. And it 

is important. I think it is critically important. I do not think any 

party should inflame the situation by either unhelpful rhetoric or 

by escalating tensions through actions that result in the tragic loss 

of life. 

With respect to the question of the sales of military hardware, 

it raises a difficult issue, but something that we have to pay incredibly close attention to. We have to comply strictly with the waiver 

provisions under section 907. I think we also have to recognize that 

Azerbaijan does live in a difficult neighborhood. There are increasing tensions with respect to other neighbors, particularly Iran. And 

that we have to provide, I think, security assistance, possibly military assistance, in ways that cannot be used to exacerbate any situation with respect to Armenia or Nagorno-Karabakh. And I think 

we have to do that—we have to be very strict in doing that. But 

that still would allow us to do some things that are important, 

whether it be maritime security in the Caspian, whether it be cooperating on counterterrorism with respect to Iran, with respect to 

some of the other things we do. I fully appreciate your concern. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I did not hear President Aliyev say his 

main enemy or security concern is Iran. He said his main enemy 

or enemies are Armenians of the world. And so when we are talking about giving military or selling military hardware to the 

Azerbaijanis, I think about what the Helsinki Final Act’s bottom 

lines are. When I asked a similar question to former ambassadordesignee, Mr. Bryza, because there had been another incident 

where four Armenians had been killed. He reiterated the three pillars of the Helsinki Final Act: nonuse of force or the threat of force, 

the principle and territorial integrity, and equal rights and selfdetermination of people. Well, nonuse of force or the threat of force, 

obviously that gets enhanced by giving military hardware to the 

Azerbaijanis, especially when they say our major enemy is the 

Armenians of the world. 

I have a real problem with us going ahead and selling military 

hardware to Azerbaijanis based upon what has happened. He did 

not say the Iranians are their threat. 

Let me ask you, if I may, with the indulgence of the chair, two 

other questions. One is, why was Azerbaijan’s demolition of the 

Christian Armenian cemetery in Djulfa not included in the State 

Department’s international religious freedom report? Do you know? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. No, I do not know, but I can say that 

if I am confirmed and if I go to Baku, I will make every effort to 

visit that cemetery, that any kind of desecration such as that is, 

you know, unacceptable, outrageous. And I will do my best to get 

there and see it. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So do I take your response to mean—and 

correct me if I am wrong—that if confirmed, you will personally 

travel to Djulfa to investigate the destruction of the cemetery? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. I will make my best effort. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

388

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I would assume that your best effort 

would only be impeded by the Azerbaijanis not letting you go. I 

want to try and understand what your best effort is. You are going 

to do everything possible to go. 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Yes. 

Senator MENENDEZ. OK. Second, what specific steps will you 

take if confirmed and if you have the opportunity to go, which I 

would expect you should be, to have the cemetery preserved as a 

protected holy site? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. I think that it is important as one of 

our major priorities to press for religious freedom in Azerbaijan. It 

is not an all-negative record. They have been helpful with respect 

to some communities, but not others. What we need to do is to take 

very strong positions as an administration and in Baku if I am 

there to protect the rights of the Armenian church as well as to 

rectify the situation with respect to the cemetery. And that would 

be a major part of the agenda. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I appreciate that answer. Finally, I do 

not expect you to answer differently than have previous nominees 

before this committee. But I do have to ask you whether or not you 

contest any of the facts of what transpired in 1915 as it relates to 

1.5 million Armenians who were brutally massacred or marched to 

their deaths in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire. 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. No, I do not. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I look forward 

to following up with Ambassador Morningstar. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. I am going to give Ambassador 

Morningstar a little break here and——

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. No, it is fun. 

Senator SHAHEEN [continuing]. Focus on the other two nominees 

for a few minutes. 

Mr. Broas, I want to start with you because as you mentioned 

and Senator Barrasso mentioned, the Netherlands currently has a 

caretaker cabinet. Its government is one of those that has fallen as 

the result of the fiscal crisis in Europe and disagreements over 

what the austerity measures mean there. The caretaker cabinet 

that is currently in power agreed on an emergency austerity deal, 

but elections are coming up in September, and it raises the 

prospect that a new Parliament might withdraw support for that 

agreement. 

Can you talk about what the implications of that might be for 

the Netherlands, and the ripple effect that might have throughout 

the rest of Europe, and also whether we have an official policy on 

whether we are going to urge the country to support the current 

austerity deal that has been advocated in Europe, or whether we 

will have any statement at all relative to that? 

Mr. BROAS. Thank you, Senator. I do not know what the administration’s position will be, and I will just wait for the elections to 

see what happens in September. So I do not know sitting here 

today what position I will be advancing, if I am confirmed as 

Ambassador. 

The eurozone crisis that we are all reading about and hearing 

about is being felt very deeply in the Netherlands. We, of course, 

the United States, we are not a member of the eurozone. We do not 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

389

have a say in this. We do not have a vote. But we have a huge 

stake in this. As you know, the EU is our biggest trading partner, so the outcome of these negotiations is critical to the United

States. And if I am confirmed to be an ambassador, I will certainly 

strongly and diligently advance and advocate the position of the administration, to the extent it takes a position with respect to the 

austerity measures being advanced by the rest of the EU. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Certainly I would think that one of our positions is that we hope the Europeans will move expeditiously to do 

everything they can to address the crisis there. And I appreciate 

that they have been working toward it. But as you point out, there 

are significant implications for the inability to positively respond to 

the crisis, not only for Europe, but for the United States and for 

the rest of the world. 

Mr. BROAS. And, Senator, I fully expect the Netherlands, as one 

of the few AAA-rated sovereign debt countries in the EU, I fully expect them to be a leader in these negotiations, and that the rest 

of the EU will look to the Netherlands for support and leadership. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And have they taken that kind of a role to 

date? Have they been aggressive? 

Mr. BROAS. To my knowledge, they have been—in light of their 

caretaker government situation, they have been fairly neutral 

lately. That is my understanding. 

Senator SHAHEEN. OK. One of the things that you pointed out in 

your testimony is the importance of the trade relationship between 

the United States and the Netherlands. And certainly even in my 

home State of New Hampshire, there is a very important bilateral 

trade relationship with the Netherlands. Can you talk about what 

role you might play as Ambassador, as the top U.S. official in the 

Netherlands, to help promote that trade relationship? 

Mr. BROAS. Certainly, Senator. Thank you for the question. As 

I said in my opening statement, they are one of our biggest and 

most reliable trading partners. And as you know, the Port of Rotterdam is the biggest port in Europe. So many things transship 

through Rotterdam and through the Amsterdam airport that it is 

a huge trading center, and it remains one of the biggest investors 

in the United States. And vice versa we are one of the biggest 

investors in the Netherlands. 

As Ambassador, if I am confirmed, I will certainly have an open 

door and welcome the Dutch companies, to meet with them, and 

advance, and advocate for them to continue and to increase their 

trade relationships with all of our States and vice versa. I will have 

an open door to American companies. As you know, there are 2,100 

U.S. companies with offices in the Netherlands, and they are all 

doing business with Dutch companies and Dutch consumers. And 

so I will have an open door, and I will welcome commercial opportunities from the Netherlands and from the United States to maintain that trade relationship. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. So it is fair to say that you will 

commit to making commercial ties and business advocacy a top 

priority. 

Mr. BROAS. That is going to be one of my top priorities, absolutely, Senator. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

390

Senator SHAHEEN. Great, thank you. You pointed out that the 

Netherlands was a founding member of the EU. It is also a founding member of NATO, and has been a significant contributor to the 

alliance. It has participated in supporting the operations in Libya, 

and, as we mentioned both of us in our testimony, supporting our 

operations in Afghanistan, although their role there has changed. 

It is the first non-U.S. NATO ally to contribute to the alliance’s 

new missile defense system. And it also participating in the multinational program to develop the F–35 joint strike fighter, something that has been a very important priority in this country, 

though not without its detractors and not without controversy. 

Can you talk about the opportunity that you will have as Ambassador to learn more about what is going on with the development 

of the joint strike fighter, and the cooperation that you might advocate for the continued effort toward development of the plane, and 

what role you see for the joint strike fighter in the Netherlands? 

Mr. BROAS. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I would be happy to. 

As you know, the Dutch have invested over a billion dollars since 

1997 in the joint strike fighter program, and the research, and the 

development. And they remain one of the key contributors to the 

development and construction of the joint strike fighter. If I am 

confirmed as Ambassador, I will certainly advance the administration’s position to have the Dutch continue to contribute to the development of the program and to commit to purchase as many of 

the planes as possible once constructed. 

They have committed, so far to my knowledge, to buying 2, but 

they have also had discussions about buying as many as 85. And 

as Ambassador, I am going to advocate very strongly that they purchase at least 85. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Good, we appreciate that. As we are talking 

about NATO, I had the opportunity to be in Chicago for the NATO 

summit, and it was, I thought, a great opportunity for those countries who have participated in NATO to point out the continuing 

relevance of our alliance, how important it is to our transatlantic 

partnership, and to so many other countries around the world. 

And one of the things that has been challenging, particularly as 

we deal with the fiscal issues that we are facing both in Europe 

and the United States, are the resources that are needed to continue NATO’s role in the world. One of the things that was touted 

in Chicago and that is talked about to address those fiscal challenges is the new Smart Defense Initiative that is being promoted. 

Can you talk about how this concept of pooling military resources 

is being received in the Netherlands? And it is my understanding 

that the Dutch have agreed to purchase new refueling tankers with 

the French and the Germans and to share those aircraft. And can 

you talk about how that is being received as well? 

Mr. BROAS. Yes, thank you, Senator. Yes. At the Chicago meetings on NATO, the Dutch did commit, as did several other members of the EU, to adopting the smart defense approach, employing 

technology and missile defense as the top priorities for the future 

of NATO’s alliance. My understanding is that they have also 

agreed to replace the older Hawk missiles with the Patriot missiles, 

and that that is something they have committed to. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

391

My understanding is that the Dutch are very enthusiastic and 

very actively considering all of the commitments and discussions 

that were in Chicago, and that they are very enthusiastic about the 

Smart Defense Program. 

Senator SHAHEEN. That is great. Thank you. I think, as you 

point out with the Dutch and was touted in Chicago, that smart 

defense is something that makes sense as we try and figure out 

how to use our limited resources. I think we are all concerned that 

it not become an opportunity for countries to contribute less than 

their fair share to NATO as well. So I will just say that for the 

record and not ask you to respond to that. 

I want to go now to Suriname. And, Mr. Anania, you pointed out 

that—you mentioned the new President of Suriname who was 

elected in 2010. And only as we were preparing for this hearing did 

I learn how controversial he has been, that he was convicted in 

absentia by the Dutch for smuggling cocaine in 1999, that he has 

been on trial over the past 4 years for the 1982 killing of 15 prominent political opponents, although he denies any direct involvement 

in those killings. The likelihood of any conviction appears slim 

given that the national assembly has now approved an amendment 

granting amnesty to offenses committed between 1980 and 1992. 

The U.N. High Commission on Human Rights and Amnesty 

International have both called for the amnesty law to be reversed, 

and there was a large silent march there in April 2012 to protest 

the law. 

Given the controversial trial, the issues surrounding the President, can you comment on the state of democracy and the rule of 

law in Suriname and whether there are any efforts under way to 

urge a repeal of that amnesty law? 

Mr. ANANIA. Yes, Senator. Thank you for the question. It is a 

very important issue of great concern to the people of Suriname at 

the moment, and you are right to highlight it with your question. 

First of all, the United States certainly expects Suriname to 

actively participate in the Western Hemisphere region’s general 

consensus supporting democracy and human rights, and we certainly do look with concern upon these most recent actions. The 

President was democratically elected. It is a coalition government 

that he leads. He has a solid majority in their national assembly. 

But nonetheless, his past is checkered, and he previously did lead 

a military coup against the civilian government. So we continue to 

be very concerned about any actions that the government might 

take to infringe upon, in this case, an independent judiciary. 

In fact, the national assembly did pass an amnesty law which 

would apply to the murders which took place in 1982. However, the 

court proceeding has not been terminated, and so at this point the 

people of Suriname are very carefully discussing the situation. And 

I think you are right to be concerned that the prosecution will end; 

however, it has not yet ended, and the court is still considering it. 

So for that reason, the Embassy and the administration continue 

to encourage the Government of Suriname to respect the separation of powers within its democratic structures in keeping with its 

own constitution. 

Unfortunately, the Constitution of Suriname calls for the creation of a constitutional court, but there has never been one 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

392

created. And this has further exacerbated the situation and made 

it difficult to determine what the outcome of this particular amnesty law or what impact it will have on the trial will be. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And are there other areas where there are 

concerns about human rights violations and rule of law in 

Suriname? 

Mr. ANANIA. Well, in general, the Bouterse government does generally respect the rule of law and human rights as they seek to improve Suriname’s infrastructure and economic conditions. However, 

Suriname is a middle-income country, probably trending toward 

the low end of that scale, and it is quite a large country with not 

a lot of people in it. So its borders are porous, and the ability of 

the government to enforce law throughout the country is often very 

limited. And so there certainly are documented cases of human 

rights abuses, which have taken place within Suriname. Particularly there is a large informal and, in many cases, illegal gold mining sector, which operates within the interior of the country. And 

most of the people who are working in that sector are coming from 

other countries, particularly Brazil. 

And so the administration does have concerns about potential 

trafficking in persons both for labor or the sex trade, and we continue to engage with the Government of Suriname, which has made 

progress in these areas. They have a fairly good legal regime. 

There have been some limited prosecutions. And if confirmed, I 

pledge to you that we will continue to follow these issues closely, 

and beyond that, seek to assist and advise the Government of 

Suriname to combat these gorges, which unfortunately do exist in 

the country. 

Senator SHAHEEN. The porous borders also make drug trafficking 

a bigger concern. And certainly we have assisted Suriname in fighting drug trafficking, and by training antidrug units, police officers, 

and custom officials. Is there evidence that cooperation has been 

effective? 

Mr. ANANIA. I would say, yes, there is, but the effect is limited, 

it must be said. As I noted, Suriname is a country with modest 

means. The government does not have large law enforcement resources. It is a very large country. So while they do have generally 

a free and independent judicial system, and while they have prosecuted successful many small-time drug traffickers, there is continuing concern that there might be larger scale activities undertaken either unknown to the government or possibly even with the 

connivance of some officials. 

We do have a Drug Enforcement Agency office at the Embassy. 

It is quite active. And I am pleased to have learned that the relevant law enforcement entities in Suriname do cooperate closely 

with us. They participate in many of our training programs. And 

they are very grateful for the support that we offer. And we have, 

in fact, increased the dollar value of the programs within 

Suriname, so I would say that this is a bright spot in the relationship. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And given that it has had mixed success, are 

we looking at trying to do anything differently? Is Suriname looking at trying to do anything differently? Is there an effort to get 

more buy-in from the population there to address the issues around 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

393

drug trafficking, or do we think continuing the program as it has 

existed is what is warranted? 

Mr. ANANIA. Well, again, we have to speak of limited resources 

both on the part of the Government of Suriname, but also from the 

United States. I was pleased to see that we have increased our 

training dollars fairly significantly. It should be up to about a million dollars. But I think we have to restrain our expectations for 

the impact that such a small amount of money could have in a 

place like Suriname, which, after all, is a very wild country. 

Senator SHAHEEN. One of the things that I understand is that 

President Bouterse is making strengthening ties with China a priority. Have we seen an increase in influence on the part of China 

in the country? And are there ways in which we should be cooperating or working together to try and look at where there are areas 

of mutual interest that we could cooperate on, the United States 

and China, in Suriname? 

Mr. ANANIA. Well, that is an important development in the economy history of Suriname. China is very interested in Suriname as 

they are in many other countries of the world because Suriname 

does have such a large array of natural resources. So, in particular, 

logging and mining industries are very attractive to China, and 

they have obviously devoted some significant resources to building 

a strong relationship with Suriname. 

There are also political elements of that because Suriname continues to support a one China policy, which has, of course, for 

many years been a major priority for the Government in Beijing. 

In terms of cooperation, that is actually an interesting question, 

and there may be some areas in particular. Unfortunately in many 

cases, extractive industries lead to damage to the environment, and 

that is very much a concern in Suriname. I mentioned informal 

mining that goes on, particularly gold mining. The price of gold is 

very high now, and there has been an influx of informal/illegal gold 

miners. And they have caused great environmental degradation 

because, in particular, I understand that these operators use quantities of mercury in their gold mining operations, and this poisons 

rivers and destroys the environment. 

There is also concern frankly that some Chinese companies may 

not be interested in preserving the environment, and, therefore, 

may go in and clearcut forests, rain forests in particular, or otherwise cause damage to the environment. And this is, of course, not 

an issue that is solely confined to Suriname. This is an issue in 

many countries in Africa and elsewhere in Latin America as well. 

So it remains to be seen if we could find common ground. 

I must also say, building on one of the earlier questions, that I 

definitely believe that promoting U.S. industry and economic ties 

between our countries would be extremely important. And in this 

area, I guess we could say that China may be the competition, and 

I would certainly, if confirmed, work to advance the argument that 

having United States firms working in Suriname would, in fact, be 

more likely to result in protection of the environment. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, thank you. You make a very important 

point. And as you suggest, China is investing in a lot of parts of 

the world, and we need to think about how we are affected by that 

growing influence around the world. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

394

Ambassador Morningstar, there are two issues I want to raise 

with you before closing out the hearing that have not been explored 

in the kind of detail that I had hoped. One is Iran, and several people have mentioned Iran. But can you talk about how concerned 

you are about Iran’s influence in Azerbaijan, and how extensive 

that is, and what approach we might take to counteract the influence that Iran is having in Azerbaijan? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Thank you. I think it is a really

important question, and Iran is a concern, and it is a concern, I 

believe, to the Azeri Government. I think they have made that very 

clear. And they are concerned about the influence that Iran is having internally within Azerbaijan. 

We also have to recognize that Azerbaijan is in a difficult situation. Iran is a neighbor. To some extent, I think it has to walk a 

tightrope. At the same time, they recognize the dangers. And I 

come back to the point, and not to reiterate too much, but they are 

looking for our help with respect to Iran, and that we do have to 

provide help from the standpoint of how from a civil society standpoint they can deal with the Iranian situation, but also from the 

standpoint of security assistance. And that is recognizing that—

I said this before to the questions from Senator Menendez—that we 

have to very strictly draw the line with respect to assistance that 

can be in our interest and helpful to Azerbaijan as opposed to 

assistance that could be used with respect to the dispute with 

Armenia. 

Now that is a difficult line to draw, but we have to make every 

effort to draw that line in working with Congress and working with 

the Senate and your staff to ensure that that happens. And I think 

there is a lot we can do. I believe that when I get there, that is 

going to be a very major issue, if confirmed. 

Senator SHAHEEN. It is interesting to me that Azerbaijan has

recently agreed to purchase 1.6 billion dollars’ worth of Israelimade weapons. And there was a March Foreign Policy article that 

reported that Azerbaijan has likely given Israel access to its military bases for activities targeting Iran, though I think it is important to point out that both countries have denied that report. 

So can you talk about how we should we view this weapons deals 

between Azerbaijan and Israel, and what that growing military 

relationship between the two countries signals for Iran? 

Ambassador MORNINGSTAR. Well, I think we obviously have to 

watch it very closely. Israel is our close friend and ally, and Azerbaijan is another close friend. 

I do not think at this point, at least the best information I have, 

we do not know much about that arms agreement and what it entails, how much it really does entail, and so on. And I think we 

need to learn more about it. But it is incumbent upon us, to the 

extent that there is a relationship that grows, and, again, recognizing that they have denied some of the more explosive allegations 

with respect to their cooperation, that we need to work closely with 

both countries to understand what, if anything, is really 

happening. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. I want to thank all of you for 

agreeing to take on this responsibility and for your testimony 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

395

today. I think we will keep the record open for, what, another 24 

hours? 

VOICE. Yes, 48 hours. 

Senator SHAHEEN. For another 48 hours in case any questions 

come in from the committee. 

But at this time, I would like to close the hearing and, again, 

congratulate you all. And we look forward to working with you in 

your future roles in these ambassadorship posts. 

Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 4:24 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF RICHARD MORNINGSTAR TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Just last week President Obama made the rare step of endorsing the 

Trans-Anatolia gas pipeline, known as ‘‘TANAP.’’ TANAP would be a major new gas 

pipeline transiting Turkey and would be largely financed by Azerbaijan. TANAP 

would replace the need for the proposed Nabucco trunkline section within Turkey, 

but it would require pipelines to carry gas from the Turkish-Bulgarian border onward to Europe such as through a scaled-down version of Nabucco. 

There are several rival pipeline proposals to carry Caspian gas to Europe. Each 

may have some economic credibility, but they vary greatly in strategic benefit warranting U.S. Government backing. Specifically, our first priority must be to help relieve our Eastern European allies from their overdependence on Russian gas, and, 

in doing so, not subject them to European energy companies heavily influenced by 

Russian state-controlled companies. 

Transit decisions made by the BP-led consortium developing Shah Deniz gas and 

the Government of Azerbaijan will directly impact U.S. policy, including the extent 

to which projects in the Caspian warrant consideration as strategically important 

to the United States vis-a-vis our sanctions regime on Iran.

• Please clarify the administration’s position following the President’s comments 

on TANAP and describe what have been the primary delays in gas projects advancing in the years since you and I attended the Nabucco Treaty signing in 

Ankara? In short, has the United States endorsed TANAP officially?

Answer. President Obama sent a letter to President Aliyev congratulating Azerbaijan at the 19th Annual Caspian Oil and Gas Conference. The letter did not specifically mention TANAP but rather recognized the critical importance of Azerbaijan 

in the role of the Southern Corridor and the signing of gas transit agreements between Azerbaijan and Turkey. 

It has become apparent that there is not sufficient gas to fill a full scale Nabucco 

pipeline by 2017–18. By the early to mid 2020s, there will likely be sufficient gas 

from Azerbaijan and possibly Turkmenistan and Iraq. The United States supports 

any commercially viable pipeline that brings Caspian gas to Europe provided the 

following two conditions are met: (1) a significant portion of the gas must be supplied to our friends and allies in the Balkans and elsewhere in Central and Eastern 

Europe, which are particularly dependent on a single source of gas; and (2) the pipeline must be expandable, so that additional sources of gas can be accommodated 

once they become available. TANAP could play an important and valuable role in 

bringing Caspian gas to Europe. 

Delays in opening the Southern Gas Corridor have stemmed primarily from the 

difficulty of reaching agreement among all of the stakeholders on what export route 

will best address their commercial and political interests. In my role as the Special 

Envoy for Eurasian Energy, I have been working diligently on this issue and continue to work closely with all the companies and parties involved to achieve energy 

security for Europe as soon as possible. With the recent progress in narrowing down 

potential routes, it appears likely that the Shah Deniz Consortium will reach a decision on a final export route within the next year.

Question. As you know, the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program 

has been involved in Azerbaijan for a number of years. Recently, the focus has been 

on Caspian energy security and biothreat discussions. I’d like to ask that you make 

this work a priority in Azerbaijan when you assume your responsibilities in Baku.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

396

• Please indicate how you will advance this cooperation when you arrive in Baku.

Answer. The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program has been 

a critical component of our security assistance to Azerbaijan, serving as a vivid example of how our assistance to Azerbaijan bolsters vital U.S. interests in the region. 

Just this month, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) conducted a successful training session for Azerbaijani officials in Baku on combating proliferation of 

weapons of mass destruction (WMD). If confirmed, I pledge to ensure that these 

efforts remain a priority at the U.S. Embassy in Baku. 

In another prominent example of our CTR cooperation with Azerbaijan, DTRA 

Director Kenneth Myers traveled to Azerbaijan last year to attend the opening of 

a new state-of-the-art disease-monitoring laboratory. The construction of the laboratory was financed by the U.S. Government within the framework of DTRA’s Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP); the lab was the first of 10 regional 

diagnostic labs to be opened within the framework of this program, which aims to 

secure dangerous pathogens, promote disease reporting and response, and advance 

research on pathogens and potential countermeasures. United States-Azerbaijan cooperation has also led to the renovation of two national level diagnostic laboratories 

for the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Agriculture, bringing the facilities, 

equipment, and procedures of these institutes up to international standards. In addition to the upgrades to Azerbaijan’s physical infrastructure, the CBEP has completed numerous training events and cooperative research projects, building skills 

among Azerbaijani scientists in areas such as biosafety, biosecurity, laboratory techniques, epidemiological analysis, and international research standards. 

The CTR program also had a successful partnership with Azerbaijan’s maritime 

security forces in bolstering Azerbaijan’s capacity to secure its interests in the Caspian. An interagency effort continues to address Critical Energy Infrastructure in 

the Caspian, and this issue will remain a priority for the Embassy. 

If confirmed, I will look forward to continuing these critical efforts to enhance 

Azerbaijan’s capacity to reduce, eliminate, and counter the threat of WMD, a vital 

U.S. interest.

Question. Ambassador Morningstar, I would like to commend your efforts to advance many critical initiatives as the Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy. Key initiatives such as the Unconventional Gas Technical Engagement Program and opening 

the Southern Corridor from the Caspian to Eastern Europe offer opportunities to 

promote economic growth and shift power dynamics in energy markets in favor of 

the United States and our allies. 

The Special Envoy position was created by Secretary Rice at the urging of Vice 

President Biden and myself, and it was propelled with the strong support of Secretary Clinton. Several former Soviet states still come under tremendous pressure 

from Russia, and energy is a primary point of leverage. The constant presence of 

a high-level U.S. Envoy demonstrates U.S. commitment to these countries and to 

energy security at little taxpayer expense. 

I am hopeful that you will join me today in encouraging the continuation of the 

Special Envoy role following your departure to Baku. But more to the point, please 

indicate whether the Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy continue to report directly 

to the Secretary of State given the creation of the new Energy Bureau.

Answer. Thank you for the support you have given to addressing energy security 

challenges generally, as well as in Europe and Eurasia particularly. As you know, 

Secretary Clinton has appreciated your leadership on the integration of energy security with American foreign policy, as these issues directly affect our national security and prosperity. Secretary Clinton has tasked the Assistant Secretary of the 

Energy Resources Bureau and, until his confirmation in the interim, our Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, Carlos Pascual, to lead our energy issues in 

Europe and Eurasia to ensure that we sustain the highest level of attention in the 

Department, while mobilizing the full support of the Energy Resources Bureau. Ambassador Pascual will continue to report to the Secretary directly on these matters.

Question. Good governance of oil and gas resources and revenues is fundamental 

to the future prosperity and democratic development of Azerbaijan. I have had several conversations with President Aliyev on this topic, and he has professed his intention to pursue the ‘‘Norway model’’ in transparency and spending of revenues. 

To that end, the State Oil Fund of Azerbaijan has made remarkable progress. 

However, more needs to be done, particularly to account for SOCAR’s [State Oil 

Company of Azerbaijan] revenues and to improve civil society involvement. 

The Cardin-Lugar amendment will require many oil companies operating in Azerbaijan to disclose payments through SEC filings. If confirmed, what will be your 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

397

priority areas to further improve transparency in Azerbaijan, and how will you advocate for the purposes of the Cardin-Lugar amendment?

Answer. Advocating for transparency and compliance of international standards 

and U.S. laws will be a key priority in engaging both the public and private sector 

at all levels in Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan was the first country to complete Extractive 

Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) validation, with the Board finding Azerbaijan EITI compliant in February 2009. Azerbaijan will be up for revalidation in 

2014, and we will continue to monitor its compliance and place consistent emphasis 

on the importance of EITI and the Cardin-Lugar amendment, which is an extremely 

valuable complement to EITI. Once the SEC issues final regulations, the Embassy 

will work with the Government of Azerbaijan to create the necessary conditions for 

companies listed in the United States to be compliant with U.S. law. 

Azerbaijan has also signed on to the Open Government Partnership (OGP), a 

global partnership between governments and civil society in which governments 

commit to an action plan to promote transparency and fight corruption and submit 

to independent monitoring on their progress in carrying it out. If confirmed, I will 

continue to work closely with both the government and civil society groups to help 

Azerbaijan carry out its commitments under the OGP.

Question. What is your view of the Nabucco West proposal? Is Nabucco West premised on TANAP becoming a reality? Would the 2009 Intergovernmental Agreement 

still be valid for Nabucco West?

Answer. The United States supports any commercially viable pipeline that brings 

Caspian gas to Europe provided the following two conditions are met: (1) a significant portion of the gas must be supplied to our friends and allies in the Balkans 

and elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe, which are particularly dependent on 

a single source of gas; and (2) the pipeline must be expandable, so that additional 

sources of gas can be accommodated once they become available. 

There will ultimately be large amounts of gas to ship through Georgia and Turkey 

to Europe. We believe that TANAP could be an excellent project, because it would 

be a dedicated pipeline across Turkey that would provide greater flexibility as more 

gas becomes available. Nabucco West, however, is not necessarily premised on 

TANAP becoming a reality. The parties are discussing how best to utilize the 

Nabucco IGA as part of the project.

Question. What is your view of the Southeastern Europe Pipeline (SEEP) proposal? If reports are correct that SEEP would rely on much existing infrastructure, 

how would it be able to handle additional gas supplies, if Iraq or Turkmen gas 

comes online in the future?

Answer. A full Nabucco pipeline may not be the first pipeline, but ultimately 

there will be significant gas available in the future from Azerbaijan and possibly 

Turkmenistan and Iraq. The South East European Pipeline (SEEP), as well as the 

two other pipelines being considered (Nabucco West and the Trans Adriatic Pipeline 

(TAP)), are still in the running. We would support SEEP, or any commercially viable pipeline that brings Caspian gas to Europe, provided the following two conditions are met: (1) a significant portion of the gas must be supplied to our friends 

and allies in the Balkans and elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe, which are 

particularly dependent on a single source of gas; and (2) the pipeline must be expandable, so that additional sources of gas can be accommodated once they become 

available. 

The final architecture of SEEP is not yet clear. The expandability of SEEP to handle potential future volumes of gas from countries beyond Azerbaijan is an important question, and one that we will be examining closely as the process of choosing 

an export route for Shah Deniz gas proceeds. 

RESPONSES OF RICHARD MORNINGSTAR TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BARBARA BOXER

Question. According to news reports, on June 4–7, at least eight Armenian and 

Azeri soldiers were killed during fighting along the border of Armenia and Azerbaijan. In a troubling development, the fighting—which reportedly began after Azeri 

forces attempted to penetrate Armenian lines—took place at the same time that 

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was visiting the region.

• If confirmed, how will you respond, publicly and privately, to new acts of 

aggression that now extend beyond the Nagorno-Karabakh region into the 

Armenian-Azerbaijani border area? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

398

• How will you specifically work to ensure that the Azerbaijani Government respects the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk 

Group negotiated cease-fire?

Answer. As a cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United States remains committed at the highest levels to assisting the sides of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict 

to reach a lasting and peaceful settlement. During her recent visit to the region, 

Secretary Clinton made clear that these cycles of violence must end and that the 

sides should exercise restraint, comply with their obligations under the 1994 ceasefire agreement, and take the steps necessary for peace. The Secretary also expressed 

concern about the danger of rising tensions, which could have unpredictable and disastrous consequences. 

If confirmed, I will work with U.S. Minsk Group cochair, Robert Bradtke, and engage at the highest levels of the Azerbaijani Government to urge respect for the 

cease-fire and strengthen its implementation.

Question. Last year, then-Ambassador Matthew Bryza attempted to visit the Armenian cemetery of Djulfa to investigate the 2005 destruction of Armenian 

Khachkars, or burial monuments. The desecration of one of the oldest and largest 

Armenian cemeteries was an affront to religious freedom and was criticized by the 

European Parliament and international archaeological bodies. Disturbingly, the 

Azerbaijani Government denied Ambassador Bryza’s request to visit the site.

• If confirmed, will you commit to attempt to travel to Djulfa to investigate the 

destruction of the cemetery? What steps will you take to ensure that other religious sites and monuments in Azerbaijan are protected?

Answer. The United States has publicly condemned the desecration at Djulfa and 

reiterated our concerns to the Azerbaijani Government on this issue, urging a transparent investigation of the incident. Despite our requests to visit the Djulfa Cemetery, local authorities have so far refused permission to do so. If I am confirmed, 

I pledge to make every effort to visit the cemetery at Djulfa. I will also amplify our 

concerns to the Government of Azerbaijan and stress the need to respect and safeguard Armenian religious and cultural sites in Azerbaijan. 

As a strong proponent of preserving world cultural heritage, we urged Azerbaijan 

and Armenian to work with UNESCO to investigate the destruction of these cultural monuments.

Question. I am deeply concerned by recent reports of attempts by Iran-linked 

operatives to kill foreign diplomats, including American Embassy employees and 

their families, in Azerbaijan. According to news reports, U.S. Embassy officials in 

Azerbaijan have been alerted to plots against employees at least three times in the 

past 2 years. 

I am also troubled by inadequate security at the U.S. Embassy building in Baku. 

According to a 2007 report by the Office of the Inspector General report, the 

Embassy is ‘‘lodged in a 100-year-old building and has an unprotected annex 30 

minutes away through horrific traffic.’’ For the safety of our citizens serving in Azerbaijan, it is imperative that the Embassy go through the Compound Security 

Upgrade Program and relocate. In her recent visit to Azerbaijan, Secretary Clinton 

reminded President Aliyev about the need to build a new, state-of-the-art chancery, 

which has been under negotiation with the Azerbaijani Government for more than 

10 years.

• What will you do to protect U.S. Government employees—particularly regarding 

threats from Iran—and how do you intend to communicate to the Azerbaijani 

Government the urgency of this situation? 

• What are the existing obstacles to relocating the Embassy and when do you expect that a new facility could be ready?

Answer. If confirmed, my highest priority as Ambassador will be the safety and 

security of our staff and their families in Baku. Our security cooperation with the 

host government is a key component of that effort. Azerbaijani authorities have announced the arrest of a number of individuals since the start of this year for allegedly plotting attacks against foreign interests in Azerbaijan. We are appreciative of 

our cooperation with the Government of Azerbaijan and we continue to work closely 

with Azerbaijani authorities to provide for the safety and security of our Embassy 

and personnel in Baku. 

The upgrading our Embassy facility in Azerbaijan must be the highest priority, 

both to improve security and to provide a larger and more modern workspace similar to our other embassies throughout the region. As part of this ongoing effort, we 

have been working to obtain property for a New Embassy Compound in Baku, fully 

compliant with current security standards. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

399

Even in my role as Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy, I have raised the issue 

with President Aliyev in the strongest possible terms. And while in Baku earlier 

this month, the Secretary also conveyed to the Azerbaijani Government the importance of accelerating the process toward building a modern, secure, state-of-the-art 

chancery in Baku. 

If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to stress the importance of this effort 

to the government and do everything possible to surmount the remaining obstacles 

and ensure that this project becomes a reality.

Question. In February, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev stated in a public 

speech that was later posted on his Web site that ‘‘[Azerbaijan’s] main enemies are 

Armenians of the world.’’ 

Statements such as the one above foment anti-Armenian sentiment in Azerbaijan, 

which exacerbates existing tensions and makes it increasingly difficult to reach a 

permanent peace agreement regarding the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

• If confirmed, what will you do to work with the Azerbaijani Government to 

counter anti-Armenian sentiment and to further a meaningful peace process?

Answer. The United States has joined with the other Minsk Group Co-Chairs to 

urge that all sides show restraint in their public statements and on the ground to 

avoid misunderstandings and unintended consequences. Secretary Clinton reiterated 

these points during her travel to the region earlier this month, and if confirmed I 

will reinforce this message at the highest levels of the Azerbaijani Government. 

As Secretary Clinton and the other Foreign Ministers of the OSCE Minsk Group 

Cochair Countries noted in a joint statement earlier this year, a new generation has 

come of age in the region with no first-hand memory of Armenians and Azeris living 

side by side, and it is important to emphasize that prolonging these artificial divisions only deepens the wounds of war. If confirmed, I will make the case that irresponsible rhetoric is unacceptable and undermines our efforts to achieve a peaceful 

settlement of the conflict. I will urge the Azerbaijani Government to show restraint 

in its rhetoric and to prepare its people for peace, not war.

Question. Congress has enacted legislation known as ‘‘Section 907’’ prohibiting 

U.S. assistance to Azerbaijan until it meets a number of conditions, including taking 

demonstrable steps to cease ‘‘offensive uses of force against Armenia and NagornoKarabakh.’’

Yet just last week, the Azeri military was involved in a violent attack that left 

three Armenian soldiers dead. 

Furthermore, the Azeri Government continually threatens to resolve the conflict 

by force. According to The Economist, the Azeri President—Ilham Aliyev—threatened war to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in nine separate speeches in 

2010 alone.

• Is the Government of Azerbaijan fully meeting the conditions of section 907? 

• Do you support continuing to waive section 907, as the administration has done 

for the last several years? 

• Should the U.S. Government be providing military aid to the Government of 

Azerbaijan at the same time that it is committing acts of aggression and threatening renewed war against both Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia?

Answer. Since 2002, the President has waived section 907 on an annual basis. 

Deputy Secretary Burns signed the 2012 waiver on behalf of President Obama again 

this year. If confirmed, I will support the appropriate application of this waiver 

authority and any and all other statutory requirements that dictate the conditions 

of U.S. assistance to Azerbaijan, including section 907. 

Azerbaijan is an important security partner for the United States and our assistance to Azerbaijan is provided in this context, helping to further common objectives 

including counterterrorism, border control, and maritime security. Azerbaijan has 

over 90 troops stationed in Afghanistan and provides critical support for U.S. and 

coalition aircraft bound for Afghanistan. U.S. assistance to Azerbaijan has enhanced 

Azerbaijan’s interoperability with NATO and U.S. forces and advances vital U.S. 

security interests in the region. 

If confirmed, I will advocate for assistance programs in areas that serve these key 

U.S. interests while ensuring that our security assistance cannot be used for offensive purposes against Armenia and does not undermine ongoing efforts to negotiate 

a peaceful settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Question. As you know, a goal of U.S. policy in the South Caucasus is to foster 

regional cooperation and economic integration. Yet, Azerbaijan continues to undermine U.S. efforts in the region. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

400

For example, in May 2011, Azeri President Aliyev stated in his Republic Day address, ‘‘As far as Armenia is concerned, we will continue to make efforts to isolate 

Armenia from all regional projects. We do not hide it. This is our policy.’’

• How will you address Azerbaijan’s continued attempts to isolate Armenia? • How will you work to promote regional cooperation and economic integration?

Answer. The only path to peace, stability, and prosperity in the region is a lasting, 

peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. As a cochair of the Minsk 

Group, the United States remains committed, at the highest levels, to helping the 

sides achieve this outcome. If confirmed, I will emphasize to Azerbaijan’s leadership 

that it is in Azerbaijan’s interest to accelerate efforts toward peace and regional economic integration. 

As part of this effort, the United States and the other cochairs have proposed confidence-building measures, including humanitarian and people-to-people contacts, 

which should be used to promote mutual understanding among peoples of the region. The sides have agreed to pursue such measures, and if confirmed, I will urge 

the Azerbaijani Government to move forward with these vital initiatives to help 

move the region toward peace. 

A peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict would also allow the essential and long overdue integration of Armenia into the vital energy routes and infrastructure that are developing across the region. If confirmed, I will make the case 

in Baku that Azerbaijan stands only to gain from such an outcome. 

RESPONSES OF RICHARD MORNINGSTAR TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT MENENDEZ

Question. Do you support the proposed sale of military hardware to be used in 

conjunction with Azerbaijan’s military helicopter fleet for border surveillance and 

‘‘police-type’’ activities? What message would this sale send to the Azeris about 

cross-border incursions and what message does it send about U.S. even-handedness 

or seriously encouraging Baku to agree to Minsk Group cochair demands that it 

remove its snipers from the ‘‘line of contact’’ in the Nagorno-Karabakh region?

Answer. The United States reviews all license applications in light of our international commitments and U.S. laws. In this specific case, I understand that the 

applicant seeking the Department’s approval for a proposed license agreement has 

now requested that the Department remove Azerbaijan from the sales territory of 

the agreement. The Department will honor this request from the applicant when it 

delivers the statutory notification of the sale to Congress. 

If confirmed, I will ensure that our security assistance to Azerbaijan cannot be 

used for offensive purposes against Armenia, and does not undermine ongoing 

efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. 

As a cochair of the OSCE Minsk Group, the United States remains deeply committed to assisting the sides of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to reach a lasting and 

peaceful settlement. We reiterate at every opportunity that there is no military solution to the conflict, and that only a peaceful settlement will lead to security, stability, and reconciliation in the region.

Question. Baku has rejected successive appeals by the OSCE and the U.N.

Secretary General to withdraw its snipers from the line of contact. Armenia and the 

Nagorno-Karabakh leadership have consistently said they will withdraw their snipers provided Azerbaijan agrees to do the same.

• What will you do to convince Azerbaijan to support the Minsk Group and U.N. 

Secretary General’s call to pull back snipers, as both Armenia and the Nagorno 

Karabakh Republic have agreed to do?

Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will support our U.S. cochair for the OSCE 

Minsk Group, Ambassador Robert Bradtke, in his efforts to work with the sides to 

achieve a lasting, peaceful resolution to the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. I will 

urge the highest levels of the Azerbaijani Government to take steps—including the 

withdrawal of snipers—to improve the atmosphere for negotiations, prevent unnecessary casualties, and strengthen implementation of the cease-fire. I will emphasize 

at every opportunity that there is no military solution to the conflict, and that only 

a peaceful settlement will lead to security, stability, and reconciliation in the region.

Question. Why wasn’t Azerbaijan’s demolition of the Christian Armenian cemetery 

in Djulfa included in the State Department’s International Religious Freedom 

Report? Will it now be documented in future editions of this report?

Answer. The incident remains of great concern to the Department, and if confirmed as Ambassador, I will raise the issue frequently and forcefully with the AzerFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

401

baijani Government. I will also review reports of the incident and its relationship 

with the International Religious Freedom Report. 

The United States has publicly condemned the desecration at Djulfa and called 

for a transparent investigation. If confirmed, I pledge to make every effort to visit 

the cemetery and will emphasize the need to respect and safeguard Armenian religious and cultural sites in Azerbaijan.

Question. Will you, if confirmed, personally travel to Djulfa to investigate the destruction of the Djulfa Armenian cemetery? What specific steps will you take, if confirmed, to see the Djulfa Armenian cemetery restored or preserved, to the extent 

possible, as a protected holy site?

Answer. If I am confirmed, I pledge to make every effort to visit the cemetery at 

Djulfa, including pressing for permission from the appropriate authorities if needed. 

I will also amplify our concerns to the Government of Azerbaijan and stress the 

need to respect and safeguard Armenian religious and cultural sites in Azerbaijan. 

The United States has publicly condemned the desecration at Djulfa and reiterated our concerns to the Azerbaijani Government on this issue, urging a transparent 

investigation of the incident. Despite our requests to visit the Djulfa cemetery, local 

authorities have so far refused permission to do so.

Question. If confirmed, will you commit, during your trips to Washington, DC, to 

consult with members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and other Senators regarding United States-Azerbaijani relations and the issues raised during 

your confirmation hearing?

Answer. If confirmed, I will be happy to meet with members of the Senate Foreign 

Relations Committee, other Senators, and their staffs to discuss United StatesAzerbaijan relations and the issues raised during my confirmation hearing. I will 

also be available for any consultations at any time in Baku.

Question. If confirmed, will you commit, during your trips to Washington, DC, to 

consult with the leaderships of the Azerbaijani and Armenian American communities regarding the issues raised during your confirmation hearing?

Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would look forward to visiting and meeting with 

members of the Azerbaijani- and Armenian-American communities both in the 

United States and in Azerbaijan, as my predecessors have done before. If I am confirmed, I would also be happy to meet with both communities prior to leaving for 

Baku. It would be a valuable opportunity to understand and respond to their concerns, update them on the status of the United States-Azerbaijan relationship, and 

to exchange views on a wide range of issues.

Question. The administration’s position has been that the resolution of the 

Nagorno-Karabakh issue and the normalization of relations between Turkey and 

Armenia are on separate tracks. The former Ambassador to Baku since leaving that 

post has contested that assessment and said that we need to manage the two processes together.

• What is your view of the path to resolving each of these issues? Should Baku 

have a role in negotiations between Armenia and Turkey?

Answer. Our interest is in seeing Armenia and Turkey heal the wounds of the 

past and move forward together in a shared future of security and prosperity. Our 

policy is guided by this goal. The United States strongly supports the efforts of 

Turkey and Armenia to normalize their bilateral relationship, and has urged the 

parties to ratify the normalization protocols without preconditions. We believe the 

ball is in Turkey’s court. 

We have consistently emphasized that there is no linkage between the protocols 

process and the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations. These are two separate processes. 

As a cochair of the Minsk Group, the United States remains firmly committed to 

achieving a peaceful, negotiated settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict based 

upon three core principles of the Helsinki Final Act: the nonuse or threat of force, 

territorial integrity of states, and equal rights and self-determination of peoples. If 

confirmed, I would work with U.S. Minsk Group Cochair Robert Bradtke and engage 

at the highest levels of the Azerbaijani Government to support these efforts.

Question. Over the past decade, strategic energy projects launched with U.S. support in the South Caucasus have created long-term development opportunities for 

most of the nations in the region. However, these initiatives have not benefited 

Armenia, due to Turkish and Azerbaijani policies. Ongoing attempts to isolate 

Armenia from regional projects, such as the Azeri-proposed rail bypass of Armenia, 

also run counter to stated U.S. policy goals of regional cooperation and economic 

integration.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

402

• What concrete steps will be taken to eliminate the Turkish and Azeri blockades 

of Armenia and Azerbaijan’s continued pattern to try and isolate Armenia?

Answer. The United States believes that the only path to peace, stability, and 

prosperity in the region is a lasting, peaceful settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh 

conflict. A settlement of the conflict would have a profound impact in promoting regional cooperation and economic integration. As a cochair of the Minsk Group, the 

United States remains committed, at the highest levels, to helping the sides achieve 

this outcome. 

To support this goal, the United States and the other cochairs have proposed confidence-building measures, including humanitarian and people-to-people contacts, 

which would promote mutual understanding among peoples of the region. The sides 

have agreed to pursue such measures, and if confirmed, I will emphasize to Azerbaijan’s leadership at the highest levels that it is in Azerbaijan’s interest to accelerate efforts towards peace and regional economic integration. 

One of the many unfortunate consequences of the conflict is that Armenia has 

been precluded from participating in regional energy projects and other projects. A 

peaceful resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict would allow the essential and 

long overdue integration of Armenia into the vital energy routes and infrastructure 

that are developing across the region. If confirmed, I will make the case in Baku 

that Azerbaijan stands only to gain from moving the region forward toward peace, 

prosperity, and stability. 

The United States also strongly supports the efforts of Turkey and Armenia to 

normalize their bilateral relationship, and has urged Turkey to ratify the normalization protocols without preconditions. We have consistently emphasized that there is 

no linkage between the protocols process and the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations. 

These are two separate processes.

Question. You testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2009 

that ‘‘At the heart of our policy is the belief that energy security is best achieved 

through diversity—diversity of suppliers, diversity of transportation routes and 

diversity of consumers.’’ On the one hand the United States values the Azeri relationship because of role the Azeris play in providing alternative sources to Russian 

oil and gas to Europe and Israel and on the other hand the Azeris are continuing 

to provide natural gas to Iran.

• What is U.S. policy regarding Azerbaijan’s gas supply relationship with Iran? 

How crucial is Azerbaijan to securing alternative energy supplied for Europe? 

What specific actions can be taken to integrate Armenia into regional energy 

initiatives?

Answer. We work closely with Azerbaijan on energy security, and we share Azerbaijan’s goal of establishing a Southern Corridor for natural gas exports to Europe. 

Azerbaijan plays a key role in our efforts to promote a diversity of energy routes 

and sources for European energy consumers. The government in Baku clearly recognizes the benefits that multiple routes to market would bring to Azerbaijan. 

The Shah Deniz gas field and potential future developments in Azerbaijan are 

critical to European energy security, particularly for those countries that are largely 

reliant on a single source. Azerbaijan has been an active and willing strategic partner for both the United States and Europe in efforts to achieve this important goal. 

If gas from Shah Deniz does not go to Europe, Azerbaijan would be forced to sell 

it to Iran, Russia, or further east. 

It is our policy to minimize the gas supply relationship between Azerbaijan and 

Iran, and if confirmed, I will advance this policy. We are aware that Azerbaijan has 

a swap relationship with Iran whereby Azerbaijan provides gas to Iran in exchange 

for Iranian gas supplies to the exclave of Nakhchivan. At present, there is no alternative to supply gas to this isolated region of Azerbaijan. 

If confirmed as Ambassador in Baku, I will emphasize to the government the benefits that Azerbaijan stands to gain from a peaceful, lasting settlement of the 

Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which is the best path toward regional cooperation and 

economic integration. A peaceful resolution of the conflict would allow the integration of Armenia into the vital energy routes and infrastructure that are developing 

across the region.

Question. By all account the human rights situation in Azerbaijan has declined 

significantly over the last year. President Aliyev has been in power since 2003. Do 

you see him become more entrenched and less tolerant of dissent?

Answer. Advancing respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Azerbaijan continues to be a key pillar in the bilateral relationship. As the Secretary 

said during her recent visit to Baku, ‘‘The United States remains strongly committed to working with the government and people to advance respect for human 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

403

rights and fundamental freedoms.’’ She urged the government to respect its citizens’ 

right to express views peacefully, including dissenting views, and to release those 

who have been detained for doing so in print or on the streets or for defending 

human rights. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will reinforce this vital message at the 

highest levels of the Azerbaijani Government. 

We continue to believe that respect for these rights is essential for promoting the 

sort of dialogue between citizens and their government that forms the basis for positive change and the deeper development of a culture of democracy in any society. 

The United States continues to raise these concerns privately and publicly, including concerns about many specific cases. For example, last year, following the authorities’ efforts to thwart the gathering of opposition groups in Baku, we urged the 

Azerbaijani Government to uphold its own international commitments to the rights 

of all its citizens to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression, which are guaranteed under the Azerbaijani Constitution, and which are enshrined in OSCE agreements to which the government has committed. 

The 2013 Presidential election will be an opportunity for the government to demonstrate its commitment to these fundamental freedoms, and the United States will 

continue strong diplomatic and assistance efforts to encourage such progress.

Question. In an official state address to his people, Azerbaijan’s President Aliyev 

stated that ‘‘our main enemies are Armenians of the world.’’ Last year, Azerbaijani 

citizens were questioned, on national security grounds, simply for suspicion of having voted for Armenian artists in a Europe-wide singing contest. Also, in August 

2011, the head of Azerbaijan’s Presidential Administration’s Political Analysis 

Department Elnur Aslanov told a gathering of hundreds of Azerbaijani students, 

who were studying abroad, that Ramil Safarov, who was convicted of murdering an 

Armenian with an axe while he was sleeping in his dorm room in Hungary, is an 

inspiration and ‘‘give[s] special spirit to Azerbaijani youth.’’

• What plans do you have for confronting Azerbaijan’s official anti-Armenian 

rhetoric?

Answer. If confirmed, I will make the case that inflammatory rhetoric is unacceptable, dangerous, and undermines our efforts to achieve a peaceful settlement of the 

conflict. As a cochair of the Minsk Group, the United States has repeatedly called 

on all sides to show restraint in their public statements and on the ground to avoid 

misunderstandings and unintended consequences. Secretary Clinton emphasized 

this message during her travel to the region earlier this month, and if confirmed 

I will urge the Azerbaijani Government to show restraint in its rhetoric and to prepare its people for peace, not war. 

As Secretary Clinton and the other Foreign Ministers of the OSCE Minsk Group 

Cochair Countries noted in a joint statement earlier this year, a new generation has 

come of age in the region with no first-hand memory of Armenians and Azeris living 

side by side, and it is important to emphasize that prolonging these artificial divisions only deepens the wounds of war. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(405)

NOMINATION OF DEREK J. MITCHELL 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

Hon. Derek J. Mitchell, of Connecticut, to be Ambassador to the 

Union of Burma 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m,. in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jim Webb, presiding. 

Present: Senators Webb, Inhofe, and Rubio. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JIM WEBB,

U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA 

Senator WEBB. The hearing will come to order. 

The committee meets today to consider the nomination of Ambassador Derek Mitchell to be U.S. Ambassador to Burma, also known 

as Myanmar. The nomination of Ambassador Mitchell comes at a 

historic turning point in Burma’s political transition and in our 

relations with that country. I would say this is one of those moments we will look back on clearly as a historic turning point. 

And when such moments occur, history teaches us that we must 

act in a clear and decisive manner. I am pleased that the administration has responded to positive changes within Burma by upgrading our diplomatic relations to this proper status. 

Three years ago when I visited Burma in August 2009, I can 

safely say that few were considering this prospect. My visit was the 

first visit to Burma by a Member of Congress or a national leader 

in more than 10 years. The country was locked in isolation, keeping 

its government, military, and people from exposure to the international community. 

Aung San Suu Kyi remained under house arrest. Numerous 

other activists remained in prison. Conflicts with ethnic minority 

groups continued and challenged the unity of the country. The 

prospects for reform opening up and economic development looked 

bleak, while the potential for increased isolation and tighter sanctions seemed likely. 

Yet during that visit, one could clearly see the promise of a different future. My own interactions with leaders in the military government, as well as with Aung San Suu Kyi, suggested that with 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

406

international support and faith, Burma could begin a different 

path. 

In September 2009 with my support, the administration redirected U.S. policy to engage directly with the government, which 

began sending positive reciprocal signals. Then Foreign Minister 

Nyan Win visited New York for the U.N. General Assembly and 

made a private visit to Washington, DC. 

The next year, the government announced that elections would 

be held. And on November 7, 2010, the country held elections for 

national and regional Parliaments with the participation of multiple political parties. By all accounts, these elections were neither 

completely free nor fair, but they represented a step toward a new 

system of governance, a step that many of Burma’s regional neighbors have not yet taken. 

Additionally, in March 2011, the military government officially 

transferred power to the civilian government led by President 

Thein Sein. In his first year of office, President Thein Sein released 

more than 620 political prisoners, released more than 28,000 prisoners, and reduced the sentences of all prisoners by 1 year. He 

began a series of economic reforms to prepare the country for trade 

and investment. Also during this time, the Parliament passed new 

labor and peaceful demonstration laws, amended the political party 

laws, and enabled the National League for Democracy to conclude 

that they would participate in the next elections. 

During my August 2009 visit, I specifically observed to Burmese 

Government officials that at a time when Aung San Suu Kyi was 

still under house arrest, in order for elections in Burma to be perceived as credible, she and her party should be offered the opportunity to participate fully and openly in the process. Her release in 

November 2010, the government’s compromise on the political 

party laws, and Aung San Suu Kyi’s decision to participate in the 

April parliamentary bielection of this year demonstrates the political reconciliation taking place within that country. 

Over the past year, many people across the world have followed 

Aung San Suu Kyi’s dramatic transformation from a prisoner 

under house arrest, to a political candidate, and now to Member of 

Parliament. As an elected official in the national legislative body, 

she’s now in a position to work within the government to formally 

affect the reconciliation process. 

In the bielection, the NLD won 43 out of 45 seats, making it the 

largest opposition party in the Parliament, and placing it in a position to advance policies that support democratic transition. 

While much needs to be done to solidify this transition, the combined efforts of President Thein Sein and MP Aung San Suu Kyi 

have moved the country forward toward promised democracy. I 

respect them both for their courage, and for their commitment to 

their country, and also for their foresight in accomplishing political 

reforms ahead of economic reforms. They have led the country on 

a different path than many of their neighbors in the region, and 

we all hope they remain successful in those efforts. 

And I think a couple of comparisons are useful given the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. First, within China, democratic activists 

and ethnic minorities, such as Tibetans or Uighurs face the threats 

of constant surveillance, detention, and repression. The State 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

407

Department estimates in its ‘‘Country Reports’’ of 2011, ‘‘Tens of 

thousands of political prisoners remain incarcerated, some in prisons, others in re-education camps or administrative detention.’’ Notably, China’s Nobel Peace Prize winner, as opposed to Aung San 

Suu Kyi, Liu Xiaobo, remains incarcerated. 

China has no free elections. Its leadership transition this year 

will not be influenced by popular vote. The Freedom House ‘‘Freedom in the World Report’’ for 2012 notes that China is ‘‘trending 

downward in its protection of political freedoms and civil liberties.’’ 

In the 2012 ‘‘Freedom of the Press Report,’’ North Korea is the only 

country ranked below China for its lack of freedoms of the press. 

Yet no one is advocating at this time that we impose economic 

sanctions on China. 

The United States lifted its trade embargo against China 41 

years ago. It continues to promote U.S. investment there. Last 

year, our trade totaled $530 billion, making China our secondlargest trading partner. 

Second, consider Vietnam, with which I have had a continuous 

relationship since I was a 23-year-old Marine serving there during 

the war, and over the past 21 years have participated regularly 

and continuously in rebuilding the relations between our two 

countries. 

The United States lifted its trade embargo in Vietnam in 1994. Our total trade has grown from $6.9 million in 1993 to $21 billion 

last year. Vietnam has never had popular elections for its leaders 

or allowed opposition parties. Concerns about censorship of the 

media, restrictions on the freedom of religion, or detention of political prisoners have not prompted the United States to restrict our 

trade with Vietnam. In fact, our policy has been based on the 

premise that increased trade will promote rule of law, transparency, and political freedom. Otherwise, we would not be negotiating a significant trade agreement with Vietnam at this moment, 

the Trans-Pacific Partnership. 

This is not to single out China or Vietnam for opprobrium. On 

the contrary, it is simply to point out the need for consistency in 

the logic of those who argue for overly punitive restrictions as we 

develop our relations with Burma. 

Let us not forget that this country has had two peaceful national 

elections within the last year, released hundreds of political prisoners, negotiated cease-fire agreements with 12 ethnic minority 

groups, reduced censorship of the media, and supported the development of an effective political opposition. This is a country whose 

political system remains a challenge, but where positive conduct 

calls for reciprocal gestures. 

We should never take our concerns about political freedoms or 

individual rights off the table. We should make these concerns central to our engagement with all countries, including with Burma, 

as I mentioned. But we should also be promoting economic progress 

to sustain the political reforms that have taken place. It is time to 

make our policies internationally consistent with our principles. 

As was evident during my visit to Burma in April of this year, 

there is general enthusiasm in the country, but there is also some 

skepticism inside Burma that Burma and the United States will be 

able to pull this thing off. People need to see and believe that the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

408

government is working for them and that our government is sincerely dedicated to seeing further change. 

I believe that President Thein Sein and other government leaders are sincere in their efforts, but they need our support in building a better foundation for the government and economy to deliver 

results to their people. For this reason, it is ever more important 

that our sanctions policies not inhibit this development. In fact, we 

should take pains to incentivize this development. 

Initial steps have been taken. In February, the United States 

granted a partial waiver to allow international financial institutions to conduct assessment missions in Burma. On April 17, the 

Treasury Department issued a general license for educational and 

nonprofit institutions to support development and humanitarian 

projects. On May 17, Secretary Clinton announced that the ban on 

U.S. investments and export of financial services would be suspended, a move that has the potential to jump-start United States 

private sector engagement. However, more than 1 month later, the 

Treasury Department has not issued a general license for companies to begin this process. 

In April before this subcommittee, OFAC Director Adam Szubin 

testified that the main categories of sanctions imposed by statute 

or Executive order can be lifted by the President via licenses, 

rescission of Executive orders, or issuance of waivers on national 

security. Further, he noted that Executive decisions to remove 

sanctions can still target and blacklist the assets or activities of 

people which they refer to as ‘‘bad actors’’ from their previous military junta so that they will not benefit from economic relations 

with the United States. 

I believe this is the right approach to take. I have supported the 

steps taken thus far, but I believe more needs to be done. Time is 

of the essence here. If we do not act proactively and soon, we will 

lose a critical window of opportunity to influence development of 

financial governance inside Burma. It is critical to implement the 

decisions that have been announced and to continue to ease additional sanctions, such as the ban on imports. 

Ambassador Mitchell, as the special representative and policy 

coordinator for Burma, has been well situated to observe and influence American policy across agencies during this period of transition. And now if confirmed, he will have a unique opportunity to 

strongly impact this new approach and to identify new means to 

incentivize and aid reform. I will look forward to hear your ideas 

and suggestions on this matter. 

And now I would like to recognize Senator Inhofe. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE,

U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA 

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think you are 

aware of it, but they may not be, that as chairman and ranking 

member of EPW, Barbara Boxer and I are in the middle of our 

final negotiations right now as we speak on the highway reauthorization bill. So I am going to have to leave to go to that. But this 

is very significant. There are some things that I am concerned 

about, and so I thank you for holding this hearing. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

409

This is kind of historic. This is the first time we will be sending 

an ambassador there in, what, 20 years, I guess, since 1992. So I 

want to welcome Ambassador Mitchell, and I understand that we 

are going to be able to talk in my office tomorrow. We can elaborate a little bit more on this subject. 

But as you know, I am very interested in the ability of our American oil and gas industry to compete for business in Burma as soon 

as possible. Unfortunately, that has not yet happened, and in the 

meantime, European Union oil and gas companies have been there 

since the suspension of the EU sanctions against Burma last April. 

And, of course, China and Russia are already there. 

Senator Webb and I wrote a letter on May 4, 2012, to Secretary 

Clinton, which stated that it would be a strategic mistake to 

exclude the U.S. petroleum industry in the suspension of U.S. sanctions in Burma. Her response on May 23 was encouraging, I 

thought anyway, when she wrote that certain sanctions would 

remain, but there was no mention that the American oil and gas 

firms would be excluded. 

I have heard rumors, however, that there is an intent by this administration to ‘‘carve out’’ the American petroleum industry from 

doing business in Burma by slow rolling and issuing of licenses to 

this industry by the U.S. Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control. 

I reiterate that this or any other carve-out strategy would be a 

strategic mistake. I believe that U.S. companies, including the oil 

and gas companies, can play a positive role in the effort by demonstrating high standards and responsible business conduct and 

transparency, including the respect for human rights in Burma. 

And I am sure that maybe you can, during your opening statement, could tell me whether or not you agree. And I hope so because this is a direct quote from the State Department, response 

to my question for the record from our hearing on Burma back on 

April the 26th. And I could not be more in agreement. 

So I thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding this nomination. I look forward to hearing your opening statement here, but as 

I say, since we are in what I consider to be a very significant 

breakthrough with the highway reauthorization bill, I will have to 

be leaving early. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe. 

Ambassador Mitchell, welcome. Just for the record, Ambassador 

Mitchell currently serves a special representative and policy coordinator for Burma with the rank of Ambassador. 

Prior to this appointment, he served as a Principal Deputy 

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security 

Affairs. He also worked as a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Special Assistant in the Department of Defense, a senior program officer at the National Democratic Institute. 

Ambassador Mitchell has a master’s degree from the Fletcher 

School of Law and Diplomacy, and a bachelor’s degree from the 

University of Virginia. 

And I understand your wife is here with you today. We would 

like to welcome her. 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Yes, my wife is right here. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

410

Senator WEBB. And appreciate both of your dedication to public 

service. 

And, Ambassador, welcome, and the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DEREK J. MITCHELL, OF CONNECTICUT, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE UNION OF BURMA 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, 

Senator Inhofe, members of the committee. I am honored to appear 

before you today as the President’s nominee to serve as the U.S. 

Ambassador to Burma, the first in more than two decades. 

I am humbled by the confidence that President Obama and 

Secretary of State Clinton have shown in me with this nomination. 

Mr. Chairman, I know you take a particularly keen personal interest in the situation in Burma, as you have discussed, and I commend all you have done during your tenure to advance the relationship between our two countries. 

Mr. Chairman, it was almost exactly a year ago that I sat before 

you and this committee as the President’s nominee to serve as the 

first special representative and policy coordinator for Burma. I 

noted in my testimony then the many challenges facing Burma and 

our bilateral relationship. As you said, no one would have thought 

possible the remarkable developments that have occurred since 

then. Ongoing reform efforts have created an opening for increased 

engagement between our two countries, and instill the sense of 

hope among millions inside and outside Burma who have worked 

and sacrificed so much for so long for real change. 

During my time as special representative, I traveled to the country many times and was able to have open and candid conversations with the government in Naypyitaw and representatives from 

all sectors of society. I was able to discuss a full range of perspectives on the complexity and diversity of the country, and I thank 

these interlocutors for their hospitality and their candor. 

I have traveled throughout East Asia and Europe to share ideas 

and coordinate policy approaches. This included meetings with the 

many men and women in Thailand who have worked tirelessly 

along the border with Burma for decades to provide the humanitarian needs of Burmese migrants and refugees. With so much 

attention focused on developments inside Burma, we should not 

forget the work of these committed individuals. 

I have, of course, spent many hours with Daw Aung San Suu 

Kyi. As we all know, Daw Suu Kyi remains a uniquely iconic figure 

inside and outside Burma. Upon helping bring her country to this 

point, she has now entered the field as an elected politician to help 

guide its next steps toward a secure, democratic, just, and prosperous future. If confirmed, I look forward to many more opportunities for discussions with her about her country and about how the 

United States can assist its progress going forward. 

Perhaps the most important development of the past year, again, 

as you suggested, Mr. Chairman, in fact has been the partnership 

between Daw Suu Kyi and President Thein Sein. President Thein 

Sein has proved to be a remarkable figure. We should never forget 

to recognize his extraordinary vision and leadership and the many 

reformist steps he and his partners in government have taken over 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

411

the past year, steps that have clearly reflected the aspirations, 

indeed sacrifices, of millions of brave Burmese over many years. 

At the same time, we have no illusions about the challenges that 

lie ahead. As Secretary Clinton has observed, reform is not irreversible, and continued democratic change is not inevitable. We 

remain deeply concerned about the continued detention of hundreds of political prisoners and conditions placed on those previously released, lack of the rule of law, and the constitutional role 

of the military in the nation’s affairs. 

Human rights abuses, including military impunity, continue, particularly in ethnic minority areas. Recent sectarian violence in 

Rakhine State demonstrates the divisiveness in Burma cultivated 

over many decades, if not centuries, that will need to be overcome 

to realize lasting peace and national reconciliation in the country. 

We have been quite consistent and direct in public and private 

about our continuing concerns about the lack of transparency in 

Burma’s military relationship with North Korea, and specifically 

that the government must adhere to its obligations under relevant 

U.N. Security Council resolutions and its other international nonproliferation obligations. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to make this issue of highest priority in my conversations 

with the government and be clear that our bilateral relationship 

can never be fully normalized until we are fully satisfied that any 

illicit ties to North Korea have ended once and for all. 

As the Burmese Government has taken steps over the past year, 

so, too, has the United States in an action-for-action approach. 

Each action we have taken in recent months has had as its purpose 

to benefit the Burmese people and strengthen reform and reformers within the system. This engagement should continue and 

expand. If confirmed, I will do my part in the field to support a 

principled approach that effectively marries our values with our 

broader national interests. 

Most recently, as you know, Mr. Chairman, Secretary Clinton 

announced a broad easing of restrictions on new investment and 

the exportation of U.S. financial services to Burma. As she stated 

in May, ‘‘We look forward to working with the business sector as 

a new partner in our principled engagement approach.’’ If confirmed, I will promote U.S. business interests in Burma while ensuring companies understand the complex environment in which 

they will be engaging, and the important role they can play in promoting American values and interests in the country. 

It is clear to me from my discussions inside the country that the 

Burmese people admire U.S. products, standards, and principles. 

Staying true to them promises to serve both our public and private 

interests going forward. And I think that would address Senator 

Inhofe’s questions about the carve outs and such. She had talked 

about a general license that hits all sectors equally, no carve outs 

according to sector. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, as the special representative and policy coordinator for Burma, I made it a priority 

to provide regular briefings and consultations on Capitol Hill. I also 

urged the Burmese Government to open its doors to congressional 

visitors so they may see the changes on the ground for themselves. 

I believe the administration and Congress have formed an effective, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

412

bipartisan partnership on Burma policy. It is critical to maintain 

this partnership going forward. Should I be confirmed, I will make 

every effort to continue to reach out to interested members and 

staffs, and hope to see you all regularly on our doorstep in 

Rangoon. 

Let me conclude by taking this opportunity to extend my utmost 

appreciation to my many partners within the executive branch with 

whom I have worked over the past year as special representative, 

including at USAID, Treasury, Commerce, DOD, the White House, 

and, of course, at State. 

In particular, I want to commend the excellent career officers, 

interagency representatives, and locally engaged staff members at 

our Embassy in Rangoon whom I have gotten to know during my 

visits. This team has proved again and again to me that we have 

people of the highest quality in Rangoon and in the Department. 

They have responded superbly to a rapidly changing tempo of operations in the field, and have done so with professionalism and skill. 

If confirmed, I will make it a priority to ensure they have the tools 

and the direction necessary to continue serving our interests in 

Burma in an exemplary fashion and be proud of the work they do 

for our country every day. 

Thank you for considering my nomination. I will look forward to 

your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Mitchell follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DEREK MITCHELL

Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you 

today as the President’s nominee to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Burma, the 

first in more than two decades. I am humbled by the confidence that President 

Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have shown in me with this nomination. Mr. 

Chairman, I know you take a particularly keen personal interest in the situation 

in Burma, and I commend all you have done during your tenure to advance the relationship between our two countries. 

It was almost exactly a year ago that I sat before you and this committee as the 

President’s nominee to serve as the first Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma. I noted in my testimony then the many challenges facing Burma 

and our bilateral relationship. No one would have thought possible the remarkable 

developments that have occurred since a year ago. Ongoing reform efforts have created an opening for increased engagement between our two countries, and instilled 

a sense of hope among millions inside and outside Burma who have worked and sacrificed so much for so long for real change. 

During my time as the Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma, 

I traveled to the country many times. The government in Naypyitaw provided excellent hospitality and demonstrated a willingness to have open and candid discussions 

with me on each occasion. I also want to thank the many other interlocutors—political party officials, civil society representatives, ethnic minority and religious leaders, former political prisoners, business executives, international diplomats and nongovernmental representatives, and many local citizens—for opening their doors to 

me to discuss a full range of perspectives on the complexity and diversity of Burma. 

I have also traveled throughout East Asia and Europe to share ideas and coordinate policy approaches. This included meetings with the many men and women in 

Thailand who have worked tirelessly along the border with Burma for decades to 

provide for the humanitarian needs of Burmese migrants and refugees. With so 

much attention focused on developments inside Burma, we should not forget the 

work of these committed individuals who help those in need. I am confident that 

these and many other committed individuals will join ongoing efforts inside the 

country when conditions are right. 

And of course I have spent many hours with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. As we all 

know, Daw Suu Kyi remains a uniquely iconic figure inside and outside Burma. 

Upon helping bring her country to this point, she has now entered the field as an 

elected politician to help guide its next steps toward a secure, democratic, just, and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

413

prosperous future. I look forward to many more opportunities for discussions with 

her about her country and about how the United States can assist its progress going 

forward. 

Perhaps the most important development of the past year, however, has been the 

partnership forged between Daw Suu Kyi and President Thein Sein. President 

Thein Sein has proven to be a remarkable figure. We should never forget to recognize his extraordinary vision and leadership, and for the many reformist steps he 

and his partners in government have taken over the past year. These actions have 

clearly reflected the aspirations, indeed sacrifices, of millions of brave Burmese. 

At the same time, we have no illusions about the challenges that lie ahead. As 

Secretary Clinton has observed, reform is not irreversible, and continued democratic 

change is not inevitable. We remain deeply concerned about the continued detention 

of hundreds of political prisoners and conditions placed on those previously released. 

The rule of law requires an independent and effective judiciary. The constitutional 

role of the military in the nation’s affairs is inconsistent with traditional democratic 

principles of civil-military relations. 

Human rights abuses, including military impunity, continue, particularly in ethnic minority areas. Although there may be some hope for an end to the violence and 

establishment of serious dialogue on fundamental political issues, mutual mistrust 

between the government and ethnic minority groups runs deep and a long road lies 

ahead. Recent sectarian violence in Rakhine State demonstrates the divisiveness in 

Burma cultivated over many decades, if not centuries, that will need to be overcome 

to realize lasting peace and national reconciliation in the country. 

We have been quite consistent and direct in public and private about our continuing concerns about the lack of transparency in Burma’s military relationship 

with North Korea, and specifically that the government must adhere to its obligations under relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions and its other 

international nonproliferation obligations. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue to make this issue of highest priority in my conversations with the government, and be clear that our bilateral relationship can never be fully normalized 

until we are fully satisfied that any illicit ties to North Korea have ended once and 

for all. 

As the Burmese Government has taken steps over the past year, so too has the 

United States in an action-for-action approach. Each action we have taken in recent 

months has had as its purpose to benefit the Burmese people and strengthen reform 

and reformers within the system. 

Most recently, Secretary Clinton announced a broad easing of restrictions on new 

investment and the exportation of U.S. financial services to Burma. As she stated 

in May, we look forward to working with the business sector as a new partner in 

our principled engagement approach. If confirmed, I will promote U.S. business interests in Burma while ensuring companies understand the complex environment in 

which they will be engaging and the important role they can play in promoting 

American values and interests in the country. It is clear to me from my discussions 

inside the country that the Burmese people admire U.S. products, standards, and 

principles; staying true to them promises to serve both our public and private interests going forward. 

As the Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma, I made it a priority to provide regular briefings and consultations with Capitol Hill. I also urged 

the Burmese Government to open its doors to congressional visitors so they may see 

the changes on the ground for themselves. I believe the administration and Congress have formed an effective, bipartisan partnership on Burma policy. It is critical 

to maintain this partnership going forward. Should I be confirmed, I will make 

every effort to continue to reach out to interested Members and staffs, and hope to 

see you all regularly on our doorstep in Rangoon. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, let me conclude by taking this opportunity to extend my utmost appreciation to my many partners within the executive 

branch with whom I have worked over the past year as Special Representative—

including at USAID, Treasury, Commerce, DOD, the White House, and State. In 

particular, I want to commend the excellent career officers, interagency representatives, and locally employed staff members of our Embassy in Rangoon whom I have 

gotten to know during my visits. This team has proved again and again to me that 

we have people of the highest quality in Rangoon. They have responded superbly 

to a rapidly changing tempo of operations in the field, and have done so with professionalism and skill. If confirmed, I will make it my priority to ensure they have the 

tools and direction necessary to continue serving our interests in Burma in an exemplary fashion and be proud of the work they do for our country every day.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

414

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Ambassador Mitchell. And 

since I know Senator Inhofe has to leave fairly quickly, let me 

begin with a question that I know that Senator Inhofe also will 

want to address. And then I will get into the more general policy 

issues that I would like to hear from you about. 

In a recent speech before the ILO, Aung San Suu Kyi stated, and 

I am going to quote, that ‘‘The Myanmar Government needs to 

apply internationally recognized standards, such as the ‘IMF Code 

of Good Practices on Fiscal Transparency.’ Other countries could 

help by not allowing their companies to partner with the MOGE, 

the state-owned oil company, unless it signed up to such codes.’’

This raises a number of questions, first, about standardization of 

policy from the United States, and, second, about officials of a foreign government basically telling us where we should allow our 

economic interests to apply once we lift sanctions. 

It is my understanding that the United States does not require 

countries to endorse this code or other standards as a prerequisite 

for U.S. investment. In fact, I asked my staff, you know, whether 

there were other countries that did not adhere to this code, and 

among them are China, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, and 

a number of other countries. So it does not seem like this is a 

standard United States policy as a prerequisite. 

And then, second, there is a concern about our being told from 

the outside where we should allow our companies to invest, and 

that goes directly to Senator Inhofe’s question. 

So could you clarify this matter from your understanding of her 

statement and what our policy should be? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The issue of 

MOGE is one that we are looking very carefully at. We have concerns about this enterprise and its transparency and the corruption 

that is associated with it through reports that we have. And, of 

course, there is corruption and lack of transparency throughout the 

economy, the current economy in Burma. There are particularly 

concerns here with connections to the military and such. 

We obviously are going to be careful, and we should be careful, 

as we stated, that however we engage, that we do so with the highest standards of transparency, that we are contributing to reform 

inside the country, that we are contributing to the highest values, 

and that we model the type of behavior that we like to see broadly 

by U.S. companies and by others. 

This particular issue, when it comes to the general licenses that 

are being debated and discussed, obviously it is on the agenda and 

being looked at. There are no decisions made on this particular 

question. Clearly, we want to see others raising their level to the 

standards that not just the American companies so that we are on 

a level playing field. And as we looked at the general license, we 

understand the balance between competitiveness and the standards 

that we want to set. 

So this is an ongoing question. There is nothing I can say here 

definitively on this because it is an ongoing internal discussion—

interagency discussion that applies to the general license that will 

come out. 

But, as I said before, we are not looking to exclude any sectors 

from this, but we are trying to make the balance very carefully. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

415

Senator WEBB. Would you agree that standards that are applied 

should be the same standards that the United States applies in 

other countries? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Yes, absolutely. And I know under DoddFrank and under Cardin-Lugar as well, there are certain standards 

there that Dodd and Lugar is law, and we want to act consistent 

with that, and do not want to—we think that we are looking to do 

is complementary with those types of standards. 

We are encouraged, I should also say—I mean, I want to add 

here that the Burmese Government has also taken steps itself in 

terms of transparency and talked about signing up for the EITI, 

the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative. There is going to 

be a delegation coming in at the end of the July, and there have 

been public statements saying they are interested in more transparency in the extractive industries, including oil and gas. 

It is very encouraging. I think it is our role to encourage that, 

to continue to educate. And I see things moving in the right direction. And Aung San Suu Kyi could certainly play a role inside the 

country in doing that so that, as you say, everyone has a level playing field. 

But I would never dismiss what she says from our thinking. I 

mean, she is obviously a unique figure representing the people in 

the country, and she represents the values that we care about. So 

we will make our own decisions, but we take her thoughts on this 

as an ongoing conversation that we will have with her. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. I would—let me just summarize my—

what I think is my agreement with you here. The United States 

sets the standards of transparency of our own business environment. You know, I took American companies into Vietnam for 21⁄2

years in the mid-1990s. We had the laws that we have to obey. And 

it is a little delicate to say that an official from any foreign government should be telling us what sectors that we should invest in 

and not invest in. 

And, Senator Inhofe, I know you have a question here. 

Senator INHOFE. I appreciate that very much. Let me—first of 

all, Senator Webb and I signed a letter back on May 4. I would like 

to have that part of the record. 

Senator WEBB. Without objection, it will be entered into the 

record at this point. 

[The letter referred to follows:]

U.S. SENATE, 

Washington, DC, May 4, 2012. 

Hon. HILLARY CLINTON, 

Secretary of State, U.S. Department of State, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR SECRETARY CLINTON: We write you to express our strong belief that it is 

imperative for the United States to act in a clear, proactive manner to facilitate reforms in Burma through the lifting of economic sanctions. This recommendation is 

based on years of interaction with the countries of East Asia, including visits to the 

region and to Burma and meetings with its top leadership, as well as the testimony 

received at the East Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee hearing of April 26, 

2012, regarding ‘‘U.S. Policy on Burma.’’

We are mindful that the European Union (EU) announced on April 23, 2012, that 

it is suspending all sanctions against Burma, except for an arms embargo. Other 

countries that share our political philosophy, including Japan, have enacted similar 

measures. The countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) 

have embraced recent political reforms in the country and are unanimously in favor 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

416

of immediate changes in economic policies. In short, the United States alone is left 

holding the most restrictive sanctions on Burma, banning visas, imports, exports, 

financial services, foreign assistance, and assistance by international financial institutions. 

In response to questions raised at the hearing last week, Office of Foreign Assets 

Control Director Adam Szubin testified that the main categories of sanctions imposed by statute or executive order can be lifted by the President via licenses, rescission of executive orders, or issuance of waivers on national security. Further, he 

noted that executive decisions to remove sanctions can still target and blacklist the 

assets or activities of specific ‘‘bad actors’’ from the previous military junta so that 

they will not benefit from economic relations with the United States. These decisions do not require legislation; importantly, they can also be reversed, should the 

situation in Burma deteriorate. 

We understand that as part of its review of sanctions policy, the Administration 

is considering lifting sanctions sector by sector, with the possibility that sanctions 

may be retained on individual industries such as petroleum. We believe that this 

would be a strategic mistake. The United States should not be picking winners and 

losers in our economic engagement abroad, but rather should be encouraging the 

business community as a whole to take on the risk of investing in human development in Burma. Their involvement can foster an open, transparent business environment that supports the rule of law and a level playing field for foreign investment. 

Progress in Burma toward the goals we all share—greater freedom and prosperity 

for the people of Burma—is ultimately tied to the sanctions that are in place. Unlike 

some other countries in the region, most notably China and Vietnam, Burma’s new 

leadership has moved forward with political change ahead of economic change. It 

is important to note that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi herself, speaking as an elected 

representative of the government of Burma, publicly announced her support for the 

EU’s decision to suspend sanctions in response to democratic reforms in the country. 

The process of reform in Burma is still far from complete, but the positive steps that 

have been taken should be met with a positive response from our own government. 

It is also important to note that the lifting of sanctions on Burma does not equal 

the establishment of full trading relations. The U.S. trade embargo with China was 

lifted 41 years ago, but permanent normal trade relations were granted only 12 

years ago and continue despite ongoing concerns about the detention of political 

prisoners, repression of religious activity and lack of representative government. 

Burma has a long way to go, but its leaders—notably President Thein Sein and 

Aung San Suu Kyi—should be acknowledged for their concrete efforts to take the 

country in a different direction. 

At this critical moment, it is imperative that our policy toward Burma be forward 

thinking, providing incentives for further reforms and building the capacity of reformers in the government to push for additional change. We urge the Administration to take action under its own authority, and seize this opportunity to support 

the Burmese people in their efforts to form an open, democratic government that 

respects and protects the rights of all. 

Sincerely, 

JIM WEBB, 

United States Senator. 

JAMES M. INHOFE, 

United States Senator.

Senator INHOFE. All right. We will have a chance to talk about 

this tomorrow, but I want to get three questions just in the record 

here and get your responses. It will be very brief. 

You talked a little bit about the state-owned oil company there, 

and I have heard some things concerning their lack of transparency. And I would only say, do you not think that our involvement, the United States, in oil and gas there could add transparency to the system? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. I would say, Senator, yes. I think our

engagement with them, again, through EITI and other methods 

can help model the type of behavior and help with this. 

Senator INHOFE. I appreciate that. Now there is no one who has 

more of an intimate knowledge of Burma than you do and the people. And I would only say that if the United States Government 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

417

decided not to allow our oil and gas companies to operate there, 

would those resources go undeveloped, or would they—the companies, some other countries take up that slack? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Well, I think it has been demonstrated 

from the past the countries will likely take up the slack. But there 

may be some areas where the United States is uniquely able to 

exploit. But clearly there are other countries that are ready to pick 

up the slack. 

Senator INHOFE. OK, I appreciate that. And last, do you agree 

that the U.S. oil and gas companies are more transparent and generally operate in a more free market manner than Chinese, Russian, and many other nationally owned oil companies? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Well, Senator, I am not an expert on 

that. I believe American companies overall exhibit higher standards than other countries. 

Senator INHOFE. I think that is right, and that is good enough. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Inhofe. And let 

me reclaim my time and ask a couple of questions before we go to 

Senator Rubio. 

As you recall, in my opening statement I mentioned the comparison with political and economic situations in China and Vietnam. 

And, again, not as a suggestion that we impose sanctions on those 

two countries, but to try to put what we are doing here into some 

sort of consistent standard. 

I actually held a hearing a couple of years ago on the—what I 

was calling the situational ethics in American foreign policy where 

we tend to focus on different countries in different ways, depending 

on power relationships and economic relationships and where we 

really need to have a common standard. 

And I think we have something in the recent developments in 

Burma that is fairly unique, and that is that a governmental system has made a political decision to liberalize, to take a great risk 

before the economic systems are liberalized, before sanctions are 

raised. And as I mentioned, in China we lifted sanctions 41 years 

ago. We have proceeded under the hope and the assumption that 

liberalized economy might encourage a liberalized political system. 

I think the results in that so far are pretty mixed. 

As I mentioned to you, Nobel Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, if I am 

saying his name right, is still incarcerated while, you know, we 

have had a positive journey with Aung San Suu Kyi. China has no 

free elections. Freedom House report for 2012 notes that China is 

trending down in terms of its political freedoms and civil liberties. 

If you look at a listing of the 40 countries in East Asia and the 

Pacific, China is above only North Korea and actually tied with 

Burma in terms of media openness. And yet we are not suggesting, 

and I am not suggesting, that we should alter our economic policies. The same principle applies with the comments that I made 

about Vietnam. 

So what are we doing here that would be inconsistent with what 

we are doing in China, places like China and Vietnam, and what 

is the rationale? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Well, it is hard for me in this position to 

comment on broader policy with Asia. It is not my role, I suppose. 

But I think you take each context individually. I think the Burma 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

418

context has been one where they had a closed system for a long 

time. They had a unique set of human rights challenges over a consistent period of time, and there are individuals like Aung San Suu 

Kyi there who have served as a beacon of change, and have represented a certain type of leadership inside the country. 

And I think what we tried to do in Burma, we will have a debate 

on what succeeded and what did not. But I think we tried to have 

that system changed through pressure, and then over time through 

more engagement. I think the combination of the two has worked. 

And I think, as I suggested in my testimony, and I think you also 

suggested, this is not irreversible, that we are only a year into this 

or several—you know, about a year into this. And we need to support the reformers, but also I think be very careful about rushing 

forward too fast. But at the same time, I think we are doing 

remarkable things and changing remarkably quickly ourselves and 

our policy. 

So I think the path that we are on has proven to have been constructive, have served our interests, served our goals, served our 

values. And I do not see us moving too fast or too slow. I think it 

is just right, and I think we can—this is an ongoing issue. And I 

think if the Burmese continue, time will tell. If Thein Sein and his 

partners continue on this path and show more progress, then we 

will be looking at the infrastructure that is there of sanctions, regulations, and such over time. 

Senator WEBB. Well, let me just respond with the personal view 

that I do not think that there has been any greater challenge in 

this area in my adult life than Vietnam. Burma has a situation 

where when we examine the inequities that occurred, we have the 

ability to personalize them because of Aung San Suu Kyi’s unique 

situation. But look at the aftermath of the Vietnam war, with more 

than a million Vietnamese jumping into the sea, including my 

wife’s family, by the way. A Stalinist state was clearly taking over 

that was subsidized by the Soviet Union. A tremendous division 

inside our own country that had to be overcome before we began 

to repair relations. 

I was one of those—I think as you and I have discussed before—

I was one of those who was very opposed to lifting the trade embargo against Vietnam until the mid-1990s after Japan lifted their 

trade embargo. And just kind of similar to what Senator Inhofe 

just said, after Japan lifted their trade embargo toward Vietnam, 

the sensibility of keeping one just lost its place. And the idea was 

for us to move in in a more proactive way, and I think it has had 

enormously positive results. 

And there is a moment in time here, and I totally agree with you 

that we are on unchartered ground, but we have seen clear gestures from President Thein Sein and the people he is trying to 

work with, not just simply in terms of opening up trade relations, 

but in attempting to learn more about democratic systems from 

which they were basically firewalled for 20 years. 

So I hope we are going to approach this issue with a sense of 

being proactive, of incentivizing the positive conduct so that we do 

not lose this moment here and then have people sitting around and 

saying, well, see, we said this was not real. I mean, this very well 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

419

could be a great change, and to the benefit of our country, their 

country, and also the region. 

And let me ask you your thoughts in terms of the motivation of 

the present government. Do you see the main momentum in this 

present government as pro-democracy, pro-change? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, I think you have to pick 

and choose within the government. I think there is—the people I 

meet with, many of them seem quite committed to real change. The 

Lower House Speaker of the Parliament, Thura Shwe Mann, has 

been remarkable in his desire, for instance, to have exchanges with 

the Congress here. And he has gone around to India, and Britain, 

and, I think, Germany, and sought to learn about legislative processes and how to build an institution—a parliamentary institution. 

He has empowered that institution remarkably, more than we ever 

would have expected a year ago. 

I think you have, again, the President himself and some other 

partners and certain ministries that are very much committed to 

a very progressive agenda. Where it leads we do not know. We just 

do not know. We do not know how long this leadership will last. 

We do not know. As you say, expectations are high. We do not 

know if they can fulfill their remarkable challenge or fulfill the 

goals given the remarkable challenges they face. 

I completely agree with you, and this administration completely 

agrees with you, that this is a window of opportunity. And Aung 

San Suu Kyi, people in the opposition, former political prisoners 

have been released. They all say we must go in and support this 

government and Thein Sein to try to keep reform going. There is 

no question about that. I think we have taken those steps to 

empower the reformers, to help the people of Burma to try to institutionalize the change as best as possible. 

But as long as the constitution is as it is, which I mentioned in 

my opening testimony, the military has a unique role to play, 

which is not consistent with democratic values. The civil-military 

relationship is not consistent with what you want to see in a democracy. Until those fundamentals change, you do have the question of whether this can revert or whether the military or others 

associated with it can reverse what is going on. 

So we have to be careful, but I do not think there is any question 

through or rhetoric publicly or through our activities privately and 

otherwise that we are on the side of reform. We will partner with 

them. We will work with them on this, and I should say work with 

the international community, which is extremely important. It has 

a tremendous interest in helping Burma. We need to coordinate 

effectively so that we are doing it in the most productive way possible. And that has been my job, and that will continue to be my 

job if confirmed on the ground. 

Senator WEBB. Would you say that the opposition parties in 

Burma are legitimately now a part of the government? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. I do not know what legitimate would 

mean in this case. I mean, the elections in 2010 were not credible. 

There are political parties. I mean, they allowed the National 

League for Democracy to register, which is obviously a very positive move. There are some parties in some ethnic areas that were 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

420

not able to take part in even the most recent elections. In the most 

recent elections, just 7 percent of the legislature were up for grabs. 

So there is still much more that needs to be done on the democratic development side and the civil society side, and, again, to 

really embed this. The rule of law, the balance of power, the activity of civil society, all this needs to be ingrained. The right things 

are being done, the right words. But time will tell whether it really 

takes hold or not. 

Senator WEBB. Would you say there are legitimate opposition 

parties in China? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. In China? I think I can say pretty honestly, probably not, no. There are not. 

Senator WEBB. Well, we have something to build on, which is 

really the point I am trying to make. And I hope we do not lose 

this moment. 

Senator Rubio. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ambassador Mitchell, 

welcome and thank you for your service to our country. I want to 

build on the topic you touched upon. 

The length between economic openings and political openings are 

two separate things sometimes. And I think it is important to draw 

that distinction because I think where we can make the biggest influence, not just in Burma, but in all countries around the world, 

is toward this direction of a political opening. Ultimately it is the 

right of people to choose any economic model they want. But it is 

the political opportunities that are most important. 

And I think is a unique opportunity for our country to use our 

sanctions as a leverage point, for lack of a better term, to help 

bring about or continue to encourage political openings. And so I 

wanted to walk through with you some of the challenges that we 

face in that regard with this specific case. 

The first is, I was struck by a statement that President Sein 

made back in 2011 where he said there were no political prisoners 

in Burma, that all prisoners have broken the law. I do not think 

that would be our position. 

What is the best estimate that we have in terms of the existence 

of political prisoners? Has that thought process changed? Where do 

we stand from his point of view and from our point of view on the 

existence of political prisoners and their prospects? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Thank you, Senator. The President last 

year did say the traditional view has been the traditional view of 

the government publicly. And he stayed consistent with that publicly. But to be honest, in private discussions with the government, 

they acknowledge, however they call them—prisoners of conscience—there are various words or phrases you can use. 

We were talking in the same terms, and we saw that when we 

engaged with them on lists, the types of people we were talking 

about that were in because of political moves and such. They took 

it very seriously. They continue—from what I understand, even 

today they take it very seriously. They have released more than 

500, up to 600 back last May, and then last October, and then this 

past January, including the most—the leaders of the movement. 

Senator RUBIO. So how many are still in? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

421

Ambassador MITCHELL. So we think there are still hundreds. 

There are different lists out there. Our list has several hundred in 

it, and we have been sharing this with the government. There is 

an exile group along the Thai border who has several hundred. I 

think theirs is in the 400 range. Aung San Suu Kyi has her list. 

And now we are all bringing this to the government. 

Senator RUBIO. When you say ‘‘released,’’ are they all back in the 

country? Were they exiled? What is the status of——

Ambassador MITCHELL. They are back in the country. They were 

not released unconditionally; they had for the most part, sign. But 

they are not released unconditionally in the sense that they were—

there is still a section 403, I think it is. But they are actually acting as if they are normal citizens in the country. They are not restrained from—in fact, some of them ran for office last April. They 

are forming civil society. 

Senator RUBIO. What are the conditions? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. I am sorry? 

Senator RUBIO. What are the conditions of their release? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Well, they just said—it was not unconditional in the sense of—if they have—if they commit another crime 

of some kind, they could be put back in prison and their sentence 

is resumed. That is on paper. We are watching that very closely. 

We are making it clear to them we want to see this unconditional. 

It is still a Damocles sword hanging over their head that is unacceptable that I think is a cloud that they feel psychologically. But 

in practice, we have been encouraged that they have not been 

constrained. 

The one area I would say that is different, though, they have not 

been able to travel as freely as I think we would like to see. 

Senator RUBIO. Within the country. 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Well, no, I think outside the country. 

Senator RUBIO. Oh, outside. 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Some have tried to, and there have been 

difficulties getting passports here and there. But we have been 

working on this issue. It could be as much an issue of internal 

bureaucracy because they are not a very efficient government yet. 

But we will work on these issues. It is not over and done with just 

because they are released. 

Senator RUBIO. The second issue, which is related to all of this, 

is just this terrible history of trafficking in persons that has existed 

there. Burma has historically been Tier 3 ranking. I think they 

have been upgraded to a Tier 2. I know the President last year—

our President—suspended, if I am not mistaken—I had it here in 

my notes—suspended or waived Section 110 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act with respect to Burma, meaning certain sanctions would not be applied. 

I am curious to know two things, because it sounds from what 

I have read that what they are doing on trafficking is all aspirational. What specifically have they done? And it is not just trafficking. They have this horrible problem with child soldiers being 

conscripted into the armed services. I want to talk about the armed 

services in a moment. 

But what exactly have they done that has been so promising to 

move them from a Tier 3 to a Tier 2 and lead to the waiving of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

422

these Trafficking Victims Protection Act sanctions. What have they 

done? What exactly has happened with regards to child soldiers 

and trafficking and persons that justify this? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. There is no question there continues to 

be severe challenges in the country on forced labor, and child soldiers, and the rest. And the Tier 2 Watch List does not mean that 

they are given a blank slate on this. What it says is they are moving in the right direction. 

I was with Ambassador Cdebaca, who is our Ambassador responsible for trafficking in persons. I was with him in Burma in January. And he went in with very low expectations of what he could 

get from the Burmese, and it was remarkable actually. He talked 

about this when he released the most recent report, how they had 

done a lot internally. They had books and tabs of what they were 

doing on this issue, particularly on trafficking outside the country, 

of trafficking in Thailand, trafficking into China. But they also 

were looking at some issues of forced labor internally. 

Since then, and this is what Ambassador Cdebaca had pressed 

very heavily. There was a law in place from 1907 when the British 

were there—it is colonial. It is the Village and Towns Act that gave 

the authority to the government to force labor, to requisition labor 

for official purposes. And what Ambassador Cdebaca said, you need 

to get rid of this law. This is official sanction for doing this. You 

need to get rid of the official sanction. And they did that. They did 

that in March. So it was actually a fairly substantial move where 

they took action to say it is not official policy. We are going to work 

on this. 

And what has been very encouraging, I can tell you privately, 

that they were very happy about being moved up to the Tier 2 

Watch List. They felt that was at least recognition that they were 

trying to deal with these issues. And they said next year we want 

to be off the list. How can we get off the list? So this is not done. 

Senator RUBIO. What was our answer? What did we tell them 

when they said that? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Oh, we said we will work with you on 

the types of things we need to see, including on forced labor, including on child soldiers, including accountability for what is going 

on. So we were going to—we will say you want to get off the list. 

Senator RUBIO. My time is running out. I had one more question, 

so I do not want to belabor this point. But I am very interested to 

know specifics of what they are doing, what they have done, and 

what we expect them to continue to do on this issue, because—and 

I am not accusing them of this. I am, quite frankly, not as aware, 

and that is why I am asking. But there are cosmetic things that 

people do to show, and then there are real things that they do on 

trafficking. 

My last concern, and I think it is a broader issue, is the military 

continues to be unaccountable to the civilian leadership. It seems 

to me from my reading—I have never visited there—that the military in particular has and many officers in the military have benefited greatly from the crony nature of the economy. 

Here is my concern, how big of an impediment in your observation is it to have this continued existence of this very powerful military not accountable to civilian leadership still be able to step in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

423

at any moment and stop this progress? And what are your general 

thoughts on where that is headed, and how much willingness there 

is from the civilian areas in government to deal with it. 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Well, as I said, it is imbedded in the constitution. As long as that is imbedded in the constitution, it raises 

questions about how far they are going to go for democratic reform. 

And they have said repeatedly privately and publicly we are committed to democracy and democratic change. But as long, as you 

suggest, that the military remains able to act with impunity and 

has a unique position in the affairs of the nation that is not democratic, then that raises questions. And I think that has been raised 

repeatedly as a concern, and we will continue to focus on that. 

Having said that, I think we need to bring the military in and 

continue to talk to them about how they see themselves playing in 

this road to reform. 

The final thing I will say on trafficking in persons, we can get 

Ambassador Cdebaca to come up and talk to you about his observations specifically on Burma, what he sees and what he is not seeing. I do not mean to whitewash. There are obviously a lot of concerns that remain, but it is just that they are making some 

progress, and we just took them out of a Tier 3 kind of closet and 

put them in a Tier 2 watch list so we can work more closely with 

them. 

Senator WEBB. Senator Rubio, before we leave you, or before you 

leave us, I would like to add on to what you just said about this 

TIP list. 

We have been working on this from our staff for 4 years now. 

And my strong view, and we have communicated to Secretary 

Clinton on more than one occasion, is that the entire process for 

developing these TIP lists is fundamentally flawed. What they do 

in their evaluations is they rank a country against itself year by 

year rather than compared to an international standard. And the 

benchmark that they use most frequently is the number of legal actions and the number of legal procedures that have been put into 

place in order to address the issue. 

And you have these unexplainable disparities country by country 

where you have advanced governmental systems, like Singapore 

and Japan or Tier 2 Watch Lists, and then last year we had Nigeria, which was Tier 1, because in 1 year they had increased the 

number of legal actions rather than, you know, the actual state of 

these trafficking issues inside their country. 

And we got literally a blast from the foreign ministry of Singapore about this when they were downgraded talking about how the 

United States had the audacity to give itself a Tier 1 with all of 

the trafficking in persons that goes on here with respect to immigration policies and these sorts of things. 

So I would welcome the opportunity to have a discussion and 

show you what we have done on this in terms of remedial legislation. I think it is really—countries around the world do not understand the numbers that are coming out of it. 

Ambassador, Senator Rubio mentioned another issue that I 

would like to get your clarifications on, and that is the numbers of 

prisoners and the release process, because from what we have been 

hearing is this present government has been attempting to address 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

424

these issues name by name. In other words, if they are given specific names, that they are doing for the most part a good job of 

trying to separate political prisoners from others who might have 

committed recognizable criminal offenses. 

And, in fact, yesterday I was speaking with my friend and yours, 

Thant Myint, who is just back from a visit in Bangkok. And he was 

saying to me—back in Bangkok from a visit inside Burma. And he 

was saying to me that this is a priority over the next 2 months for 

their government to try to review the lists as they are being furnished in an attempt to clear the slate. Is that your impression of 

what is going on? 

Ambassador MITCHELL. I have heard the same, and we are going 

to take advantage of that window to put our list forward and encourage them to take that step. I think it will be a very positive 

step. 

And I do think there are people in the government quite serious 

about it. Whether they call them political prisoners or common 

criminals, we do not care. We want these people out because they 

should not be incarcerated. 

Senator WEBB. You can legitimately in any country have someone who has committed acts that are not political acts and still be 

a political person who is incarcerated. 

Ambassador MITCHELL. That is right. There are different definitions that people have, but I think we will stand by our definition 

of what we consider a political prisoner and seek to get them 

released unconditionally. 

Senator WEBB. All right. I wish you the best. I am very grateful 

that we are going to have you, barring some unfortunate incident 

that I do not think is going to occur over the next 24 hours, I think 

we are going to be very grateful to have you serving as our Ambassador in this very unique and historic time. 

It is our intention to try to move this nomination before the end 

of the week. For that reason, I am asking any members of the subcommittee who wish to get you questions for the record to do so by 

close of business today, and appreciate your rapid turnaround so 

that we might request that your nomination be moved before the 

end of the week. 

Also we have statements from the Chamber of Commerce and 

the U.S. ASEAN Business Council that will be entered into the 

record at this time. 

And, Ambassador, we again appreciate your willingness to continue in public service. 

Ambassador MITCHELL. Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. This hearing is closed. 

[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF HON. DEREK MITCHELL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. What role, if any, can the United States play in Burma’s national reconciliation? In the wake of ongoing change within Burma, please describe the strategy being implemented by the United States to communicate with each of the ethnic 

groups and their respective militias, and/or encourage such an effort by the United 

Nations.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

425

Answer. Burma’s national reconciliation, which will address key political, economic, and cultural issues among the central government and ethnic groups, must 

be driven by the Burmese people themselves to be successful in the long term. Secretary Clinton, myself, and other U.S. Government officials have met with ethnic 

groups and their representatives in Burma, throughout the region, and in the 

United States. Our embassies in the region maintain regular contact with U.N. 

agencies, international NGOS, and ethnic groups along Burma’s borders and inside 

the country to gauge their concerns and seek current information on the ongoing 

political process and cease-fire negotiations. 

We also meet with Burmese Government officials and consistently convey at the 

highest levels that, while we understand the sensitivity of the national reconciliation questions, the United States stands ready to assist in effective and appropriate ways to establish a durable solution for peace. We also strongly encourage 

the Government of Burma to work cooperatively with ethnic groups to find peaceful, 

lasting solutions to their conflicts and, in the meantime, to negotiate cease-fire 

agreements by which all sides will abide. 

Additionally, in light of ongoing conflict and tensions in ethnic minority areas, including Kachin State and Rakhine State, we urge the government to allow unfettered humanitarian access to Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). We regularly contact U.N. offices and local and international NGOs operating in Burma to provide 

assistance to those most in need. In March 2012, we provided $1.3m to UNHCR to 

assist Kachin IDPs in the areas of protection, nonfood items, and shelter/camp management. We also collaborate closely with our international partners and the donor 

community to work with the Burmese Government and ethnic groups to encourage 

and strengthen the cease-fire negotiations and political dialogue.

Question. Have United States officials raised concern with North Korea regarding 

the country’s military and technological exports to Burma, and collaboration with 

the Burmese military? Are submarines among the exports from North Korea to 

Burma?

Answer. In our broader bilateral engagement with the North Koreans and with 

regional partners, we have consistently raised our concerns on proliferation activities. We also consistently raise with the Burmese Government at the highest levels 

our concerns over military ties with North Korea, and stressed the importance of 

full and transparent implementation of UNSCRs 1718 and 1874 which prohibit all 

purchases of military equipment and weapons from North Korea. We take all reports of military trade between the two countries very seriously. We would be happy 

to offer you a classified briefing to fully address any questions regarding military 

ties between Burma and North Korea.

Question. Have United States officials raised concerns with China regarding 

North Korea’s military and technological exports to Burma, and collaboration with 

the Burmese military? Have United States officials raised specific concerns to China 

regarding reports of transshipment of military-defense cargo to Burma from North 

Korea via China?

Answer. We regularly, and will continue to, address a broad range of proliferation 

issues, to include links to Burma, with our partners in the region, including China.

Question. Please provide a list of political prisoners (or combination of lists of prisoners), which the United States uses as a point of reference in discussions with the 

Government of Burma.

Answer. We have attached a current list of political prisoners. We consulted with 

key political parties and civil society organizations in Burma, including members 

who are former political prisoners and will continue to have ongoing conversations 

to ensure we have the most accurate and up-to-date information.

[EDITOR’S NOTE.—The list of political prisoners mentioned above 

was too voluminous to include in the printed hearing therefore it 

will be maintained in the permanent record of the committee.]

Question. When does the United States anticipate that IAEA officials and inspectors will travel to Burma?

Answer. We have regularly urged Burma to improve its cooperation with the 

IAEA, particularly in support of concluding an Additional Protocol (AP). Universalization of the AP was an important aspect of the 2010 NPT Review Conference 

Action Plan, which was adopted by consensus and with Burma’s support. In addition, the same commitment was made by the 10 ASEAN States at 2011 U.S.-

ASEAN’s Leaders Summit. While the Government of Burma has indicated a willingFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

426

ness to consider an AP, we have no indication that it has initiated the necessary 

consultations with the IAEA.

Question. How do you envision American institutions of higher learning contributing to the overall reform process within Burma?

Answer. American institutions of higher learning, as well as private foundations 

and other nongovernment entities, can effectively contribute to the overall process 

of reform in several ways. Many such institutions are already contributing. One way 

is to establish faculty exchanges to send American professors to Burma and bring 

Burmese professors to the United States in order to modernize and reinvigorate the 

Burmese system of higher learning. Another way is to promote leadership and management training for Burmese diplomats and government officials to develop their 

capacity to lead both in Burma and at the international level. Additionally, hospital 

to hospital exchanges or collaborations help ensure the availability of high-quality 

medical treatment for the people of Burma. 

The State Department has been encouraging American institutions to make their 

own fact-finding trips to Burma to assess opportunities to assist on higher learning 

activities. Many U.S. educational institutions are considering establishing campuses 

in Burma or partnering with Burmese educational institutions. We will work, along 

with our Embassy in Rangoon, to facilitate their efforts. We encourage these institutions to take into serious consideration the views of their Burmese counterparts 

who, for example, have identified a great demand for English Language Teaching.

Question. What are the benchmarks that when achieved, the United States will 

favor international financial institutions providing technical and financial assistance 

to the Government of Burma?

Answer. The administration has carefully calibrated its approach on international 

financial institutions (IFIs) under the ‘‘action for action’’ framework articulated by 

Secretary Clinton to encourage continued progress on economic and political reforms 

in Burma. The Secretary of State waived the portion of the Trafficking in Persons 

(TIP) sanctions that applied to IFI assistance, which remains operable until September 30, 2012. The TIP waiver gave U.S. Executive Directors (USEDs) at the IFIs 

limited flexibility to support those assessment missions and limited technical assistance to Burma that did not require a Board vote. Burma moved up this year in its 

TIP Ranking from Tier 3 to Tier 2 Watch List and will not be subject to TIP sanctions in 2013. 

However, USEDs are currently directed to vote ‘‘no’’ on IFI financial assistance 

to Burma, based on existing legislation, including several Burma-specific laws (section 570 of the Burma Freedom and Democracy Act and section 7044 (b) of the FY12 

Foreign Operations Appropriations Act) . The FY12 Appropriations Act contains no 

criteria for Burma to meet, nor does it provide waiver authority of any kind for 

these laws. 

We assess that the critical priorities for IFI engagement with Burma at this time 

include assessment, technical assistance, and capacity-building, but that conditions 

are not yet appropriate for IFI lending to Burma. IFI engagement in Burma, which 

Aung San Suu Kyi supports, can be a valuable tool of United States foreign policy, 

particularly in encouraging economic reform in Burma 

Other major shareholders are already beginning to discuss the preparation of multilateral development bank (MDB) country assistance strategies, and options for the 

clearance of Burma’s arrears to the MDBs and to certain bilateral creditors. 

Although the United States will vote ‘‘no’’ on any IFI operations that require a 

Board vote, the United States cannot unilaterally prevent the IFIs from engaging 

with Burma, and a strong international consensus is emerging in favor of deeper 

IFI engagement to cement the positive direction of economic reforms undertaken by 

President Thein Sein. 

The administration is not seeking congressional action on directed vote mandates 

at this juncture, but it is possible to envisage a future need for the United States 

to effectively guide IFI engagement in Burma in a manner that meets our shared 

objectives through the flexible exercise of its voting power.

Question. What evidence exists that Burma’s Commander in Chief, Gen. Min 

Aung Hlaing and his senior officers support political reform in Burma and are willing, at some future time, to accept civilian control over the military and relinquish 

the military’s privileged status as provided for in Burma’s constitution?

Answer. During my time as Special Representative and Policy Coordinator, I met 

with Commander in Chief Min Aung Hlaing, Defense Minister Hla Min, and other 

senior military officials. In those discussions, these officials expressed support for 

the political reform process initiated by President Thein Sein. Min Aung Hlaing 

stressed his intention to make the military a responsible, respected, and profesFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

427

sional force, and stated that the armed forces no longer wanted responsibility for 

governing the country. While the internal dynamics and debates within the military 

are relatively opaque, and we have ongoing concerns about the authority granted 

to the military under Burma’s constitution, to date, the military has not intervened 

or taken any other overt action to derail the political and social liberalization that 

has taken place over the past year. 

There are no guarantees, however, that the military in the future will remain supportive of continued political reform, accept de facto control of its affairs by civilian 

authorities, or relinquish its privileged status under Burma’s Constitution. Such 

steps will be necessary for a full democratic transition and will continue to be factors in U.S. assessments of Burma’s reform process.

Question. What are the benchmarks that when achieved, the United States will 

initiate military-to-military interaction with Burma? Once those benchmarks are 

met, what will be your recommendation(s) as to the specific type of military-to-military contact?

Answer. Increased military-to-military ties with Burma would enable greater insight into the Burmese military, and offer opportunities, consistent with U.S. values 

and interests, to promote a professional, respected, and responsible military force. 

We have started this process of engagement by renewing joint cooperation on efforts 

to recover remains of U.S. personnel from the World War II era, suspended in 2004, 

and the visit of a National War College student delegation to Burma in early May. 

Continued violence and human rights abuses against civilians, including women 

and children, in Kachin and Shan states, and questions about the Burmese military’s relationship with North Korea are the major constraints on further development of military-to-military ties.

Question. What is the timetable for the completion of guidelines for a general

license to authorize new investment and the waiver needed to authorize financial 

transactions with Burma—as announced by the administration last May?

Answer. We are moving forward through an interagency process to complete the 

steps necessary to implement President Obama and Secretary Clinton’s May 17 

announcements on easing sanctions on the export of financial services and on new 

investment. Procedurally we expect to take several steps to ease the ban on new 

investment in Burma, including by exercising statutory waiver authority and 

issuing a general license to authorize such investment. We will also seek a separate 

general license to ease the prohibition on the exportation of financial services to 

Burma. 

We seek to ensure our sanctions easing measures support our overall policy objectives of transparency and accountability and are comprehensible for both the Burmese people and the business community. We will continue to pursue a calibrated 

approach in our engagement with Burma and will work to promote responsible investing practices.

Question. What is the administration’s perspective on the status of the Rohingyas? 

What steps have been taken to address the challenges of injury and death to the 

Rohingyas resulting from the policies of the governments of Bangladesh and Burma? 

By name and title, who are the lead State Department officials on matters related 

to the Rohingyas?

Answer. The administration has, and will continue to, express serious concern at 

the continuing discrimination, human rights violations, violence, displacement and 

economic deprivation affecting numerous ethnic minorities in Burma, including the 

stateless Rohingya ethnic minority in northern Rakhine state. We have consistently 

called upon the Government of Burma to take immediate action to bring about an 

improvement in their situation, to recognize the right of the Rohingya to nationality, 

and to protect their human rights. 

Soon after sectarian violence broke out in early June between Buddhist ethnic 

Rakhine and Muslim minorities, including ethnic Rohingya, in Burma’s Rakhine 

state, Secretary Clinton issued a statement condemning the violence and urging 

authorities to conduct a timely investigation into attacks and a dialogue among all 

key stakeholders to promote greater religious and ethnic tolerance and understanding. 

Embassies Rangoon and Dhaka continue to work in close coordination to monitor 

the situation in Rakhin state and along the Burma-Bangladesh border and have met 

with relevant ministers from the respective governments to note our concern and 

to encourage both governments to work with the international community to restore 

peace and to provide protection and assistance to those individuals fleeing the violence. We continue to urge the Government of Bangladesh to respect the principle 

of nonrefoulement as these persons may be refugees or have other protection needs. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

428

We remain deeply concerned and, and if confirmed, I will continue to call for restraint, an end to violence, and the upholding of principles of nondiscrimination, tolerance, and religious freedom. 

In the State Department, several bureaus and offices track the Rohingya population in Burma and the region, including the Bureaus of East Asia and Pacific Affairs; South and Central Asia Affairs; Population, Refugees, and Migration; Conflict 

and Stabilization Operations; and Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Senior 

principals including Assistant Secretary Campbell, Assistant Secretary Posner, 

Assistant Secretary Barton, and Assistant Secretary Richard, office directors, program officers, and embassies related to the above-mentioned offices work in coordination with the international community to not only address the current violence, 

but also to develop comprehensive durable solutions to address the Rohingya situation.

Question. Officials of Thailand have discussed the forced return of thousands of 

displaced person to Burma who fled to Thailand. Have U.S. officials discussed

this situation with Thai authorities and what is the present position of the Thai 

Government?

Answer. U.S. officials in Thailand and Washington have consistently reinforced 

with Thai leaders our firm belief that refugees from Burma should only return voluntarily, and when they can do so safely and in dignity. Secretary Clinton raised 

this issue with Foreign Minister Surapong on June 12. The Foreign Minister, as 

well as Thai officials from both civilian and military agencies, confirmed to us that 

the Thai Government will avoid the forcible return of Burmese refugees back to 

Burma, that there is no timeline for return, and return will only occur when conditions are right in Burma. We will continue to monitor the situation and reinforce 

our message as appropriate.

Question. Some Burmese leaders have been accused of committing or ordering 

international crimes of humanity against ethnic minorities within Burma. How 

should these allegations be addressed to ensure accountability and to facilitate 

reconciliation within Burma? Does the administration support a Commission of 

Inquiry?

Answer. We consistently prioritize concerns with human rights violations and, in 

our engagement with Burmese Government officials and members of civil society, 

we have underscored the importance of establishing a mechanism for accountability. 

We view the establishment of a national human rights commission in Burma in September 2011 an important first step, and we have encouraged the government to 

draw on international expertise to ensure the impartiality and the credibility of the 

commission. 

As Secretary Clinton noted during her November visit to Burma, the United 

States supports an appropriate mechanism to ensure justice and accountability. We 

believe it is important to support the Burmese Government, the political opposition, 

and civil society in pursuing their own approach toward achieving these objectives. 

An inclusive process that comprises key Burmese stakeholders is required for a sustainable mechanism to ensure accountability.

Question. Has the United State held discussions with the Government of India 

and the government of Mizoram state to help identify and address protection of the 

Chin?

Answer. India is not a signatory to the 1951 U.N. Refugee Convention, but all refugees, along with foreign residents, tourists, and migrants, are covered by the Foreigners Act. The Indian Government does not afford refugee status to any group. 

U.S. Consulate officers from Kolkata have met in Kolkata and in Aizawl with 

members of Burma’s ethnic Chin population and with groups assisting the Chin in 

Mizoram. During visits to the state, consulate officers consistently raise the Chin 

issue with members of local government and civil society. Most recently, the Consul 

General used a June meeting with the Chief Minister to encourage the government 

of Mizoram and the Government of India to provide more assistance to this population. 

The State Department will continue to engage with UNHCR on indentifying durable solutions for Burma’s ethnic Chin, including resettlement. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

429

RESPONSES OF HON. DEREK MITCHELL TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. Beyond the anecdotes provided in the 2012 Trafficking in Persons

Report, what specific steps or measures has the Burmese Government taken to 

move from Tier 3 to Tier 2 Watch List in the 2012 TIP report?

Answer. Burma’s record on human trafficking, including forced labor and the use 

of child soldiers, has been a concern for many years. The ILO and other international observers assessed that the government had used the colonial-era Village 

Act and Towns Act of 1907 to legally sanction forced labor. The government’s moves 

to repeal these antiquated acts, however, and to replace them with a new law that 

explicitly prohibits forced labor as a criminal offense, were in direct response to U.S. 

Government requests, and attest to a stronger commitment to cooperate more 

closely with the United States on human trafficking issues. 

Several other significant and unprecedented steps in advancing political reforms 

corrected Burma’s legal framework vis-a-vis human trafficking:

• An interministerial working group on trafficking in persons introduced best 

practices through collaboration with international partners. As a result, we 

have seen improved victim protection measures. 

• Authorities undertook significant efforts to address the cross-border sex trafficking of women and girls; inaugurated a national hotline to respond better to 

public complaints of all forms of human trafficking that has since led to the rescue of 57 victims of trafficking; and launched an antitrafficking Web site in February 2012. 

• Earlier this year, the government signed a framework agreement with the ILO 

that commits it to developing and implementing an ambitious new plan of action to eradicate forced labor in the country by 2015.

The government’s cooperation with the ILO also achieved progress in addressing 

conscription of child soldiers in the Burmese military. Of 324 complaints of forced 

labor in Burma that the ILO received in 2011, 236 involved alleged conscription of 

children for military service. For the first time in several years, the Ministry of 

Defense provided data on military personnel disciplined for forced labor offenses: 

four officers and 37 enlisted personnel were punished for ‘‘improper recruitment.’’

The Ministry of Labor also took a number of unprecedented steps to prevent 

forced labor of Burmese citizens at home and abroad. In late 2011, the Deputy Minister of Labor negotiated with the Thai Government for the placement of a labor 

attache ́ at the Burmese Embassy in Thailand and the opening of five labor assistance centers in Thailand. The centers, which the Thai Government has not yet approved for opening, will help expatriate Burmese workers with obtaining Burmese 

identity documents and other assistance. 

Through several visits by the Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for 

Burma, Ambassador Derek Mitchell, and Ambassador CdeBaca from the Office to 

Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, the United States engaged relevant 

ministries and security forces in Burma to express our concerns and guide the government toward progress in meeting achievable goals. 

We recognize there is still much to be done, and Burma’s Tier 2 Watch List ranking reflects serious deficiencies. We also remain concerned with continued reports 

on conscription of child soldiers. We will build upon the foundation we have laid 

with the government to cooperate on these issues as well as collaborate with Aung 

San Suu Kyi, who has highlighted the issue of human trafficking as an essential 

issue to resolve.

Question. What are the measures that the Burmese Government must meet for 

Burma to remain off the Tier 3 list in the 2013 TIP Report?

Answer. In order to avoid a Tier 3 ranking in the 2013 TIP Report, the Burmese 

Government must avoid backsliding on its improvements to date and begin to make 

progress on implementing a series of recommendations that the Department of State 

provided in the 2012 TIP Report:

• Complete and implement the terms of the International Labor Organization 

(ILO) action plan for the elimination of forced labor offenses perpetrated by government employees, particularly military personnel. 

• Take additional measures to confront the unlawful conscription of children into 

the military and ethnic armed groups, including the criminal prosecution and 

punishment of offenders. 

• Increase efforts to investigate and sanction, including through criminal prosecution, government and military perpetrators of internal trafficking offenses, including child soldier recruitment and other such crimes. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

430

• Actively identify and demobilize all children serving in the armed forces. 

• Continue improving U.N. access to inspect recruitment centers, training centers, and military camps in order to identify and support the reintegration and 

rehabilitation of child soldiers. 

• Cease the arrest and imprisonment of children for desertion or attempting to 

leave the army and release imprisoned former child soldiers. 

• Enhance partnerships with local and international NGOs to improve victim 

identification and protection efforts, including victim shelters. 

• Develop and implement formal victim identification and referral procedures. 

• Focus more attention on the internal trafficking of women and children for commercial sexual exploitation.

Question. At the hearing, you mentioned an interest by Burmese authorities to 

take measures that would lead to their removal from the TIP Report’s Tier 2 Watch 

List. What specific measures would the Department of State expect Burma to take 

in order to accomplish this? What type of monitoring will the State Department do 

to ensure these measures are followed?

Answer. Each Trafficking in Persons Report narrative contains specific recommendations for a government to consider implementing over the coming year 

toward achieving a favorable tier ranking. In addition to the country-specific 

recommendations within the TIP Report narrative, the Department of State provided the Government of Burma with an action plan that is derived from these recommendations. The State Department delivered the action plan to the Government 

of Burma on June 19. Both the action plan and accompanying recommendations are 

aimed at providing authorities with guidance related to the minimum standards 

outlined in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. In order for Burma to be removed 

from the Watch List, its Government must make progress on these recommendations. 

To help the government achieve its goal of a more favorable tier ranking, we will 

build on our strengthened engagement, including upgraded diplomatic ties, to work 

with relevant ministries and authorities on the necessary criteria it must address. 

We will outline procedures and recommendations from our Trafficking in Persons 

report and seek progress on core concerns specific to Burma. The Department’s 

Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, in partnership with the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs and the U.S. Embassy in Rangoon, will assess 

the Government of Burma’s progress in achieving the action plan items through direct discussions with authorities, soliciting feedback from nongovernmental organizations and monitoring media coverage of these issues. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation, representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as State and local chambers and industry associations, is pleased to 

have the opportunity to submit this statement for the record to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in connection with today’s hearing on the nomination 

of Derek Mitchell to be United States Ambassador to Burma. 

The Chamber has been very encouraged by political and economic developments 

in Burma over the past year. Badly needed political and economic reforms in that 

country are moving forward, in many cases at a pace faster than most observers 

had expected. Following the landslide victory by the opposition National League for 

Democracy in the April 1 elections, there is, for the first time in many years, a genuine sense of hope for the future. 

It is patently in U.S. interest that the process of reform and liberalization in 

Burma continue. The Chamber has therefore strongly supported the U.S. Government’s responses to developments there, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit last December, the upgrading of diplomatic relations, and the announcement that some U.S. economic sanctions will be eased. 

Many observers question whether the changes in Burma are irreversible. That is 

the wrong question; little in this world is truly irreversible. The momentum is currently behind reform, but the process will not be linear. As with most major 

changes, reform of the economic and political system in Burma is fraught with formidable challenges, and there is ultimately no guarantee of success. Therefore, U.S. 

policy should be geared toward supporting and strengthening the hand of the 

reformers. Strategic engagement by the U.S Government, as well as by leaders from 

the nonprofit and business sectors, is vital to solidifying and broadening these 

reforms. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

431

For these reasons, we are pleased that the Senate is considering the nomination 

of Derek Mitchell as U.S. Ambassador to Burma. It has been 20 years since the 

United States last had an Ambassador in Burma, and his appointment further demonstrates U.S. sincerity in its commitment to ongoing engagement with that country. If we are to have meaningful dialogue and interaction with Burma, there is no 

substitute for the presence of an ambassador. 

U.S. Chamber representatives visited Burma last month and had discussions in 

Naypyidaw with a broad range of officials, including the Ministers of Finance, 

Health, Construction, National Planning, and Energy, and the Vice Ministers of 

Commerce and Railways. In Rangoon, the Chamber met with economic and political 

advisors to the President, among others. 

The message was clear and consistent: They want U.S. investment because they 

recognize that U.S. companies bring with them a respect for the rule of law and 

high standards of corporate governance. Leaders understand that these are essential elements for sustained economic growth. 

In those meetings, we detected no illusions on the part of anyone we met about 

the daunting challenges the country faces. Burma is woefully short of technical 

skills as well as skilled manpower across every part of the economy from the health 

care system to the financial sector. They need and want help, and they know it, and 

they freely admit it. And the United States is in a position to offer that help. 

Its realization of the difficulty of the path forward is has not deterred Burma from 

moving down that path. Indeed, the commitment to reform is genuine, and in the 

view of the Chamber executives who recently visited, it is not a question of pro- vs. 

anti-reform, but rather a question of the pace of reform. The pace of reform relates 

directly to the question of capacity. 

U.S. business community involvement can play a crucial role here. U.S. companies 

not only create jobs, but they bring capital, technology, training, community development, high standards for protecting the environment and respecting human rights 

and the rule of law that will build a foundation for sustained economic growth. 

Without this foundation, development and improved standards of living for the people of Burma (or any other country) is simply not possible. 

How do we build this foundation? Most immediately, the lifting of financial services and investment sanctions—as promised by Secretary Clinton on May 17—will 

be essential to the sustainable expansion of the Burmese economy and the successful operation of any U.S. business effort. Currently, U.S. companies are unable to 

conduct many basic research efforts that would enable them to even formulate plans 

to operate there. Lifting the financial services and investment ban is a prerequisite 

for enabling any U.S. business to work in Burma. A basic financial services infrastructure is a prerequisite for creating an environment in which businesses can invest, and where other promising sectors, such as tourism, can flourish. 

Secretary Clinton’s announcement generated great enthusiasm on the ground in 

Burma, as the Chamber executives who were there at the time saw firsthand. However, it is disappointing that the announcement has not been followed by action. 

Movement is needed quickly to issue a general license that is needed to authorize 

new investments in, and financial transactions with, Burma, consistent with the 

Secretary’s May 17 announcement. 

This license should apply across the board to all industry sectors and should avoid 

burdensome reporting requirements or onerous preconditions on any sector. For example, suggestions to restrict engagement with Burma’s State-owned oil company, 

Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) would result in a de-facto investment 

ban. In Burma, like many other countries around the globe, foreign investors are 

legally required to enter into joint ventures with state-owned companies. Our standard should continue to be to limit engagement with those entities on the prescribed 

list of prohibited entities and persons known as Specially Designated Nationals 

(SDN) who have been unjustly enriched in the past, have violated other statutes 

such as counterterrorism, money laundering, proliferation, counternarcotics proscriptions or who are owned by the military. MOGE has not been listed for any of 

these violations and is not controlled by the military. Instead, MOGE reports to the 

civilian-controlled Ministry of Energy. 

Effectively prohibiting American companies from dealing with MOGE will only ensure that non-American companies continue to capture additional energy projects. 

It will not lead to greater transparency over natural resource revenues. 

American companies have been at the forefront of a decade-long global effort to 

promote greater transparency around the flow of natural resource revenues, i.e. the 

Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). Some 35 nations are now implementing countries in this initiative and participate with other stakeholders from 

industry, international financial institutions and civil society; 14 countries have 

achieved ‘‘compliant’’ status with the EITI disclosure standard. The United States 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

432

has recently applied to join EITI. American companies can and will encourage 

Burma, as they have encouraged other countries, to join this initiative, which provides the capacity not only to implement the disclosure standard, but to develop the 

institutions to manage public expenditures over the long term. If the U.S. Government goal is to promote transparency, then our policy should strongly support U.S. 

companies entering the natural resource space, and engaging with MOGE and the 

government to embrace EITI. 

But these are only first steps. What is needed is a broader and longer term vision 

about the future of the U.S. relationship with Burma. That vision must address how 

we can sustain support for a reform process that will likely take many years, see 

fits and starts, and encounter challenges both foreseen and unforeseen. 

That vision must also consider a plan for more comprehensive easing of economic 

sanctions. Over the past few months, all the major economies that had sanctions 

in place against Burma have now suspended or eliminated them. A sanctions regime 

that was multilateral is now unilateral. 

As the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has pointed out repeatedly, tying the hands 

of U.S. companies simply ensures that our competitors fill the void, as they are 

already doing. As a result, the jobs which could go to American workers will instead 

go to their counterparts in Asia, Europe, and elsewhere. U.S. companies are already 

starting from a disadvantage, as numerous entities from other nations have substantially stepped up their activity in recent months. 

For example, the AFP noted in a June 19 article that Myanmar has recently 

signed a series of oil and gas exploration deals with companies from Hong Kong, 

Switzerland, Malaysia, India, Thailand, Indonesia, and Russia. In recent weeks, a 

flurry of business delegations from Japan, Singapore, and many European countries 

have visited the country. Not only have other governments eased sanctions, but 

many, such as those in Japan and Europe, in fact are helping and partnering with 

their industries to get them into Burma. Similar efforts on the U.S. side, perhaps 

led by the Commerce Department, would be helpful. 

Ironically, slow-walking the implementation of the administrative steps necessary 

to suspend sanctions on new investment and financial transactions will not increase 

transparency, advance respect for human rights, or slow economic activity. It will 

only mean that U.S. companies that push for better governance and transparency 

are not involved in shaping the corporate culture and norms that are formed as 

Burma’s private sector is invigorated. 

Moreover, the easing announced last month does not limit U.S. policy options. The 

United States can renew the investment and financial services sanctions should conditions in Burma deteriorate. Other sanctions remain in place and in some cases 

would require legislative action to undo. Thus, their removal will be neither quick 

nor easy. 

In addition, the SDN list provides a way to ensure that business dealings do not 

enrich those parties responsible for Burma’s decades of suffering, and that those 

honest entrepreneurs seeking a way to connect with the outside world are not kept 

in isolation due to the actions of others. This list could be made more accessible and 

user-friendly, but we are not recommending its elimination. Many countries around 

the world have individuals and entities on this list, so it is not unique to Burma, 

and it serves a very important function. 

However, our long-term vision must take into account those sanctions and restrictions which are unique to Burma. We need an open and honest dialogue in which 

we can discuss the efficacy and utility of some of the remaining sanctions and their 

impact on the Burmese people. 

From the Chamber’s discussions on the ground, it is clear that a U.S. presence 

is welcomed in Burma and in a sense, the U.S. is pushing on an open door. A U.S. 

commercial presence will serve our economic, political, and strategic interests, and 

will help the people of Burma. 

The past 20 years have been a dark chapter in Burma’s history. We believe that 

Burma is trying to turn the page, and the United States must support this process. 

Deepening our engagement with that country is an important way to do so. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER FELDMAN, PRESIDENT, US–ASEAN BUSINESS

COUNCIL AND FRANCES ZWENIG, PRESIDENT, US–ASEAN BUSINESS COUNCIL

INSTITUTE, INC. 

The US–ASEAN Business Council and the US–ASEAN Business Council Institute, Inc are pleased to have the opportunity to submit a statement for the record 

to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in connection with today’s hearing 

on the nomination of Derek Mitchell to be United States Ambassador to Myanmar. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

433

The US–ASEAN Business Council is the premiere advocacy organization for U.S. 

corporations operating within the dynamic Association of Southeast Asian Nations 

(ASEAN). ASEAN represents nearly 600 million people and a combined GDP of 

USD $1.5 trillion across Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, 

Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. The Council’s members include the largest U.S. companies working in ASEAN, and range from newcomers to the region to companies that have been working in Southeast Asia for 

over 100 years. 

The US–ASEAN Business Council Institute, Inc is a charitable organization 

whose purpose is to enrich the opportunities for strengthened and deeper engagement by U.S. companies in ASEAN through a variety of educational activities and 

capacity-building. Broadly defined, this mission also supports humanitarian activities and community engagement to help improve the lives of people in ASEAN 

where the Council’s companies work; support for programs to preserve and expand 

knowledge about the rich cultural and art heritage of the region in the U.S. and 

of the U.S. in ASEAN; and other initiatives in the fields of education, governance 

and rule of law, health, the environment, trade, commerce and investment that the 

Council’s members may propose from time to time. 

The Council and its members have been very pleased to see the forward motion 

in the reform process that has taken place in Myanmar over the past year. This 

reform has been not only political, as Myanmar has held elections which have included key opposition groups and has expanded the political space for open, sometimes critical dialogue, but also economic, as Myanmar has taken the long-overdue 

step of allowing a managed floating exchange rate, invited in foreign investment, 

and begun the process of privatizing state-owned enterprises. President Thein Sein 

has promised further reforms, and Myanmar has indicated it will continue the process of releasing political prisoners. 

These reforms are not irreversible, and need support from all corners in order to 

be successful. The presence of a U.S. Ambassador will make a substantial difference 

in the amount of influence the United States can wield in encouraging further 

reforms. 

The Council supports without qualification the confirmation of Derek Mitchell for 

the position of U.S. Ambassador to the Union of Burma, or Union of Myanmar. 

Ambassador Mitchell brings experience from his years of government service in the 

Congress and in the executive branch which will prove invaluable in this position, 

and is very well qualified for the job. He has demonstrated his commitment and energy to finding a way forward in this rapidly changing environment, and has the 

temperament, ability, and insight which this challenging position will require. The 

Council has long believed that the cause of improving the lives of Burmese people 

was ill-served by the lack of an American Ambassador to Myanmar and the subsequent U.S. insistence that Myanmar downgrade its diplomatic representation in 

Washington, DC. Levels of representation matter and impact the quality of dialogue, 

access to key decisionmakers, and quality of information about one another’s country. With representation restored to normal levels, we hope the guidance to the 

Embassy to provide the full array of assistance to American individuals and companies seeking to undertake projects with civil society and business with business and 

government partners will be adopted. Currently, as this committee knows, the 

Embassy’s ability to provide any assistance to individuals or companies seeking to 

do business is constrained by State Department policy. 

U.S. companies bring best practices in governance, corporate responsibility, safety 

and environmental standards. We believe they can make an important contribution 

to the new legal and fiscal frameworks now under discussion, but they must have 

access to good information as the insights that an active diplomatic presence can 

provide. We urge the State Department to update their guidance to the Embassy 

to be consistent with the May 17 announcement by Secretary Clinton that the 

United States is suspending sanctions on new investment and financial transactions 

with Myanmar. 

The Council is also very encouraged that the administration has decided to suspend sanctions and allow economic engagement. The Council has long believed that 

engagement can be more effective than isolation in effecting positive change. 

The next vital step will be the issuing of a general license that will allow U.S. 

business to begin to work in Myanmar. Secretary Clinton’s May 17 announcement 

of the suspension of certain sanctions has emboldened reformers, but it must be 

backed up with action. It is essential that a general license authorizing new investments in and a waiver authorizing financial transactions with Myanmar are issued 

soon, and that both apply equally across all industry sectors. 

Currently, potential U.S. investors remain in limbo, unable even to perform basic 

research functions while their competitors move forward aggressively. A June 19 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

434

article by the AFP indicated that Myanmar has signed oil and gas deals with numerous companies from Asia and Europe, and large delegations of foreign companies 

have made numerous visits. Each day puts U.S. companies further behind. 

Major U.S. companies, including iconic brands like council members the Coca-Cola 

Company and GE, have indicated that they intend to pursue opportunities in 

Myanmar once they are allowed. 

A key example of the level of business interest in Myanmar is the excitement surrounding the Council’s first Business Mission to Myanmar, which will take place in 

July. Despite the challenges that will face companies looking to do business in 

Myanmar, 37 leading U.S. companies have agreed to join the mission. The companies participating in the mission include 5 of the Fortune 10, and represent all sectors. Top firms in health care, manufacturing, infrastructure, financial services, 

energy, and ICT are interested in the opportunities offered by the opening up of 

Myanmar’s economy. 

During their visit to Yangon, the delegates will meet with a wide spectrum of the 

key figures in Myanmar’s evolution: key government ministers, members of opposition groups like the NLD, NDF, and the 88’ers, and members of civil society. They 

will participate in meetings with U.S. Government officials who will travel to 

Myanmar as part of the State Department delegation which will also visit 

Myanmar. The business mission will include a panel of NGOs who will describe the 

conditions they face in operating on the ground, and share their knowledge and experience on the best way for U.S. companies to help move Myanmar forward. Those 

NGOs will include: PACT, Proximity Designs, Marie Stopes International, and 

World Vision. 

Connecting Burmese citizens to the wider world of global business will be a vital 

step in helping them build the civil society that will enable them to move Myanmar 

from the list of failed states into being a member of ASEAN’s success story. The 

Council encourages maintaining, regularly updating, and providing easy to use access to the Specially Designated Nationals list as a way to ensure that business 

dealings do not enrich those parties responsible for Myanmar’s decades of suffering, 

and that those honest entrepreneurs seeking a way to connect with the outside 

world are not kept in isolation due to the actions of others. 

U.S. companies can create the jobs and economic base needed for the government 

to jump-start the economy and meet the expectations of the people. U.S. companies 

bring with them respect for the rule of law, corporate governance structures including adherence to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, intellectual property rights, and 

labor standards unmatched in the world. U.S. companies can and do provide capacity-building, training, and respect for the environment, as well as projects to engage 

with communities where they work to a substantially greater degree than most of 

their competitors from other nations. These Corporate Social Responsibility projects 

include globally successful education, public health, and environmental programs. 

U.S. companies look forward to vastly expanding their presence in Myanmar. 

These are programs which are already clearly reported and documented, and 

which major U.S. companies view as part of their competitive advantage. Burdensome reporting requirements surrounding CSR work in Myanmar will have the 

effect of making it more difficult for companies to bring in existing successful programs, and will act as a barrier to entry for small and medium-sized enterprises. 

In addition to the efforts of its members, the US–ASEAN Business Council Institute performs a variety of CSR functions. Those efforts have included facilitating 

and supporting flood relief in Thailand and will include expanding the Council’s 

training program for small and medium-sized enterprises throughout ASEAN. 

Myanmar has already been the location of one of the Council’s key CSR efforts; 

the restoration of the Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue. Rangoon was once the home of 

a thriving Jewish community consisting primarily of Jews from Iraq, Iran, and 

India. Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue was built in 1893–1896 to serve the growing 

Jewish population, which, at its peak, numbered about 2,500 individuals. During 

World War II, and, in the years following, most of the Jews in Burma fled to other 

countries. The Burmese Government’s nationalization of businesses in 1969 caused 

further migration. 

As a result of the community’s dwindling numbers, the synagogue has limited 

funds to support itself. Even before the May 2008 cyclone, the building was in desperate need of restoration and the historic Jewish cemetery nearby was slated to 

be destroyed by the city. Cyclone Nargis only made the situation more desperate. 

This historic building still serves as the religious center for Jews visiting Myanmar. 

Without restoration and maintenance, this unique piece of history would have been 

lost. 

Moses Samuels and his family are among the few Jews in Myanmar. Moses is the 

Trustee of Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue. Cyclone Nargis rocked the beautiful synaFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

435

gogue, shattered its windows, and destroyed its roof. Without assistance, the Jewish 

community of Myanmar would have been unable to restore and maintain its place 

of worship. Even with its own Nargis damage, the Jewish community—led by 

Moses’s son Sammy—organized several aid missions to help their fellow Burmese 

in the hard-hit Delta. 

The US–ASEAN Business Council Institute, Inc., the US–ASEAN Business Council’s 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization, obtained a license from the United States 

Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to raise funds 

for the maintenance and restoration of Musmeah Yeshua Synagogue in Yangon, 

Myanmar. With the OFAC license, the Council achieved a number of things:

• Raised funds to complete restoration and necessary maintenance of the synagogue; 

• Raised funds for the synagogue’s monthly expenses consisting of utilities, salaries for workers, and various miscellaneous expenses; 

• Raised funds for the maintenance of 700 historic graves and for the construction 

and maintenance of the new cemetery.

It is unquestionable that U.S. companies are at a disadvantage to foreign competitors who are already operating in Myanmar. Jobs that could be created in the U.S. 

are instead going to other nations. We hope this testimony will help to show some 

of the vital and necessary CSR projects that the Burmese people will be denied by 

the absence of U.S. companies. 

We believe Derek Mitchell has a firm grasp of these issues and the importance 

of welcoming Myanmar back into the global fold. 

We respectfully urge his swift confirmation. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(437)

NOMINATIONS OF GENE A. CRETZ, DEBORAH 

R. MALAC, DAVID B. WHARTON, ALEXANDER 

M. LASKARIS 

THURSDAY, JULY 12, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

Hon. Gene Allan Cretz, of New York, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Ghana 

Deborah Ruth Malac, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Liberia 

David Bruce Wharton, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Zimbabwe 

Alexander Mark Laskaris, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Guinea 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:05 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher A. 

Coons, presiding. 

Present: Senator Coons. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE 

Senator COONS. I am pleased to call to order this nomination 

hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the Ambassadors for Ghana, Zimbabwe, Liberia, and Guinea. As always, I am 

grateful for the supportive service of my good friend and ranking 

member, Senator Isakson of Georgia, as well as other members of 

the committee. Senator Isakson and I were just on the floor 

together where we had a series of three votes, and he wanted me 

to express his apologies. He hopes to join us briefly, but he may 

well not be able to join us here for this hearing today. He has been 

a diligent and reliable partner and has attended literally every 

single hearing from beginning to end we have had so far. So he 

wanted me to make those apologies at the outset given the exigencies of trying to make his flight home. 

I want to welcome and thank our distinguished nominees, 

Ambassador Cretz, the nominee for Ghana, David Wharton, who is 

the nominee for Zimbabwe, Deborah Malac, who is the nominee for 

Liberia, and Alexander Laskaris, the nominee to serve in Guinea. 

All four of you bring to the table a vast array of relevant experiFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

438

ence in Africa and around the world, and I look forward to hearing 

your vision for how to advance U.S. foreign policy objectives in 

these countries. 

Last year, Senator Isakson and I traveled to Ghana, which has 

experienced remarkable growth and has placed it amongst the top 

10 fastest-growing economies in the world. Despite the persistent 

challenge of widespread poverty, Ghana is largely seen as a regional model for good governance, democracy, stability, and economic success. And I look forward to hearing from you about how 

we will continue to utilize our resources to encourage greater U.S. 

trade investment in Ghana, which presents, I think, great opportunities for American business. 

As I mentioned at our last subcommittee hearing, I am disappointed that the U.S. Department of Commerce chose not to replace the U.S. commercial service officer, formerly posted in Accra. 

And I believe it is one of many examples why the administration 

needs to be better coordinate its strategy for promoting economic 

engagement with Africa among the many agencies responsible for 

this task. 

Zimbabwe is sadly at the other end of the spectrum from Ghana 

when it comes to democracy and good governance as demonstrated 

by the fact President Mugabe has been in power more than 32 

years. Since 2009, a transitional coalition government has worked 

toward reform and power-sharing, mediated by SADC, which is 

proven to be one of the more effective regional organizations in 

Africa. While Zimbabwe’s political environment remains volatile, 

the GPA has led to a period of stability and recovery, relatively 

speaking, after many years of violence and collapse. 

I look forward to hearing about how the international community 

can encourage the constitutional reform process and progress that 

SADC has made with the Global Political Agreement. I am hopeful 

all political parties will soon agree on a draft constitution that can 

pave the way toward successful future elections. 

Since its historical elections in June 2010, Guinea has begun to 

emerge from decades of authoritarianism toward a more open and 

democratic system, but there are very significant challenges which 

remain. Legislative elections have been delayed due to disagreements about elections management and distrust. Tensions that 

escalated during the 2010 elections remain central today, but there 

also has to be accountability for abuses carried out by the military 

and government. And Guinea must implement economic reforms to 

reduce corruption, including in its mining sector where increased 

transparency and certainty could open the door to increased investment and trade. 

Finally, we turn to Liberia, which has experienced economic 

growth, improved rule of law, and increase stability since the civil 

war there ended in 2003. In my view, much of Liberia’s progress 

can be attributed to strong leadership, and I am hopeful President 

Johnson Sirleaf will continue to build on gains made combating 

corruption and strengthening governance in her second term. I was 

honored to join the Secretary of State at her second inaugural. 

As the U.N. Peacekeeping Force continues its drawdown, Liberia 

must continue to focus on building its security and justice sectors, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

439

especially the police. Increased recent violence on the border with 

Cote d’Ivoire underscores the importance of security sector reform. 

As I mentioned, in all four countries, we have before us four 

strong nominees. Since 2008, Ambassador Gene Cretz has served 

as the United States Ambassador to Libya. He is the current nominee to serve in Ghana. He has previously overseen the closing and 

reopening of the U.S. Embassy and significant transition that followed the fall of Gadhafi. Previously, Ambassador Cretz served as 

DAS in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, in addition to posts in 

Tel Aviv, Damascus, Beijing, and New Delhi. 

David Wharton is the nominee to be Ambassador to Zimbabwe. 

He is currently serving as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of African Affairs following posts in 

Guatemala, Tanzania, Nigeria, and Kenya. 

Alexander Laskaris is the nominee to be Ambassador to Guinea, 

who most recently served as counsel general at the U.S. consulate 

in Erbil, Iraq. He has previously served as DCM at Embassies in 

Kosovo and Burundi, as well as postings in Angola, Botswana, and 

Liberia. 

Finally, last but not least, Deborah Malac is the nominee to serve 

as our next Ambassador to Liberia, currently serving as Director 

of the Office of East African Affairs. I have a lot I want to talk to 

you about. Previously Ms. Malac served as DCM at the U.S. 

Embassy in Ethiopia, as well as important posts in Senegal and 

Bangkok and South Africa and Laos and in Cameroon. 

I am very pleased to welcome all four of today’s distinguished 

nominees and look forward to your opening statements. 

Senator COONS. I would, in the absence of Senator Isakson—do 

we expect Senator Isakson? We’re not sure. 

VOICE. The latest I heard was he was going to try to join us 

later. 

Senator COONS. OK. If at some point Senator Isakson’s evolving 

schedule allows him to drive by, please let me know and we will 

interrupt wherever we are. 

I would like to invite, in turn, each of the four nominees to introduce your family, your supporters, your friends, anyone you would 

like to recognize who might be watching us by Webcast, which is 

increasingly common. And after that, in order, we will then turn 

to your opening statements. If we might just simply go in order 

from right to left. 

Ambassador Cretz. 

Ambassador CRETZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to 

introduce my wife, Annette, my daughter, Gabrielle, my son, Captain Jeffrey Cretz of the Air Force National Guard Unit, you will 

be pleased to know, out of Newcastle, DE. 

Senator COONS. Wonderful. I look forward to talking with you. 

Ambassador CRETZ. My daughter-in-law, Meghan, and my 

daughter’s fiance, Justin, as well as friends, the Ludwig family, 

who recently came from Tunisia, and they will be heading to Cambodia. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador. 

Ms. Malac. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

440

Ms. MALAC. I would like to introduce my husband, Ron Olson, 

my daughter, Katharine, my oldest son, Nicholas, and my younger 

son, Gregory, who are here today. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ms. Malac. 

Mr. Wharton. 

Mr. WHARTON. Thank you, Senator. I am honored to introduce 

my wife, Julia, and my son, Sam, who I believe has the proxy vote 

for our other two children, Sarah and Turner, who could not be 

here today, but they wanted to be. And to my parents if they are 

watching on Webcast from North Carolina. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Wharton. 

Mr. Laskaris. 

Mr. LASKARIS. Senator, I was in Iraq until Saturday of last week, 

so this is kind of in a hurry, so my family is watching on the Web 

throughout the United States and in the old country. 

Senator COONS. Thank you so much for joining us today. I am 

grateful for your willingness to serve. And just at the outset, I 

would like to thank your families, both the parents or extended 

families, that made possible your personal commitments to public 

service in what, in many cases, have been difficult or challenging 

posts, which are exactly the sorts of places where American values 

are shown most clearly. And to your families who are with you 

today or who are watching by Web. I am just grateful for their support for your service. None of you serve alone. You are all sustained by a network of family and friends. And so I just join, I 

know, with my ranking minority member, who always also makes 

this comment, to express our gratitude for your careers of public 

service and for your families who support you. 

I would like to now invite each of you to make an opening statement to the extent you would like to. 

Ambassador Cretz. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GENE ALLAN CRETZ, OF NEW YORK, TO 

BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA 

Ambassador CRETZ. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I am honored to 

appear before you today and grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as their 

nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana. 

As I mentioned, I am joined today by my wife, Annette, my son, 

Jeffrey Cretz, and my daughter, Gabrielle, whose love and support 

have carried me throughout my 31 years in the Foreign Service. 

Without them I would not be here today. 

In addition, I would note that my son has honorably served his 

country through three deployments to Afghanistan and the Middle 

East. 

My journey began as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Kabul, Afghanistan, before joining the Foreign Service in 1981. I have served in 

Islamabad, Damascus twice, New Delhi, Tel Aviv twice, Beijing, 

Cairo, and most recently as United States Ambassador to Libya. If 

confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana, 

I will draw upon these experiences to advance U.S. interests in 

Africa. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

441

I am very proud of the role the United States played to help the 

courageous people of Libya gain their freedom from the 42-year dictatorial rule of Muammar Gadhafi. One only has to visit Libya 

today to witness a people breathing freedom for the first time to 

realize how important our efforts were. 

Ghana is a good news country as President Obama stated in his 

remarks during President Mills’ March visit to the Oval Office. A 

democracy since 1992 and an economic success story with GDP 

growth rates reaching a historic high of over 13.5 percent in 2011, 

and sustaining a growth rate of at least 8 percent in 2012, Ghana’s 

record of achievements speaks for itself. Having successfully completed its first $547 million Millennium 

Challenge Corporation Compact in February, Ghana is eligible to 

receive its second compact focused on improving access to reliable 

power. We have seen the Ghanaian people benefit from improved 

schools, health services, roads, and basic infrastructure as a result 

of sound macroeconomic policy and debt relief. If confirmed, I will 

maximize the talents and skills of Embassy personnel, advance 

existing USAID programs, and implement a second MCC Compact, 

if approved. 

United States exports to Ghana have grown 186 percent over the 

past 5 years, and two-way trade is expected to reach an all-time 

high, surpassing the $2 billion mark in 2012 as Ghana continues 

its impressive economic development. Companies such as GE, IBM, 

Baker Hughes, Cargill, Archer-Daniels-Midland Company, and others are investing in Ghana precisely because Ghana is a model for 

economic development in West Africa. I look forward to ensuring 

that the promotion of U.S. commercial interests remains an integral part of our statecraft. 

Home to a lively, free media, an apolitical military, and blessed 

with cocoa, gold, mineral reserves, and natural resources, Ghana is 

setting the standard for democracy and economic development on 

the continent of Africa. If confirmed, I will explore new and innovative approaches to expand commercial ties between the United 

States and Ghana. 

Ghana has held five free and fair national elections since 1992, 

and witnessed two peaceful transitions from one political party to 

another in 2000 and 2008. National and legislative elections are 

scheduled for this December. And if confirmed, I expect to witness 

Ghana achieve its sixth consecutive peaceful and transparent 

democratic election. 

The people-to-people links made strong through more than 50 

years of a continuous and vibrant Peace Corps presence, Fulbright, 

Humphrey, Community College Initiative, and Kennedy-Lugar 

Youth Exchange and Study student exchange programs, and military cooperation through our International Military Education and 

Training Program, the Africa Contingency Operations Training and 

Assistance Program, the State Partnership Program with the 

North Dakota National Guard, and Africa Command’s Africa Partnership Station are among the initiatives I will continue to advance 

if confirmed. 

Ghana and the United States share an interest in countering terrorism and promoting regional stability. It is one of Africa’s premier peacekeeping partners. If confirmed, I will support Ghana’s 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

442

capacity to promote regional and global stability. This includes 

combating escalating drug trafficking and human trafficking. Protecting the safety and welfare of U.S. citizens will be a top priority. 

Political power in Ghana remains highly centralized, and Ghana 

faces challenges in managing its oil resources. With a GDP per capita of $1,286 in 2010, Ghana is a lower middle-income country. The 

Government is committed to a path of reducing Ghana’s aid 

dependency in the medium to long term. U.S. developments are

focused on maintaining sustainable, broad-based economic growth 

through initiatives such as Feed the Future and the Partnership 

for Growth. 

President Obama chose Ghana as the site for his historic speech 

in 2009 about a new moment of promise for Africa. Ghana is living 

up to that promise, and our continued cooperation will enhance the 

partnership further. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee for 

the opportunity to address you today. If confirmed, I look forward 

to working with you in representing the interests of the American 

people in Ghana. And I am happy, of course, to answer any questions you have. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Cretz follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GENE ALLAN CRETZ

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you 

today, and grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence 

they have placed in me as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana. 

I am joined today by my wife, Annette, my son, U.S. Air Force Captain Jeffrey 

Cretz, and my daughter, Gabrielle, whose love and support have carried me 

throughout my 31 years in the Foreign Service. Without them I would not be here 

today. In addition, I would note that my son has honorably served his country 

through three deployments to Afghanistan and the Middle East. 

My journey began as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Kabul, Afghanistan, before joining the Foreign Service in 1981. I have served in Islamabad, Damascus (twice), New 

Delhi, Tel Aviv (twice), Beijing, Cairo, and most recently as United States Ambassador to Libya. If confirmed as the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana, 

I will draw upon these experiences to advance U.S. interests in Africa. I am very 

proud of the role the United States played to help the courageous people of Libya 

gain their freedom from the 42-year dictatorial rule of Muammar Qadhafi. One only 

has to visit Libya today to witness a people breathing freedom for the first time to 

realize how important our efforts were. 

Ghana is a ‘‘good news’’ country as President Obama stated in his remarks during 

President Mills’ March visit to the Oval Office. A democracy since 1992 and an economic success story with GDP growth rates reaching a historic high of over 13.5 

percent in 2011, and sustaining a growth rate of at least 8 percent in 2012, Ghana’s 

record of achievements speaks for itself. Having successfully completed its first $547 

million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact in February, Ghana is 

eligible to receive its second compact focused on improving access to reliable power. 

We have seen the Ghanaian people benefit from improved schools, health services, 

roads, and basic infrastructure as a result of sound macroeconomic policy and debt 

relief. If confirmed, I will maximize the talents and skills of Embassy personnel, 

advance existing USAID programs, and implement a second MCC Compact, if

approved. 

United States exports to Ghana have grown 186 percent over the past 5 years, 

and two-way trade is expected to reach an all-time high, surpassing the $2 billion 

mark in 2012 as Ghana continues its impressive economic development. Companies 

such as GE, IBM, Baker Hughes, Cargill, Archer-Daniels-Midland Company (ADM), 

and others are investing in Ghana precisely because Ghana is a model for economic 

development in West Africa. I look forward to ensuring that the promotion of U.S. 

commercial interests remains an integral part of our statecraft. Home to a lively, 

free media, an apolitical military, and blessed with cocoa, gold, mineral reserves, 

and natural resources, Ghana is setting the standards for democracy and economic 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

443

development on the continent of Africa. If confirmed, I will explore new and innovative approaches to expand commercial ties between the United States and Ghana. 

Ghana has held five free and fair national elections since 1992, and witnessed two 

peaceful transitions from one political party to another in 2000 and 2008. National 

and legislative elections are scheduled for this December, and if confirmed, I expect 

to witness Ghana achieve its sixth consecutive peaceful and transparent democratic 

election. The people-to-people links made strong through more than 50 years of a 

continuous and vibrant Peace Corps presence; Fulbright, Humphrey, Community 

College Initiative (CCI) and Kennedy-Lugar Youth Exchange and Study (YES) student exchange programs; and military cooperation through our International Military Education and Training Program, the Africa Contingency Operations Training 

and Assistance Program, the State Partnership Program with the North Dakota 

National Guard, and Africa Command’s Africa Partnership Station are among the 

initiatives I will continue to advance if confirmed. 

Ghana and the United States share an interest in countering terrorism and promoting regional stability. Ghana is one of Africa’s premier peacekeeping partners. 

If confirmed, I will support Ghana’s capacity to promote regional and global stability. This includes combating escalating drug trafficking and human trafficking. 

Protecting the safety and welfare of U.S. citizens will be a top priority. 

Political power in Ghana remains highly centralized and Ghana faces challenges 

in managing its oil resources. With a GDP per capita of $1,286 in 2010, Ghana is 

a lower middle-income country. The Government is committed to a path of reducing 

Ghana’s aid dependency in the medium to long term. U.S. development efforts are 

focused on maintaining sustainable, broad-based economic growth through initiatives such as Feed the Future and the Partnership for Growth. The G8 New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, announced by President Obama under the 

U.S. G8 Presidency, strongly supports private sector investment in agricultural development and nutrition; and Ghana is one of the first three countries where the 

New Alliance will be launched. If confirmed, my priority will be to work with the 

Government of Ghana to enhance Ghana’s economic vitality and to promote U.S. 

commercial opportunities in Ghana. 

President Obama chose Ghana as the site for his historic speech in 2009 about 

‘‘a new moment of promise for Africa.’’ Ghana is living up to that promise, and our 

continued cooperation will enhance the partnership further. As one of only four 

countries in the world selected for the Partnership for Growth, I intend to work 

closely with our Ghanaian partners to support Ghana’s development efforts, not only 

in the areas of power and credit as highlighted in the Joint Country Action Plan, 

but also in areas such as food security and health. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to 

address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you in representing 

the interests of the American people in Ghana. I am happy to answer any questions 

you have.

Senator Coons. Thank you very much, Ambassador Cretz. 

And thank you for your service and for Jeffrey’s service. And I 

look forward to further questions. 

Ms. Malac. 

STATEMENT OF DEBORAH RUTH MALAC, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA 

Ms. MALAC. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I am honored and 

pleased to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee 

to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Liberia. I would like to thank the President and Secretary Clinton for 

the confidence and trust they have placed in me by nominating me 

for this position. 

As I mentioned earlier, I would like to recognize the presence of 

my husband, Ron Olson, and my three children, Nicholas and 

Gregory and Katharine. I am deeply grateful for their unstinting 

love and support, and without it, I certainly would not be sitting 

here today. 

Mr. Chairman, I have been privileged to spend the last 31 years 

representing the United States as a member of the Foreign Service. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

444

The majority of my career has been spent working in Africa and 

on African issues, starting with an assignment to Cameroon in 

1981. That assignment was followed by assignments to South Africa, Senegal, and Ethiopia, interspersed with time in Washington to 

work on issues, such as South Africa’s transition to democracy, 

East African issues, agricultural trade and development, and food 

security. 

Mr. Chairman, the United States and Liberia share a strong 

relationship rooted in our historical ties and preserved through our 

mutual commitment to democracy, human rights, and economic 

prosperity. We have always been a friend to the Liberian people, 

and our commitment is demonstrated through our robust foreign 

assistance. If confirmed, I will continue to strengthen our bilateral 

relationship and leverage our resources to help Liberia overcome 

its challenges to development. 

Mr. Chairman, it has been 9 years since the end of Liberia’s 14-

year civil war, and Liberia has taken significant steps to develop 

democratically and economically. 

Last fall, Liberia held its second free, fair, and transparent 

national election since 2003. The success of these elections demonstrated Liberia’s strong commitment to democracy. President 

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was reelected to her second and final term, 

and she has laid out an ambitious agenda to move Liberia forward. 

If confirmed, I will work to pursue key shared priorities that 

include improving the investment climate, increasing access to 

education, reducing the unemployment rate, and encouraging 

reconciliation. 

Liberia has made progress, but it still faces many challenges. It 

remains one of the most impoverished countries in the world, with 

most Liberians having limited access to health care, education, or 

other government services. There is, however, growing investor 

interest in Liberia, and over the past several years, Liberia has 

negotiated nearly $16 billion in foreign investment. If confirmed, I 

will leverage our existing resources, most notably our robust 

USAID programming, to help the Government of Liberia ensure 

that all Liberians have access to basic rights and services. 

I will also encourage the Government of Liberia to continue to 

create an environment that is conducive to business and investment because sustained economic growth is essential to reducing 

poverty and stabilizing the country. 

Preserving security in Liberia is a priority of both the Liberian 

and U.S. Governments. The United States has been a major player 

in security sector reform, and we will continue this role even as a 

reconfiguration of United Nations Mission in Liberia Forces takes 

place. If confirmed, I will work with the Government of Liberia to 

encourage it to take the necessary steps to continue to build the 

capacity of its security sector. 

Addressing reconciliation is also important to the future stability 

of Liberia. President Sirleaf is committed to reconciliation, and has 

appointed fellow Nobel Peace Laureate Leymah Gbowee to lead 

Liberia’s new national reconciliation initiative. As this process 

moves ahead, it will be important that all Liberians participate 

actively and have their voices heard. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

445

As a partner, the United States can play a supportive role, offering technical or logistical support to the Government of Liberia’s 

efforts. We understand, however, that this process must be Liberian-led and Liberian-owned. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to address you 

today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you to represent 

the interests of the American people in Liberia. And I am happy, 

of course, to answer any questions you may have. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Malac follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DEBORAH RUTH MALAC

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Isakson, and distinguished members of the committee, I am honored and pleased to appear before you today as President Obama’s 

nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Liberia. I 

would like to thank the President and Secretary Clinton for the confidence and trust 

they have placed in me by nominating me for this position. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take the opportunity to recognize my husband, Ron 

Olson, and my three children, sons, Nicholas and Gregory, and daughter, Katharine. 

I am deeply grateful for their strong and unstinting support; without it, I would not 

be seated here today. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have been privileged to spend the 

past 31 years as a member of the Foreign Service, working abroad and here in 

Washington. The majority of my Foreign Service career has been spent working in 

Africa and on African issues, although I started my career expecting to focus on 

issues such as the former Soviet Bloc and missile throw-weights. Instead, the 

Department of State, in its infinite wisdom, sent me to Cameroon, and I was 

hooked. That first assignment was followed by assignments to South Africa, Senegal 

and Ethiopia interspersed with time in Washington to work on South Africa’s transition to democracy, East African issues, agricultural trade and development and 

food security. For the past year, I have served as the Director of the Office of East 

African Affairs. If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to return to West 

Africa. 

Mr. Chairman, the United States and Liberia share a strong relationship rooted 

in our historical ties and preserved through our commitment to democracy, human 

rights, and economic prosperity. We have always been a friend to the Liberian people and our commitment is demonstrated through our robust foreign assistance. If 

confirmed, I will continue to strengthen our bilateral relationship and leverage our 

resources to help Liberia overcome its challenges to development. 

Mr. Chairman, it has been 9 years since the end of Liberia’s 14-year civil war and 

Liberia has taken significant steps to develop democratically and economically. Last 

fall, Liberia held its second free, fair, and transparent national election since 2003. 

The success of these elections demonstrated Liberia’s strong commitment to democracy. As a result, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was reelected to her second and 

final term, and has laid out an ambitious agenda to move Liberia forward. If 

confirmed, I will work to address the key U.S. priorities, which also are priorities 

of the Government of Liberia, and include improving the investment climate, increasing access to education, reducing the unemployment rate, and encouraging 

reconciliation. 

Through a $15 million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Threshold program, Liberia is taking the right steps to advance development and economic 

growth. Liberia’s Threshold Program focuses on improving land rights and access, 

increasing girls’ primary education enrollment and retention, and improving Liberia’s trade policy and practices. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of Liberia to encourage progress on its MCC Scorecard indicators so that Liberia can be eligible for a MCC Compact in the near future. 

Though significant progress has been made, Liberia still faces many challenges. 

Liberia remains one of the most impoverished countries in the world, with most 

Liberians having limited access to health care, education, or other government services. There is, however, growing investor interest in Liberia and over the past 

several years Liberia has negotiated nearly $16 billion in foreign investment. If confirmed, I will leverage our existing resources, most notably our robust USAID programming, to help the Government of Liberia ensure that all Liberians have access 

to basic rights and services. I will also encourage the Government of Liberia to conFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

446

tinue to create an environment conducive to business and investment, as sustained 

economic growth is key to reducing poverty and stabilizing the country. 

Preserving security in Liberia is a priority of both the Liberian and U.S. Governments. The U.N. Secretary General has recommended reducing the United Nations 

Mission in Liberia’s (UNMIL) troop levels from 7,900 to 3,750 over 3 years while 

increasing the U.N. police levels by up to three Formed Police Units. The United 

States has been a major player in security sector reform and will continue this role 

when UNMIL’s reconfiguration takes place. If confirmed, I will work with the Government of Liberia to encourage it to take the necessary steps to continue to build 

the capacity of its security sector. It will be important that the United States, Liberia, and UNMIL and other donor countries work closely together so that when a reconfiguration does occur, the gradual handover of security responsibility from 

UNMIL to Liberia will be handled properly. 

Addressing reconciliation will also be important to the future stability of Liberia. 

The conviction of former Liberian President Charles Taylor for his role in the Sierra 

Leone civil war brings to the forefront the need for Liberia to address the wounds 

left open from its own civil war. President Sirleaf is committed to reconciliation and 

has appointed fellow Nobel Peace Laureate Leymah Gbowee to lead Liberia’s new 

national reconciliation initiative. As this process moves ahead, it will be important 

that all Liberians participate actively and have their voices heard. As a partner, the 

United States can play a supportive role, offering technical or logistical support to 

the Government of Liberia’s efforts. We understand, however, that this process must 

be Liberian-led and Liberian-owned. 

Last, my highest priority, if confirmed, will be the protection of Americans and 

American business interests, including mission personnel, living and traveling in 

Liberia. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you in representing 

the interests of the American people in Liberia. I am happy to answer any 

questions.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ms. Malac. 

Mr. Wharton. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID BRUCE WHARTON, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF ZIMBABWE 

Mr. WHARTON. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I am honored to appear before you today, and grateful to President Obama 

and Secretary Clinton for the confidence that they have placed in 

me as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of Zimbabwe. 

And as I expressed before, I am also deeply honored by the presence of my wife and my son here, and their representation of others in my family. My family has represented the United States well 

in our five overseas assignments, and have been a tremendous support to me. So I thank them for that. 

Having been raised myself in a family full of stories about, and 

respect for, the people of Africa, which is a legacy of my grandparents’ 35 years as missionaries there, and having raised our own 

children in Africa during previous Foreign Service assignments, the 

possibility of returning to Zimbabwe to lead the United States mission is a privilege that is full of personal, as well as professional, 

meaning for my wife and me. 

With full recognition of the complex challenges Zimbabwe faces, 

I am optimistic about that country’s future, and I know that the 

United States has an important role to play in helping the people 

of Zimbabwe build a just, free, and prosperous nation. 

Though battered by more than a decade of political strife and 

economic decline, Zimbabwe retains a foundational human and 

physical infrastructure upon which it can build a strong future. 

And it is in the interest of the United States to be a partner in that 

process. If confirmed, I will continue the work of building producFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

447

tive and respectful relationships with all Zimbabweans of goodwill. 

And I will look forward to working with the representatives of 

other friends of Zimbabwe, especially countries in the SADC region 

in supporting progress on the Global Political Agreement and on 

the SADC roadmap to elections. 

The United States has shown our abiding concern for Zimbabwe 

through the nearly $1 billion in humanitarian relief and healthrelated assistance we have provided just in the last 6 years. But 

we need to move the relationship beyond aid. The people of 

Zimbabwe are fully capable of feeding themselves, of meeting the 

nation’s health and education needs, of building a dynamic political 

system, and restoring their nation’s economy. Zimbabwe can and 

should be a nation of economic opportunities, of respect for the rule 

of law, and the rights of all people. Those are the values that reflect the core beliefs that Americans share with the people of 

Zimbabwe, and those are the values that we should pursue together. 

United States policy in Zimbabwe is not about regime change. 

Only the people of Zimbabwe have the right to choose their government. Our policies support principles, not parties or people. However, when the right to self-determination is denied, the United 

States cannot stand idly by. We will always stand up for the rights 

of Zimbabweans to speak, write, read, meet, and fully participate 

in their nation’s political processes. That was United States policy 

in 1980 when we were the first nation to recognize an independent 

Zimbabwe, and it continues to be our policy. We will not always 

agree with the Government of Zimbabwe, but we will always 

attempt to maintain a respectful and open dialogue. 

The United States stands ready to alter the current restrictions 

on the relationship with Zimbabwe and to forge stronger economic 

and political ties. Full implementation of the Global Political 

Agreement, progress on the Southern African Development Community’s roadmap, and well-managed and credible electoral processes should be triggers for the United States to open a much more 

dynamic relationship with one of Africa’s most important countries. 

If confirmed, I will give special attention to the welfare of American citizens in Zimbabwe, and to meeting with people from across 

the rich spectrum of Zimbabwe’s society, making an assessment of 

the situation there, and offering recommendations on the best way 

forward. 

As we continue to urge democratic development, we must also 

continue to invest in the people of Zimbabwe in order to preserve 

the human capital that is needed to rebuild Zimbabwe in the years 

ahead. I have faith that with this support, the people of Zimbabwe 

will find the best path forward and pursue it successfully. 

Thank you again for the chance to appear before you, and I will 

be happy to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wharton follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID BRUCE WHARTON

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you. I am honored to appear 

before you today, and grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the 

confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic 

of Zimbabwe. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

448

Having grown up in a home full of stories about and respect for the people of Africa—a legacy of my grandparents’ 35 years as missionaries in what was then the 

Belgian Congo—and having raised our own wonderful three children in Southern 

Africa during previous Foreign Service assignments in South Africa and Zimbabwe, 

the possibility of returning to lead a U.S. mission is a privilege that is full of personal as well as professional meaning for my wife and me. 

With full recognition of the complex challenges Zimbabwe faces, I remain optimistic about the country’s future and believe that the United States has an important role to play in helping the people of Zimbabwe build a just, free, and prosperous nation. The trajectory of Zimbabwe’s last 15 years should not obscure the nation’s tremendous potential. Though battered by more than a decade of political 

strife and economic decline, Zimbabwe retains a foundational human and physical 

infrastructure upon which it can build a strong future. It is in the interest of the 

United States to be a partner in that process and, if confirmed, I will continue the 

work of building productive and respectful relationships with all Zimbabweans of 

goodwill. 

The United States has shown its deep and abiding concern for Zimbabwe through 

the nearly $1 billion in humanitarian relief and health-related assistance we have 

provided just in the last 6 years. There is no more explicit expression of our support 

for the people of Zimbabwe than our standing by them through their times of greatest need. But, we need to prepare to move beyond a relationship defined by aid. The 

people of Zimbabwe are fully capable of feeding themselves, meeting the nation’s 

health and education needs, building a dynamic political system, and restoring what 

was once one of the strongest economies in Africa. Zimbabwe can and should be a 

nation of economic opportunities, of respect for the rule of law and the rights of all 

people. Those are values that reflect the core of what Americans share with 

Zimbabweans and that we should pursue together. 

U.S. policy in Zimbabwe is not about regime change. Only the people of Zimbabwe 

have the right to change their government. Our policies support principles, not parties or people. However, when the right to self-determination is denied, as it has 

been in Zimbabwe through restrictions on citizen rights, through political violence, 

and fraudulent and mismanaged elections, the United States cannot stand idly by. 

We have taken principled steps to demonstrate our concern about the actions of 

those responsible for, and those who profit from, miscarriages of the promise 

Zimbabwe offered at independence. We will always stand up for the rights of 

Zimbabweans to speak, write, read, meet, organize, and fully participate in their nation’s political processes. 

If confirmed, I will work to enable Zimbabwe to become a just, prosperous, and 

democratic state that meets the needs of its people, contributes to development in 

the region, and plays an important role in world affairs. That was U.S. policy in 

1980 when we were the first nation to recognize Zimbabwe’s independence, and it 

continues to be our policy. We will not always agree with the Government of 

Zimbabwe, but we will always attempt to maintain a respectful and open dialogue. 

The United States stands ready to alter the current restrictions on our relationship with Zimbabwe and to forge stronger economic and political ties. 

The full implementation of the Global Political Agreement, progress on the Southern African Development Community’s roadmap toward elections, and well-managed 

and credible elections will be a trigger for the U.S. to open a much more dynamic 

relationship with one of Africa’s most important countries. The United States remains open and willing to work with the government to support free and fairly elections. 

If confirmed, I will give special attention to the welfare of American citizens in 

Zimbabwe and to meeting with people from across the rich spectrum of Zimbabwe’s 

society, making an assessment of the situation there and offering recommendations 

on the best way forward. As we continue to urge democratic development, we must 

also continue to invest in the people of Zimbabwe—the health, education, humanitarian aid, and business development work—to preserve the human capital needed 

to rebuild Zimbabwe in the years ahead. I have faith that with this support, once 

given the opportunity to communicate, organize, and express their will, the people 

of Zimbabwe will find the best path forward and pursue it successfully. 

Thank you for the chance to appear before you and I would be happy to answer 

any questions that you might have.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Wharton. 

Mr. Laskaris. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

449

STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER MARK LASKARIS, OF MARYLAND, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA 

Mr. LASKARIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am deeply honored 

to appear before you today, and very grateful to President Obama 

and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as 

their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic of Guinea. 

For my family and me, this is another milestone in our American 

dream and our American journey, both of which began in the chaos 

of post-World War II Greece. My presence here today is made possible by the land of opportunity that embraced my late father in 

1946 and my mother in 1960. 

I approach an assignment in the Republic of Guinea, if confirmed, knowing that Guinea has sent a large number of immigrants to the United States originally via the horrors of the African 

slave trade, but later in the manner of my parents, young people 

seeking better lives for themselves and their future children. 

Indeed a walk down 125th Street in Harlem today shows part of 

a prospering and vibrant Guinean-American community with 

which I will be actively engaged, if confirmed. Together with this 

diaspora, a large community of returned Peace Corps Volunteers, 

former missionaries, and other dedicated Americans, serve as committed advocates for Guinean-American relations and for the welfare of the Republic of Guinea. 

My first exposure to the African Continent was during a 2-year 

stint as a volunteer high school teacher in a township parochial 

school in Galeshewe, South Africa. It was 1989 and 1990, and in 

those 2 years, I lived the miraculous democratic transition led by 

men and women of good will. As hitchhiking was my only means 

of travel, I missed Namibian independence by a few days, but still 

managed to absorb the career lesson that even the most momentous political changes can take place peacefully and democratically. 

My first exposure to the Republic of Guinea was quite the opposite from the inspiration of South Africa. I arrived in Monrovia, 

Liberia, my first Foreign Service posting in 1991, as the countries 

of the Mano River Union were falling into chaos and violence. The 

Guinea I first encountered was host to some 1 million Liberian refugees. Its armed forces served in the West African peacekeeping 

force, then known as ECOMOG. And its government sought to 

avoid the abyss from which Liberia and Sierra Leone are only now 

emerging. This experience suggests to me that if confirmed, I will 

be working in a country that both supports us and needs our 

support. 

The Republic of Guinea has recently been in the headlines for 

the best reasons: real democratic progress after a succession of dictators. But the story behind the headlines reveals the longstanding 

social and economic challenges that impoverish the country and 

stymie its development. 

Have also served in Botswana, Angola, and Burundi, my experience in a number of African conflicts tells me that past performance is indeed an indicator of future performance when it comes to 

countries emerging from dictatorship and civil conflict. To break 

the cycle, to keep the Republic of Guinea from lapsing back into 

authoritarianism, we need to be part of the architecture of democracy, supporting all three branches of government plus media and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

450

civil society. We need engagement with the military to professionalize the force and bring it firmly and irrevocably under elected 

civilian authority. We need to be engaged in poverty relief and disease eradication, as well as in responsible mineral exploitation and 

sustainable agriculture. 

The Republic of Guinea achieved a landmark election in 2010, its 

first free and fair democratic Presidential campaign. President 

Alpha Conde, who spent decades advocating for democratic change, 

emerged as Guinea’s first ever democratically elected head of state, 

ending 50 years of despotic rule and military repression. However, 

Guinea’s transition to a fully functioning democracy will not be 

complete until the long-anticipated legislative elections are held. I 

do not need to remind this chamber on the importance of the legislative branch to sustainable democracy. If confirmed, I will have no 

higher priority than helping Guinea to seat a new legislature and 

then helping that branch of government to fulfill its critical role—

its critical institutional role. 

In the Republic of Guinea, we have a willing but technically limited partner on regional and international issues. If confirmed, I 

will work with the Government of Guinea on a coordinated 

approach to regional crises in Mali and Guinea-Bissau. I will do my 

best to strengthen cooperation on counterterrorism and counternarcotics issues, as well as other forms of transnational crimes, 

such as trafficking in persons and money laundering. I will also 

make promoting the safety and welfare of U.S. citizens my highest 

priority and seek out commercial opportunities for U.S. companies. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to address you 

today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you in representing the interests of the American people in Guinea. And I am 

happy to answer any questions you might have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Laskaris follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER MARK LASKARIS

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am deeply honored to appear before you today, and grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me as their nominee for Ambassador to the Republic 

of Guinea. 

For my family and me, this is another milestone in our American journey and our 

American dream, both of which began in the chaos of post-World War II Greece. My 

presence here today is made possible by the land of opportunity that embraced my 

late father in 1946 and my mother in 1960. 

I approach an assignment in the Republic of Guinea—if confirmed—knowing that 

Guinea has sent a large number of immigrants to the United States . . . originally 

via the horrors of the African slave trade, but later in the manner of my parents, 

young people seeking better lives for themselves and their future children. A walk 

down 125th Street in Harlem shows part of a prospering and vibrant GuineanAmerican community with which I will be engaged, if confirmed. Together with this 

diaspora, a large community of returned Peace Corps Volunteers, former missionaries, and other dedicated Americans serve as committed advocates for GuineanAmerican relations and for the welfare of the Republic of Guinea. 

My first exposure to the African continent was a 2-year stint as a volunteer high 

school teacher in a township parochial school in Galeshewe, South Africa. It was 

1989 and 1990, and in those two years, I lived the miraculous democratic transition 

led by men and women of goodwill; as hitchhiking was my only means of travel, 

I missed Namibian independence by a few days, but still managed to absorb the career lesson that even the most momentous political changes can take place peacefully and democratically. 

My first exposure to the Republic of Guinea was quite the opposite from the inspiration of South Africa. I arrived in Monrovia, Liberia—my first Foreign Service postFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

451

ing in 1991—as the countries of the Mano River Union were falling into chaos and 

violence. The Guinea I first encountered was host to some 1 million Liberian refugees; its armed forces served in the West African peacekeeping force, known as the 

Economic Community of West African State Monitoring Group or ECOMOG; and its 

government sought to avoid the abyss from which Liberia and Sierra Leone are only 

now emerging. 

This experience suggests to me that—if confirmed—I will be working in a country 

that both supports us and needs our support. The Republic of Guinea has recently 

been in the headlines for the best reasons—real democratic progress after a succession of dictators—but the story behind the headlines reveals the longstanding social 

and economic challenges that impoverish the country and stymie its development. 

My experience in a number of African conflicts tells me that past performance is 

indeed an indicator of future performance when it comes to countries emerging from 

dictatorship and civil conflict. To break the cycle, to keep the Republic of Guinea 

from lapsing back into authoritarianism, we need to be part of the architecture of 

democracy, supporting all three branches of government plus free media and civil 

society. We need engagement with the military to professionalize the force and bring 

it firmly, irrevocably under elected civilian authority. We need to be engaged in poverty relief and disease eradication, as well as in responsible mineral exploitation 

and sustainable agriculture. 

The Republic of Guinea achieved a landmark election in 2010, its first free and 

fair democratic Presidential campaign. President Alpha Conde, who spent decades 

advocating for democratic change, emerged as Guinea’s first-ever democratically 

elected head of state, ending 50 years of despotic rule and military repression. However, Guinea’s transition to a fully functioning democracy will not be complete until 

the long-anticipated legislative elections are held. I do not need to remind this 

chamber on the importance of the legislative branch to sustainable democracy; if 

confirmed, I will have no higher priority than helping Guinea to seat a new legislature and then motivating that branch of government to fulfill its critical institutional role. 

In the Republic of Guinea, we have a willing but technically limited partner on 

regional and international issues. If confirmed, I will work with the Government of 

Guinea on a coordinated approach to regional crises in Mali and Guinea-Bissau; I 

will do my best to strengthen cooperation on counterterrorism and counternarcotics 

issues, as well as other forms of transnational crimes, such as trafficking in persons 

and money laundering. I will also make promoting the safety and welfare of U.S. 

citizens my highest priority and seek out commercial opportunities for U.S. companies. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to 

address you today. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you in representing 

the interests of the American people in Guinea. I am happy to answer any questions.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Laskaris. Thank you to all four 

of you for those thoughtful, concise, well-rounded summaries of the 

challenges facing you in the posts to which you go, and for helping 

me gain some further insight into the things that motivate you to 

this. Whether it is a family history of missionary service, or personal experience as a Peace Corps Volunteer, or personal experience teaching in a township in South Africa, it is always helpful. 

You know, I get these profiles and backgrounds. It is always helpful to see and hear the personal experience. And the fact that, 

literally, you have spent decades in the Foreign Service across the 

region and across the world further leavens my respect for your 

willingness to serve. 

I am going to ask a series of questions that sort of looking at the 

interplay between security, democracy, and economic development. 

And I am interested in a variety of issues. How can we most effectively partner with these nations? How can we work with regional 

institutions? And what are the things we are doing right, doing 

wrong. And I will just ask a series of questions in order, if I might. 

I have about 20 minutes, and unless another member of the committee surprises by showing up at this point, I am simply going to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

452

keep asking them. I do not think we need to limit me by minutes 

or rounds or anything like that. We are not used to having that 

much freedom here. 

So if I might, Ambassador Cretz, first, I think you are the one 

nominee who referenced on the security sector both IMET and the 

state partnership. I am quite interested to hear from you in the 

future how you think the State partnership between, I think it is 

the North Dakota National Guard. Is it North or South Dakota? 

Ambassador CRETZ. North. 

Senator COONS. North Dakota and Ghana. If I am not mistaken, 

there is a North Dakota National Guard State Partnership with 

Ghana. And this is something I have discussed with General 

Hamm as well as with some of the leaders of the National Guard 

Bureau. Our own Delaware General Vavala is the current chair of 

the adjutant’s nationally. 

I think there is a lot of potential for the State Partnership Program, particularly in nations where you have militaries where 

accepting civilian rule, as is the case in Guinea, transitioning out 

of great conflict, as is the case in Liberia, have a lot to offer. 

If you have any comments for me about how our IMET work or 

the State Partnership Program with the National Guards could be 

more effective, or what promise you think it might hold, I would 

appreciate that. 

Ambassador CRETZ. Mr. Chairman, I think that, first of all, the 

relationship with AFRICOM is a very important one. 

And having worked very closely with General Ward and now 

over the past year and a half with General Hamm, I am fairly 

aware of the different kinds of activities that AFRICOM can bring 

to bear. 

We do have a close relationship with the military in Ghana. They 

are apolitical. They are very professional. They have been a bulwark in terms of the peacekeeping efforts, whether through the 

African Union ECOWAS or the U.N. throughout the region and 

throughout the world, in fact. 

I think there is a great deal of opportunity to expand that. I 

think we have seen already that those countries that take advantage of our IMET programs, we find those people return to their 

countries very respectful certainly of the U.S. military, and certainly wanting to get more of U.S. expertise. 

So I think with respect to the relationship and the better coordination that we could do with the States, I certainly am willing to 

look at how we can develop that relationship further. I think that 

the National Guard units, of which my son is a member, especially 

in Delaware, bring to bear a lot of expertise that these countries 

can use in coping with the various crises, et cetera. And certainly 

given the issues that Ghana faces, for example, in the explosion of 

drug trafficking throughout the region, in terms of the problems in 

the Gulf of Guinea with piracy, et cetera, that there will be ample 

scope to expand that relationship between our military in the 

State, AFRICOM, and the Guinean Army as well. 

Senator COONS. Well, thank you. I will be interested to stay in 

touch about regional security, training, what ECOWAS is hoping to 

do and able to do. I think your experience in Libya will be particularly relevant here. And I think AFRICOM has the opportunity as 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

453

a combatant command that does not have a lot of legacy assets 

that is relatively new to be a leader in how we imagine a new relationship for security with the whole region, where we can deploy 

assets, such as the National Guard, that have not really been utilized with the strength that I think is possible here. 

You mentioned in your statement new, innovative processes for 

economic growth. And I am particularly in and concerned about our 

economic relationship with Ghana. I think it is very strong. I am 

hopeful that the second MCC compact will be quite successful. If 

I remember correctly, you mentioned it is around power and power 

generation. 

I would be interested in what you see as the opportunities and 

limitations for economic growth with Ghana. They have had some 

challenges with extraction recently in terms of their oil discoveries. 

So, if you would, just to what were you referring in terms of innovative economic development procedures? And how do we make 

sure that Ghana does not follow the path of Nigeria, but instead 

is more like Norway? And what are the developmental issues you 

see tackling? 

Ambassador CRETZ. Right. Well, I think, Mr. Chairman, that 

we—first of all, I think there is a great opportunity for American 

businesses to invest and trade in Ghana. And just as I have 

throughout my career, and especially in the last several years in 

terms of positions when I have had the ability to interact with 

American companies, this will be a main priority certainly of mine 

should I be confirmed and take over the mission. 

I think we have a lot of tools available to help Ghana improve 

what—even the dramatic improvements that they have made in 

trade and investment and in developing their economy over the 

past several years. We have the Africa Growth and Opportunity 

Act. We have the West Africa trade hub. We have the MCC, as you 

said. And I think the idea with the MCC is that we are going to 

be able to have a more mature relationship as we discuss the possibility of having a second MCC pact with Ghana because it will follow on the agrarian reforms that were undertaken in the first pact. 

Only this time we are asking them to pay a certain amount of the 

funding, and we are also asking them for some policy reform as 

part of that compact. So I think that that would be a very possible, 

very fruitful area for cooperation. 

The Partnership for Growth is also a very important aspect of 

the economic tools that we can utilize to help Ghana in this way 

because what it does is with no specific funding, it basically lays 

out a framework whereby the United States Government adopts a 

whole of government approach to helping Ghana develop its economy, and says that, look, if you have certain issues, you have certain problems within your economy that need to be improved, such 

as access to credit, the power infrastructure. 

We as the United States are willing to take a look at the various 

kind of policy changes, adaptions, or see what flexibility we have 

in response to policy changes that you are willing to take as well. 

And I think at the end of the day, if you look at the various economic tools that we have to work with Ghana, what they do is they 

help open—improve the climate in Ghana so as to make it easier 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

454

and more attractive for American companies and others to come in 

to help them with their infrastructure. 

So I think there’s tremendous opportunity. And, you know, as 

you mentioned, the loss of the FCS officer is a blow, there is no 

doubt. And I experienced the same thing in Libya where Libya is 

on the verge of an explosion in terms of American business, especially to help them rebuild after 42 years of the devastation of 

Gadhafi’s rule. And we lost that officer. 

But there are ways, you know. I leave it to the Department of 

Commerce colleagues to explain what the rationale behind it is. 

But we did try to find other ways to do it. But at the end of the 

day, given the importance of helping these countries move forward, 

and given the importance of having American business, and help 

these countries, and invest in them, that the Embassy—other parts 

of the Embassy and the mission are going to have to pick up the 

slack because we cannot do without commercial advocacy and getting American trade, you know, increased, especially in a country 

like Ghana, which is poised for even more great success in that 

area. 

Senator COONS. I agree. Thank you, Ambassador Cretz. And I 

look forward to staying in contact as you support their work in 

preparation for the December elections, and as you further develop 

and implement the second MCC. There is also a long-standing relationship between Delaware actually and GMSA—Delaware State 

University’s leadership and GMSA, which provides critical career 

training for certain mid-level managers. And Ghana is also of real 

interest to me. 

If I might, Ms. Malac, given the limitations of time, I will move 

to each of you, if I might. 

I am very interested in the National Reconciliation Initiative 

which you referenced. Given your prior experience, you, I know, 

can give some insight into how it is similar to or different from the 

reconciliation commissions that Kenya is currently sort of winding 

up, one that really was largely a regional model in South Africa 

and different others in other countries. What do you see as the 

prospects for reconciliation through this reconciliation initiative, 

and how will you support it as Ambassador? 

Ms. MALAC. Thank you, Senator. We are still waiting for the 

fuller details on what this newest initiative is going to look like, 

and we expect that that will be forthcoming very soon. It appears 

to be something that will look different than the Truth-in-Reconciliation Commission, for example, that has been held before. So at 

this point, it is very difficult for me to give you any sort of real 

insight into any estimate of what might happen or how it might 

play out. 

I think, as I said in my comments, the role that the United 

States can really play is to, as appropriate, and where we can find 

ways to do so, to provide technical and/or logistical support in order 

to ensure that those kinds of constraints do not prevent the process 

from going forward. But it certainly is critical that is a nationwide 

effort and that Liberians from all parts of the country and all factions are able to participate and feel that they can do so. 

Senator COONS. And security sector reform, as you referenced, as 

the U.N. presence is drawn down, given some recent incidents in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

455

the border with Cote d’Ivoire, and given the tragic national history, 

what more can we and should we be doing, and to what extent will 

we be taking advantage of some of the partnerships that Ambassador Cretz also referenced as being relevant to Ghana? 

Ms. MALAC. Security is a huge concern for both us and for the 

Liberian Government. I mean, given the history that the country 

has, it is clear that we need to continue to be vigilant in the security sector. 

I do believe that the Government of Liberia has certainly responded appropriately after the recent incident, has worked with 

the Government of Cote d’Ivoire, both through UNMIL and through 

UNOSE, to take steps to move more forces into the region, to try 

to at least shut down some of that cross-border activity. 

But it is going to be an ongoing challenge. It is something that 

we are going to have to watch as UNMIL starts this drawdown, 

and certainly President Sirleaf has expressed her concern about 

this phased withdrawal. There will be a requirement for very close 

coordination both between the United States, the Government of 

Liberia, UNMIL, and other donors who are active in this sector to 

ensure that this all happens in a very manageable and responsible 

fashion. It is going to be still a long process to get to the point 

where we have enough capacity within Liberia itself to provide for 

its own security. 

But if confirmed, certainly this will be a very high priority for 

me and will be something that I suspect will take a great deal of 

my time and energy. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Mr. Laskaris referenced the vibrant Guinean

diaspora community. There is certainly a strong Liberian diaspora 

community that just by coincidence has a strong footprint in the 

State of Delaware. The last time I saw President Johnson Sirleaf, 

I was referencing that there was a reunion of an Episcopal high 

school from Liberia that has folks from all over the United States, 

as well as two very large family reunions happening in Delaware 

of Liberians. 

I think this is an important emerging strategy for economic development, helping access American entrepreneurship, financing, 

export opportunities. What advantage will you take of the tools 

available to an ambassador? You mentioned $16 billion, if I am not 

mistaken, in foreign direct investment in Liberia. 

I was very concerned at my first meeting with President Johnson 

Sirleaf about her comments about the Chinese and their very sizable infrastructure investments, her desire for partnership with the 

United States, but our very real lack of available programs or resources outside of MCC or Partnership for Growth. 

What advice would you have for me about how we might 

strengthen those opportunities, and what do you hope to do as 

Ambassador? 

Ms. MALAC. Thank you, Senator. Well, you have raised several 

very good issues here. 

I think on the diaspora side, there is, in fact, a program 

through—both through UNDP, and USAID itself provides some 

funding to help try to match individuals and organizations within 

the diaspora with Liberia to bring particular skills or expertise to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

456

bear in different sectors. And so certainly this is actually something I just learned about in the last couple of days, and have great 

interest in, and will certainly make it a priority to find out more 

about this program, having worked with other countries where we 

have a vibrant diaspora—Somalia comes to mind. 

We believe very firmly that they can play a role in a country like 

Liberia in a post-conflict situation where there is so much need and 

so much to be done. So I can assure you that at least in that regard, we are looking—I would be looking, if confirmed, to build 

some of those bridges and work to support efforts that the Government of Liberia itself has put into place to try to tap into that diaspora expertise because there is a lot of potential there. 

As for the Chinese, they are a relatively small presence, as it 

were, in Liberia compared to some places on the continent. But, of 

course, they are looking, as they always are, to enlarge that footprint. They are currently working on World Bank grants to build 

road infrastructure in Liberia. I mean, again, there is a lot to be 

done in terms of infrastructure building, so there is lots of room for 

everyone. 

You can have my pledge that if confirmed, I will do everything 

I can to identify opportunities for U.S. business, not just in the 

infrastructure arena obviously, but in all aspects of the economy

because there is potential there, I think, for U.S. businesses. And 

we are only at the beginning end of that. 

But we are seeing progress in that regard. U.S. presence on the 

economic side has been steadily increasing, and I can assure you 

if confirmed, that it will be a high priority for me. 

Thank you. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. Mr. Wharton, Zimbabwe is certainly 

a nation with great economic potential that has gone through one 

of the worst economic collapses we have seen in recent history. I 

have in my office—what is it? I think it is a $100 trillion bank note. My kids thought it

was fake. Sadly, it is not. My sense is they have sort of clawed

their way back out by largely adopting the U.S. dollar’s working 

currency. 

I would be interested in hearing what you view—I appreciated 

your statement that our policy is not regime change, but rather the 

opportunity for self-determination. There have been calls from 

other of our allies at SADC and U.N. and others for us to either 

review or relax our sanctions. On what conditions and at what 

timeline do you think we would consider that, and then how will 

you support appropriate political progress, hopefully forward progress in Zimbabwe? 

Mr. WHARTON. Thank you, Senator. I think that, in fact, those 

are key issues in the relationship between the United States and 

Zimbabwe, and in Zimbabwe’s way forward. 

One of the problems with sanctions that I am sure you are aware 

of is that they have turned into talking points for the ruling party 

in Zimbabwe. 

I do not think, though, that the evidence supports the thesis that 

American sanctions have hurt Zimbabwe’s economy. I note that the 

Zimbabwe Democracy Economic Recovery Act has been in force for 

11 years now, but in the last 3 years, Zimbabwe’s economy has 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

457

grown by 7, 8, 9 percent per year. Per capita GDP has grown about 

5 percent a year. And the agricultural and mining sectors have 

grown by nearly 50 percent. 

So I think that the key to continued economic development in 

Zimbabwe actually has more to do with economic policies in Zimbabwe, and establishing a sort of transparent framework and rule 

of law that will encourage investors, businesses, and Americans, I 

hope among them, to take another look at Zimbabwe. 

I believe that the individual sanctions that we have placed on 

about 120 individuals and about 70 entities have had an effect. 

And, again, I would cite recent economic growth as an indication 

that these specific sanctions and travel restrictions have not hurt 

the larger Zimbabwean economy. 

I believe, though, that we do need to make it clear that our policies are flexible. They are not static. And we should be able to 

adjust them in response to democratic progress and progress on the 

rule of law on the ground in Zimbabwe. 

Some of the benchmarks that I think would be important I mentioned in my statement: continued progress on the Global Political 

Agreement, clear progress toward the SADC roadmap on elections. 

And one of the things that I think would be especially important 

would be an express commitment from the Government of 

Zimbabwe to welcome international as well as national election 

monitoring groups, groups that could come in 6 months or even a 

year before the election to take a look at and certify, essentially 

build international confidence that the people of Zimbabwe have, in 

fact, had the right to choose their own government. 

So those are some of the benchmarks that I think would be critical as we look at adjusting our own policy. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. Forgive me because I am greatly

interested in the transition in Zimbabwe. I have to go preside over 

the body, the Senate, in 7 minutes. And so I am going to turn to 

Mr. Laskaris for a final question, if I might. 

I was just interested to read about the Guinean mining code of 

2011 and some of the other changes that they are making in the 

direction of post-security sector reform and economic reform. What 

do you think are the most important steps Guinea can take to stabilize and secure its transition toward both rule of law and predictability and civilian supervision of the military? And what do you 

think are going to be the most important steps you will take as 

Ambassador in these areas? 

Mr. LASKARIS. Well, thank you, Senator. I think one thing we 

have learned in the Africa Bureau over the last two decades is that 

elections are necessary, but not sufficient, for democratic development. We held a successful election, but we realized that what I 

call the architecture of democracy needs to follow along with that. 

And so let us start on the security side. One of the few forms of 

military assistance that we did not suspend as a result of the coup 

in Guinea is a security sector reform advisor who is embedded in 

the Guinean ministry of defense. And that person works with 

regional, with donors, and local counterparts trying to devise the 

policy moving forward on reforming the security services. And that 

is specifically professionalizing it, bringing it firmly and irrevocably 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

458

under the control of elected civilian authorities, improving its 

human rights record, improving its civil military relations. 

I think we need to give the Government of Guinea a very clear 

roadmap on the conditions under which IMET would be resumed. 

And if we do that, I will report faithfully back to the Department 

and let the Washington policy community make a determination as 

if those conditions had been met. If those conditions are met, I 

would recommend moving to an IMET program, what we used to 

call expanded IMET, which is the focus on civil military relations, 

professionalization of the force. 

As I mentioned in my statement, Senator, Guinea has been a 

reliable and consistent troop contributor to regional peacekeeping, 

both under the ECOWAS umbrella and under the United Nations 

umbrella. I think it is an area of real mutual interest that we get 

the Guinean Armed Forces into the peacekeeping function through 

ACODA and through subregional and international means. 

So, again, given a roadmap to the Government of the Republic 

of Guinea, if they meet the conditions for resumption of that kind 

of aid, I think we need to be looking at Guinea as a troop contributor and folding it into broader Africana activities on the continent. 

On the rule of law side, sir, No. 1, I think there is a national reconciliation commission in Guinea. From what I can tell, it really 

has yet to be fleshed out. It has really yet to function. I think one 

of our key priorities as donors, as the United States Government, 

is to end the culture of impunity in Guinea, and you do that 

through a transitional justice mechanism. It can be the Truth-inReconciliation Commission model of South Africa or the Rwandan 

Cachaca model of tribal justice. 

Guinea is an overwhelmingly Islamic country. It can come 

through the institutions of Islam. It can come through the indigenous tribal institutions of the country. What the United States 

thinks of that is less important than what the Guineans think of 

the legitimacy of that process. So if confirmed, I will get out there 

and try to work within the context of Guinean culture to find something that the Guinean people regard as a legitimate means of 

addressing the crimes of the past. 

On the question of the mining law, specifically, and drawing on 

your question to my colleague about China, I think the United 

States mining industry should welcome free and fair competition 

on a level playing field. So I think it is my obligation as chief of 

mission, if confirmed, to make sure the regulatory system is free, 

it is transparent, and it meets the world-class standard, is capable 

of attracting world-class companies, including those from the 

United States. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Mr. Laskaris. 

Mr. Wharton, Ms. Malac, Ambassador Cretz, I am deeply interested in the issues we have raised today and wish I could dedicate 

more time to it. One of the things I have not done as a Senator 

is be late to preside, so I hope to maintain that now. 

Jeffrey, thank you for your service. I am a past honorary commander of the 166th, and I hope that if there is anything my office 

or I could do to support you, you will let me know. 

To everyone from the families of these four very talented nominees, thank you for being with us here today. And I look forward 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

459

to hearing from you as you serve as our Ambassadors in very important regions. I know Senator Isakson and I really enjoy serving 

together and intend to travel regularly to Africa in the years 

ahead. It is my hope to continue on this subcommittee for some 

time, and so developing relationships and knowing how we can 

support and sustain you in your very important work is of real 

value to me. And I believe I also speak for Senator Isakson in that 

regard. We are both very grateful for your willingness to serve. 

We will keep the record open for a week for any member of the 

committee who may wish to submit questions for the record. 

Senator COONS. We are otherwise for today adjourned. Congratulations. 

[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(461)

NOMINATIONS OF MARCIE RIES, JOHN KOENIG, MICHAEL KIRBY, THOMAS ARMBRUSTER, AND GRETA CHRISTINE HOLTZ 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Marcie B. Ries, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador 

to the Republic of Bulgaria 

John M. Koenig, of Washington, to be Ambassador to the Republic 

of Cyprus 

Hon. Michael David Kirby, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Serbia 

Thomas Hart Armbruster, of New York, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of the Marshall Islands 

Greta Christine Holtz, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Shaheen, Menendez, and Barrasso. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator SHAHEEN. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome. I am 

pleased to open these nomination hearings this afternoon and 

pleased to be joined by Ranking Member Senator Barrasso from 

Wyoming. 

Today the Senate Foreign Relations Committee considers the 

nominations of Marcie Ries to be the U.S. Ambassador to Bulgaria; 

John Koenig to be the Ambassador to Cyprus; Michael Kirby to be 

the Ambassador to Serbia; Thomas Armbruster to be Ambassador 

to the Marshall Islands; and Greta Holtz to be Ambassador to 

Oman. 

We have a wide variety of posts under consideration today and 

an impressive panel of Career Foreign Service nominees. Each of 

you will be critical in helping to meet U.S. responsibilities and protecting American interests throughout Europe, the gulf, and the 

Pacific. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

462

First on the agenda today, the committee is going to examine our 

relationship with Bulgaria, and as some of you may have already 

heard, this afternoon there was an explosion in Bulgaria on a bus 

carrying tourists from Israel. It killed at least seven civilians and 

wounded many more. Early reports suggest that this was a suicide 

bomb attack likely aimed at innocent Israeli civilians. If true, it 

represents the kind of cowardly attack that has been condemned by 

civilized society across the world. We must all stand together to 

strongly condemn those individuals responsible for the attack and 

to hold accountable any associated terrorist organizations or 

nations who played a role in this heinous and senseless violence 

against innocent civilians. 

There have been a number of attempted attacks against Israeli 

diplomats in recent months around the world, and if this explosion 

proves to be a similar attack, it will be part of a troubling pattern 

that should not be accepted by the international community. I am 

confident that the United States will do everything in its power to 

work with Bulgarian and Israeli officials to fully investigate the 

attack and reveal those responsible. And when we get to the question and answer portion of this afternoon’s hearing, I will ask the 

nominee to be Ambassador to Bulgaria if she would comment. 

As a relatively new member of the NATO alliance, Bulgaria has 

contributed significantly to the military and training effort in 

Afghanistan and it continues to provide the United States with several of its military bases for joint training exercises in Southeast 

Europe. As one of the poorest countries in the European Union, 

Bulgaria faces serious issues with respect to organized crime, corruption, and trafficking which need to be more robustly addressed. 

This afternoon we will also consider U.S. policies with respect to 

the Republic of Cyprus, a critical ally of the United States and an 

EU Member State that took over the rotating Presidency of the 

European Union this month. As I and 26 other U.S. Senators attested to in a letter to President Obama last fall, the U.S.-Cyprus 

friendship remains an anchor of American foreign policy in the 

strategically important Mediterranean region, and our relationship 

is based on shared traditions of freedom, democracy, and a marketbased economy. In fact, one of the strongest components of our 

bilateral relationship is the active and vibrant Hellenic-American 

community in the United States, and if you will forgive me for 

being parochial, particularly in my home State of New Hampshire 

where we have the highest percentage of Hellenic Americans in the 

country. 

The ongoing division of Cyprus has lasted for far too long, and 

a fair and lasting reunification agreement which benefits all Cypriots is in everyone’s strategic interest. I hope the United States 

will continue to encourage all parties, including Turkey, to work 

toward a fair resolution. 

We will also discuss U.S. relations with Serbia, a critically important country in the challenging region of the Western Balkans. 

Serbia’s most recent elections have brought new leadership to the 

country with Tomislav Nikolic and his Serbian Progressive Party 

winning the Presidency and leading the new parliamentary coalition there. The new leadership has committed to continue the 

previous administration’s path toward EU integration. I hope that 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

463

Belgrade will make progress in the ongoing dialogue with Kosovo 

and will be a constructive partner with the international community in Bosnia. I share the concerns of our State Department over 

recent comments by Serbia’s new leadership denying the 

Srebrenica genocide, and I would urge the Nikolic administration 

to do more to promote reconciliation rather than divisiveness at 

this important time for the Western Balkans. 

Today we will also consider America’s relationship with the Marshall Islands, a country in the northern Pacific that has long had 

a unique free association agreement with the United States since 

it gained its independence in 1986—the Marshall Islands, obviously, not the United States. The Marshall Islands also provide a 

critical missile defense base for the United States in the Pacific. 

And finally today we will examine U.S. policies with respect to 

Oman, a strategically located sultanate in the Persian Gulf. The 

United States has long had a constructive security partnership 

with Oman, and despite some important political reforms over the 

course of the last several decades, protests in the early part of last 

year highlight the importance of the United States doing more to 

encourage the sultanate to continue to open up its political process 

and give the people of Oman a voice in its government. 

Now, before introducing our panel, I will turn over the chair to 

the ranking member, Senator Barrasso, for his statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman. And I would like to associate myself with your remarks about 

the act of violence in Bulgaria and the senseless loss of life of 

Israeli citizens. So I appreciate your comments and we know it is 

a heartfelt and great concern. 

Today the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations meets to consider five positions from different areas around the globe. Each of 

your nominations is important to fostering vital relationships and 

promoting U.S. national interests. There are real challenges ahead, 

and it is important that the United States continues to be a strong 

leader across the globe. Should you represent our Nation as a U.S. 

Ambassador, it is important that each of you, No. 1, provide strong 

stewardship of American taxpayer dollars; No. 2, demonstrate professionalism and good judgment; and No. 3, vigorously advocate for 

the priorities of the United States. 

I look forward to hearing your goals for each of these countries 

and your plan for achieving them, and I join Madam Chairman in 

congratulating each and every one of you on your nominations. And 

I want to extend also a warm welcome to all of your family and 

friends who are here joining you today. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. 

Today we have five distinguished nominees with wide-ranging 

experience and expertise. All five members of our panel are career 

members of the Foreign Service who have served extensively in 

leadership posts around the world and here in Washington. Together the panel represents over 14 decades of experience working 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

464

in the Foreign Service. And I must say none of you look old enough 

to—even combined—represent 14 decades. That is a very long time. 

But first, going from right to left—at least my right to your left—

up first we have Ambassador Marcie Ries, nominated to be the 

United States Ambassador to Bulgaria. Ambassador Ries is currently the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Arms 

Control, Verification, and Compliance and has previously served as 

the United States Ambassador to Albania. 

Next, we have John Koenig who is nominated to be our Ambassador to the Republic of Cyprus. Mr. Koenig most recently served 

as the political advisor to the Allied Joint Force Command in 

Naples and as the Deputy Chief of Mission in Berlin. 

We also have Ambassador Michael Kirby, the nominee to be the 

United States Ambassador to Serbia. He is currently the Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs and previously served as the United States Ambassador to Moldova. 

Mr. Thomas Armbruster has been nominated to be the United 

States Ambassador to the Marshall Islands. He is currently a diplomat in residence at City College in New York and was previously 

the consul general at the United States consulate in Vladivostok, 

Russia. 

And finally today we have Greta Holtz, the nominee to be our 

Ambassador to Oman. Ms. Holtz is the Deputy Assistant Secretary 

of State for Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of Near Eastern 

Affairs, and prior to that, she was the director of provincial affairs 

at the United States Embassy in Baghdad. 

Congratulations to each of you on your nominations. We thank 

you for taking on these important jobs and look forward to hearing 

from you this afternoon. 

And I would just ask when you are testifying, if you would feel 

free to introduce any family or friends who are here with you. We 

understand that we ask a lot of your families when you are serving 

in our diplomatic core, and we want to have the opportunity to 

thank them as well for their service jointly with you. So I thank 

all of you. 

I am actually going to begin this afternoon with Ms. Holtz 

because we are still expecting some people in the audience, and

so we are going to left to right. So if you would begin with your 

testimony. 

STATEMENT OF GRETA CHRISTINE HOLTZ, OF MARYLAND, TO 

BE AMBASSADOR TO THE SULTANATE OF OMAN 

Ms. HOLTZ. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman and distinguished members of the committee. I thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today. 

I am very honored to be President Obama’s nominee to serve as 

Ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman. I deeply appreciate the confidence that the President and Secretary Clinton have shown in 

me. 

If confirmed by the Senate, I will employ the full range of our 

diplomatic tools to help achieve our goal of a stable, secure, and 

democratic Middle East. I will work with our Omani partners on 

counterterrorism, counterproliferation, and encourage their efforts 

to promote transparency, accountability, and reform. With our priFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

465

vate sector partners, I will encourage expansion of the commercial 

ties between the United States and Oman, together with efforts to 

diversify the Omani economy through the development of entrepreneurship and the additional empowerment of women and youth. 

Finally, I will work with the Government of Oman to promote the 

growth of independent civil society and deepen the people-to-people 

engagement that we have between our two countries. 

Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, for allowing me recognize my family. I have here today with me my husband, Paco; our 

two daughters, Victoria and Alexandra; and a dear friend Annie. 

Our son, Anthony, is in music camp in Michigan and cannot be 

with us today. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. Can we just ask you all if you 

would raise your hands? Great. Thank you. 

Ms. HOLTZ. Thank you very much. 

I want to thank them for their endless support through accompanied and unaccompanied tours in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Tunisia, 

Syria, Turkey, and Iraq. They have loved our tours together in the 

region and have been stoic during long separations. 

The United States and Oman have shared a strong and dynamic 

relationship since the earliest days of our Nation’s history. This 

bond dates back to 1790 when the Boston brig Rambler entered the 

port of Muscat. In 1833, the United States and Oman concluded a 

treaty of friendship and navigation. 

The United States and Oman enjoy an excellent security relationship and work together to pursue shared regional strategic 

objectives, enhanced border security, and freedom and safety of 

navigation in vital shipping lanes. Operation Enduring Freedom, 

Operation Iraqi Freedom, and other contingency operations have 

benefited from Omani support and cooperation. The Omani military is well trained, pursues a focused strategy, and is regarded as 

one of the most professional armed forces in the region. If confirmed, I will work hard to broaden and deepen the decades-long 

security relationship between the United States and Oman. 

From the United Nations to the Gulf Cooperation Council and 

the Arab League, Oman has played an active and helpful role in 

multilateral diplomacy. In neighboring Yemen, Oman invests significant resources in a strategy of stabilization through political 

engagement, development aid, and humanitarian assistance. Oman 

is a strong partner of the United States in countering terrorism 

and extremism in the Arabian Peninsula. 

Since Sultan Qaboos bin Said came to power in 1970, Oman has 

made dramatic gains in its development, emerging as a modern 

state with first-class infrastructure and modern educational institutions. In the 2010 U.N. Human Development Report, Oman 

ranked No. 1 out of the 135 countries studied for progress in the 

previous 40 years in human development which focuses on 

education, access to quality health care, and other basic living 

standards. 

The sultan has demonstrated his ongoing interest in partnering 

with the institutions of higher education around the world, including our own. In 2011, Oman established a new scholarship program 

through which more than 500 young Omanis have enrolled in 

higher education in the United States. Last October, the sultan 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

466

funded an endowed professorship of Middle East studies at the College of William and Mary. 

Madam chairman, with your permission, I will end my oral testimony here and submit the rest as my written statement. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Holtz follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GRETA CHRISTINE HOLTZ

Madam Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I thank you for 

the opportunity to appear before you today. 

I am honored to be President Obama’s nominee to serve as Ambassador to the 

Sultanate of Oman. I deeply appreciate the confidence that the President and Secretary Clinton have shown in me. If confirmed by the Senate, I will employ the full 

range of our diplomatic tools to help achieve our goal of a stable, secure, and democratic Middle East. I will work with our Omani partners on counterterrorism and 

counterproliferation, and will encourage their efforts to promote transparency and 

accountability. With our private sector partners, I will encourage expansion of the 

commercial ties between the United States and Oman together with efforts to diversify the Omani economy through the development of entrepreneurship, and the 

empowerment of women and youth. Finally, I will work with the Government of 

Oman to promote the growth of independent civil society, and deepen people-topeople engagement between our two countries. 

I would like to pause for a moment, Madam Chairman, to recognize my husband, 

Paco Cosio-Marron, our children, Victoria, Alexandra, and Anthony, and my sister, 

Carla Holtz, who are with me here today. I thank them for their endless support 

through accompanied and unaccompanied tours in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Tunisia, 

Syria, Turkey, and Iraq. They have loved our tours together in the region, and have 

been stoic during long separations. 

The United States and Oman have shared a strong and dynamic relationship 

since the earliest days of our Nation’s history. This bond dates back to 1790, when 

the Boston brig Rambler entered the port of Muscat. In 1833, the United States and 

Oman concluded a treaty of friendship and navigation. 

The United States and Oman enjoy an excellent security relationship, and work 

together to pursue shared regional strategic objectives, enhanced border security, 

and freedom and safety of navigation in vital shipping lanes. Operation Enduring 

Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and other contingency operations have benefited 

from Omani support and cooperation. The Omani military is well-trained, pursues 

a focused strategy, and is regarded as one of the most professional armed forces in 

the region. If confirmed, I will work hard to broaden and deepen the decades-long 

security relationship between the United States and Oman. 

From the United Nations to the Gulf Cooperation Council, and in the Arab 

League, Oman has played an active and helpful role in multilateral diplomacy. In 

neighboring Yemen, Oman invests significant resources in a strategy of stabilization 

through political engagement, development aid, and humanitarian assistance. Oman 

is a strong partner in countering terrorism and extremism in the Arabian Peninsula. 

Since Sultan Qaboos bin Said came to power in 1970, Oman has made dramatic 

gains in its development, emerging as a modern state with first class infrastructure 

and modern educational institutions. In the 2010 U.N. Human Development Report, 

Oman ranked No. 1 out of the 135 countries studied for progress in the previous 

40 years in ‘‘human development,’’ which focuses on education, access to quality 

health care, and other basic living standards. 

The Sultan has demonstrated his ongoing interest in partnering with institutions 

of higher education around the world, including our own. In 2011 Oman established 

a new scholarship program through which more than 500 young Omanis have enrolled in higher education in the United States Last October, the Sultan funded an 

endowed professorship of Middle East Studies at the College of William and Mary. 

Oman has made important strides in promoting women’s rights and participation 

in public life. Omani women serve in elected and appointed political offices, including two Cabinet posts. In 2005 Oman was the first Arab country to appoint a 

woman as Ambassador to the United States, the Honorable Hunaina Al Mughairy, 

who remains a pillar of Washington’s diplomatic community. Omani women comprise over 40 percent of university students, though female illiteracy remains a significant problem. The Government of Oman is making an effort to strengthen legislation that will enhance the resources available for women and children in health 

and education. The State Department’s Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

467

has, for many years, supported training and other programming for Omani women, 

and if confirmed, I look forward to enhancing those efforts. 

The Sultan took quick action to respond to demands by the Omani public for 

greater civic participation early last year. There were elections for the country’s 

Consultative Council, a Cabinet shuffle that incorporated several members of the 

elected Council into leadership positions in government, and programs to address 

unemployment. If confirmed, I will encourage Oman, our friend and partner, to continue to respond to the hopes and aspirations of its people. 

Economic and commercial ties between our two countries are growing rapidly 

across a variety of sectors. U.S. exports to Oman were over $1.4 billion last year, 

and bilateral trade volume is up over 50 percent since January 2009, when the U.S.-

Oman Free Trade Agreement came into effect. If I am confirmed, I will place a high 

priority on ensuring that U.S. companies have the support needed to pursue new 

commercial opportunities in Oman. 

The important cultural connection between our two countries was demonstrated 

recently by the 2011–2012 inaugural season of the Royal Opera House in Muscat. 

Over the past year, world-renowned American artists such as Wynton Marsalis,

Yo-Yo Ma and Renee Fleming shared the great American performing arts tradition 

with sold-out audiences in Muscat. The Kennedy Center will continue its partnership with the Opera House in the coming season, in which American artists will 

headline nine performances. If confirmed, I look forward to encouraging a blossoming cultural relationship. 

I would also like to assure you that, if confirmed, my highest priority will be protecting the safety and security of the dedicated men and women at our mission, as 

well as all Americans living in, working in, and visiting Oman. 

Finally, if confirmed, I also look forward to welcoming the committee’s members 

and staff to Muscat. Madame Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to address 

the committee. I look forward to your questions.

Senator SHAHEEN. That would be great. Thank you. 

Mr. Armbruster. 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS HART ARMBRUSTER, OF NEW YORK, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL 

ISLANDS 

Mr. ARMBRUSTER. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman and 

members of the committee. It is a pleasure to appear before you 

today as President Obama’s nominee for the Republic of the Marshall Islands as United States Ambassador. I am thankful for their 

confidence and would welcome the chance to work with you, this 

committee, and other Members of Congress, and would be honored 

to advance American interests in the Pacific. 

I would like to introduce my wife, Kathy, and son, Bryan, who 

are here with me and Kathy’s mom, Kitty Chandler, and also my 

brother, Chris, and his daughter, Natalie. They have joined me on 

this career path from Hawaii to Finland, to Cuba, Russia, Mexico, 

Tajikistan. We have all got a lot of mileage. 

The Marshall Islands is a key partner in the United States deepening commitment in the Pacific. Secretary Clinton said: ‘‘One of 

the most important tasks of American statecraft over the next 

decade will be to lock in a substantially increased investment—

diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise—in the Asia-Pacific 

region.’’ And in just a few weeks, Assistant Secretary Campbell and 

Admiral Haney will travel to the Marshall Islands underscoring 

our commitment to the region. 

The United States and the Marshall Islands have a close and 

special relationship. The Marshall Islands, as you said, Madam 

Chairman, became part of the U.N. Trust Territory of the Pacific 

Islands under the administration of the United States after World 

War II, and in 1986, the Compact of Free Association came into 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

468

force and the RMI, Republic of the Marshall Islands, became an 

independent state. Accordingly, citizens of the RMI can live, study, 

and work in the United States without a visa. The compact obliges 

our two countries to consult on foreign policy, and I am happy to 

say that the RMI has an excellent voting affinity with the United 

States in the United Nations, sharing our positions on many contentious issues, including human rights and Israel. 

Under the compact, the United States is committed to defending 

the Marshall Islands. The RMI has no military of its own, and 

Marshallese citizens serve in the U.S. Armed Forces, volunteering 

at a higher rate than citizens from any individual State. And Jefferson Bobo was the first Marshallese cadet to graduate from the 

U.S. Coast Guard Academy in May 2011. 

As mentioned, Senator, the Marshall Islands hosts the U.S. 

Army’s Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll, known as USAKA. The base is the country’s secondlargest employer. And I met with General Formica and his talented 

and dedicated team at the Space and Missile Defense Command in 

Huntsville. I know what an important job they have. The test site 

plays a significant role in the U.S. missile defense research, development, and testing network. It is used to monitor foreign 

launches, provides deep-space tracking, and is an ideal near-equator launch site for satellites. If confirmed, I will work to maintain 

the strong relationship between USAKA and the Marshall Islands 

Government and promote USAKA’s beneficial role for affiliated 

Marshallese communities. 

The United States and the Marshall Islands have a developing 

economic relationship. To help achieve the goal of self-sufficiency, 

the United States will provide the Government of the RMI over

$60 million a year in assistance through 2023. The majority of our 

assistance goes toward health, education, environment, and a 

jointly managed trust fund will serve as a source of income after 

that grant assistance expires in 2023. 

Despite our aid, Marshallese citizens struggle with health issues, 

unemployment, and social problems. More has to be done to prepare young Marshallese for today’s global economy. I believe education is the key. If confirmed, I intend to do everything I can to 

ensure that our programs are effective and will lead the country 

team in a whole-of-government approach. 

If confirmed, I will draw on my experience from postings 

throughout the world to work cooperatively with Marshallese officials and society. We have a lot of interagency departments in the 

Marshall Islands, and I will be happy to work with them to coordinate that effort. 

The Marshallese are great Pacific navigators, and I am sure we 

can chart a course together. I would like to continue the great work 

Ambassador Martha Campbell is doing with her staff of 39 officers, 

local staff, and guards. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman, for your consideration, and I welcome questions later. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Armbruster follows:]

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

469

PREPARED STATEMENT THOMAS HART ARMBRUSTER

Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, members of the committee, it is 

an honor to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the U.S. 

Ambassador to the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). I am thankful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence shown in me by this nomination. If confirmed, I would welcome the chance to work with you, this committee, 

and other Members of Congress to advance American interests in the Pacific. 

I would like to introduce my wife, Kathy, and son, Bryan, who along with our 

daughter, Kalia, have traveled every step of my career path from Hawaii to Finland 

to Cuba, Russia, Mexico, Tajikistan, and New York serving the United States in the 

Foreign Service. 

The Marshall Islands is a key partner in the United States deepening commitment to the Pacific. Secretary Clinton said: ‘‘One of the most important tasks of 

American statecraft over the next decade will be to lock in a substantially increased 

investment—diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise—in the Asia-Pacific 

region.’’ 

The United States and the Marshall Islands have a close and special relationship 

dating back to the end of the Second World War, when the Marshall Islands became 

part of the U.N. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands under the administration of 

the United States. In 1986, the Marshall Islands and the United States signed the 

Compact of Free Association and the RMI became an independent state. This Compact, which was amended in 2004 to extend economic assistance for an additional 

20 years, provides the framework for much of our bilateral relationship. Under the 

Compact, citizens of the RMI can live, study, and work in the United States without 

a visa. The Compact obliges the two countries to consult on matters of foreign policy, and the RMI Government has an excellent voting affinity with the United 

States in the United Nations, sharing our positions on many contentious issues, including on human rights and Israel. 

Mutual security of our nations is an underlying element of the special relationship 

between the United States and the Republic of Marshall Islands. Under the Compact the United States has committed to defend the Marshall Islands as if it were 

part of our own territory, and the RMI has no military of its own. Marshallese citizens serve in our Armed Forces, volunteering at a higher rate than citizens from 

any individual state. Jefferson Bobo was the first Marshallese cadet to graduate 

from the Coast Guard Academy in May 2011. He will do his part to defend global 

peace and security, in peacekeeping missions, in U.S.-led combat operations, and in 

patrolling the world’s waterways. If confirmed, I will work closely with the host government and the Marshallese people to ensure such mutual benefits of our close 

relationship are widely recognized. 

The United States also enjoys complete access to Marshallese ports, airports, and 

airspace, a vital asset for our defense and security needs. The Marshall Islands 

hosts the U.S. Army’s Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on Kwajalein (known as USAKA). The base is the country’s second-largest employer, second 

only to government services. I met with General Formica and his talented and dedicated team at the Space and Missile Defense Command Headquarters in Huntsville 

and know how important their work is. The test site plays a significant role in the 

U.S. missile defense research, development, and testing network. It is used to monitor foreign launches and provide deep-space tracking and is an ideal near-equator 

launch site for satellites. Under the Amended Compact, the United States has 

access to Kwajalein through 2066 with the option to extend until 2086. Continued 

access is important, but as important is a good relationship with the Marshallese. 

If confirmed, I will work to maintain the strong relationship between USAKA and 

the Marshall Islands Government and to promote USAKA’s beneficial role for affiliated Marshallese communities. 

The United States and the Marshall Islands also have an important economic relationship. To help achieve the Compact goal of economic self-sufficiency, the United 

States will provide the Government of the RMI over $60 million a year in economic 

assistance through FY 2023. The majority of this assistance is provided as grants 

directed toward six sectors: health, education, infrastructure to support health and 

education, public sector capacity-building, private sector development and the environment. In addition, U.S. federal agencies operate more than 20 different government programs in the Marshall Islands. Another very important aspect of the Compact is a jointly managed Trust Fund that will serve as a source of income for the 

Marshall Islands after annual grant assistance expires in 2023. If confirmed, I will 

promote economic development and strongly advocate that the Marshallese work 

vigorously toward economic self-sufficiency, which is one of the primary goals of the 

Compact, as Amended. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

470

Maintaining a solid partnership requires work on both sides. Education is a priority sector under the Amended Compact, but more has to be done to prepare young 

Marshallese for today’s global economy. Despite our aid every year, Marshallese citizens are struggling with health issues, unemployment, and social problems. It is in 

our interest to help the Marshall Islands become more self-reliant and retain their 

talented and ambitious citizens to foster development and economic growth at home. 

As I mentioned, many U.S. Government agencies are working to advance those 

goals. If confirmed, I intend to do everything I can to ensure that our programs are 

effective in achieving their objectives and will ensure that the interagency is also 

working harmoniously in a ‘‘whole of government approach.’’

If confirmed, I will draw on my experiences from postings throughout the world 

to work cooperatively with Marshallese officials and society. For example, joint 

efforts like the Border Liaison Mechanism that I cochaired with my Mexican counterpart were effective in coordinating policy. In Moscow, as nuclear affairs officer, 

I coordinated with a range of U.S. agencies to safeguard Russia’s nuclear materials. 

And in negotiating an emergency response agreement with Russia, I forged a close 

relationship with the Russian negotiator to have that agreement signed and in force 

to the benefit of both countries. 

If confirmed, I will work closely with colleagues in other Pacific countries to 

advance U.S. interests regionally. In that spirit I led a counternarcotics team

from Tajikistan to Kabul and a business delegation to Konduz, Afghanistan, to 

strengthen regional ties to the benefit of the United States in Central Asia. Furthering citizen services, I currently serve as an auxiliary police officer with the New 

York Police Department in Manhattan and I have assisted Americans in prison in 

Cuba, Mexico, and Russia. 

If confirmed, my interagency experience will be a critical asset in the RMI, where 

so many domestic federal agencies—such as the U.S. Postal Service, the Federal 

Aviation Administration, and the National Weather Service—operate side by side 

with foreign affairs and defense colleagues. If confirmed, I will work closely with 

these agencies, and particularly with the Department of the Interior, which has primary responsibility for implementing the Compact’s economic provisions, to ensure 

that assistance efforts are appropriately coordinated and implemented with transparency and accountability. 

Working in several embassies around the world, I know how critical local staff is 

to our success. Our mission in the Marshall Islands depends, not just on the written 

text of the Compact of Free Association, but also on creating a bilateral relationship 

based on partnership and mutual respect between Marshallese and the American 

people. The Marshallese are great Pacific navigators and I’m sure we can chart a 

course together. If confirmed, I will work hard to ensure that my staff has the resources and support it needs to meet our mission in the Marshall Islands. I would 

like to continue the great work Ambassador Martha Campbell is doing with her 

staff of 39 officers, local staff, and guards.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Ambassador Kirby. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL DAVID KIRBY, OF VIRGINIA, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA 

Ambassador KIRBY. Thank you, Madam Chairman. It is a privilege to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to 

serve as United States Ambassador to the Republic of Serbia. I am 

honored by the confidence placed in me by the President and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this 

committee and the Congress in advancing United States interests 

in Serbia. 

I am pleased to have my wife, Sara Powelson Kirby, here with 

me today. Foreign Service families are unsung heroes and true diplomats themselves. My wife and daughters, Katherine and Elizabeth, neither of whom could be here with me today, have been 

living, working, and going to school overseas for most of their lives, 

serving as examples of American values to their friends and 

colleagues. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

471

I would also like to note the presence of my mother, Dolores 

Kirby. She has been a great help to my siblings and to me. She 

also contributed greatly to the career of my father who was in the 

Foreign Service for 30 years. 

I had the privilege of serving for the past 4 years as the Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Consular Affairs of 

the State Department. Prior to this, as U.S. Ambassador to 

Moldova, I worked with my team to manage a range of issues, including the frozen conflict in Transnistria, improving the climate 

for multiparty democracy, furthering U.S. business interests, and 

trying to reduce corruption. I believe these experiences have prepared me well to serve as chief of mission in Serbia. 

The Serbia-United States relationship is 130 years old. In fact, 

we marked the anniversary on July 5. Our cooperation, friendship, 

and close commercial ties are anchored by a vibrant Serbian diaspora community here in the United States. While our ties were 

strained in the 1990s, for the past 12 years, we have worked with 

successive Serbian governments to overcome recent challenges and 

to build a new, strong partnership with a country that we see as 

critical to regional stability. 

Over the past 4 years, the United States has worked closely with 

the outgoing government to help Serbia realize its goal of attaining 

candidate status in the European Union. We now look forward to 

helping Serbia meet the standards the European Union has set out 

in order to obtain a start date for accession negotiations. Serbia 

has made significant progress by undertaking democratic reforms 

and strengthening institutions to solidify the rule of law. In addition, the military services have undergone fundamental restructuring with the goal of building a modern, civilian-directed force 

that can play a positive, stabilizing role in the region. Serbia joined 

NATO’s Partnership for Peace with our support, and its military 

has established a robust cooperation with ours. Its partnership 

with the Ohio National Guard serves as a model for the region. 

Together, the United States and Serbia have made significant 

strides in recent years to repair and rejuvenate our relationship, 

and if confirmed, I look forward to working with President Nikolic 

and the new government, once constituted, to build on this strong 

foundation and continue to deepen our partnership. 

While much progress has been made in Serbia, Kosovo remains 

a significant challenge to our bilateral engagement. We have made 

clear that on the matter of Kosovo, we can agree to disagree on 

Kosovo’s status as an independent state. We understand that for 

now Serbia will not recognize the Republic of Kosovo. However, we 

have also made clear that Serbia must begin to come to terms with 

today’s realities and move toward normalizing its relationship with 

Kosovo. As the European Union stated in its council decisions in 

December 2011 and subsequently confirmed, Serbia’s path into the 

EU passes through normalization of its relationship with Kosovo. 

This is in Serbia’s interest, as it is the only way to ensure the 

Kosovo issue does not continue to interfere with Serbia’s relations 

with its neighbors, the EU, or the United States. 

If confirmed, I will also seek to bring resolution to two important 

challenges to our bilateral relationship. The murderers of the three 

Bytyqi brothers, New York residents who were executed by Serbian 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

472

Ministry of Interior personnel in 1999, have never been prosecuted. 

The U.S. Government cannot accept that the murderers of three of 

its citizens go unpunished. Likewise, those who authorized the 

attacks on the United States and other Western embassies in February 2008 have never been arrested. While we welcome the recent 

indictments of 12 of the perpetrators who participated in the attack 

on our Embassy in Belgrade, we also expect Serbia to thoroughly 

complete its investigation and ensure that all who were involved 

are brought to justice regardless of their rank or position. 

This is a challenging agenda but it is also achievable. If confirmed, I am committed to working to make this vision: a Serbia 

at peace with all of its neighbors, firmly set on a path of European 

integration. 

Thank you once again for granting me the opportunity to appear 

before this committee today, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Kirby follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL D. KIRBY

Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and members of the Senate 

Foreign Relations Committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the Republic 

of Serbia. I am honored by the confidence placed in me by both President Obama 

and Secretary Clinton. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee 

and the Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Serbia. 

I am pleased to have my wife, Sara Powelson Kirby, here with me today. Foreign 

Service families are unsung heroes and true diplomats themselves: my wife and 

daughters, Katherine and Elizabeth—neither of whom could be with me today—

have been living, working, and going to school overseas for most of their lives, serving as examples of American values to their friends and colleagues. I would also like 

to note the presence of my mother, Dolores Kirby. She has been a great help to my 

siblings and me. She also contributed greatly to my father’s more than 30-year Foreign Service career. 

I have had the privilege of serving for the past 4 years as the Principal Deputy 

Assistant Secretary in the Consular Affairs Bureau of the State Department. Prior 

to this, as U.S. Ambassador to Moldova, I worked with my team to manage a range 

of issues, including the frozen conflict in Transnistria, improving the climate for 

multiparty democracy, furthering U.S. business interests, and trying to reduce corruption. I believe these experiences have prepared me well to serve as Chief of Mission in Serbia. 

The Serbia-United States relationship is 130 years old—in fact, we marked its 

anniversary on July 5. Our cooperation, friendship, and close commercial ties are 

anchored by a vibrant Serbian diaspora community here in the United States. While 

our ties were strained in the 1990s, for the past 12 years we have worked with successive Serbian governments to overcome challenges and build a new, strong partnership with a country that we see as critical to regional stability. 

Over the past 4 years, the United States has worked closely with the outgoing 

government to help Serbia realize its goal of attaining candidate status in the European Union. We now look forward to helping Serbia meet the standards the European Union has set out in order to obtain a start date for accession negotiations, 

the next step in the process leading to EU membership. Serbia has made significant 

progress by undertaking democratic reforms and strengthening institutions to solidify the rule of law. In addition, the military services have undergone fundamental 

restructuring with the goal of building a modern, civilian-directed force that can 

play a positive, stabilizing role in the region. Serbia joined NATO’s Partnership for 

Peace with our support, and its military has established a robust cooperation with 

ours. Its partnership with the Ohio National Guard serves as a model for the region 

and has helped to encourage civilian partnerships between Serbia and the State of 

Ohio. I take great pride in the Ohio roots of my parents—both native Clevelanders—and will seek to deepen the Ohio-Serbia bonds. Together, the United 

States and Serbia have made significant strides in recent years to rejuvenate our 

relationship, and if confirmed I look forward to working with President Nikolic and 

the new government, once constituted, to build on this strong foundation and continue to deepen our partnership. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

473

Our economic ties also continue to grow. An economically prosperous Serbia can 

serve as an engine for the region. Like many countries around the world, Serbia is 

suffering from the consequences of the global recession. But Serbia has enormous 

economic potential, including a well-educated and talented workforce, which make 

it a potentially attractive source for foreign direct investment by U.S. as well as 

European companies. Over the past several years, with assistance from the EU and 

the United States, Serbia has undertaken real economic reforms designed to demonstrate its commitment to long-term economic growth and harmonization with EU 

norms. There is still much work left to be done, however, to streamline the process 

of doing business, reduce bureaucratic impediments, and combat the corrosive consequences of corruption. The United States has worked closely with the Serbian 

Government to aid this effort, particularly in supporting the implementation of the 

government’s anticorruption strategy and action plan. If confirmed, I look forward 

to continuing this work. 

While much progress has been made in Serbia, Kosovo remains a significant challenge to our bilateral engagement. When Vice President Biden visited Belgrade in 

May 2009, he emphasized that the United States wanted to move beyond the recriminations of the past and looked toward the future, to a fully Europeanintegrated Serbia partnering with us in the pursuit of common interests in the region. We understand that, for now, Serbia will not recognize the Republic of Kosovo. 

However, we have also made clear that Serbia must begin to come to terms with 

today’s realities and move toward normalizing its relations with Kosovo. As long as 

there is instability in the region, Serbia and all the other countries of the region 

are held back from realizing their full potential. As the European Union stated in 

its Council decisions in December 2011 and subsequently confirmed, Serbia’s path 

into the EU passes through normalization of its relationship with Kosovo. This is 

in Serbia’s interest, as it is the only way to ensure the Kosovo issue does not continue to interfere with Serbia’s relations with its neighbors, the EU, or the United 

States. And it is in the interest of Kosovo Serbs, as it will improve the daily lives 

of citizens, irrespective of ethnicity, on both sides of the border. Serbia needs to understand that Kosovo’s status and border are decided and that partition is off the 

table. At the same time, we have assured Serbia that the United States, in partnership with the EU, will remain vigilant in working with the Kosovo Government to 

ensure that the far-reaching rights of Kosovo Serbs are fully protected under 

Kosovo’s Constitution and laws. 

If confirmed, I will also seek to bring to resolution two important challenges to 

our bilateral relationship. The murderers of the three Bytyqi brothers, New York 

residents who were executed by Serbian Ministry of Interior personnel in 1999, have 

never been prosecuted. The U.S. Government cannot accept that the murderers of 

three of its citizens go unpunished. Likewise, those who authorized the attacks on 

the U.S. and other Western embassies in February 2008 have never been brought 

to justice. While we welcome the recent indictments of 12 of the perpetrators who 

participated in the attack on our Embassy in Belgrade, we also expect Serbia to 

complete a thorough investigation and ensure that all who were involved are 

brought to justice, regardless of their rank or position. 

This is a challenging agenda, but it is also achievable. If confirmed, I am committed to working to make this vision a reality: a Serbia at peace with all of its 

neighbors, firmly set on a path of European integration.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Mr. Koenig. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN M. KOENIG, OF WASHINGTON, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS 

Mr. KOENIG. Madam Chair, thank you very much. Members of 

the committee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to be with 

you here today. It is a great honor to appear before you. It is also 

my great honor to be nominated by President Obama to serve as 

the next Ambassador of the United States to the Republic of 

Cyprus. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the committee 

and Congress to advance the interests of the United States in 

Cyprus. 

I would like to introduce my wife, Natalie, who has joined me 

here today, along with my sons, Theodore and Alexander, and my 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

474

Cyprus desk officer, Lindsay Coffey from the State Department. I 

would also like to mention my friends, Bob and Ellen Cory and Will 

Embrey, who have attended this hearing today. 

My wife and sons have been living, working, and going to school 

overseas for much of their lives. We look forward to serving our 

Nation overseas once again. Both of my sons started school in 

Cyprus and they, like Natalie and me, have fond memories of the 

island and its people. 

I believe the 28 years I have spent in the Foreign Service have 

helped prepare me for this important assignment. I served previously in Cyprus, an experience which I believe will enhance my 

effectiveness as chief of mission, if I am confirmed. 

In addition, my two tours in Greece deepened my understanding 

of regional issues. From my time spent working at the U.S. mission 

to NATO and as political advisor to the Allied Joint Forces Command in Naples, I understand the importance of NATO in maintaining peace and stability throughout Europe and beyond. 

If I am confirmed, my top priority will be to support efforts to 

reunite Cyprus into a bizonal, bicommunal federation. The longstanding division of the island must come to an end through a just 

and lasting settlement. Since 2008, the leaders of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities have made important 

progress in the Cypriot-led negotiations under the auspices of the 

U.N. Good Offices Mission coordinated by Special Advisor Alexander Downer. However, much more must be done to end the de 

facto division of the island. Although this is a Cypriot-led process, 

the United States will remain actively engaged. The reasons are 

clear. The status quo is unacceptable. It threatens effective NATO–

EU cooperation and affects regional stability and also remains an 

obstacle to Turkey’s EU accession process, which the United States 

and this administration have long supported. 

If confirmed, I look forward to continuing to build our bilateral 

relationship with the Republic of Cyprus and strengthening cooperation in our many areas of common interest. I am pleased to 

see increased investment by U.S. companies in Cyprus especially in 

the energy sector. Our countries have also been working together 

to safeguard Cypriot cultural heritage, prevent pillaging, and stop 

the illegal trafficking and sale of antiquities. In addition, Cyprus 

has been a generous host for an increasing number of U.S. Navy 

ship visits, which has driven growing cooperation in antiterrorism 

and port security. 

The Republic of Cyprus is facing a number of challenges: assuming the rotating Presidency of the European Union, responding to 

the European financial crisis, and managing newly discovered natural gas resources. Although Cyprus has the third-smallest economy in the EU, its financial sector is heavily exposed to Greek 

debt. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of 

Cyprus to explore ways the United States can assist Cyprus as it 

seeks to meet these challenges. We must also work together to 

address serious issues such as possible terrorist threats and trafficking in persons. 

The administration recognizes the Republic of Cyprus’ right to 

develop its Exclusive Economic Zone. We believe that its oil and 

gas resources, like all of its resources, should be equitably shared 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

475

between both communities in the context of an overall settlement. 

The discovery of natural gas underscores the urgent need for a settlement, but it need not hinder the talks. 

I also look forward to engaging the Turkish Cypriot community. 

If confirmed, I will be accredited to one government, that of the 

Republic of Cyprus. That said, we need to maintain a constructive 

relationship with the Turkish Cypriot community. I am pleased 

that they share our goal of peaceful reunification of the island. We 

must continue to work with them to help prepare for reunification 

by strengthening civil society and reducing economic disparities 

across the island. 

Madam Chair, members of the committee, if I am confirmed, my 

foremost priority will be promoting United States interests in Cyprus while working to advance a comprehensive settlement. The 

United States stands only to gain from a reunited Cyprus that is 

peaceful, prosperous, and fully benefits from EU membership. 

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you may have later. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Koenig follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN M. KOENIG

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for giving me the 

opportunity to be with you here today. It is a great honor to appear before you. It 

is also my great honor to be nominated by President Obama to serve as the next 

Ambassador of the United States to the Republic of Cyprus. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Committee and Congress to advance the interests of the 

United States in Cyprus. 

If you will permit me, I would like to introduce my wife, Natalie, who has joined 

me here today, along with my sons, Theodore and Alexander, and Cyprus desk officer, Lindsay Coffey. My wife and sons have been living, working, and going to school 

overseas for much of their lives. We look forward to serving our Nation overseas 

once again. Both of my sons started school in Cyprus, and, like Natalie and me, 

have fond memories of the island and its people. 

I believe that the 28 years I have spent in the Foreign Service have helped prepare me for this important assignment. I served previously in Cyprus, an experience 

which I believe will enhance my effectiveness as Chief of Mission, if I am confirmed. 

In addition, my two tours in Greece deepened my understanding of regional issues. 

From my time spent working at the U.S. Mission to NATO and as political advisor 

to the Allied Joint Forces Command in Naples, I understand the importance of 

NATO in maintaining peace and stability throughout Europe and beyond. 

If I am confirmed, my top priority will be to support efforts to reunite Cyprus into 

a bizonal, bicommunal federation. The longstanding division must come to an end 

through a just and lasting settlement. Since 2008, the leaders of the Greek Cypriot 

and Turkish Cypriot communities have made important progress in the Cypriot-led 

negotiations under the auspices of the U.N. Good Offices Mission and coordinated 

by Special Advisor Alexander Downer. However, much more must be done to end 

the de facto division of the island. Although this is a Cypriot-led process, we will 

remain actively engaged. The reasons are clear. The status quo is unacceptable. It 

threatens effective NATO–EU cooperation and affects regional stability, and also remains an obstacle to Turkey’s EU accession process, which the United States and 

this administration have long supported. 

If confirmed, I look forward to continuing to build our bilateral relationship with 

the Republic of Cyprus and strengthening cooperation in our many areas of common 

interest. I am pleased to see increased investment by U.S. companies in Cyprus, especially in the energy sector. Our countries have also been working together to safeguard Cypriot cultural heritage, prevent pillaging, and stop the illegal trafficking 

and sale of antiquities. In addition, Cyprus has been a generous host for an increasing number of U.S. navy ship visits, which has driven growing cooperation in 

antiterrorism and port security. 

The Republic of Cyprus is facing a number of challenges: assuming the rotating 

Presidency of the European Union, responding to the European financial crisis, and 

managing newly discovered natural gas resources. Although Cyprus has the thirdFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

476

smallest economy in the EU, its financial sector is heavily exposed to Greek debt. 

If confirmed, I will work closely with the Government of Cyprus to explore ways the 

United States can assist Cyprus as it seeks to meet these challenges. We must also 

work together to address serious issues such as possible terrorist threats and trafficking in persons. 

The administration recognizes the Republic of Cyprus’ right to develop its Exclusive Economic Zone. We believe that its oil and gas resources, like all of its resources, should be equitably shared between both communities in the context of an 

overall settlement. The discovery of natural gas underscores the urgent need for a 

settlement, but it need not hinder the talks. 

I also look forward to engaging the Turkish Cypriot community. If confirmed, I 

will be accredited to one government, that of the Republic of Cyprus. That said, we 

need to maintain a constructive relationship with the Turkish Cypriot community. 

I am pleased that they share our goal of peaceful reunification of the island. We 

must continue to work with them to help prepare for reunification by strengthening 

civil society and reducing economic disparities across the island. 

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, if I am confirmed, my foremost 

priority will be promoting U.S. interests in Cyprus while working to advance a comprehensive settlement. The United States stands only to gain from a reunited 

Cyprus that is peaceful, prosperous, and fully benefits from EU membership.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Ambassador Ries. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARCIE B. RIES, OF THE DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF 

BULGARIA 

Ambassador RIES. Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before 

you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the United 

States Ambassador to the Republic of Bulgaria. I am grateful for 

the confidence placed in me by the President and by Secretary 

Clinton. 

The United States and Bulgaria share a very strong partnership 

and friendship both between our governments and our peoples. If 

confirmed, I will work with Congress and this committee to further 

strengthen the relationship and to advance United States interests 

in Bulgaria. 

I am delighted and proud that my husband, Charlie, who was a 

fellow officer in the Foreign Service for more than 30 years, as well 

as my son, Alexander Ries, and his friend, Susan Ziff, are here 

with me today. My mother, Mona Berman, who is a continuing 

inspiration to all of us, plans to accompany me to Bulgaria if I am 

confirmed. Although unable to attend this hearing, I would also 

like to mention my daughter, Meredith, who was along on postings 

in Ankara, Brussels, and London. While it was an honor and a 

privilege for us together to represent our country abroad, I am 

especially grateful for my family’s encouragement, even when I was 

posted without them in Kosovo and Albania, and for their unswerving support when my husband and I were assigned together in 

Baghdad. 

This summer marks the 109th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Bulgaria and the United States. This is worth noting 

because our relationship with Bulgaria, a member of NATO and 

the European Union, exemplifies the sort of transatlantic cooperation that has been the cornerstone of our common security. Bulgaria has generously contributed to NATO and EU missions, notably in Afghanistan. If confirmed, I will apply my prior experience, 

especially as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

477

of European and Eurasian Affairs, to further enhance our security 

cooperation with Bulgaria. 

I learned during my time as chief of mission in Pristina and 

Ambassador to Albania that ensuring the rule of law is both fundamental and a long-term endeavor. Bulgaria has made progress in 

rule of law, including taking important steps to pursue judicial reform, combat corruption, and fight organized crime. Bulgaria’s new 

asset forfeiture legislation is a positive example of such progress. 

However, much more needs to be done, and if confirmed, I will do 

my best to support Bulgarian efforts to move forward via robust 

law enforcement cooperation and engagement with the Bulgarian 

Government and civil society. 

The Roma population in Bulgaria, as elsewhere in Europe, has 

not fully benefited from Bulgaria’s progress. The Bulgarian Government has launched a new integration strategy and worked with 

civil society to develop an action plan. If confirmed, I will work 

hard with the Bulgarian Government and the Roma communities 

to support and encourage effective implementation. 

Bulgaria has taken noteworthy steps toward diversifying and 

securing the country’s energy supplies while protecting the local 

environment. If confirmed, I will make working with the Bulgarian 

Government, business, and civil society toward achievement of this 

goal a high priority. Bilateral trade with Bulgaria jumped from US$429 million in 2010 to $672 million in 2011. This includes a 33-percent increase 

in U.S. exports directly supporting American jobs. 

In conclusion, Bulgaria is a country with great potential for economic advancement, a proud history going back to ancient times, 

and warm feelings toward the United States. If I am confirmed, I 

will work with Congress and this committee to expand and develop 

the strong partnership we have with Bulgaria, building on the fine 

work of outgoing Ambassador, James Warlick, and our country 

team at U.S. Embassy Sofia. As Ambassador, my highest priorities 

will be to advance U.S. interests in Bulgaria, including working together to counter organized crime and corruption, promoting economic growth and prosperity in both our countries, and strengthening security cooperation both bilaterally and within the NATO 

alliance. 

Madam Chairman, and members of the committee, thank you for 

this opportunity to appear before you. I would be pleased to answer 

any questions that you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Ries follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARCIE B. RIES

Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Barrasso, and members of the committee, it 

is an honor to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as 

the United States Ambassador to the Republic of Bulgaria. I am grateful for the 

confidence placed in me by the President and by Secretary Clinton. The United 

States and Bulgaria share a very strong partnership and friendship, both between 

our governments and our peoples. If confirmed, I will work with Congress and this 

committee to further strengthen the relationship and to advance U.S. interests in 

Bulgaria. 

If you will permit me, I would like to introduce my family members who are here 

with me today. I am delighted and proud that my husband, Charlie, who was a fellow officer in the Foreign Service for more than 30 years, as well as my son, Alexander Ries, and my mother, Mona Berman, are with me today. Although unable to 

attend this hearing, I would like to mention my daughter, Meredith, who was also 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

478

along through postings in Ankara, Brussels, and London. While it was an honor and 

a privilege for us to represent our country abroad, I am especially grateful for my 

family’s encouragement even when I was posted without them in Kosovo and Albania, and for their unswerving support when my husband and I were assigned 

together to Baghdad in 2007 and 2008. 

This summer marks the 109th anniversary of diplomatic relations between 

Bulgaria and the United States. This is worth noting because our relationship with 

Bulgaria, a member of NATO and the European Union, exemplifies the sort of 

transatlantic cooperation that has been the cornerstone of our common security, 

freedom, and prosperity. Bulgaria has generously contributed to NATO and EU missions, including in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia, Libya, Georgia, and off the coast 

of Somalia. If confirmed, I will apply my prior experience in NATO and EU matters, 

especially as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European and 

Eurasian Affairs, to further enhance our cooperation with Bulgaria. I will also encourage Bulgaria’s efforts to develop a military that is modern, deployable, and fully 

interoperable with its European and American partners. 

Our relationship with Bulgaria is based upon much more than security cooperation. Bulgaria’s experience transitioning from authoritarian rule to democracy and 

persevering through many challenges is commendable and provides positive lessons 

for others making democratic transitions. Today, Bulgaria plays a constructive role 

in promoting stability in the Western Balkans and supporting emerging democracies 

in the Middle East and North Africa, including by sharing these lessons. 

I learned during my time as Chief of Mission in Pristina and Ambassador to Albania that ensuring the rule of law is both fundamental and a long-term endeavor. 

Bulgaria has made progress in rule of law, including taking important steps to pursue judicial reform, combat corruption, and fight organized crime. Bulgaria’s new 

asset forfeiture legislation is a positive example of such progress. However, more 

needs to be done, and if confirmed I will do my best to support Bulgarian efforts 

to move forward via robust law enforcement cooperation, the Open Government 

Partnership, and engagement with the Bulgarian Government and civil society. 

The Roma population in Bulgaria, as elsewhere in Europe, has not fully benefited 

from Bulgaria’s progress. The Bulgarian Government has launched a new integration strategy, worked with civil society to develop an action plan, and is organizing 

a resource framework. If confirmed, I will work with the Bulgarian Government and 

the Roma communities to support and encourage effective implementation. 

Bulgaria has taken noteworthy steps toward diversifying and securing the country’s energy supplies while protecting the local environment. If confirmed, I will 

make working with the Bulgarian Government, business and civil society toward 

achievement of this goal a high priority. 

Bilateral trade with Bulgaria jumped from 429 million U.S. dollars in 2010 to 672 

million in 2011. This includes a 33-percent increase in U.S. exports, directly supporting American jobs. Though Bulgaria is a small market of 7.3 million consumers, 

there are considerable commercial opportunities due to an educated work force and 

a strong work ethic, membership in the European Union, and approximately 7 billion euro in EU funds to be spent in the coming years on infrastructure development 

and modernizing the country’s institutions. 

In conclusion, Bulgaria is a country with great potential for economic advancement, a proud history going back to ancient times, and warm feelings toward the 

United States. If I am confirmed, I will work with Congress and this committee to 

expand and develop the strong partnership we have with Bulgaria, building on the 

fine work of outgoing Ambassador James Warlick and our country team at U.S. 

Embassy Sofia. As Ambassador, my highest priorities will be to advance United 

States interests in Bulgaria, including working together to counter organized crime 

and corruption, promoting economic growth and prosperity in both our countries, 

and strengthening security cooperation both bilaterally and within the NATO 

alliance.

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you all very much for your testimony. 

Ambassador Ries, I would like to give you an opportunity to comment on the crime that was perpetrated against innocent Israeli 

victims today in Bulgaria. I know that reports are still coming in. 

So it is difficult to get the facts, but I do want to ask you if you 

would like to comment. 

Ambassador RIES. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

Of course, I do not want to get ahead of the people who are on 

the ground in Bulgaria and who have direct access to the informaFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

479

tion, but I certainly do want to add my voice to all those who would 

condemn such attacks on innocent people in the very strongest possible terms. And certainly all of our thoughts and prayers are with 

the family and friends of the victims, as well as with the people 

of Israel and the people of Bulgaria. 

I am certain that our Embassy in Baghdad will offer to assist 

their counterparts in any way possible, as I would do in the same 

circumstances. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

As I indicated in my statement and I am sure you are aware, 

this is one in a series of troubling attacks. Well, in January there 

was a package found on a bus carrying Israeli tourists from Turkey 

to Bulgaria. I wonder, are you confident that the Bulgarian local 

police will work closely with us and with Israel in trying to get to 

the bottom of these attacks and that they have the technical expertise to be able to engage in this kind of investigation? 

Ambassador RIES. Madam Chairwoman, yes. I do believe that we 

will certainly work very closely with the Bulgarians to attempt to 

get to the bottom of this matter. We enjoy very strong law enforcement cooperation with the Bulgarians on a continuing basis. That 

includes training and all kinds of exchanges and work together, 

and I am sure that that will be helpful as we work together to get 

to the bottom of this. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Mr. Koenig, in your testimony, you mentioned the new natural 

gas find off the coast of Cyprus, and as I understand it, the President of Cyprus has committed to sharing this resource with all 

Cypriots, including the Turkish Cypriot community. And as you 

point out, this is another critical reason for the Greek and Turkish 

communities on Cyprus to come together to find a just resolution 

to the divisions in Cyprus. 

Unfortunately, Turkey has called on the major international oil 

and gas companies to withdraw their bids to seek a license for 

development of those gas deposits in Cyprus saying it will not 

allow exploration to go ahead and threatening to ban those companies from Turkish energy projects. 

Can you tell us whether you agree that the discovery of natural 

gas within Cypriot waters could, with some leadership, help to 

bring a resolution to the division in Cyprus? And can you put the 

Turkish response in context for us? Are you concerned that Turkey’s response will contribute to a further deterioration of relations 

between Turkey and Cyprus? And finally, how can the United 

States and our EU counterparts work to help as this situation 

unfolds? 

Mr. KOENIG. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

This is, indeed, a very important discovery and a very important 

new factor in the region, the presence of these resources in the offshore area in the eastern Mediterranean. 

We believe that the existence of this new resource, these new 

riches in that region should spur the parties to think of new ways 

of cooperation, and we very much appreciate President Christofias’ 

statements that he is interested in sharing this resource with all 

the people of Cyprus with both communities. We see that as imporFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

480

tant to realize in the context of an overall settlement of the Cyprus 

issue. 

With regard to our position on the EEZ and Cyprus’ right to 

exploit resources in the EEZ, we have been very clear, and I think 

that has helped a great deal in responding to the actions of others, 

including Turkey. Cyprus is exploiting these resources in a manner 

that is cooperative with Israel. We recognize Cyprus’ right to delimit the EEZ and to enter into such bilateral arrangements. So the 

clarity that we have expressed on this, I think, has been unmistakable. 

The administration is very pleased to see that American companies are engaged in the exploration and development of these 

resources and other energy opportunities in Cyprus. I believe the 

administration is committed to supporting these companies in their 

work, as we do with other companies interested in such situations, 

and if I am confirmed, I will certainly support those efforts very 

energetically. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, so can you elaborate a little more on 

Turkey’s reaction and what additional response might be needed 

either to reassure the companies who would like to bid on these 

projects or Cyprus that we are serious about engaging on this issue 

and helping to make sure that the development can occur in the 

waters around Cyprus? 

Mr. KOENIG. Yes, Madam Chairman. The United States has

engaged with—first, let me say that the United States does not 

believe that any country in the region or any party involved in the 

situation on Cyprus should do anything to heighten tensions or to 

create new problems. The situation on Cyprus is already difficult 

enough. So we have been engaging with Turkey and with others on 

this very consistently and hope that our message is understood. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Senator Barrasso. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

If I could start, Ms. Holtz. I wanted to visit with you a little bit 

about Iran sanctions and wondering if Oman is complying with 

United States sanctions, international sanctions against Iran. If 

not, how would you address the issue with the Government of 

Oman, and what is Oman’s current relationship and economic ties 

and trade endeavors with Iran? 

Ms. HOLTZ. Thank you very much, Senator, for that question. 

Oman is a regional player. It is a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Arab League, and as a regional player, it shares our 

concerns about Iran’s destabilizing activities, including their acquisition or attempt to acquire nuclear weapons capability. They are 

compliant and supportive of the international sanctions on Iran. 

They are deeply concerned, as are we, about the tensions and instability in the region. So they have been a very effective partner for 

the United States in addressing those issues. 

Oman does have a unique relationship with Iran given its geographic proximity and its policy of having good relations with its 

neighbors. But as we see the tensions in the region increasing, it 

has been very beneficial for the United States to have a partner 

like Oman who is able to de-escalate some of the tensions that are 

out there because of Iran. So if I am confirmed, I will continue to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

481

work very hard to partner with our Omani ally on Iran’s destabilizing role in the region. 

Senator BARRASSO. Because I had some concern. I understood 

there was an agreement signed between Oman and Iran and they 

had some joint military operations together last year. Is my understanding correct? 

Ms. HOLTZ. Yes, they did sign an agreement and I believe they 

held one exercise. 

Senator BARRASSO. OK, thank you. 

Mr. Armbruster, in terms of United States priorities in the Marshall Islands, you mentioned Secretary Clinton and some of the 

comments that she had made. So I just wonder what the top three 

United States priorities are with respect to the Marshall Islands 

and what initiatives you might have to implement them. 

Mr. ARMBRUSTER. Thank you, Senator. 

And now with Secretary Clinton breaking travel records, maybe 

she will visit the Marshall Islands. 

The top three priorities, I would think—the first would be our 

strategic relationship. The Marshall Islands is a good friend of ours 

in the United Nations, and in terms of our Pacific strategy, I know 

that the Defense Department is talking about rebalancing and 

looking at the Pacific as a very important part of their overall 

global strategy. So the USAKA base and the strategic part I think 

would be the first priority. 

Second would be education. The Marshallese are not able to compete globally and the education system needs work frankly. Many 

Marshallese migrate to the United States, and if they are coming 

to the United States, I think they have to be better prepared to 

work here and contribute, as I know that they can. 

And the third priority, Senator, I think would be something that 

I know you are interested in and that is health. They have some 

challenges: dengue, Hansen’s disease, TB, and so on. But I have 

received good news that we are working on telemedicine to try to 

take care of some of their health challenges in the Marshall 

Islands, and that would be something that, if confirmed, I would 

work very closely with my colleagues on. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

Ambassador Kirby, recent reports indicate that Serbia’s new 

President is seeking to clarify some of the agreements previously 

signed by the previous government with Kosovo. Do you believe 

that Serbia is going to go back on any of the agreements signed 

between Serbia and Kosovo, and what steps are you going to take 

to ensure the new government remains committed to negotiations 

from a previous administration? 

Ambassador KIRBY. Thank you, Senator. 

If confirmed, I would—the agreements that were reached were 

never fully implemented in any case. We will have a dialogue 

because Serbia is committed. The new President has said that he 

is committed to getting Serbia into the EU. That path leads 

through a more normalized relationship with Kosovo. So I think, 

working with our European partners, we would stress that the 

United States is firmly committed to Kosovo with its borders, and 

I think that that would give us a lot of leverage. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

482

Senator BARRASSO. Ambassador Ries, during Secretary Clinton’s 

trip to Bulgaria in February, she stressed the importance of energy 

security and energy independence for the country of Bulgaria. Can 

you talk a little bit about why energy independence is so important 

for Bulgaria and for the broader European energy sector? 

Ambassador RIES. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

We believe that energy diversity both of sources and routes for 

supply is very important for Bulgaria, as it is for all of the countries in the region. Bulgaria has had some discussions with other 

countries in the region about interconnectors. We are encouraging 

them to pursue those discussions with respect to sources of supply. 

We are encouraging them to pursue sources such as from the Caspian area and to look at unconventional sources of gas. 

Senator BARRASSO. I believe Bulgaria currently has a moratorium on shale gas exploration and production. Do you believe that 

they should maybe lift that moratorium as a way to diversify their 

energy supply? 

Ambassador RIES. You are correct, Senator. They do have a moratorium on shale gas exploration, and they have appointed a parliamentary committee to examine the question. Eventually they 

will need to make a decision, which should be based on economic 

factors, environmental factors, and research and scientific matters. 

It will be their sovereign decision, but we are encouraging them to 

take all those things into account. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

Mr. Koenig, when you think about Cyprus and the two distinct 

solutions that are often mentioned as ways to resolve the dispute, 

either reunification or complete partition, does the administration 

back either of these options? And if not, what solution does the 

administration support? 

Mr. KOENIG. Senator Barrasso, the administration strongly supports the efforts to reunify the island as a bizonal, bicommunal 

federation, and we are very, very supportive of the effort that is 

Cypriot-led and is being coordinated by the U.N. Secretary General’s Good Offices Mission. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

My time has expired, Madam Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chairlady. 

Congratulations to all of you on your nominations. 

First, I want to say my thoughts and prayers are with those 

Israeli citizens who died today in Bulgaria and those who are 

injured. 

And I want to ask you, Ambassador Ries, even though I know 

these are unfolding events, so I do not expect you to have information. But on the broader question of Bulgaria, do you view them as 

a cooperative security ally of the United States vis-a-vis Iran? 

Ambassador RIES. Senator, I think that Bulgaria is a very good 

and effective security partner for us. In addition, I mentioned earlier that they are deployed in Afghanistan. They are also in Kosovo, 

in Bosnia. They mustered a frigate on short notice for the situation 

in Libya and Georgia and off the coast of Somalia. They voted with 

us on the Iraq war. I do not have any specific information to speak 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

483

to the question that you asked, but I must say that as a security 

partner, the Bulgarians really are very effective. 

Senator MENENDEZ. We have a wide range of interests as it

relates to Iran. As the author of the sanctions on the Central Bank 

of Iran, I am concerned that some countries are not cooperating 

with us in that regard. I am also concerned, within the context of 

today’s attack, how seriously the Bulgarians take to the whole 

question of our efforts to ensure that Iran does not achieve nuclear 

weapons. Are they in concert with us, do you believe? 

Ambassador RIES. Senator, I cannot speak for the Bulgarians 

myself, but——

Senator MENENDEZ. I am asking for your observation of them, 

not for their official view. 

Ambassador RIES. Yes, sir. I think that would be consistent with 

the positions that they have taken on many of these subjects and 

their willingness to stand with us in all of these other conflicts 

which they have done in the past. 

Senator MENENDEZ. We look forward to your being able to follow 

up on this and I will be looking forward to having a conversation 

with you when you are on the ground. 

Ambassador RIES. Yes, sir. I would look forward to that. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Mr. Koenig, I am very interested in Cyprus. 

I have spent a good part of my time both on the House International Relations Committee and on this committee addressing 

this issue. Thirty-eight years after the occupation and invasion, it 

is beyond the mindset of anyone to believe that we would still be 

in this set of circumstances today. And so this assignment in my 

mind is incredibly important to the national interests of the United 

States. Cyprus has been a good ally of the United States in critical 

times when we have needed them, including providing refuge for 

our citizens at different times. And so I want to get a sense from 

you of your positions on a number of issues. I listened to your 

responses earlier. Let me go through a series of questions. 

No. 1, I assume that you believe that the solution to the Cyprus 

issue must be based on a Cypriot-run, Cypriot-determined basis 

and that our goal, as with the Cypriots, is to have a single sovereignty with an international personality, a single citizenship with 

independence and territorial integrity safeguarded and comprising 

all of those elements that are relevant in Security Council resolutions. Is that the view that you would take with you to Cyprus if 

you are confirmed? 

Mr. KOENIG. Yes, sir, that is. These are the principles behind the 

bizonal, bicommunal federation as well. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Now, how do you view the two new conditions laid out by Turkish Cypriot leader Eroglu 2 weeks ago that 

talks can only resume if there is an introduction of a deadline for 

negotiations and the lifting of embargos placed on Turkish Cyprus? 

Mr. KOENIG. Sir, we do not see any reason why talks cannot

resume immediately. We do not want to set artificial deadlines or 

anything like that. We think it is important that the parties work 

toward a solution as soon as possible but that there is no need to 

impose artificial deadlines on these talks. And these other issues 

regarding Turkish Cypriot contacts with the outside world—these 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

484

are subjects that can also be discussed in the framework of these 

discussions that we would like to see resumed as soon as they can. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So I look at that view, and then I look at the 

continuing colonization, I will call it, of northern Cyprus. I am sure 

that you are aware that in 1974 the demographic composition of 

Cyprus was estimated to be about 506,000 Greek Cypriots and 

about 118,000 Turkish Cypriots. Today the demographic composition of the Republic of Cyprus is estimated to be 672,000 Greek 

Cypriots, 89,000 Turkish Cypriots, and 200,000 to 500,000 Turkish 

citizens transferred by Turkey to live permanently in Cyprus. 

Do you feel that Turkey’s efforts to colonize the north constitutes 

a violation of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention which 

states, ‘‘the occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of 

its civilian population into the territory it occupies’’? 

Mr. KOENIG. This is clearly a very, very important issue, sir, and 

it is one of the tragic consequences of the division of the island and 

the events of 1974 which all of us lament so greatly. 

The administration sees the best way to resolve this issue is to 

actually achieve a settlement based on a bizonal, bicommunal federation which would deal with the question of who really belongs 

on the Island of Cyprus, who has an entitlement to citizenship, 

who——

Senator MENENDEZ. I still see tens of thousands of people who 

were never there, who have no history with the Island of Cyprus 

and I see them from Anotoli and elsewhere, and there is no family 

background, no roots, no hereditary background here. And all we 

have is an enormous transfer of people. How do we expect there 

ever to be a solution? 

It seems to me that part of what we should be saying is that 

there should be a ceasing of the colonization of northern Cyprus 

because, if not, at the rate that we are going, it will almost make 

it impossible for us to work with the real Cypriots in my mind, 

Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots, who I think if we left to 

their own devices, would find a solution. But if you are going to get 

hundreds of thousands of people transferred and at the rate we are 

going, that is where we are headed, then how do we achieve our 

goals here? 

Mr. KOENIG. I recognize that this is a very sensitive issue, a very 

big challenge. I would be very interested in knowing more about 

your views. If confirmed, I would like to get out to the island and 

maybe we could discuss this further and we could look at ways that 

we can be helpful. 

Senator MENENDEZ. With the chair’s indulgence, let me ask you. 

Are you aware that the Turkish leadership in the north has 

rejected the Council of Europe’s request to conduct an islandwide 

census to accurately determine the current demographic composition of the island’s population? 

Mr. KOENIG. Yes, I am aware of that, Senator. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So you are aware that they have rejected 

that. 

Now, I can only assume that one would reject a census because 

the very essence of my question is the concern that is being driven 

here. Are you aware of recent press reports in the news which 

illustrate that thousands of remaining Turkish Cypriots have been 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

485

demonstrating against Turkey, some of them actually carrying banners that read ‘‘Ankara, get your hands off of our shores.’’ Are you 

aware of those press reports? 

Mr. KOENIG. Yes, sir, I am aware of those press reports. 

Senator MENENDEZ. You said earlier that while you will only be 

credentialed to one country and that is the Republic of Cyprus, the 

only one that is internationally recognized and the only one that 

we recognize as the United States, you also said that it is important to have meetings with the Turkish community in the north. 

Will you focus those meetings also with Turkish Cypriot groups? 

Mr. KOENIG. Yes, of course, sir. All of our efforts—all of these 

contacts are focused on our effort to support—on the administration’s effort to support reconciliation and reunification of the island. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Also, if I may, Madam Chair, I have concerns that for some time while you are the Ambassador, there is 

going to be a host of people who are there with different interests. 

I hope that when you become the Ambassador, you will come to 

your own independent conclusions. In my many visits, I have often 

found that there is somewhat of a historical bias here in which 

there is an inbred view versus looking at the view from where we 

are today, all of the pertinent factors considered. So I hope when 

you become the Ambassador, presuming that you get confirmed, 

that you will commit to the committee to go there with an independent view. Of course, you will have a staff to talk to, but I want 

to hear from you that you are going to approach the many issues 

that we have in Cyprus with a fresh, independent view, and while 

you may listen to the views of existing staff at the Embassy, you 

are going to come to your own independent judgment as to what 

is the set of circumstances that bedevils us after 38 years. Is that 

something that we can get you to commit to the committee? 

Mr. KOENIG. Yes, Senator. Of course, I will go there with an open 

mind, and I will do my best to reach sound judgments based on 

everything that I learn there. And I also look forward to staying 

in touch with you and others on the committee to help me understand the Cyprus situation. 

Senator MENENDEZ. And my very last question is will you commit to the committee that, if confirmed, you will engage with the 

Cypriot diaspora here in the United States prior to your departing 

to Cyprus to get some of their perspectives. They are very much 

engaged with their original homeland. They are U.S. citizens who 

have every right to express a point of view. Is that something that 

we would expect of you? 

Mr. KOENIG. Absolutely, sir. If confirmed, I would be very eager 

to do that to understand the points of view of people who are 

deeply committed to this issue and have in many cases felt the 

pain of the situation on the island. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Senator Menendez. 

Ambassador Kirby, last year I had the opportunity to travel to 

Serbia to represent the U.S. Senate at the OSCE Parliamentary 

Assembly, and during that trip, I went for a day to Bosnia and, 

while I was there, participated in a very moving ceremony on the 

16th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre which commemorated 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

486

the nearly 8,000 Bosniac men and boys who were killed in that 

awful event. 

And I have been very troubled to see some of the statements 

from Serbia’s new President claiming that these acts were not 

genocide. In fact, as you know, the International Criminal Tribunal 

for the former Yugoslavia has confirmed with some of its verdicts 

that the events of Srebrenica were genocide. I think it is important 

that that not be denied. 

And so I wonder if you could give us your perspective on how you 

think we should interpret these recent statements from President 

Nikolic and where Serbia might be on the efforts to continue the 

reconciliation with Bosnia and the impact on the stability there in 

Bosnia. 

Ambassador KIRBY. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

President Nikolic’s comment both on Srebrenica and, frankly, 

also on Vukovic were unhelpful, and that was, of course, of concern 

to the administration. I would note that his statements subsequently, particularly related to his inauguration, were much more 

helpful. He has said useful things in terms of wanting to cooperate 

in the region. I think he got off on the wrong foot by saying things 

that were troubling in the region and troubling here and inconsistent with the international community’s view. 

But I think we can work with him. I think that we will have conversations certainly, if confirmed. I will share your concerns, note 

that you were there. But we have to move forward. Serbia plays 

a very important role in the region and long-term stability in the 

region rests also through a good dialogue with the President and 

the future government. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And can you talk about how those comments 

were viewed in the Republic of Srbsca and Bosnia and whether we 

should be concerned about potential mischief there as the result of 

the change in administration in Serbia? 

Ambassador KIRBY. Of course, I was here at the time. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Right. 

Ambassador KIRBY. And certainly, if I am confirmed, I will get 

a better view of that. 

There are a variety of opinions in Serbia, as there are in many 

places, but I would note that the recent election results supported 

parties that were committed to a European trajectory, committed 

to joining the EU, and I think with that commitment comes an 

understanding that they have to deal with and go beyond what 

happened in the past in the breakup of the former Yugoslavia. So 

I think that they were unfortunate but I think we can work with 

the government. We will. We have to move forward and he has said 

some positive things since then that we should also balance with 

that. 

Senator SHAHEEN. You talked about the importance of making 

progress on Kosovo in terms of the EU admission. Are there other 

challenges that face Serbia that will be important as it works to 

be welcomed into the EU? 

Ambassador KIRBY. Well, I think the first challenge they have 

right now is very difficult economic conditions. They have unemployment of over 25 percent and they have youth unemployment 

that is in some cases double that. They have some poor regions in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

487

the country that have to come forward and prosper more economically. So that for the new government is going to be a very important step. 

Clearly there are issues of corruption, not just in Serbia but in 

the region, and they will have to deal with that and to make more 

effective government. The corruption impedes good governance. 

And so those, I think, are a couple of the items that I think are 

most important that have to come along with EU membership, and 

EU membership and that kind of stuff can help it along, help it 

forward. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And is there a reason to be hopeful about the 

potential to address some of the economic challenges facing Serbia? 

Ambassador KIRBY. Well, first, I am optimist. I think we have to 

be. There is a number of countries that are going through difficult 

times in Europe. Serbia had launched itself on an export-driven 

growth that has not done so well in the last year as there have 

been problems in the region between Greece, Spain, Italy, and 

other countries in the EU. But I think that the idea of using private industry and private development to spur the economy is the 

right idea. So I think there is some optimism there, but I think it 

is related also to—some of their troubles are related not just 

domestically but to the international situation. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, as you point out, Serbia is very important in the region. I have been a friend of Serbia since I arrived 

here. I have shared the interest and seen it succeed and will continue to do everything that I can as chair of this subcommittee to 

support those efforts. 

As we are talking about the financial challenges facing Europe, 

Mr. Koenig, I know that you are watching Cyprus very closely 

because it became the fifth country in the eurozone to apply for 

financial support. Can you assess for us their current economic situation? You talked about the relationship with Greece and the 

amount of Greek holdings in Cyprus that have affected their economic situation, but can you elaborate a little bit on that? 

Mr. KOENIG. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. 

The Cypriot financial sector grew very, very rapidly during the 

last decade, and one of the places where large Cypriot banks were 

heavily exposed was in Greece so that the consequences of the serious problems, things like the so-called haircut and so forth in the 

Greek economy have been felt very, very strongly in Cyprus. And 

this has created big problems on the balance sheets of two of the 

largest three Cypriot banks. 

This is one of the reasons why Cyprus did become the fifth country to seek a eurozone bailout arrangement. Those discussions between Cyprus and the troika, the EC, the European Central Bank, 

and the IMF, are still underway, but those are the reasons why 

there is such an acute situation in Cyprus. They also need to undertake reforms, and that would be part of an EU bailout package. 

Senator SHAHEEN. So should we be comfortable that Cyprus is 

moving forward to take those steps to address the recommendations from the EU, or are there going to be obstacles in trying to 

get that done? 

Mr. KOENIG. We should encourage them I think—and I will do 

that if confirmed—to take these tough decisions about reform, but 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

488

the current discussions are the right framework in which to sort 

out the requirements in order to take advantage of the European 

support funds. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Ms. Holtz, you mentioned in your testimony the role of women 

in Oman. I wonder if you could talk about what is currently going 

on in terms of women’s participation in Omani politics and government. Has there been progress? Should we be pleased about what 

is happening there or should we be concerned? 

Ms. HOLTZ. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I appreciate your asking this question because I think it highlights the 

importance that the U.S. Congress and the American people place 

on women’s empowerment for our allies and friends and throughout the world. 

I believe that the sultan, since he took over in the 1970s, has 

opened his society and has really advocated for an equal role for 

women. They have the right to vote. They run for the Majles, the 

Parliament equivalent. The Omani Ambassador to the United 

States is a woman. Forty percent of the college students in Oman 

today are women. Oman is a traditional society. So there are areas 

for improvement, but they have equal treatment under the law. 

So I think that, if I am confirmed, of course, I will advocate for 

greater participation, work with the Government of Oman on its 

reform goals, work closely with the NGO partners that we have in 

Oman, the civil society advocates who also advocate for a greater 

role for women. We have the Middle East Partnership Initiative 

office in Oman which for many years has done work to empower 

women, education of women. 

So I think the trajectory is very good. The intention is there. The 

sultan of Oman gave an interview this February wherein he said 

that men and women are like the two wings of a bird, and without 

one wing, the bird cannot fly. So I think that shows his intention. 

But, you know, additional progress can be made, absolutely. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And you said that women are equal under the 

law. Do we see that, in fact, in things like ability to inherit ownership of property, rights to divorce, and being able to have children 

in divorce that are able to stay with the mother? 

Ms. HOLTZ. So thank you very much for the question. 

I am not an expert yet on Omani law. They have many different 

types of law. They have civil law. They have sharia law I am not 

yet familiar with what part of that law would apply to women. If 

I am confirmed, I will, of course, welcome further engagement from 

you on these issues and advocate for equal rights under all parts 

of the law. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Mr. Armbruster, as you know, the United States has provided 

the Marshall Islands with compensation for damages stemming 

from nuclear weapons testing in the 1940s and 1950s. Can you tell 

us what the current status is with respect to compensation for 

those affected by radiation as a result of the tests that were done 

there and also, if you could, speak to the ongoing effort to address 

monitoring of citizens who have been exposed? 

Mr. ARMBRUSTER. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, for that

question. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

489

The United States has provided full and final compensation for 

the Pacific Island nuclear series of tests that took place in the 

1940s and 1950s, some 67 nuclear explosions. The Marshallese 

asked for a review of that compensation package asking that we 

look at changed circumstances, and the State Department did review the claims and determined that the circumstances had not 

changed. So in terms of the compensation, that package has been 

paid. 

However, we do, through the compact of free association, have 

ongoing payments and assistance to the Marshall Islands in a 

range of programs. The last nuclear test took place some 50 years 

ago. So there are survivors who are monitored and whose health 

is screened very thoroughly by the Department of Energy. So it is 

a legacy and a problem that we review with the survivors, and I 

think it is something that I know Ambassador Campbell has taken 

part in the commemorations of the anniversary of those tests. But 

as far as the compensation package itself, that has been settled, 

Senator. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And are there issues that have occurred in the 

next generation of people who were exposed? 

Mr. ARMBRUSTER. Senator, I am not aware of issues that I could 

speak to authoritatively about issues, but I know that it is a very 

small population, some 60,000 people. And the health issues that 

are most prominent now are often lifestyle issues, obesity, as I 

mentioned TB, dengue, those types of challenges, but that is a 

question that I will become more fully informed on. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, I know that the Marshall Islands is

already experiencing the effects of climate change and that it is 

having an impact on rising sea levels, contamination of water, 

damage to homes and crops. Are we taking steps to help the Marshall Islands citizens cope with these effects of global warming, and 

are there any actions that you have heard that you think we 

should be taking that we are not? 

Mr. ARMBRUSTER. Thank you, Senator. 

I know that it is a very strong concern of the Marshallese. They 

took part in the recent Rio summit. So they have reached out to 

many partners, including the United States, in having a look at 

this issue. We are fortunate to have in the State Department the 

Office of Oceans, Environment, and Science, and we have very 

strong experts who can work with the Marshallese on these questions. Whether the programs in place right now are considered sufficient by the Marshallese, I do not know, but I know that that 

would be one of the top issues that we would be working on. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Mr. ARMBRUSTER. Thank you. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Ambassador Ries, Senator Barrasso raised the 

question about energy for Bulgaria, and in March Bulgaria canceled a project to build two Russian nuclear reactors in the country. 

Can you elaborate on the reasons for the cancellation of this project 

and both the impact that it might have had on Bulgaria’s relationship with Russia, as well as the energy requirements and where 

the source of that energy is going to come from in the future? 

Ambassador RIES. Senator, the Bulgarians did decide this year 

not to continue the project of building the Belene nuclear power 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

490

plant. They came to this decision after some consideration and I 

am sure a thorough examination of the economic factors involved 

in going ahead with it. As I mentioned, we have been encouraging 

very strongly energy diversity in Bulgaria which would include further development of their nuclear capacity. They do have another 

nuclear plant at Kosloduy, and I imagine that they will be using 

that one as well. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

You talked about the rule of law challenges facing the country. 

The EU has suspended funding to Bulgaria due to some of the ongoing corruption concerns in the country. Can you explain what 

those suspensions were for and whether we should expect to see 

further suspensions from the EU or whether Bulgaria is moving to 

address some of those issues of corruption that have been raised? 

Ambassador RIES. Bulgaria has, with the EU, a cooperation and 

verification mechanism through which Bulgaria has an ongoing 

dialogue with the EU about rule of law issues. As it happens, the 

EU has just issued a report on 5 years of Bulgaria’s performance 

under this mechanism. It just came out today, and I have not yet 

seen the complete report. It discusses a number of areas of concern. 

I must say that the Bulgarian Government itself has identified 

rule-of-law matters as of concern to them and certainly of civil society. And one of the good things that has happened as a result of 

this is that there is a robust public discussion of rule-of-law 

matters. 

I cannot speak to penalties that have been assessed. I do not 

have any specific information on that. I would be glad to look into 

it. But certainly having this relationship with the EU, this dialogue 

has had several positive effects. One is, as I mentioned, that there 

is a broad discussion in the society of these matters, and certainly 

any improvements that accrue as a result of this mechanism will 

be all to the good. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

In response to Senator Barrasso, I think you talked about some 

of the military cooperation between Bulgaria and the United 

States, and I do want to acknowledge, before we close our discussions, the contribution that Bulgaria has made to the NATO efforts 

in Afghanistan. I know that has been very important to the United 

States and we very much appreciate that, and I hope you will 

share that, when you are confirmed and you get to Bulgaria, with 

the people of the country. 

Ambassador RIES. Yes, ma’am, I certainly will. 

Senator SHAHEEN. I just have one final question for you, Ms. 

Holtz, before closing the hearing, and that is with respect to regional cooperation in the gulf because at a GCC leadership meeting 

in May, Saudi Arabia proposed a plan to strengthen the political 

unity of the GCC members and that move would indirectly give the 

Saudis greater control over the GCC. Can you let us know what the 

Omani position was with regard to the Saudis’ plan, and do they 

support that? Are they signed on or do they have some concerns 

about it? 

Ms. HOLTZ. Thank you, Madam Chairman. A very good question. 

Oman has occasionally taken a somewhat independent role and 

voice in the GCC deliberations and decisions, and I believe in this 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

491

case that they are still debating the issue but have concerns about 

the relative weight that the other gulf countries apply within the 

GCC role. So we are in a constant dialogue with all the GCC partners about the security architecture and beefing up the regional 

capacity to deal with issues as a political union, as a security 

union. So, yes, you are correct that Oman has occasionally been 

somewhat independent in that body. They support the strategic 

goals of the GCC, of course: regional stability, resolution of conflict, 

de-escalation of tensions, and all those things. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And does our State Department think that the 

Saudis should have greater control over the GCC? 

Ms. HOLTZ. I do not think we have taken a position on that at 

all. I think we want to enhance the ability of the GCC to address 

the issues regionally, but I do not think that we have indicated 

that any one particular GCC member should be dominant over the 

rest. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Well, thank you all very much for your testimony this afternoon, 

for your willingness to take on these new challenges. 

And I will just announce that the record for this hearing will be 

open until close of business tomorrow. So there may be other questions that come in during that time. 

Again, thank you all. Thank you to your families. 

And the hearing is now ended. 

[Whereupon, at 4: p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF GRETA C. HOLTZ TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. The U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement entered into force in January 

2009. In a review of the potential effects of an FTA with Oman, the U.S. Trade 

Representative indicated that the FTA would likely have negligible impact on U.S. 

employment.

• Since its implementation in 2009, how has the FTA changed the nature and 

level of trade between Oman and the United States? 

• What categories of trade have seen the greatest growth, and how have the U.S. 

and Omani economies been affected by the FTA?

Answer. Bilateral trade volume has grown by over 50 percent since the FTA was 

implemented, from $2.2 billion in 2008 to $3.6 billion in 2011. U.S. exports to Oman 

were up 56 percent in the first quarter of 2012, measured year on year. U.S. firms 

are involved in large-scale cooperative construction projects, such as Oman’s new 

international airport. The FTA has enabled U.S. firms to export high-quality products at very competitive prices. U.S. chemical exports increased 196 percent from 

2008 to 2011 while U.S. agricultural exports increased 176 percent in the same time 

period. Embassy Muscat is facilitating joint ventures in health care, port development, and marine research. If I am confirmed, continuing to promote American 

businesses in Oman will be one of my priorities. In addition, I will work with the 

Omani Government on full implementation of the agreement.

Question. The Sultan of Oman has been leading his government through a series 

of political reforms for many years, including a parliamentary election in 2011.

• How much progress has the Omani Government made in securing political and 

civil rights for its citizens and ensuring that Omani leaders are accountable to 

their citizens? 

• How can the United States continue to facilitate the gradual reforms already 

underway?

Answer. In 2010, a United Nations Development Program report ranked Oman 

No. 1 globally in human development over the previous 40 years. In addition, Sultan 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

492

Qaboos has addressed Omani citizens’ requests for a more active role in government 

by appointing seven members of the Majlis al-Shura, or Consultative Council, to the 

Cabinet in 2011. Immediately following the 2011 Council elections, he granted the 

Council new fact-finding and regulatory powers. The Sultan has raised the level of 

government accountability by replacing several ministers and enhancing the State 

auditing institution’s power of review, as well as increasing the authority of elected 

representatives to call ministers to account for performance. Increased women’s participation in government is also an encouraging sign. 

If confirmed, I will work with the Omani Government to actively expand and 

strengthen civil society and political participation, judicial reform, media independence, and progress on gender issues. 

RESPONSES OF THOMAS H. ARMBRUSTER TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question #1. Please provide a copy of the minutes of the meetings of the Joint 

Economic Management and Accountability Committee for calendar 2009, 2010, and 

2011.

Answer. Thank you for your question. The documents you requested are maintained by the Department of Interior. I refer you to them for this request.

Question #2. Please describe the nature of the U.S. Department of the Interior 

and the U.S. Department of State relationship in the Marshall Islands. In what 

area(s) does the Interior Department take the lead in matters involving the U.S. 

Government and the Marshall Islands?

Answer. The U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of State 

enjoy a unique and productive relationship in the Marshall Islands. This interagency cooperation is critical to continuing progress in our engagement with the 

Marshall Islands. As Chief of Mission, the Ambassador oversees the overall bilateral 

relationship with the Marshall Islands, and is responsible for all executive branch 

employees while in the Marshall Islands. Under the terms of the Compact as 

Amended, the Department of the Interior is responsible for administering most 

financial assistance provisions under the Compact. The Ambassador confers frequently with the Department of the Interior’s Grant Management Specialist working in the Embassy as well as other Interior officials in Hawaii and Washington, 

DC, on issues related to oversight of Compact assistance as well as policy issues 

such as the financial impact of Compact State migrants on U.S. jurisdictions. The 

Director of Insular Affairs at the Department of the Interior chairs meetings of the 

Joint Economic Management and Financial Accountability Committee and the Trust 

Fund Committee for the people of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

Question #3. Please provide a list of U.S. Government civilian positions, by 

Departments/other entities, in the Marshall Islands.

Answer. The U.S. Embassy employs 39 individuals, including four direct hire U.S. 

State Department employees, one direct hire representative from the Department 

of the Interior, and one Personal Services Contract employee of the U.S. Agency for 

International Development. The remaining 33 are local-hire Embassy employees, 17 

of which are the guard force. The Department of Energy employs 22 local hire employees in the RMI at its office in Majuro, 2 employees in Kwajalein,and 13 local 

workers in Rongelap, Utrik, Bikini, and Enewetak (including full-time, part-time 

and casual field workers). Marshallese citizens staff the whole body counting facilities in Majuro, Rongelap, and Enewetak. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) funds one position to manage the regional NOAA 

weather station in Majuro. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has one local hire 

position in the RMI to manage the agency’s housing loan program. 

On Kwajalein, the U.S. Army Installation on Kwajalein Atoll is led by 14 uniformed members of the U.S. military and 39 Army civilians. The remaining workers 

on the installation include 778 U.S. contractors and 873 local Marshallese workers.

Question #4. U.S. grant assistance to the Marshall Islands under the Compact targets the areas of education, health, infrastructure, public sector capacity-building, 

private sector development, and the environment.

• What mechanisms are in place in each sector to provide transparency and

accountability in the use of U.S. funds?

Answer. The Department of the Interior employs one full-time grant oversight 

officer, working out of the U.S. Embassy in Majuro, to ensure that Compact funds 

are properly managed and reported. In addition, the Department of the Interior’s 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

493

Office of Insular Affairs in Honolulu sends representatives to Majuro every quarter 

to review accounting reports and ensure all funds are properly administered. 

Articles V,VI, and VII of the Agreement Concerning Procedures for the Implementation of United States Economic Assistance provided in the Compact, as amended, 

of Free Association Between the Government of the United States of America and 

the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands (the Fiscal Procedures 

Agreement) stipulate the mechanisms that are in place in each sector of the Compact, as amended, to provide transparency and accountability in the use of U.S. 

funds. 

Requirements under Article V include the submission by the Government of the 

Republic of the Marshall Islands (GRMI) of a Medium-Term Budget and Investment 

Framework (MTBIF) and amended every 3 years; the submission of an annual proposal for the division of the annual economic assistance among sectors; and annual 

U.S./RMI Budget consultations in July of each year prior to the Annual JEMFAC 

Meeting in August of each year. 

Article VI stipulates the Standards for Financial Managements Systems, Quarterly Financial Reporting Requirements, Annual Financial Reporting Requirements, 

Accounting Basis, Period of Availability of Grant Funds, and Procurement Regulations. 

Article VIII requires that the GRMI conduct a yearly financial and compliance 

audit, within the meaning of the Single Audit Act, as amended (31 U.S.C. 7501 et 

seq.), More detailed information can be found in the attached sections of Articles 

V, VI, and VIII of the Compact’s Fiscal Procedures Agreement.

Question #5. During the last 3 years what have been the areas of greatest 

progress in anticorruption efforts in the Marshall Islands pertaining to the flow of 

U.S. funds, and other areas as well?

Answer. Although more work remains to be done, the Republic of the Marshall 

Islands (RMI) have worked to improve capacity and accountability for the flow of 

U.S. and other bilateral funds. In 2011, the RMI identified $539,888 in fraudulent 

transactions involving U.S. federal grants, and the RMI Office of the Attorney General continues to prosecute the individuals involved. These prosecutions—the first 

in RMI history related to misuse of foreign donor assistance—send an important 

message that the country is committed to improving accountability. In 2012, the 

RMI also increased the staffing of the Office of the Auditor General and has begun 

conducting performance audits and other regular audits of public accounts.

Question #6. During the last 3 years, what are the other major aid donor countries 

with which United States officials have had direct discussions to coordinate and to 

promote sustainable development in the Marshall Islands? Please provide a comparison, by country, of aid provided to the Marshall Islands.

Answer. The United States, through our Embassy in Majuro, routinely consults 

with the other largest bilateral donors—Taiwan and Japan—resident in the Marshall Islands and Australia, resident in the Federated States of Micronesia, as well 

as with multilateral organizations such as the Asian Development Bank and the 

United Nations Development Program. The United States has also, on occasion, met 

with and discussed donor issues with other nonresident diplomatic representatives 

visiting the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), such as New Zealand, the European Union, France, and Sweden. Embassy officials have information suggesting the 

RMI also receives donor assistance from Israel and the United Arab Emirates, but 

we have not had the opportunity to meet with their representatives, who are not 

resident in Majuro. In December 2011, the RMI hosted a Development Partner 

Meeting for bilateral and multilateral donors. 

The RMI does not currently have an office to coordinate donor assistance or provide a breakdown of assistance received by country. A recent recommendation from 

the Pacific Islands Forum during a 2012 visit was the creation of an aid management unit with a mandate to monitor aid flows and develop and implement a development assistance policy to better coordinate international donor assistance.

Followup to Question #1. Does the State Department not have a copy of the minutes of the meetings referenced even though the Department is represented on the 

JEMFAC?

Answer. The Department of the Interior holds the final, official copies of the minutes of JEMFAC meetings. The Department of State is on the board of the committee, and we collaborate closely with the Department of the Interior in oversight 

of RMI funding. The Ambassador attends JEMFAC meetings as an observer. 

As a result of Senator Lugar’s request and followup question, the Department of 

State consulted with the Department of the Interior about releasing copies of the 

meeting minutes requested. The Department of the Interior has no objection to reFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

494

leasing the documents through the Department of State to Senator Lugar, and the 

minutes of the meetings have been attached.

[EDITOR’S NOTE.—The JEMFAC meetings documents mentioned above were too voluminous to include in the printed hearing therefore they will be maintained in the 

permanent record of the committee.] 

RESPONSES OF MARCIE B. RIES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BENJAMIN L. CARDEN

Question. The situation of the Roma may present the most serious human rights 

issues in Bulgaria.

• First and foremost, are you prepared to speak out and speak out publicly in the 

event of significant intraethnic violence of the kind that erupted before the local 

elections last fall?

Answer. In reaction to the protests, the administration strongly encouraged efforts 

by the Bulgarian Government authorities to ensure respect for the rule of law and 

the protection of all citizens. If confirmed, I will continue to vigorously advocate for 

respect for the rule of law, and in the event of significant incidents of interethnic 

violence, to condemn them publicly.

Question. Bulgaria, like a number of other countries, has failed to adequately

ensure that all of its Romani citizens have proper identity documents. Separately, 

Bulgaria has also failed to adequately regularize the legal status of significant 

amounts of housing in which Roma live. It now appears that these two problems 

are spiraling together to create yet a third: a new law requires people to own property or have a tenancy agreement in order to get identity documents, and without 

identity documents, they can’t vote. I don’t have any indication that the disenfranchisement of Roma was an intended consequence, but it is a terrible result.

• Will you engage with Bulgarian authorities on all three of these issues: identity 

documents, regularizing housing, and voting rights for Roma?

Answer. As Secretary Clinton told young Roma leaders when she met with them 

in Sofia on February 5, protecting and promoting the human rights of Roma everywhere has long been a personal commitment of hers and remains a priority for the 

Obama administration. If confirmed, I will advocate for nondiscrimination and equal 

protection of all citizens, including the Roma, and will encourage strong, effective 

Romani civil society capable of advancing and defending its own interests. 

RESPONSES OF MICHAEL D. KIRBY TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR BENJAMIN L. CARDIN

Question. I want to thank the State Department for keeping the unresolved case 

of the Bytyqi brother murders on the bilateral agenda.

• What steps will you take as Ambassador to ensure justice in this case? 

• There are other unresolved cases from the late Milosevic era as well; do you 

believe the Interior Ministry should be targeted for reform that would remove 

the holdovers from the 1990s and deny them their current protection from prosecution for past crimes?

Answer. The ongoing failure of Serbian authorities to investigate adequately, and 

hold accountable those responsible for the murder of the Bytyqi brothers continues 

to pose a challenge to the deepening of our bilateral relationship. Secretary Clinton, 

Deputy Secretary Burns, and other senior officials have urged Serbian authorities 

to bring those responsible to justice, including most recently Assistant Secretary 

Philip Gordon during his July 8–9 visit to Belgrade. 

The failure of the Serbian Government to prosecute not only those who ordered 

and carried out the Bytyqi killings, but also those who permitted the attack on our 

Embassy in Belgrade in 2008 and those responsible for such crimes as the murder 

of Slavko Curuvija in 1999—who was shot and killed not long after he testified before the Helsinki Commission in 1998—is deeply troubling. The United States will 

continue to advocate strongly for justice in these cases. These failures point to continuing weaknesses in the rule of law in Serbia, a critical criterion for Serbia’s advancement in the EU accession process. 

The United States expects the Serbian authorities to take necessary steps to investigate properly these cases, to continue undertaking necessary reforms within 

the Interior Ministry to break down this ‘‘wall of silence,’’ and to ensure that those 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

495

complicit in Milosevic-era crimes are brought to justice. If confirmed, I will make 

it a priority to seek justice in these cases.

Question. What can we be doing now to ensure that Serbia will not abuse its 

chairmanship of the OSCE in 2015 to advance its own national agenda in the Western Balkans? Given the longstanding OSCE focus on Roma, will we use the upcoming 2015 chairmanship as a mechanism to press Serbia to respect the rights of 

Roma, especially as authorities address the housing disputes which recently have 

increased tensions and led to violence?

Answer. Each OSCE Chairman-in-Office is expected to uphold the values, principles, and institutions of the OSCE during its chairmanship. The United States will 

expect no less from Serbia. The 2014 Chairman-in-Office, Switzerland, is working 

closely with Serbia to establish continuity across their two chairmanships. We expect that their proposed program of work will focus on the core issues facing the 

organization, including how to ensure and enhance our collective efforts to meet the 

OSCE’s commitments in an era of tight budgets. In addition, during Serbia’s chairmanship, Switzerland will appoint a Swiss envoy on Balkan issues to avoid any perceptions of a conflict of interest, given Serbia’s vested interests in the region, in particular in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which currently host the OSCE’s two 

largest field missions. 

Chairing the OSCE is Serbia’s opportunity to demonstrate it is ready to take a 

position of leadership in world affairs. This also means leading by example. Living 

up to its OSCE commitments will show all concerned that Serbia is ready for its 

chairmanship, and if confirmed I will engage at all levels of the Government of Serbia to assist them in this endeavor. 

The United States will expect Serbia to live up to its commitments in the human 

dimension, including those that concern minority populations such as Roma. This 

administration remains committed, a fact reinforced by Secretary Clinton’s announcement that the United States will be an observer in the Decade of Roma Inclusion, to continuing to champion the human rights of members of the Roma minority 

and reminding Serbia and other OSCE participating states of their commitments to 

protect and promote the inclusion of Roma. 

RESPONSE OF GRETA C. HOLTZ TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. Oman is one of our closest allies in the Persian Gulf, and also maintains 

a friendly relationship with Iran.

• How does Oman balance relations with the United States and Iran? 

• How does Oman support U.S. and international policy on Iran, including compliance with sanctions? 

• If confirmed, how will you work with Oman on Iran?

Answer. The Sultanate of Oman is one of our oldest and most dependable friends 

in the Arab world. Oman values its close relationship with the United States and 

has expressed its appreciation for U.S. cooperation on a range of issues. With a longstanding policy of maintaining open avenues of communication and working relations with all of its neighbors, Oman has also served as a helpful interlocutor between the United States and Iran in the past. The Omanis have conveyed to Iran 

the possible consequences of its behavior. We work with Omani officials on issues 

related to Iran. The Omanis share our concern about a nuclear Iran and have cooperated with the United States on U.S. and international sanctions. 

TheGgovernment of Oman has made it clear that it is in Oman’s national interest 

to maintain peace and security in the region. This includes keeping the region free 

of a nuclear-armed Iran and other Iranian provocations. Oman also shares the interest of the United States and the international community in maintaining the free 

flow of commerce and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, which falls 

within Omani territorial waters, as well as other international waterways. As a 

member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and the Arab League, Oman has 

been supportive of initiatives such as the U.S.-GCC Strategic Cooperation Forum, 

which promotes regional collaboration on issues of strategic importance to the region, such as the threat posed by Iran. 

If confirmed, I will employ the full range of our diplomatic tools to deepen our 

engagement and enhance cooperation with Oman in order to achieve our national 

security objectives of regional stability and resolution of regional conflicts. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

496

RESPONSE OF JOHN M. KOENIG TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. Negotiations between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities have 

stalled, and some have suggested the hope for a settlement is low. Prospects for a 

settlement have suffered as a result of Turkey’s objections to the Republic of 

Cyprus’s plans for energy exploration and threats to boycott EU activities involving 

Cyprus as rotating EU president. Concerns have also been raised about non-Cypriot 

Turkish citizens who have settled on the island in the past 20 years, changing the 

island’s demographics. This group has become a key issue in the negotiations.

• What is your assessment of these concerns? 

• What is the future of reunification negotiations, and if confirmed how would you 

work with the Cypriots to encourage a negotiated settlement between the two 

communities?

Answer. If confirmed, I will support the United Nations’ efforts to work for a negotiated settlement that addresses the human rights of all concerned in a balanced 

manner. I will also exert all possible efforts to support the process, which is the only 

practical way to resolve the many critical issues between the communities. 

A comprehensive settlement plan will need to address issues of citizenship and 

residency on the island. The administration believes that a settlement plan dealing 

with these and other questions needs to be worked out between the communities, 

with United Nations support, and needs to be acceptable to majorities in both of the 

island’s communities. The Cypriot-owned and Cypriot-led process provides the best 

way forward to achieve a just and lasting settlement. Greek Cypriot and Turkish 

Cypriot leaders must demonstrate courage and ingenuity to achieve convergences on 

the difficult issues before them. The United States urges both sides to engage constructively and find ways to bridge differences. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(497)

NOMINATIONS OF JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM 

AND RICHARD G. OLSON 

TUESDAY, JULY 31, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. James B. Cunningham, of New York, to be Ambassador to the 

Islamic Republic of Afghanistan 

Hon. Richard G. Olson, of New Mexico, to be Ambassador to the 

Islamic Republic of Pakistan 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John F. Kerry 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Kerry, Menendez, Casey, Udall, Lugar, Corker, 

Rubio, and Isakson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MASSACHUSETTS 

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. Good morning. 

We apologize for beginning a few minutes late, but since this is 

our wrapup week, there are more meetings going on than there are 

hours and available moments to get to them, I’m afraid. 

We’re delighted to welcome everybody here to consider the nominations of two distinguished career Foreign Service officers who are 

selected to serve in the very important posts of Afghanistan and 

Pakistan. 

Ambassadors James Cunningham and Richard Olson are very 

experienced and talented diplomats, and I am convinced, as I think 

the committee is and will be, that they bring the combination of 

intelligence and experience, diligence, necessary for both of these 

critical assignments. 

Obviously, today’s hearing comes at a pivotal moment. All you 

have to do is pick up the newspapers any given day in the last few 

weeks, and Afghanistan and Pakistan are, as usual, swirling 

around in them. 

The signing of the strategic partnership agreement earlier this 

year marked the beginning, not the end, of a new phase of U.S. engagement in Afghanistan. And as international conferences from 

Istanbul and Bonn to Chicago and Tokyo have made clear, the 

world is not going to simply walk away from or abandon its investment in a stable Afghanistan. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

498

Our task now is to leverage our commitment into a sustainable 

transition that prevents Afghanistan and the region from backsliding into widespread ethnic or sectarian violence. 

A coordinated political, security, and economic transition will be 

challenging. And as we move forward, there are several key steps 

that we need to focus on. 

First and most important, we must prepare now for the Afghan 

elections in 2014. Ultimately, it is the political transition that will 

determine whether our military gains are sustainable, and the 

strength and quality of the Afghan state we leave behind will be 

determined by that political transition. 

Our role should not interfere in domestic politics. It is critical 

that Afghans must pick their leaders freely and fairly. But we 

should make clear that we will only support a technical process 

that is transparent and credible. Selection of an accountable, independent election commission, transparency in new election laws, 

and early preparation of voter lists are all critical steps for Afghans 

in order that they have a voice and a choice in the election. 

Just as important, our political strategy has to go beyond reconciliation in order to support a national consensus among key 

Afghan stakeholders. Too many Afghans are preparing to fight to 

secure their interests, instead of uniting for the good of their country. I think we need to send a strong message that the United 

States supports a comprehensive political process that is fully 

inclusive, transparent, and respectful of the rights of all groups, 

including women and ethnic minorities. 

Facilitating a political transition also requires us to consider how 

to best build and sustain the Afghan Army and the police in order 

to leave behind a force that can independently secure key terrain. 

And there are a lot of questions about the viability of that, needless 

to say. 

We have 2 years to lay that foundation for a force that is responsive to the needs of its people. 

And it’s interesting, as I talk to leaders in Pakistan, you get a 

difference in stated interests about the size and scope and capacity 

of that force. And obviously, there is a connection to those interests 

with respect to each country’s choices that it is making right now. 

So we need to continue to focus on combating corruption, on emphasizing respect for human rights and rule of law. We also need 

to focus our assessment tools on creating an affordable and sustainable effective force. 

As we begin to build or as we build, and as the Afghans gain confidence about their future, we also need to move in the areas of economic development and stability. 

Despite the progress that was made in Tokyo to pledge $16 billion in donor aid through 2015, Afghanistan could very well still 

face a major economic crisis. And we’ve made significant development achievements over the past decade, but I think everyone 

would agree the gains are fragile. Sustaining them is going to 

require continued investments and an Afghan Government that 

itself can generate sufficient revenue. 

Our development approach must also take into account Afghanistan’s worsening humanitarian crisis and the immense need of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

499

vulnerable populations. So obviously, there’s no shortage of challenge here. 

Finally, our strategy has to continue to reflect the interconnectedness of the region’s challenges, from Central Asia to Iran to India 

to Pakistan. 

I’ve said a number of times before, but I believe it even more so 

now, that what happens in the region, in the region as a whole, 

will do more to determine the outcome in Afghanistan than any 

shift in strategy. And Pakistan, in particular, remains central to 

that effort. 

It’s no secret that last year was a very challenging one in our 

relationship, in the United States-Pakistan axis. Many Pakistanis 

believe that America will simply once again abandon the region, as 

we did after the fall of the Soviet Union, which is one reason why 

Pakistan continues to hedge its bets and rely on certain insurgent 

groups for strategic depth. 

The result has been a counterproductive back-and-forth, point 

and counterpoint, that undermines what really ought to be a more 

cooperative relationship. And we see that in today’s newspaper stories about accusations regarding Afghanistan-based insurgent initiatives in Pakistan. 

I’m pleased that the recent developments with Pakistan have led 

to the reopening of the critical NATO supply lines. And despite 

many of our frustrations and setbacks, serious policymakers on 

both sides understand that we have more to gain by finding common ground and working together on areas of mutual concern. And 

those are, clearly, from fighting terrorism to facilitating economic 

development. 

I think we also need to point out that Pakistan has suffered 

grievously at the hands of al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and affiliated terrorist groups. Some 38,000 Pakistani citizens and more than 6,000 

Pakistani Army and security forces have died from terrorist incidents since 2001. 

Pakistan is also facing a massive economic and energy crisis. 

And political infighting and election-year politics complicate efforts 

to address deteriorating situations. And none of us are unfamiliar 

with those kinds of dynamics even here at home. 

For years now, we’ve been trying to work with Pakistan to create 

a stable economy. And that’s why our committee led the effort with 

the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill. It’s why Senator Lugar and I have 

fought for continued investments in the long-term relationship that 

is based on mutual goals. 

Often, the reward for diplomats who succeed in difficult postings 

with long odds is tougher assignments with longer odds. And our 

nominees today are no exception to that rule. 

James Cunningham has already served a tour in Afghanistan, 

most recently as Deputy Ambassador in Kabul. He’s uniquely 

placed, I think, to lay the foundation for our coordinated political, 

security, and economic transition. 

And I want to note that the Ambassador’s wife, Leslie, and I 

think his daughters, Emma and Abigail, are here today, and we 

welcome both of them, all of you, all three of you. Thank you. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

500

It’s particularly good to see him again here. I’ve been with him 

in Kabul and before that, when he was serving as our Ambassador 

to Israel, and delighted to welcome him back here. 

Richard Olson served most recently as the coordinating director 

for development and economic affairs in Kabul. And I am confident 

that his experience in Afghanistan and previous leadership in the 

Middle East will serve him well as he works to strengthen our relationship with Pakistan. 

So we’re very pleased to welcome them here today. 

Also, I think, Ambassador Olson, your daughter is here. Am I 

correct? Isabella? She’s interning in Senator Udall’s office. 

Delighted to have you here. You’ve got an inside track on the 

seating and other things, too. 

So we really thank you for your service, and we particularly 

thank your families for their service, because everybody is part of 

this. And no one recognizes that more than this committee, I think. 

Senator Lugar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I join the chairman 

in welcoming the distinguished nominees and their family members this morning. 

The Foreign Relations Committee is taking up these nominations 

at a critical time. It is important to avoid gaps in leadership that 

could diminish the effectiveness of our policies toward Afghanistan 

and Pakistan. 

We look forward to hearing the administration’s assessments of 

the situation in those countries and its plans for moving forward. 

American policy in Afghanistan has been evolving on the margins. Troop levels are anticipated to be reduced in the coming 

months, and we have seen some narrowing of the mission. However, the United States continues to spend enormous sums in that 

country on national building objectives that ultimately may contribute little to U.S. vital interests. 

We need a clear explanation of what metrics must be satisfied 

to achieve the original intent of the mission to prevent Afghanistan 

territory from being used as a terrorist safe haven. It is essential 

that Afghanistan is viewed in the broader strategic context and 

that our policy there is not determined by political optics or inertia. 

If we reapportioned our worldwide military and diplomatic assets 

without reference to where they are now, it is doubtful that a 

rational review would commit so many resources to Afghanistan. 

The country is important, but does not hold that level of strategic 

value for us, especially at a time when our Nation is confronting 

a debt crisis, our Armed Forces have been strained by repeated 

combat deployments, and we are attempting to place more emphasis on East Asia. 

Further, we know that al-Qaeda has a far more significant presence in Pakistan than in Afghanistan. To the extent that our purpose in Afghanistan is to confront the global terrorist threat, we 

should be refocusing resources on Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, parts 

of North Africa, and other locations. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

501

In this context, the question becomes how to transition to an efficient strategy for protecting our vital interests in Afghanistan over 

the long term that does not involve massive, open-ended expenditures and large American military deployments. 

The Pakistan side of the border has a fundamentally different 

dynamic. Despite the death of Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and 

other terrorist groups maintain a strong presence in the country. 

There is no question that the threat of these groups, combined with 

worries about state collapse, conflict between India and Pakistan, 

the safety of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, and Pakistan’s intersection with other states in the region, make it a strategically vital 

country worth the cost of engagement. 

But the contradictions inherent in Pakistani society and government necessitate that we apply intense oversight to ensure that our 

assistance and diplomacy advance our objectives. 

Our Ambassador will be the critical player in evaluating whether 

our programs in Pakistan are working and contributing to a genuine partnership between our two countries. 

It is worth noting that in 2011, almost 3,200 Pakistanis died in 

terrorist-related incidents. Despite our differences, our countries 

have strong incentives to cooperate on economic and security 

issues. 

I appreciate the sacrifices that our nominees have made on 

behalf of U.S. national security, and I applaud the commitment 

they are showing in accepting these very challenging assignments. 

I thank the chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Lugar, very much. 

Ambassador Cunningham, if you’d lead off, and then Ambassador 

Olson. We appreciate, again, thanks for being here. 

Your full statement will be placed in the record, as if read in full, 

and we look forward to your summary. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM, OF NEW YORK, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF 

AFGHANISTAN 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, 

Ranking Member Senator Lugar, members of the committee. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the United States next Ambassador to 

the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. 

I’m truly honored that President Obama and Secretary Clinton 

have placed their trust in me. And I look forward, if confirmed by 

the Senate, to working closely with you to advance America’s interests in Afghanistan, and I will welcome frequent opportunities to 

consult with you. 

For the past year, I’ve been serving as Deputy Ambassador at 

U.S. Embassy Kabul, supporting Ambassador Ryan Crocker in 

leading a mission of some 1,100 dedicated staff from 18 U.S. Government agencies. I fully intend, if confirmed, to follow his example 

of maintaining the closest possible cooperation between the civilian 

and the military efforts in Afghanistan and of pursuing a wholeof-government approach to the important challenges before us. 

Under Ambassador Crocker’s outstanding leadership, we have 

achieved a great deal over the past year, including completion of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

502

our historic strategic partnership agreement, which will guide our 

enduring partnership now and beyond the end of transition in 

2014. 

The strategic partnership and the successful NATO summit in 

Chicago and the Tokyo conference send a clear message to the 

Afghan people and to the region that Afghanistan will have the 

support of the international community and of the United States 

in the years ahead. 

If confirmed, I will build on this successful diplomatic campaign, 

underscoring our commitment to help build an Afghanistan that 

will contribute to stability in the region and never again be a 

source of international terrorist threat to the United States. 

On September 11, 2001, I was the Acting Representative to the 

United Nations in New York. The next day, I told the members of 

the U.N. in the Security Council and in the General Assembly, on 

behalf of the United States, that the 9/11 terror attack was not just 

an attack on the United States, but an attack on all, of whatever 

religion or nation who share the values on which our global community rests. 

That struggle between terror and those values continues today 

and will, unfortunately, continue for some time to come. 

In Afghanistan, we are turning a page. Over the past several 

months, we and our Afghan and international partners have created an unprecedented, yet sustainable, framework of support for 

Afghanistan consisting of a web of bilateral and multilateral 

commitments. 

Our strategy for a stable Afghanistan has five elements: 

transitioning to Afghan responsibility for security in 2014, training 

Afghan National Security Forces, building an enduring partnership 

with Afghanistan, supporting Afghan reconciliation, and promoting 

regional stability and economic integration. 

At the Lisbon summit in 2010, with our allies and partners, we 

established the timeline for security transition. And as foreseen, 

the Afghans are taking on responsibility for security, with Afghan 

security forces taking the lead now in providing security for some 

75 percent of the population. Afghan security forces will reach their 

full surge strength soon and are becoming increasingly capable, 

despite the many obstacles to be overcome. 

At the Bonn conference in December last year, Afghan leaders 

presented to the international community the outlines of a strategy 

to ensure Afghanistan’s stability beyond the troop drawdown. And 

in turn, the international community committed to supporting 

Afghanistan throughout a transformation decade, from 2015 to 

2024, with the aim of ensuring continued security, economic, and 

democratic gains after the transition. 

In May of this year, President Obama and President Karzai 

signed the strategic partnership agreement, which provides a longterm framework for relations between the United States and a fully 

sovereign Afghanistan. 

Secretary Clinton’s announcement during her July 7 visit to 

Kabul that the President had designated Afghanistan a major nonNATO ally was another signal of our commitment. 

At the NATO summit in Chicago, NATO and its ISAF partners 

noted that, come mid-2013, we will shift to a support role as the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

503

Afghans step forward to lead. The United States reaffirmed our 

commitment to Afghan security beyond 2014, and the international 

community committed to providing the Afghan security forces the 

support and funds they need for sustainment. 

The Afghan Government also recognized that NATO and its partners have a crucial role to play in training, advising, and assisting 

the Afghan security forces and invited NATO to continue its support after the ISAF mission concludes at the end of 2014. 

In order to address support for Afghanistan’s development, 

growth, and governance, the international community gathered in 

Tokyo on July 8 to further define the concept of mutual accountability and assure Afghanistan of continued economic assistance. 

The Japanese announced that the international community had 

pledged $16 billion in aid over the next 4 years, sufficient to cover 

Afghanistan’s fiscal gap as identified by the World Bank. 

Of equal importance was the adoption of a mutual accountability 

framework, which affirmed that international assistance to Afghanistan is not unconditional, that the Afghan Government must act 

decisively to ensure that the returns on the international effort are 

sustained and irreversible. 

That must include, as Secretary Clinton observed, fighting corruption, improving governance, strengthening the rule of law, and 

increasing access to economic opportunity for all Afghans, especially for women. 

So today, the pieces of a long term, enduring support structure 

for Afghanistan’s continuing progress and development are now in 

place. This makes clear to Afghans and to the region that the security transition does not mean we are abandoning Afghanistan. And 

the Taliban appear to be taking notice. 

For the first time in a decade, they are debating and signaling 

an openness to negotiations. The sole purpose of U.S. support for 

reconciliation is to create the conditions for inclusive national dialogue among all Afghans about the future of their country. 

We have been consistent, along with our partners, about the necessary outcomes of any negotiation. Insurgents must break ties 

with al-Qaeda, renounce violence, and abide by the Afghan constitution, including the rights afforded to women and minorities. 

And we have been clear about steps the Taliban should take to signal their interest in a peace process. 

So the Taliban face a clear choice: They can dissociate from international terrorism and enter an Afghan peace process, or face increasingly capable Afghan National Security Forces supported by 

the United States and our allies. 

And also key to Afghanistan’s future stability will be a credible 

and inclusive Presidential election in 2014, followed by a constitutional transfer of power. 

President Karzai has repeatedly affirmed his commitment to a 

peaceful constitutional transition of power at the end of his second 

term. All Afghans, whatever their gender, ethnicity, or religion, 

have much to gain from a successful political transition and should 

support it. 

The United States is committed to working with international 

partners to support the Afghans as they choose their next leader. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

504

Mr. Chairman, I will not play down the difficulties, but many, 

many Afghans are working hard every day for a better future, and 

we will continue to support the Afghan Government and people, 

now and after the 2014 elections with a new President, in the hard 

work needed to bring the security, development, and stability 

which the Afghan people so earnestly desire and deserve after decades of violence. 

I would be honored, with the consent of the Senate, to lead the 

U.S. mission in Afghanistan in the important work of enhancing 

the security of the United States and of helping Afghanistan make 

further progress toward that vision of the future. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members, I look forward to your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Cunningham follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lugar, members of the committee, thank you for 

the opportunity to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the 

United States next Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. I am truly 

honored that President Obama and Secretary Clinton have placed their trust in me. 

I look forward, if confirmed by the Senate, to working closely with you to advance 

America’s interests in Afghanistan. I will welcome frequent opportunities to consult 

with you, as I know many of you have spent a great deal of time working on 

Afghanistan in recent years and I have had the pleasure of meeting several of you 

in Afghanistan and during my previous assignment as U.S. Ambassador to Israel. 

We appreciate that so many of you are willing to travel to Afghanistan to see firsthand the conditions on the ground, and we welcome your future visits. 

For the past year I have been serving as Deputy Ambassador at U.S. Embassy 

Kabul, supporting Ambassador Ryan Crocker in leading a mission of some 1,100 

dedicated staff from 18 U.S. Government agencies. I fully intend, if confirmed, to 

follow his example of maintaining the closest possible cooperation between the civilian and military efforts in Afghanistan and of pursuing a ‘‘whole of government’’ 

approach to the important challenges before us. Under Ambassador Crocker’s outstanding leadership we achieved a great deal over the past year, including completion of our historic Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA), which will guide our enduring partnership now, and beyond the end of Transition in 2014. The SPA, and 

the successful NATO summit in Chicago and the Tokyo Conference, send a clear 

message to the Afghan people, and to the region, that Afghanistan will have the 

support of the international community, and of the United States, in the years 

ahead. If confirmed, I will build on this successful diplomatic campaign, underscoring our collective commitment to help build an Afghanistan that will contribute 

to stability in the region, and never again be a source of international terrorist 

threats to the United States. 

On September 11, 2001, I was the Acting Representative to the United Nations 

in New York. The next day, I told the members of the U.N. on behalf of the United 

States that the 9/11 terror was not just an attack on the United States but an 

attack on all, of whatever religion or nation, who shared the values on which our 

global community rests. That struggle between terror and those values continues 

today, and will, unfortunately, continue for some time to come. 

In Afghanistan, we are turning a page. Over the past several months, we and our 

Afghan and international partners have created an unprecedented yet sustainable 

framework of support for Afghanistan, consisting of a web of bilateral and multilateral commitments. As the President said in his May speech to the nation from 

Bagram Air Base, our core goal in Afghanistan is to defeat al-Qaeda and prevent 

Afghanistan from ever again becoming a safe haven for terrorists. Our strategy for 

a stable Afghanistan has five elements: transitioning to Afghan responsibility for 

security in 2014; training Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF); building an enduring partnership with Afghanistan; supporting Afghan reconciliation; and promoting regional stability and economic integration. Our task will be to ensure that 

the successes and outcomes of the three surges: military, civilian and diplomatic, 

which have accomplished so much over the last 18 months, are consolidated as 

Afghanistan assumes full security responsibility and embarks on the ‘‘transformation decade’’ agreed at Bonn. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

505

At the Lisbon NATO summit in 2010, with our allies and partners, we established 

the timeline for security transition. Transition is progressing, with three of the five 

tranches underway. As foreseen, the Afghans are taking on responsibility for security, with Afghan security forces taking the lead now in providing security for some 

75 percent of the population. Afghan security forces will reach their full surge 

strength soon, and are becoming increasingly capable despite the many obstacles to 

be overcome. 

In Istanbul in November 2011, Afghanistan’s neighbors and near-neighbors—with 

our support—began a much-needed dialogue on regional issues, including security, 

counterterrorism, and economic cooperation. At the Bonn conference in December 

2011, Afghan leaders presented to the international community the outlines of a 

strategy to ensure Afghanistan’s stability beyond the troop drawdown. In turn, the 

international community committed to supporting Afghanistan throughout a ‘‘transformation decade’’ from 2015–2024, with the aim of ensuring continued security, 

economic, and democratic gains in the post-Transition period. 

In May 2012, President Obama and President Karzai signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA), which provides a long-term framework for relations 

between the United States and a fully sovereign Afghanistan. Secretary Clinton’s 

announcement during her July 7 visit to Kabul that the President designated 

Afghanistan a Major Non-NATO Ally was another signal of our commitment. 

At the NATO summit in Chicago in May, NATO and its ISAF partners welcomed 

the progress being made on Transition, and noted that, come mid-2013, we will shift 

into a support role as the Afghans step forward to lead. The United States 

reaffirmed our commitment to Afghan security beyond 2014, and the international 

community committed to providing the Afghan security forces the support and funds 

they need for sustainment after 2014. The Afghan Government also recognized that 

NATO and its partners have a crucial role to play in training, advising, and assisting the ANSF, and invited NATO to continue its support after the ISAF mission 

concludes by the end of 2014. 

In order to address support for Afghanistan’s development, growth, and governance, the international community gathered in Tokyo on July 8 to further define the 

concept of mutual accountability and assure Afghanistan of continued economic assistance. The Japanese announced that the international community had pledged 

$16 billion in aid over the next 4 years, sufficient to cover Afghanistan’s fiscal gap 

as identified by the World Bank. Of equal importance was the adoption of a ‘‘Mutual 

Accountability Framework,’’ which affirmed that international assistance to Afghanistan is not unconditional: the Afghan Government must act decisively to ensure 

that the returns on the international effort are sustained and irreversible. Afghanistan’s partners, who want so much to help, made clear that their ability to sustain 

support for Afghanistan depends upon the Afghan Government delivering on what 

it must do, particularly in the area of governance, to preserve and build on the gains 

of the past decade. 

I want to quote Secretary Clinton in Tokyo: ‘‘The future of Afghanistan belongs 

to its government and its people. And I welcome the clear vision presented by President Karzai and the Afghan Government today for unlocking Afghanistan’s economic potential by achieving a stable, democratic future. That must include fighting 

corruption, improving governance, strengthening the rule of law, and increasing 

access to economic opportunity for all Afghans, especially for women.’’ 

Today, the pieces of a long term, enduring support structure for Afghanistan’s 

continuing progress and development are now in place. We have made clear to 

Afghans, and to the region, that the security transition does not mean we are abandoning Afghanistan. And the Taliban appear to be taking notice. For the first time 

in a decade, they are debating and signaling an openness to negotiations. The 

United States supports Afghan peace efforts, aimed at a responsible settlement of 

the conflict. The sole purpose of U.S. support for reconciliation is to create the conditions for an inclusive national dialogue among all Afghans about the future of their 

country. We have been consistent about the necessary outcomes of any negotiation: 

insurgents must break ties with al-Qaeda, renounce violence, and abide by the 

Afghan Constitution, including the rights afforded to women and minorities. And we 

have been clear about steps the Taliban should take to build confidence, and signal 

their interest in a peace process. So, the Taliban face a clear choice: they can dissociate from international terrorism and enter an Afghan peace process, or face increasingly capable Afghan National Security Forces supported by the United States 

and our allies. 

Looking to the future, there is much more to do to strengthen Afghanistan’s institutions, to ensure a smooth political transition in 2014 consistent with Afghanistan’s 

Constitution, and to build regional support for a stable, prosperous, secure Afghanistan in a stable, prosperous, secure region. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

506

Also key to Afghanistan’s future stability will be a credible and inclusive Presidential election in 2014, followed by a constitutional transfer of power. President 

Karzai has repeatedly affirmed his commitment to a peaceful, constitutional transition of power at the end of his second term. All Afghans, whatever their gender, 

ethnicity or religion, have much to gain from a successful political transition, and 

the United States is committed to working with international partners to support 

the Afghans as they choose their next leader. 

I will not play down the difficulties. But many Afghans are working hard for a 

better future, and we will continue to support the Afghan Government and people, 

now and after the 2014 elections with a new President, in the hard work needed 

to bring the security, development, and stability which the Afghan people so earnestly desire and deserve after decades of violence. I would be honored, with the 

consent of the Senate, to lead the U.S. mission in Afghanistan in the important 

work of enhancing the security of the United States and of helping Afghanistan 

make further progress toward that vision of the future. 

I want also in this testimony to highlight some of the substantial gains Afghanistan has made over the last decade in partnership with the United States and the 

international community. Today, over 8 million Afghan children are enrolled in 

school, a third of them girls, compared to just less than a million in school, nearly 

none of them girls, in 2001. Sixty percent of Afghans now have access to basic 

health care facilities—a sixfold increase as compared to 2002—and a recent public 

health survey showed average life expectancy has increased from 42 to 62, and infant mortality was cut in half. Nearly two-thirds of Afghans have phones, and expanded radio and TV access is facilitating information flow and connecting Afghan 

society. Approximately 100,000 Afghan women have benefited from microfinance opportunities and our funding supports 17 protective service facilities for women and 

children. And since 2006, our rule of law programs have trained over 20,000 professionals working in the Afghan criminal justice system including prosecutors, defense 

attorneys, judges, investigators, corrections personnel, and social workers. 

With your continued support, our bilateral civilian assistance to Afghanistan that 

has helped to achieve these results will continue to facilitate economic stability, encourage responsive governance, and sustain the social gains made over the last ten 

years. The critical principles underlying our work are ‘‘sustainability’’ and ‘‘mutual 

accountability.’’ Our resources will align with Afghan priorities, lay the foundation 

for a successful security transition, bolster viable sectors of the economy to build 

economic self-reliance, and promote critical sectors of the Afghan economy, including 

agriculture and extractives. Our programs will continue to strengthen the legal system and law enforcement, and we will redouble our efforts to increase the participation of women in all aspects of Afghan society. The Tokyo mutual accountability 

framework also called for a greater portion of our funding to be directly conditioned 

on specific reforms via an incentive mechanism. We remain committed to the goal 

of providing at least 50 percent of our development assistance through the Afghan 

Government and believe the systems we have put in place will promote transparency and accountability. 

We all recognize that corruption challenges loom large in Afghanistan and, if confirmed, I will continue to urge the government, in its own vital interest, to aggressively pursue anticorruption policies. I will also continue to make every effort to 

ensure that the assistance which the American people have so generously provided 

is used wisely and effectively, with the maximum degree of confidence that it is 

serving the intended purpose. It is also important to note that Afghanistan is making progress on key transparency reforms to facilitate economic growth, including 

significant progress toward Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) compliance and World Trade Organization accession. And while there is still much work 

to be done, the Afghans have taken steps toward holding accountable those responsible for the Kabul Bank crisis, permitting the IMF to restart its relationship with 

Afghanistan in November of last year, a decision which was reaffirmed in late June 

by the IMF Executive Board. The United States is also continuing to assist the 

Afghans in disrupting the opium trade as a funding source for Taliban and insurgent actors. 

Private sector growth in Afghanistan, both through domestic and international investment, will be key to building Afghanistan’s economic self-reliance throughout 

the Transformation Decade. We believe that the Secretary’s vision for a ‘‘New Silk 

Road’’ will gradually transform South and Central Asia through a network of transit, trade, investment, energy, and increased people-to-people ties. 

A critical next step in our partnership with Afghanistan will be the conclusion of 

a Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA), which we expect will supersede our current 

Status of Forces Agreement for the long term. Like the SPA, the BSA will be a negotiation between equal partners and sovereign countries to create an agreed, updated 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

507

framework in which to implement the security cooperation and assistance committed in the Strategic Partnership. There will be tough issues, but both sides are 

committed to work together and we have built strong relationships and partnership 

through the SPA. 

Post transition in 2014, the Department of State envisions maintaining an enduring presence in Afghanistan. We have learned lessons from Iraq and seeking a balance between an appropriately sized mission able to effect U.S. policy and current 

budget realities. We plan to maintain an Embassy in Kabul and presences in four 

regional centers that will signal our commitment to the Afghan people, support 

effective diplomacy and avoid the perception of regional favoritism. We are embracing a whole of government approach in our planning with the goal of leveraging all 

USG capabilities across agencies and avoiding redundancies. The staffing levels will 

be scaled appropriately for the civilian mission in Afghanistan and in relation to 

other global priorities. 

Ultimately, the gains of the last decade must be sustained by the Afghan people 

themselves. The processes of transition and continued economic, political and social 

development must be Afghan-led, and we are seeing Afghanistan taking increasing 

responsibility for its future. Afghanistan will continue to face significant challenges, 

but we have created the regional and international context for a political settlement 

of the Afghan war and a gradual and responsible handover of authority to Afghan 

National Security Forces.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Ambassador Cunningham. 

Ambassador Olson. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. OLSON, OF NEW MEXICO, TO 

BE AMBASSADOR TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN 

Ambassador OLSON. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Senator 

Lugar, members of the committee, I thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today. 

I’m honored by President Obama’s decision to nominate me as 

United States Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and 

I deeply appreciate this demonstration of confidence by President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton. 

I look forward, if confirmed by the Senate, to working closely 

with you to advance America’s interests in Pakistan. 

I have been privileged to serve in the Foreign Service since 1982. 

I have worked many of these years in the Islamic world, including 

most recently as Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates just 

prior to my service in Afghanistan as the coordinating director for 

development and economic affairs. 

Through my career, I’ve been thankful for the support of my family, especially my wonderful daughters, Anna and Isabella, who, as 

you noted, Senator, Isabella is here today. 

Senators, I do not need to tell you how important Pakistan is to 

the United States. The United States has a clear interest in supporting a stable, sovereign, and democratic Pakistan at peace with 

itself and with its neighbors. 

Continued engagement with Pakistan is necessary to pursue the 

strategic defeat of al-Qaeda. Engagement is necessary to promote 

peace and stability in Afghanistan, to encourage regional stability, 

and to support political and economic stability within Pakistan 

itself. Instability in Pakistan would undermine what we are trying 

to achieve in the region. 

Pakistan faces many challenges. It is located in a tough region, 

continues to face economic stagnation, and is home to a burgeoning 

population of nearly 200 million people, the majority of whom are 

under the age of 25. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

508

Pakistan has its own challenge in combating extremists that 

have killed over 30,000 soldiers and Pakistani citizens. But Pakistan is also a country with great potential, vast natural resources, 

and a talented, resilient people. 

As you know, the last several years have been extremely difficult 

for United States-Pakistan relations. As Secretary Clinton has 

said, our relationship with Pakistan is not always an easy one, but 

it is important for both of our nations. 

Throughout the past year, despite many challenges, we have continued to engage the Pakistanis at the highest levels. We are committed to putting this relationship on a more stable footing. 

The reopening of the NATO supply lines provides a renewed 

opportunity to increase cooperation on our many shared interests. 

And I would like to note in this regard that today in Islamabad our 

Charge ́ d’Affaires, Mr. Hoagland, signed a memorandum of understanding with the Pakistani Ministry of Defense on the reopening 

of the ground lines of communication, NATO ground lines of communications, formalizing that opening. 

If confirmed, I hope to build on this opportunity to identify and 

refine our shared interests with Pakistan and find practical, effective ways to work together to achieve them. Those shared interests 

are many. 

We share an interest in combating the extremists that threaten 

both of our countries. Tragically, the Pakistani people have suffered greatly from the extremist violence in their country. They 

have lost more troops and civilians to acts of terror than any other 

nation. But there has been cooperation between our nations. 

As President Obama has noted, we have captured or removed 

from battlefield more terrorists on Pakistani soil than from

anywhere else. We could not have done that without Pakistan’s 

assistance. 

We also share an interest in supporting political stability and 

security in Afghanistan. As President Obama said on May 2, we 

want Pakistan to be a full partner in supporting Afghan peace and 

stability in a way that respects Pakistan’s sovereignty, interests, 

and democratic institutions. 

Pakistani officials have told us repeatedly that, more than any 

other Nation, they have a vested interest in seeking a stable, 

secure Afghanistan. 

Promoting democratic and economic stability in Pakistan is also 

in our shared interest. Pakistan’s upcoming general election will 

mark the country’s transition of power from one civilian government to another, the first in Pakistan’s history. 

We also share an interest in combating the use of improvised 

explosive devices, and we are engaged in discussions on this critical 

issue, including on ways to increase border controls to restrict the 

flow of IED precursors. 

Unlocking Pakistan’s economic potential by supporting private 

sector growth and expanding trade and economic cooperation across 

borders is central to creating jobs for Pakistan’s dynamic people. 

Progress on normalizing trade relations between India and Pakistan will have a tremendous impact on increasing regional economic cooperation in line with Secretary Clinton’s vision for a new 

Silk Road linking the economies of South and Central Asia. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

509

And our continuing civilian assistance, which is focused on five 

priority sectors—energy, economic growth, stabilization of the border areas, education, and health—also helps promote a secure, stable, democratic Pakistan and stimulate economic growth over time. 

If confirmed, I will consult regularly with the Congress, and particularly with this committee, which has played a vital role over 

the years in supporting our goals in Pakistan, from the generosity 

of the Kerry-Lugar-Berman civilian assistance authorization to 

numerous trips to Pakistan to help the Pakistani leadership and 

your counterparts understand how the American people view Pakistan and this complex and challenging region. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, please allow me to 

reiterate how deeply honored I am to have been nominated as 

United States Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. I 

thank you for considering my nomination and would be pleased to 

answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Olson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. OLSON

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you today. I am honored by President Obama’s decision to nominate 

me as the U.S. Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and I deeply appreciate the confidence President Obama and Secretary Clinton have in me. I look forward, if confirmed by the Senate, to working closely with you to advance America’s 

interests in Pakistan. 

I have been privileged to serve in the Foreign Service since 1982. I worked for 

many of those years in the Muslim world, including most recently as Ambassador 

to the United Arab Emirates, just before I went to Afghanistan as the Coordinating 

Director for Development and Economic Affairs. Over the years and through these 

positions, I have worked closely with senior leadership of the State Department and 

other national security agencies, and look forward to continuing those relationships 

in promoting U.S. interests in, and ties with, Pakistan. I am grateful for the continuing support of my family, especially my wonderful daughters Ana and Isabella. 

I don’t have to tell you how important Pakistan is to the United States. The 

United States has a clear interest in supporting a stable, sovereign, and democratic 

Pakistan at peace with itself and its neighbors. Continued engagement with Pakistan is necessary to pursue the strategic defeat of al-Qaeda. Engagement is necessary to promote peace and stability in Afghanistan, to encourage regional stability, and to support political and economic stability in Pakistan. Instability in 

Pakistan would undermine our goals in the region. 

Pakistan faces many challenges. It is located in a challenging region, continues 

to face economic stagnation, and is home to a burgeoning population of nearly 200 

million people, the majority of whom are under 25. Pakistan has its own challenge 

in combating extremists that have killed almost 30,000 soldiers and Pakistani citizens. But Pakistan is also a country with great potential, vast natural resources, 

and talented, resilient people. 

As you know, the last several years have been extremely difficult for U.S.-

Pakistan relations. As Secretary Clinton has said, our relationship with Pakistan 

is not always an easy one, but it is important for both of our nations. Throughout 

the past year—one that has been marked by events including the May 2 raid 

against Usama Bin Laden and the November 26 Salala cross-border incident that 

resulted in the deaths of 24 Pakistani troops and the subsequent closure of the 

Ground Lines of Communication—we have continued to engage the Pakistanis at 

the highest levels. We are committed to putting this relationship on more stable 

footing. 

The reopening of the NATO supply lines provides a renewed opportunity to increase cooperation on our many shared interests. If confirmed, I hope to build on 

this opportunity to identify and refine our shared interests with Pakistan, and find 

practical, effective ways to work together to achieve them. 

Those shared interests are many. 

We share an interest in combating the extremists that threaten both of our countries. Tragically, the Pakistani people have suffered greatly from the extremist violence in their country. They have lost more troops and civilians to acts of terror 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

510

than any other nation. But there has been cooperation between our nations. As 

President Obama has noted, we have captured or removed from the battlefield more 

terrorists on Pakistani soil than anywhere else. We could not have done that without Pakistan’s assistance. 

We also share an interest in supporting political stability and security in Afghanistan. As President Obama said on May 2, we want Pakistan to be a full partner 

in supporting Afghan peace and stability in a way that respects Pakistan’s sovereignty, interests, and democratic institutions. Pakistani officials have told us repeatedly that, more than any other nation, they have a vested interest in seeing a 

stable, secure, Afghanistan. 

Even as the U.S.-Pakistan bilateral relationship has faced challenges, we have 

been encouraged by the enhanced dialogue between Afghanistan and Pakistan on 

reconciliation. As Afghanistan and Pakistan intensify their bilateral dialogue, including through restarting the Joint Peace Commission, all parties need to focus on 

concrete steps to support Afghanistan. This includes squeezing insurgents—most notably the Haqqani Taliban Network—which threaten to spoil nascent Afghan reconciliation efforts, and which target Afghans, as well as U.S. personnel. 

We will continue to encourage Afghanistan-Pakistan cooperation through the Core 

Group, which Secretary Clinton convened for the first time at the Ministerial level 

on the margins of the Tokyo Conference. At the July 8 Ministerial-level Core Group 

meeting in Tokyo, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the U.S. reiterated that the surest 

way to lasting peace and security for Afghanistan and the broader region is through 

an Afghan political process of peace and reconciliation for Afghanistan. The three 

countries underscored that this process should be supported by Afghanistan’s neighbors and by the international community. The meeting resulted in the first joint 

U.S.-Afghanistan-Pakistan call for the Taliban to enter a dialogue with the Afghan 

government, and reaffirmed Pakistan’s commitment to respond to Afghan requests 

with concrete support that would advance peace efforts. 

Promoting democratic and economic stability in Pakistan is also in our shared interests. Despite the current internal political turmoil, Pakistan’s upcoming general 

election it will mark the country’s first transition of power from one civilian government to another—the first in Pakistan’s history. 

We also share an interest in combating the use of improvised explosive devices, 

and we are engaged in discussion on this critical issue, including on ways to increase border controls to restrict the flow of IED precursors. 

Unlocking Pakistan’s economic potential by supporting private sector growth and 

expanding trade and economic cooperation across borders is central to creating jobs 

for Pakistan’s dynamic people. Progress on normalizing trade relations between 

India and Pakistan will have a tremendous impact on increasing regional economic 

cooperation in line with Secretary Clinton’s vision for a New Silk Road linking the 

economies of South and Central Asia. And our continuing civilian assistance, which 

is focused on five priority sectors—energy, economic growth, stabilization of the border areas, education, and health—also helps promote a secure, stable, democratic 

Pakistan, and stimulate economic growth, over time. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with the enormously talented team at our 

Embassy in Islamabad and our three consulates in Lahore, Peshawar, and Karachi, 

and our team in Washington. We will energetically work with members of the Pakistani Government, business community, and civil society to promote security and 

prosperity in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and throughout the region, and to improve the 

image Pakistanis have of the United States and the American people. 

I will also consult regularly with Congress, and in particular this committee, 

which has played an important role over the years in supporting our goals in Pakistan, from the generosity of the Kerry-Lugar Berman civilian assistance authorization to numerous trips to Pakistan to help the Pakistani leadership and your counterparts understand the concerns—and also the empathy—the American people 

have about Pakistan and this complex and challenging region. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, please allow me to reiterate how 

deeply honored I am to have been nominated as the U.S. Ambassador to the Islamic 

Republic of Pakistan.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Ambassador Olson. 

Let me make my excuses early here. We have a competing meeting in the Finance Committee on the tax extenders, which I need 

to attend shortly. And I think Senator Casey is going to chair at 

the point that I do that. I appreciate his willingness to do that. 

And I apologize to our witnesses. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

511

But let me ask you, Ambassador Olson, if I can, obviously, you 

are well aware of the crosscurrents here on the Hill with respect 

to the relationship with Pakistan. And I have met recently with 

Ambassador Rehman and others, just to try to talk it through. And 

obviously, they are well aware, and I think this most recent step 

to reopen is an effort to try to settle things down. 

But some people in Congress, I think ill-advisedly, but nevertheless, some people in Congress are advocating a more precipitous 

kind of reaction to the current state of affairs. Some want to suspend aid. Some don’t think there’s a value to it, et cetera. 

So could you state to the Congress, as you go over there, which 

you will, as Ambassador, how you see that, why that would be

ill-advised in your judgment, and what you see as the stakes, and 

also, importantly, the things you see the Pakistani’s doing that are 

helpful to us, notwithstanding the difficulties we’ve had in the 

relationship? 

Ambassador OLSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think that our relationship with Pakistan is critical to our 

national security interests, primarily in the area of counterterrorism cooperation. 

Over the past decade, thanks in significant part to cooperation 

from Pakistan, we are in the position of virtually eliminating

al-Qaeda as a threat to us. And I think that we want to continue 

to formulate a relationship that allows us to strengthen counterterrorism cooperation. 

I was also, Senator, very pleased that in your opening remarks 

you mentioned the perception of many Pakistanis that the United 

States had disengaged in the 1990s. And I think that’s a very

important backdrop for our relationship today. 

I think Pakistanis, in the government and outside, are very concerned about what will happen in Afghanistan post-2014. And as 

Ambassador Cunningham indicated, we have put in place over the 

last year some very strong measures for assuring Afghans, and, indeed, the region, that we will be engaged after 2014. 

I think this is also the great significance of the Kerry-LugarBerman assistance, that it provides assistance on a predictable 

basis; it provides a stable basis for an ongoing relationship. 

I think that if we can continue to emphasize to the Pakistanis 

our engagement over time, it will be possible to build the kind of 

productive relationship based on mutual interests that will serve 

us over the long term. 

The CHAIRMAN. And what do you think the Pakistani attitude is 

now about the so-called Haqqani Network? 

Ambassador OLSON. Well, sir, with regard to the Haqqani Network, first of all, I think this is one of the toughest challenges that 

we face. And I would say, at a personal level as well as a professional level, I have been in Embassy Kabul for the last year. I was 

at the Embassy on September 13 and April 15, the two attacks that 

took place. So I have a certain amount of skin in the game, for this 

particular issue. 

And we do know, of course, that the Haqqanis are based in north 

Waziristan. But the question is how we will address the challenge 

represented by the Haqqani presence. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

512

We have already taken some actions against the Haqqani Network on a whole-of-government basis. As you know, key Haqqani 

Network leaders have already been designated as foreign terrorists, 

sanctioning their travel and their finances. And the question of the 

designation of the network as a foreign terrorist organization is 

with Secretary Clinton right now. 

I can assure you, Senator, that this will be a primary focus of 

my activities and diplomatic engagement with the Pakistanis, to 

encourage further measures against the Haqqani Network, further 

squeezing of the Haqqani Network. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I look forward to connecting with you when 

I get out there, and I appreciate your observations on it. It’s worth 

a lot more conversation, obviously, but thank you for that. 

Ambassador Cunningham, I assume you had an opportunity to 

read Dexter Filkins’ piece in the New Yorker. Can you comment on 

the recurring number of articles that seem to be appearing talking 

about how Afghans are planning for the fight and laying the 

groundwork for a longer confrontation as we draw down, rather 

than engaging in the fight for the democratic process and the rule 

of law and other things? 

Can you give us your sense of that state of play at this point? 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. Sure, Senator, thank you. 

I think what we’re seeing and have seen for a while, as Ambassador Olson said, there are a lot of people in this region, in Afghanistan, hedging their bets about the future. 

I think the talk of rearming and reforming of militias is overstated. But the temptation is there, and the uncertainty about how 

various groups will advance their interests in the future is very 

much on the table. 

That’s why I said in my statement, and as you said in yours, the 

upcoming political transition is really vitally important. As I said 

in my statement, it’s not an issue of one party or another. 

It really is an issue for all Afghans and all Afghan political 

actors to take a really hard look at the significance of the upcoming 

elections and the political transition and what that means for 

Afghanistan’s future and for the unity of the country and of the 

body politic. 

We’re already working on that, in consultations with members of 

the international community and with Afghans across the political 

and civil society spectrum. And it’s something that I regard as a 

key element and a key task for all of us who are interested in 

Afghanistan’s future, and getting the concept right that the way 

forward in Afghanistan has to be one of a political process, including, hopefully in due course, the Taliban or elements thereof. And 

it cannot be a future that resorts to internal conflict or based on 

armed conflict between various elements of Afghan society. 

The CHAIRMAN. Do we have sufficient leverage? Are there ways 

in which we could increase our initiatives in that regard? Or are 

we kind of locked in, because of the drawdown? 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. I think our leverage is quite substantial. I think the logic is there. I think Afghans across a broad spectrum see that there’s a tremendous amount at stake in the coming 

years. We will still have a crucial role in all the elements of our 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

513

strategy—political, military, and economic—not just we, the international community more broadly. 

And one of the core messages that comes out of all of these meetings and discussions that we’ve been having, most clearly at Tokyo, 

is that Afghans’ international partners are absolutely united 

behind the proposition that the political process going forward 

needs to be credible and needs to produce a peaceful transition. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you. Thank you very much, Ambassador. 

Thank you, both of you, and I look forward also to seeing you out 

there. 

Senator Lugar. 

Then Senator Casey will chair. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I’m very pleased that you, Ambassador Cunningham, and you, 

Ambassador Olson, are willing to undertake these responsibilities. 

I have confidence in both of you. 

And the confirmation process, therefore, offers an opportunity for 

us to discuss Pakistan and Afghanistan, to obtain more information 

for our committee and for the public. 

Ambassador Olson, I want to raise this question broadly. According to recent State Department country reports on terrorism, 

deadly, brutal attacks within Pakistan itself amounted to well over 

3,000 Pakistanis killed in 2011 alone. The threat of violent militant 

groups is pervasive. No part of Pakistan is spared. Suicide and 

armed attacks occurred in the coastal city of Karachi, the business 

capital of Lahore; the FATA capital of Peshawar; as well as in the 

tribal areas adjoining Afghanistan. 

How does the Pakistani Government classify this threat? How 

does the Pakistan Government work to address the internal threat 

to life and government institutions these terror groups represent? 

To what extent can you distinguish between our efforts, the United 

States efforts, to support their efforts to combat internal terror 

threats and the regional threat emanating from Pakistan’s safe 

havens that is our primary concern? 

Ambassador OLSON. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

I agree entirely with your assessment about the nature of the 

challenge that Pakistan faces internally. And I think we have seen 

a great shift in the Government of Pakistan’s approach over the 

past few years to dealing with the internal threat that is represented by the terrorist groups that you describe. 

There was a time in the not-too-distant past when the Pakistani 

army was primarily deployed along the frontier with India. It is 

now very heavily deployed internally and especially in the area 

around FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, to deal with the 

insurgent threat. And, of course, I think we’re all familiar with the 

counterinsurgency operation in Swat a few years ago. 

I think that we have recognized and, indeed, supported this 

change. And thanks to the generosity of the Congress, we have a 

variety of funding mechanisms providing security assistance to 

build the capability of the Pakistani forces, particularly in 

counterinsurgency operations, moving them away from a focus on 

heavy armor toward lighter counterinsurgency operations. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

514

There have been challenges with the security assistance program, but I will look forward to working with you and members of 

other committees to see what we can do to remove some of the 

obstacles and move forward on those important security assistance 

programs. 

Senator LUGAR. To what extent does this violence, the loss of life, 

undermine any potential for civil governance in Pakistan? What 

are the ramifications on governance of the country itself? 

Ambassador OLSON. Well, Senator, I think that the Pakistani 

Government does face many challenges, and it has faced challenges, for instance, in the last year with regard to the floods. 

I would say that there are some sinews of strength in Pakistani 

society. There is a very active civil society, which picks up a considerable amount of the slack. 

For historic reasons, the Pakistan military is a very strong institution and has been involved in building capacity. 

Our assistance program, of course, our civilian assistance program, and especially the Kerry-Lugar-Berman funds, are very 

much focused on building up some of the capacity of the civilian 

government, particularly in the all-important area of energy and 

economic growth, and also in stabilization, particularly road-building in the areas closest to the Afghan border. 

I think all of these programs have been effective, but I take on 

board the point that has been made that we need to exercise diligent oversight and report back to you on the effectiveness of those 

programs. 

Senator LUGAR. While teetering on the brink of insolvency on 

some occasions, Pakistan appears to forgo considerable revenues, 

including those associated with transit trade. Though Pakistan has 

signed a transit trade agreement with Afghanistan that was intended to allow direct transit of goods between Central Asia and 

South Asia, there has been little progress in actual trade across 

Pakistan and, thus, considerable revenue and jobs continue to be 

lost. 

What is the status and prospect of finding permanent alternative 

trade routes, such as through Iran? Is the road-rail infrastructure 

through eastern Iran fully operational and capable of transferring 

the vast iron ore India and others will seek to export from rich 

mineral deposits in Afghanistan? What is the total estimate of revenue lost to Pakistan during the closure of the NATO ISAF resupply routes? 

What is the concentration of focus when it comes to trade and 

other sources of income in the country? 

Ambassador OLSON. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I agree with you 

that the Afghan-Pakistan Transit and Trade Agreement has not 

fully lived up to its potential. It’s a very important step, potentially. And it’s one that I was somewhat involved in supporting in 

my previous position. 

I have, in fact, traveled to Islamabad last fall to meet with Pakistani officials to urge further implementation. There have been a 

variety of technical factors that have yet to be worked out between 

the Pakistani and Afghan governments. And I will certainly pursue 

that, if confirmed, with great vigor. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

515

I think that with regard to the regional trade, one of the most 

promising things that we have seen out of Pakistan in recent years 

is the liberalization of trade with India. And as we all know, the 

Indian economy is experiencing a period of rapid expansion. 

Pakistan has granted most-favored-nation status to India and 

has moved to liberalize its trade from a so-called positive list—that 

is to say, a restrictive list—to a negative list, one that limits only 

certain strategic goods. 

This is all to the good. And I think we want to encourage further 

progress in the economic dialogue and commercial relationship 

between India and Pakistan. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator CASEY [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

I want to commend both Ambassador Cunningham and Ambassador Olson for their continuing service. These are tough assignments, and we’re grateful for their service, and of course that of 

their families, because when you serve, they serve with you, in one 

form or another. 

Ambassador Cunningham, I’m resisting the temptation to say 

how great it is that you were born in Allentown, PA. 

Ambassador Olson, New Jersey’s pretty good, too. 

I want to start with Pakistan, and I’ll provide a little bit of a 

backdrop as a predicate to my question. It’s about this issue of 

IEDs and the precursor elements. 

In your testimony, Mr. Ambassador, you say on the second to last 

page of your testimony, ‘‘We also share an interest in combating 

the use of improvised explosive devices, and we’re engaged in discussion on this critical issue, including on ways to increase border 

controls to restrict the flow of IED precursors.’’

And I’m happy to see that in your statement. 

Most Americans know what IEDs are and the horrific impact 

they have on our troops and also on civilians the world over. They 

may not be as familiar with the precursor ingredient, the calcium 

ammonium nitrate flowing from Pakistan into Afghanistan and 

becoming the central element in that explosive capacity. 

I’ve spent a lot of time on this issue, as have many Members of 

Congress. The administration has worked very hard on this. I just 

spoke to Secretary Clinton yesterday about it, and she and the 

whole team at the State Department have worked very hard. 

I wanted to get your sense of it, because when I was in Pakistan 

last August for 3 days, in every meeting that we had—I was there 

with three other United States Senators—and in every single meeting, whether it was then-Prime Minister Gilani, whether it was 

with President Zardari, with General Kayani, the army chief, wherever we were, we brought this up. And they knew we were coming, 

in a sense. They were prepared for the question. They would 

address the question, express their solidarity with us on this issue, 

because they’ve lost a lot of civilians in this horrific nightmare. 

And then they went another step by providing us with a briefing 

by their Interior Ministry, outlining their written strategic plan, 

and then expressing determination to implement what they had 

written down on paper. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

516

We said, when? Is this weeks away? Is it months away? They 

said it’s within months. Basically, that was their answer. 

So I was expecting sometime in the fall we’d see some measure 

of progress, or maybe it would take a little longer, maybe we’d be 

into 2012 by the time they really made progress. 

To date, in my judgment, there’s been almost no progress made, 

or no substantial progress made, and you see it in every state. 

Pennsylvania has lost 79 troops in Afghanistan, more than half of 

those from IEDs. 

So I ask you, in light of that bad news I just outlined, that unfortunate recent history, what can you do in your new posting and 

what will you do in literally the first couple of weeks after you get 

there, to press the Pakistan Government on at least one fundamental point: It is in their interest, as much as it’s in our own 

interest, to stop the flow of ammonium nitrate, to reduce the 

chances that more of our troops or their civilians will be blown up 

by these horrific explosions? 

Ambassador OLSON. Senator Casey, thank you very much, both 

for the question, and I do want to acknowledge the central importance of IEDs and countering the precursors. I am coming out of 

a year in Afghanistan, and I certainly appreciate the enormous cost 

that these devices have brought about. 

I also want to thank you for spending 3 days in Pakistan, and 

making the effort to make the trip out there, and to spend a significant amount of time. It’s always greatly appreciated when Senators 

do that. 

I do think we share a common interest, and I agree with your 

assessment, Senator, with the Pakistanis on countering IEDs. They 

have suffered heavy losses on both their military forces and among 

civilians from IEDs. 

There is a slight distinction, as you’re well aware, because most 

of the IEDs they encounter are actually generated not from the calcium ammonium nitrate, but from, I guess, military-grade explosive devices, which they have found, which have been leaked out 

into the marketplace. 

But that said, I think the fundamental interest is the same, and 

I think there are ways that we can pursue it. 

I will work closely with my team, if confirmed, with the DOD elements, and with the civilian aspects of the mission, to develop an 

approach for approaching the government, as you note, in the early 

days of my tenure, if confirmed, to follow up on this and to report 

back to you. 

Senator CASEY. What is your sense as to the reason why there 

hasn’t been progress made? And I realize the relationship doesn’t 

help here. The relationship is an impediment to them making 

progress on IEDs. But I can’t tell you how many times the promise 

was made to us, as representatives of our government, promising 

over and over again that they would make progress. 

I want to get your sense of what you believe to be the reason why 

they haven’t made progress on this. 

Ambassador OLSON. Well, Senator, I think this is probably an 

issue where it would be best for me to go out and attempt to get 

the ground truth on this and come back to you. My very preliminary sense on this is that, as you note, there have been relationFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

517

ship issues that have perhaps added some friction overall and prevented some movement forward on this. 

I think there is also the question of calcium-ammonium-nitrate 

production in Pakistan. It is not illegal to produce it, because it has 

agricultural use. So I think that that may present a domestic political issue, but that’s a very preliminary sense. I would like to get 

out, if confirmed, on the ground and report back to you. 

Senator CASEY. And I’ll talk to you more later about General 

Barbero’s work, who, as you know, has spent a lot of time on this. 

And we can both benefit from his experience. 

Thanks very much. 

Senator Corker. 

Senator CORKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you both for your public service. I know Mr. 

Cunningham and I had a lot of time yesterday in the office. I 

appreciate that. 

I understand, Ambassador Olson, we’re going to be doing the 

same here in just about a hour. 

So thank you both for your service and for your bringing your 

families. 

And if any of us wanted to be hard on you, it’s hard to do in front 

of daughters. So thank you all for being here. 

I know that you all are currently working together—is that correct?—or have, in Kabul, spent some time together. And I know, 

as we travel through Afghanistan, multiple trips, our military operators there are most concerned about fighting a war in Afghanistan 

that’s being controlled out of Pakistan. And I think that’s been the 

greatest frustration to our military leaders. 

And I know you all have certainly experienced those comments 

and concerns. 

Which of the two jobs, as you all talk, do you consider to be the 

most difficult, Pakistan or Afghanistan? Seriously. I don’t want a 

long paragraph, but, seriously, which of the two do you consider to 

be most——

Ambassador OLSON. Senator, Jim Cunningham was my boss in 

Kabul, so I’m going to let him answer that, if that’s all right. 

[Laughter.] 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. It impossible to say. They are both

challenging positions in challenging times. 

Certainly, being Ambassador to Pakistan, a country that’s so 

large and so vexed with so many problems, has got to be a really 

significant challenge. But my task in a country that is at war, and 

where we are fighting along with our Afghan and international 

partners, is a challenge of—I don’t think you can rank them—but 

it’s a challenge of a different order. 

Senator CORKER. Several years ago, I guess, we embarked on 

something called AfPak. It was called the Holbrooke doctrine. 

As we talk with people in both countries, but especially Pakistan, 

I think Pakistan viewed that whole approach to be very offensive. 

I mean, looking at Pakistan through the eyes of Afghanistan was 

pretty offensive, I think, to the folks in Pakistan. And we really 

don’t have a relationship in Pakistan. It’s more of a long-term relationship. It’s more of a transactional relationship. It’s almost a payFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

518

to-play kind of relationship. And it’s been that way for a long, long 

time. 

And so, to Mr. Olson, as we deal with a country that basically 

the military controls and the elected leaders are, candidly, not particularly effective, how do we, as Members of Congress—you talked 

about Congress’ generosity. It’s really the American taxpayer that’s 

footing this bill and is quite frustrated with the Pakistan at 

present. 

How do we leverage our relationship with them, since it is more 

of a transactional relationship, not one that’s really built on good 

will? How do we leverage the resources that we have to cause Pakistan to act, ‘‘in ways that we would like to see them act’’? 

Ambassador OLSON. Thank you, Senator. That’s an excellent 

question. 

I think that we have to remember that our relationship with 

Pakistan goes back quite a ways. It goes back right to the beginning of the Pakistani state. 

For 65 years, we’ve had a relationship. It has had some ups and 

downs during that period, but there have been periods of very close 

and very intense partnership, probably most notably in the 1980s. 

And, of course, that was a relationship that centered around 

Afghanistan. 

And I think I would agree with you that Pakistanis have perhaps 

some concern about being labeled AfPak. But at the same time, I 

think the long-term status of Afghanistan is enormously important 

to Pakistanis, and it’s one of the critical questions in our relationship. 

I think that what our interest is with Pakistan over time is 

building a more stable relationship, one that is focused on our mutual interests, but takes account of the fact that the United States 

and the international community are not going to disengage from 

Afghanistan. 

The great fear amongst many in the region, amongst—I certainly 

heard this from my Afghan friends when I was serving there, and 

I think it’s true in Pakistan as well—is that the international community will repeat the experience of 1989 to 1992, when, having 

accomplished the withdrawal of the Soviet forces from Afghanistan, 

the international community turned away and disengaged. 

And that had a severe cost, particularly in Pakistan, where a 

generation of military officers who had previously served with the 

United States and trained in U.S. institutions no longer had that 

opportunity. And we are, frankly, paying a cost in our relationship 

now, because many of those officers are now general officers and 

have not been exposed to us in a way that their predecessors were. 

So I think that all of the work that Ambassador Cunningham 

described that he and Ambassador Crocker have been doing over 

the past year on the strategic partnership agreement, solidifying 

the future of Afghanistan, will have an enormously reassuring 

effect on Pakistani sensibilities. 

And certainly, that will be my priority, to have that strategic 

level discussion about the United States not disengaging from the 

region. 

Senator CORKER. But it seems to me that—and, again, I realize 

the, ‘‘elected leadership of Pakistan’’ is more than weak. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

519

It seems to me that they continue to do those things that only 

are in their self-interests, which obviously we as a country do in 

many cases, too. But the very issue that Senator Casey is mentioning but also multiple other issues, it just seems they are concerned about Afghanistan. They’re concerned about India, not having any influence there, because they’re such a narrow country and 

it’s at their rear, and that’s really—they’d rather it be destabilized, 

would they not, than India have any influence there? 

Ambassador OLSON. Senator, on the question of this has been a 

doctrine that the Pakistanis, over the years, have talked about, 

strategic depth, the idea that Afghanistan represents strategic 

depth against a potential conflict with India. 

My sense is that the Pakistani military and the Pakistani Government have moved away from that. Foreign Minister Khar has 

made some public comments about moving away from the doctrine 

of strategic depth. Chief of the Army, Staff General Kayani, has 

redeployed his forces internally to deal with the internal threat, 

and heavily toward the border with Afghanistan to deal with the 

threats emanating from that region. 

So I think there is a basis at a strategic level for some further 

discussion with the Pakistanis, and I think that these are, frankly, 

positive developments that we would want to encourage as Pakistan looks to its strategic position. 

Senator CORKER. So I realize that we as a country need to continue to be involved with Pakistan and I know that the notion of 

just cutting off all aid is not a particularly good way of staying engaged with Pakistan. 

But on the other hand, I think just to continue as we have been 

going is also not a good route. So sometimes Congress can be helpful to people like you by doing certain things that make certain 

things that cause you to be able to talk with them about the fact 

that if things don’t change then Congress will continue doing X. 

What are some of those things that we might do prior to you 

being over there, to help us leverage Pakistan, which again, I 

understand what you’re saying about relationships down the road 

and building on it, and how they’re looking to our engagement in 

Afghanistan. I understand all those things. 

But at present our relationship is very transactional. 

So how do we—you know, do we have the physician there who 

aided us with Osama bin Laden who is in prison? I mean, how do 

we get them to act in a way that’s very different than they’re now 

acting on things that are very important to us? 

Ambassador OLSON. Thank you, Senator. 

I think we need to focus on the core areas of mutual interest, and 

I think this is primarily in the counterterrorism area. As I noted, 

I think we have made enormous progress against al-Qaeda over the 

past decade, and we are within grasp of shutting down al-Qaeda. 

I think that has got to be our primary strategic objective. 

And I think we need to have some very candid and direct discussions with the Pakistani Government about the question of the safe 

havens and the Haqqani Network. 

But I think it’s important that that discussion take place against 

the context of some predictability in the overall relationship. And 

that is what I would be hoping to, if confirmed, bring to the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

520

relationship, some sense that we want to move away from a more 

transactional relationship to one that is based on a longer term policy of engagement. 

And I think that the assistance that has been so generously provided by, as you note, by the American people has had a significant 

role and potentially has a significant role in the future on stabilizing that relationship and showing that our interests are not 

short term but, rather, long term. 

Senator CORKER. Well, our interests are in our interest. 

I will say, I know we’re taking too much time. I thank you for 

your generosity. I thank both of you for your service. I look forward 

to talking to you. 

And look, we have an election that is going to be over here soon, 

and regardless of what the outcome is, in many ways there is a 

clean slate, if you will. There won’t be the issue of dealing with 

who did what when. We’ll have, in many ways, a clean slate, no 

matter what the outcome is. 

I would just ask that both of you continue to be totally transparent with us. And the fact is that we candidly have leaders in 

both countries that are extremely difficult to deal with, and, candidly, in many cases, are not working in ways that are beneficial 

to us. 

And I hope, as you continue to talk with us, you will continue 

to be as transparent as you were in our office, Mr. Cunningham, 

and as you will be, I’m sure, in the next hour. We look forward to 

your service. 

Thank you. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Corker. 

I wanted to turn to some questions for Ambassador Cunningham. 

Maybe two broad areas, and in the less than 7 minutes we have 

in the question period we probably don’t have enough time, but we 

can further amplify them in questions for the record. 

I wanted to ask you first about women and girls in Afghanistan. 

At one level or by one measure, we could assert that, over roughly 

the last decade, significant progress has been made. When you just 

do the one metric, which I think has a lot of meaning and value, 

which is the number of girls in school, it was almost zero or in the 

area of almost no girls in school a decade ago. Now maybe as much 

as a third or more of the millions of Afghan children that are in 

school are girls. So that’s a great measure of progress. 

And also, the participation of women in the Government of 

Afghanistan has also been a significant measure of progress. The 

concern, though, is that even as that progress is marching forward, 

and even as President Karzai speaks to this issue, that those gains 

will be diminished or maybe even wiped out as a result of a reconciliation process that results in a conclusion after negotiations 

where women are set back, if not to where they were, but at least 

to a place where the gains would be substantially eroded. 

Ambassador Cunningham, you might remember—I know we 

have a lot of meetings and I don’t expect you to remember this—

but when we were there, we had a meeting with women parliamentarians. And they were inspirational on a lot of levels. 

We think politics here is tough. Over there, it’s a lot tougher 

when your life is at stake, very often. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

521

One of them I remember in particular was Fawzia Kofi. 

She talked about her father and her husband participating in 

politics, both killed in the process. And yet here she was sitting, 

talking to us about her own involvement and her own focus on the 

future of being involved in politics in Afghanistan. 

I just wanted to get your sense of not just where we are, but how 

our strategy can prevent the dramatic erosion of those gains. 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. That is an important issue, Senator. 

Before I comment on it, though, I wanted to thank you for your 

focus on IEDs. We discussed this when you were in Afghanistan in 

August. They are now the killer of choice in Afghanistan for both 

military and, very horrifically, for civilians. They are a real challenge, so I appreciate your focus on that. 

Women. We have something called the Woman of Courage Award 

in the Department of State that the Secretary gives every year. For 

the last, I think, 5 or 6 years that the award has been given, an 

Afghan woman has been a recipient of it. I think there are about 

10 a year from around the world. 

We had a reception hosted by Ambassador Crocker to welcome 

this year’s recipient, who is a politician and a media person in 

Kandahar. An absolutely incredible woman. And we had the other 

previous recipients of the award and a number of women from 

Kabul and the region for this event. And in that event, Ambassador 

Crocker said quite perceptively that to be a woman in public life 

in Afghanistan—any woman—is a woman of courage. And that is 

the case. 

It’s a marvel to meet with these people and to hear their stories 

and their sense of determination and commitment, as you did 

meeting with the parliamentarians. 

They have literally invested their lives and their personal safety 

and that of their families, in many cases, in taking up a public role, 

whether it is in business or even teaching or working in a health 

clinic or being a politician. And there are a lot of female politicians 

now in Afghanistan, including at the provincial and district level, 

as well as the national level. 

Several female ministers, deputy ministers, President Karzai’s 

deputy chief of staff is a woman. And they’ve worked hard to create 

this space and to create the space for those who are coming after 

them. 

And it is particularly inspiring to meet with women who are in 

universities now, and coming out educated, looking for opportunities, sometimes with the support of their families, but many times 

not. 

Which is a long way of saying, a lot has been invested in bringing Afghanistan’s women into—those who can and who want to—

bringing them into society in a constructive way. And we’ve played, 

I’m proud to say, the United States has played a significant role 

in this. We have programs across the board, everything from education to midwifing to teaching business skills, entrepreneurial 

skills, language, information technology, educating women about 

the law. 

There is actually a good law in Afghanistan that prohibits 

violence against women, if it’s enforced. And we contribute to a 

network of shelters that, unfortunately, are necessary in Afghan 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

522

society, but extremely valuable in providing refuge for women who, 

for whatever reason, can’t stay with their families or their husbands. 

So a tremendous amount has been accomplished in this area over 

the last years. It is one of the significant success stories and a real 

tribute, again, to the American people, that we’ve supported that. 

The United States, as well as, again, our international partners 

through a series of declarations, have made very clear that these 

gains are not to be rolled back. They’re protected under Afghan law 

and the constitution. It’s a cardinal principle for us in discussions 

about reconciliation and about the future of Afghanistan. And I 

expect that will continue—I’m sure that will continue to be the case 

and will certainly be my point of view, if I’m confirmed as 

Ambassador. 

Senator CASEY. Well, thanks very much. And I know that Secretary Clinton has not just spoken to this over and over again, but 

has made that a central focus of her work, and we’re grateful for 

that. 

I’m out of time. I want to turn to Senator Menendez. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you both for your long service to our country. 

Ambassador Cunningham, my understanding of the President’s 

goal was to shift from a military mission to an assistance mission 

in Afghanistan, in hopes of creating a functioning government that 

helps rebuild lives and institutions. We have done that elsewhere, 

but with, from my perspective, a much more committed partner. 

I look at the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruc- tion’s new report that suggests a significant portion of about $400 

million investment in large-scale infrastructure projects in Afghanistan designed to win support from local governments may be 

wasted because of delays and weaknesses in planning and execution such that those programs might not be completed until American troops leave or have already left. 

And then I look at a commitment by the United States of more 

than $90 billion to development in Afghanistan, and the administration requesting $9 billion for aid and development in 2013. 

And I look at all of this, and I say, given the continuing problems 

with instability and corruption, how do we justify and expect that 

we will, if we were to commit to those funds, effectively use those 

funds toward the development of a sustainable economy in 

Afghanistan, something that I could go to taxpayers back in New 

Jersey and say this is worthy of our support and it’s going to be 

well spent, based upon the experience we’ve had so far? 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. That’s also an important issue, Senator, and thank you for raising it. 

Yes, we have a very broad, and have had a very broad, assistance 

and development program in Afghanistan. The specific issue of the 

Afghan infrastructure fund that you referenced, we have some differences of view with the inspector, with SIGAR, as we often do, 

but we also agree with many of the recommendations that they’ve 

made. 

This was an innovative program that tried to do something new, 

which is bring together several different U.S. entities that had not 

been cooperating particularly well with each other, and to try to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

523

use this fund to bridge the difference between what normally had 

been short-term infrastructure projects designed to influence the 

counterinsurgency campaign, and longer term infrastructure that’s 

really necessary for stability and longer term growth, particularly 

with roads and electric power. 

This has taken longer to get underway than we would have 

hoped, but it has brought together a whole-of-government approach 

to doing this. And the program is constantly being reviewed and in 

each iteration has gotten better in terms of the coordination, oversight, and evaluation of sustainability going forward. 

So while it will stretch out longer than was originally intended, 

we are working hard to make it as effective as possible and make 

the best use of the funds that we have been given for a very important purpose. And one of those purposes is to link together the 

power networks in the north and the south of Afghanistan, so 

Afghans and their economy have the electrical power that they 

need. 

To the question principle of the worth of the assistance that we 

have provided and will be providing in a lesser amount going forward, I understand very well that this entails sacrifice on the part 

of all of our taxpayers, Americans and the others who are supporting these efforts. But it has produced results and will continue 

to produce results. 

It is really an investment on preserving the gains that we have 

made on the field at great cost through our own efforts on security 

and the efforts that the Afghans are increasingly taking on on security. 

Afghanistan is a very poor country. Under the best of circumstances, it would be still a very poor country with tremendous problems. Our work in development assistance is part of our campaign 

to prepare an Afghanistan which can stand on its own feet in a 

way that it has stability that is sustainable over time. And this 

goes to the point that Senator Lugar raised about what our 

enduring vital interest is in Afghanistan. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I don’t want to interrupt. I’ve let you go on 

at length. I wanted to hear your answer, but here’s my problem. 

I understand our goals, but we have an administration in Afghanistan that undoubtedly is significantly corrupt. We have an administration in Afghanistan for which we have seen wasted amounts 

of money. 

So if Afghanistan is going to be a ward of the United States for over a decade, and we’re going to spend $90 billion and maybe 

more, at least—at least—there should be an expectation that there 

should be greater transparency, greater efficiency, less corruption. 

And unless there are benchmarks to do that, I don’t see how, in 

fact, we can continue to make this long-term, open-ended commitment without a concurring response. 

And I know that we have some responsibilities because we went 

in there. But by the same token, there are responsibilities by the 

Afghan Government to be responsive, transparent, honest, and 

more efficient. 

And I just don’t get the sense that we pressure in terms of 

accomplishing those goals as much as we are committed to giving 

money. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

524

And so I’m hoping that, if you are to be confirmed, that there is 

a strong commitment here not just for us to give, but for us to get, 

at the end of the day. 

Would it be my understanding that that is going to be part of 

your drive here? 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. Absolutely. I’ve been in Afghanistan 

for the past year and it is, as Ambassador Olson knows, it is a 

daily part of not just our business with the Afghan Government, 

but of everybody’s business with the Afghan Government. 

And one of the key outcomes of the series of international meetings that I discussed earlier, and especially the Tokyo conference, 

is putting clearly on the record that there is precisely this expectation on the part of the people who are supporting Afghanistan, who 

want to support Afghanistan, but need to see that real progress is 

being made, particularly on dealing with corruption and governance issues. 

And in what’s called the mutual accountability framework, there 

are specific things laid out that are expectations that the government will address. And as we speak, my colleagues still in Kabul 

are meeting with the Afghan Government about how those elements are going to be addressed going forward. And it’s very much 

the kinds of thing you said: greater transparency, greater accountability. 

We’re doing that internally in our own processes, to make sure 

that we know where American assistance is going and what it’s 

being used for. And we will absolutely be insisting that the Afghan 

Government produce greater transparency and accountability in its 

own part. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, Mr. Chairman, I see the time has 

expired. I have one more question, if I may, to Ambassador Olson. 

Senator CASEY. Sure. 

Senator MENENDEZ. I just want to make a comment. 

For myself, I have been supportive, but it is not an open-ended 

support, just speaking for one member. 

I have to see the movement toward those elements, and I cannot 

continue at a time in which we face such enormous challenges here 

at home to vote for billions of dollars that at the end of the day 

do not lead toward a more open, transparent, honest process, at a 

minimum, at a minimum. 

Ambassador CUNNINGHAM. I understand. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Ambassador Olson, just in a similar light, 

Senator Corker and I had, a while back, looked for some benchmarks as it relates to our assistance in coalition support funds to 

Pakistan. 

You know, in my view, it’s incongruous to provide enormous 

sums to the Pakistan military via the coalition support funds 

unless we’re certain that the Pakistanis are committed to locate, 

disrupt, and dismantle terrorist threats inside of their border. 

My understanding is this new deal that we’ve cut with Pakistan 

to permit the transport of military resupply convoys also promises 

to deliver more than a billion dollars in delayed military aid. 

What commitment are we getting in return, beyond the convoy, 

that the Pakistani military will cease support to extremist and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

525

terrorist groups and prevent al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated 

terrorist groups from operating within the territory of Pakistan? 

All I hear is about the Pakistanis seeking an end to the drone 

attacks that have been the one successful effort and turning it over 

to them. 

You know, again, if we’re going to be providing billions of dollars, 

then what is the commitment, the concurrent commitment, here? 

Ambassador OLSON. Thank you, Senator, for the excellent question. 

With regard to the coalition support funds, as you know, this is 

a reimbursement for expenses incurred in support of the coalition 

activities. And my understanding of the process is that the Pakistanis submit certain expenditures for our review, and we review 

them very carefully, and we do not in any way accept all of those 

expenditures. In other words, we’re very careful to make sure that 

they are in line with our own standards and our own criteria for 

the expenditure. 

With regard to the overall question of the Pakistani support for 

counterterrorism, I think the record of the last decade shows that 

we have had substantial cooperation from the Pakistanis on the 

question of al-Qaeda in particular. I mean, we are virtually within 

grasp of defeating al-Qaeda as an organization. 

A lot of that, as President Obama has indicated, is due to support from the Pakistani Government. 

In addition, the Pakistani Government is very concerned about 

the internal threat from insurgents and extremist organizations. 

The Pakistani Army has been effectively redeployed. Many of

the units that used to be on the Indian border have now been 

redeployed internally for dealing with the threat coming from 

extremists. 

On the question of drones, Senator, as you well know, the President has said that we will go after extremists and those who 

threaten us wherever we find them. It’s beyond the level of classification for this hearing to discuss those programs in any great 

detail. But I will, if confirmed, continue to follow the President’s 

direction on the question of defending our national interests. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So I take it that what you’re telling me is 

that we’re satisfied with the Pakistani response? 

Ambassador OLSON. Senator, I think that there is more that can 

be done, absolutely. And I think that, particularly with regard to 

the Haqqani Network, this is a very difficult issue. I am coming at 

this from having served at Embassy Kabul for the last year. I was 

in the Embassy on September 13 and April 15 when the attacks 

took place that originated from the Haqqani Network out of North 

Waziristan. 

We are looking at all the ways that we can, as the whole of the 

U.S. Government, attack the question of the Haqqani Network and 

its support. We have already designated a number of individuals. 

I will certainly, if confirmed, take it as a central responsibility, 

and the most urgent of my responsibilities, to continue to press the 

Pakistanis for further action on the Haqqani Network in every way 

possible. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your courtesy. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Menendez. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

526

We’re at the end of the hearing. We want to thank both of our 

witnesses for your testimony and for your continuing commitment 

to public service in especially these difficult postings, and we again 

thank your families. 

The record will be open until noontime tomorrow for Senators to 

submit questions. 

And unless there is nothing further, we’re adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. In April, my staff shared in writing significant concerns about the

Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund (AIF) with the administration, cautioning against 

investing in new, large-scale infrastructure projects that the Afghans would not be 

able to sustain. To date, there has been no response to the inquiry. This week, the 

Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) released a report 

reaching similar conclusions for FY 2011 AIF projects.

Answer. The administration is committed to the effective use of United States resources for activities in Afghanistan. Your committee’s input has been integrated 

into our joint planning efforts under the Afghanistan Infrastructure Program and 

we would be happy to provide an updated informational briefing at the earliest opportunity. We should note that we do not agree with many of the conclusions of the 

SIGAR audit and our concerns were voiced in multiple annexes of the report. The 

Afghanistan Infrastructure Program and Fund were conceived as tools in the 

counterinsurgency campaign with ancillary development impacts. We disagree with 

SIGAR’s assertion that extension of the project timeframes will have a negative effect on the counterinsurgency campaign and development. It has been our experience that all stages of infrastructure projects (which provide essential services the 

insurgency could never offer) have a positive impact. The planning stage of these 

long-term projects gives clear assurance of the enduring commitment of the United 

States to the people of Afghanistan, the construction phase creates employment and 

helps stabilize conflict areas; and final completion opens the way for greater economic opportunity. We have provided below specific answers to your question on the 

execution of infrastructure projects in Afghanistan.

Question. What is the timeline for installing the third turbine at the Kajaki dam? 

How many additional megawatts of energy will this add to the grid for Kandahar, 

and at what cost per megawatt? What is the total cost estimate for bringing the 

third turbine online, including security costs incurred by U.S. and coalition forces?

Answer. The third turbine at Kajaki Dam is conservatively scheduled to be operational by the end of 2014 and will add 18 megawatts (MW) of electricity to the 

southern electrical power grid, for a total generation at Kajaki of 51 MW. The Government of Afghanistan and USAID estimate production costs of electricity at 

Kajaki to be 1.5 cents per kilowatt-hour (or $15 per MW-hour) including operation 

and maintenance costs. The estimated cost to install the new turbine at the Kajaki 

dam is $85 million, including the cost of security, logistics, and camp support. Based 

on initial planning, we expect 8–10 MW of the power generated by the new turbine 

to reach Kandahar, while the remaining electricity will be distributed in Sangin and 

Helmand Valley.

Question. When will the North East Power System (NEPS)—South East Power 

System (SEPS) connection come online? Could the NEPS–SEPS connection destabilize the grid in Kabul, and if so, what happens then?

Answer. USAID will use the Power Transmission Expansion Connectivity (PTEC) 

Project as the mechanism to construct the connection between Afghanistan’s Northeast Power System (NEPS) and Southeast Power System (SEPS). This ‘‘NEPS–

SEPS Connection’’ includes approximately 500 kilometers of transmission line and 

seven substations. The current completion date for the project is September 2016. 

According to the results of the recently completed feasibility study for the PTEC 

project, the connection of the northern and southern power grids is technically feasible and will not result in the destabilization of either grid. The study identified 

priorities for synchronization and reactive power compensation in and around the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

527

Kabul load center. Overall, conclusions of the study supported the planned system 

expansion, which is also consistent with the Afghan Energy Master Plan (funded by 

the Asian Development Bank, currently in draft).

Question. What is the sustainment plan for the Kandahar Power Bridging solution 

given that SIGAR found ‘‘that more sustainable sources will not be available to replace the Kandahar Bridging Solution until well beyond 2014?

Answer. The Kandahar Bridging Solution currently provides approximately 28 

MW of diesel generated power to the SEPS system. The Department of Defense 

plans to use the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund (AIF) to provide diesel fuel 

through 2014, adjusting expected requirements to account for new sources of power 

as they come online in southern Afghanistan. As indicated above, the third turbine 

at Kajaki is expected to come online by the end of 2014 which will relieve some of 

the burden on the current diesel generators for Kandahar. The connection of the 

northern grid to southern Afghanistan will bring additional power (between 25 MW 

to 70 MW, depending on multiple variables). At a minimum, the grid-based power 

from NEPS will displace the current diesel generation, but is not estimated to be 

fully operational until 2016. In the meantime, we are working with the Government 

of Afghanistan and the Department of Defense to improve the performance of the 

Kandahar grid to reduce technical and commercial losses. We are also working with 

the Afghan National Utility on a plan to manage diesel fuel and increase revenue 

collection. In addition, we are exploring ways to incentivize revenue generation in 

southern Afghanistan by giving paying customers priority to diesel-generated 

electricity. 

Ultimately, sustainability of the electrical grid in Afghanistan depends on the 

capacity of the Afghan National Utility, which has made great strides in the last 

few years and continues to improve its operations. USAID is working with the 

Afghan National Utility at both the national and local levels to better define the 

capital investments needed over the near and long term, the costs of operation and 

maintenance, and the technical, human, and financial resources needed to meet 

these obligations.

Question. What steps are being taken to address frustrations expressed by the 

local population for destruction of their property for the Nawa to Lashkar Gah road 

AIF project?

Answer. We are implementing the Afghanistan Infrastructure Program in close 

coordination with local officials of the Afghan Government to ensure local popular 

support for all projects and proper compensation by the government to the citizens 

impacted by construction. For instance, the Department of Defense worked with 

local officials to ensure proper procedures were followed in compensating residents 

for loss of their land due to the construction of the Lashkar Gah road. We have contacted our local government partners for the project and will make sure citizen concerns are addressed.

Question. For each FY 2011 and FY 2012 AIF project, please submit (1) a realistic 

estimate of costs necessary to sustain the project, the planned source of such funding, and an assessment of the reliability of the planned source; (2) evidence that estimated sustainment costs have been provided to the Afghan Government and that 

the Afghan Government has committed to sustain the project; and (3) a joint assessment of the capacity of the Afghan Government entity responsible for sustaining the 

project.

Answer. It is difficult to accurately estimate sustainment costs before project 

plans are finalized and bids are received for construction. The costs for operation 

and maintenance of infrastructure projects will be supported by a combination of 

funds from the international community and the Afghan Government. We continue 

to meet with the Ministry of Finance and line ministries to improve their capacity 

to generate revenue and budget for future maintenance. We are happy to provide 

as much information as we can on this subject and have attached the previously 

provided approaches for sustainment for each project funded with AIF to this document.

Question. Please provide background on the Afghanistan Reintegration Program 

(ARP), including the strategy and an assessment of efforts to date.

Answer. The Afghan Peace and Reintegration Program (APRP) was established by 

President Karzai on June 29, 2010. Representatives of the international community 

endorsed the APRP at the July 2010 Kabul Conference. The Afghan Government 

then issued a ‘‘Joint Order’’ on September 6, 2010, that gave detailed instructions 

to ministries and provincial governors on how to implement the APRP. The High 

Peace Council (HPC) was established in October 2010. This body is responsible for 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

528

providing advice to the President and for guiding, overseeing, and ensuring APRP 

implementation. 

The APRP seeks to enable local agreements where communities, supported by 

GIRoA, reach out to insurgents to address their grievances, encourage them to stop 

fighting, and rejoin their communities with dignity and honor. To date, the program 

has brought in over 5,000 fighters, allowing them to rejoin their communities by 

pledging to renounce violence, support the political process, and contribute to their 

communities.

Question. Of the $50 million authorized for ARP for FY 2012, please explain why 

only $616,000 has been obligated as of March 31, 2012, and how and when the remainder of the funds will be obligated.

Answer. The Department of Defense (DOD) provides funds in support of the 

APRP through Afghan Reintegration Program (ARP) and can provide further information on funding and execution of those funds.

Question. As I said during my opening statement, ‘‘we must prepare now for

Afghan elections in 2014. Ultimately, it is the political transition that will determine whether our military gains are sustainable and the strength and quality of 

the Afghan state we leave behind will be determined by that political transition. 

Our role should not interfere in domestic politics. It is critical that Afghans must 

pick their leaders freely and fairly. But we should make clear that we will only support a technical process that is transparent and credible. Selection of an accountable 

Independent Election Commission, transparency in new elections laws, and early 

preparation of voter lists are all critical steps for Afghans in order that they have 

a voice and choice in the election.’’

• Please describe the U.S. strategy to prepare for a credible Presidential election 

in 2014, including how we will ensure that elections will be held in 2014 and 

not delayed or moved earlier and how we will ensure that the technical process 

is transparent and credible.

Answer. We have and will continue to support the democratic process in Afghanistan in accordance with the Afghan Constitution. An orderly and legitimate constitutional political transition through Presidential elections in 2014 is key to future 

Afghan stability. This political transition is first and foremost a question for the 

Afghan Government and people, but we stand ready to support and assist them. We 

recognize the importance of strengthening Afghanistan’s democratic institutions in 

the lead up to the 2014 political transition and beyond, and it is a key component 

in our U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement. Additionally, we will continue to work with international partners to provide appropriate support, including 

to Afghanistan’s electoral institutions. 

The Tokyo Declaration and President Karzai’s July 26 Executive order both outlined that the Presidential election will take place in 2014, and the International 

Election Commission (IEC) has indicated its plans to hold the elections on time in 

spring 2014, as mandated in the Afghan Constitution. 

The U.S. Government made significant contributions to the 2009 and 2010 elections, including programming to strengthen the IEC and Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC). We plan to continue this line of effort for 2014. We plan to support 

the election management institutions and strengthen their capacity to administer 

legitimate elections, including supporting the IEC to hire qualified and impartial 

election officials; providing logistics support to the IEC; assisting the IEC in establishing a credible and cost-effective voter registry; and assisting in identifying and 

allocating polling locations in accordance with Afghan laws.

Question. What are the key steps that the Afghan Government must take to ensure a credible election in 2014?

Answer. One of the key challenges the Afghan Government faces in advance of 

the 2014 election is the passage of needed electoral reforms. The Afghan Parliament 

is currently considering electoral reform legislation that would determine how IEC 

commissioners are appointed and would spell out the duties of the IEC commissioners. We support this Afghan discussion and are encouraged that civil society 

groups and political actors are engaged in a wide-ranging public debate on measures 

to improve the electoral process, including promoting checks and balances to enhance the independence of the IEC and ECC. 

The IEC and other Afghan officials still need to identify the precise date of the 

election in 2014. As part of the Tokyo Declaration, the Afghan Government committed to announcing the election date by January 2013, which will enable sufficient 

preparation time for security, logistics, and candidates.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

529

Question. What must the Afghan Government and international community do in 

2012 to lay the groundwork for a legitimate political transition in 2014?

Answer. Through 2012, it will be important for the Afghans to continue working 

to pass a revised electoral law and the IEC Structure Law. Through a revised electoral law, the Afghans can establish a credible electoral complaints body with a 

clear mandate. The international community will focus on providing the technical 

assistance needed to help the Afghans strengthen their electoral process.

Question. The Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) of Afghanistan, which 

played a key role in detecting fraud in the 2009 election and forcing a recount, is 

reportedly facing a loss of its independence because it may be subsumed by the 

Ministry of Justice. As the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, would you support the 

continued independence of the ECC? If so, what steps will you take to ensure its 

independence?

Answer. An independent electoral complaints mechanism is critical for advancing 

the credibility and legitimacy of the election. Under current Afghan law, the ECC 

is established 120 days prior to the election and its activity ends 2 months after 

the certification of election results. The IEC submitted its recommendations for the 

draft electoral law to the Ministry of Justice on June 11, and under his July 26 

Executive order, President Karzai ordered the Ministry of Justice to complete its 

review of the electoral law within 2 months.

Question. If confirmed, will you create a position similar to that held by Ambassador Tim Carney in 2009 to lead Embassy Kabul’s election efforts? Why or why 

not?

Answer. Ambassador Tim Carney’s efforts helped to focus and coordinate U.S. 

Government efforts in preparing for the 2009 Presidential election. At this time, we 

are still discussing our senior staffing needs for the 2014 Presidential election, taking into account the level of resources and the importance of Afghan ownership during transition.

Question. In your opening statement before the committee, you stated that the 

Japanese announcement at the Tokyo conference on July 8, 2012, that the international community had pledged $16 billion in aid over the next 4 years was ‘‘sufficient to cover Afghanistan’s fiscal gap as identified by the World Bank.’’

• Please clarify exactly how donor pledges will sufficiently cover an estimated $16 

billion fiscal gap, given that pledges are not actual dollars until and unless 

funding has been obligated by donors, a great deal less than 100 percent of 

donor aid will go toward financing the Afghan state and its budget, and development aid in Afghanistan largely does not go directly to the Afghan state. Has 

the World Bank confirmed that the donor pledges in Tokyo are sufficient to 

cover Afghanistan’s fiscal gap?

Answer. At the July 8 Tokyo Conference, the international community agreed to 

support Afghanistan over the next 4 years with assistance pledges totaling $16 billion, according to an informal Government of Japan tally. As noted in the U.S.-

Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement, which Congress supported in a nonbinding resolution on July 31, we will consult closely with Congress on a yearly 

basis to seek appropriate funds to ensure that the United States provides sufficient 

assistance to maintain our hard-won gains in security and development in Afghanistan. We were pleased that commitments made at Tokyo indicate that our international allies have pledged to contribute an increased percentage of Afghanistan’s 

civilian assistance needs, which means that our own share of civilian assistance levels as a percentage of overall international civilian assistance to Afghanistan is decreasing. Donors also recommitted at Tokyo to find ways to put more assistance on 

budget, or channeled through the Afghan Government in transparent ways, consistent with Busan outcomes, such that our assistance will have a greater impact 

and be better aligned with Afghan national priorities. Prior to Tokyo, a joint IMF 

and World Bank debt sustainability analysis found that Afghanistan’s nonsecurity 

budgetary requirements would be between $3.2 and $3.9 billion annually, inclusive 

of on- and off-budget expenditures.

Question. In light of the Tokyo conference and commitments, what changes will 

take place in how USAID and the State Department will obligate funds in Afghanistan to help meet Afghanistan’s fiscal gap?

Answer. The Tokyo Declaration and Framework outlines ways in which donors 

will change their approach to providing assistance to Afghanistan through greater 

accountability, increased predictability, and incentive mechanisms. Working closely 

with our congressional partners, we will adjust how we request and obligate funds 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

530

in Afghanistan following Tokyo. At Tokyo, donors agreed that additional work will 

need to be done to continue improving the effectiveness of civilian assistance. At 

Tokyo, donors also agreed that we should reenergize the Joint Coordination and 

Monitoring Board (JCMB) as the key coordinating mechanism between donors and 

the Afghan Government. We agree that donors and the Government of Afghanistan 

must improve coordination to ensure that pledged funds are utilized most effectively, are allocated to the highest priorities, and are supportive of sustainability. 

The JCMB will be the primary means to follow up on the mutual accountability 

commitments made in Tokyo. 

Based on commitments reaffirmed at Tokyo, we will attempt to provide up to 50 

percent of development assistance through the Afghan budget, and ensure that at 

least 80 percent of our assistance is in line with Afghan national priorities. The 

Tokyo Declaration also encourages donors to provide increasing levels of assistance 

through incentives programs, such as those in the World Bank-run Afghanistan 

Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF).

Question. What percentage of FY 2012 funds is going through the national budget 

of the Afghan Government (‘‘on-budget’’)? What percentage of FY 2013 funds is estimated to go on-budget?

Answer. We expect approximately 45 to 50 percent of FY 2012 development assistance will be placed on-budget. Development assistance encompasses most of our 

Economic Support Funds, but does not usually include security, humanitarian, stabilization, or law enforcement funding. Prior to placing funds on-budget multiple 

safeguards are put in place. These include:

• Risk Assessments to determine whether an Afghan ministry or institution has 

the structures and processes in place to appropriately manage U.S. Government 

funds 

• Agreements with clear and achievable goals and objectives, provisions for incremental funding, along with audit and inspection rights, for each project or activity implemented.

For FY 2013 we intend to similarly pursue a responsible on-budget program. Percentage of funds placed on budget will be dependent on the final appropriation.

Question. What percentage of FY 2012 funds is aligned with the Afghan Government’s National Priority Programs (NPP)? What percentage of FY 2013 funds is estimated to be aligned with the NPPs?

Answer. We have determined that nearly 80 percent of our development assistance is already in line with Afghan national priorities, as defined in Afghanistan’s 

National Priority Programs (NPPs). Post Tokyo, we are now engaged in an evaluation to determine our precise program alignment to NPP deliverables.

Question. In your opening statement, you stated that ‘‘international assistance to 

Afghanistan is not unconditional.’’ In light of the mutual accountability framework 

and commitments made in Tokyo, please describe specifically what conditions will 

be attached to U.S. civilian assistance in Afghanistan going forward, excluding 

funds obligated by the United States to the World Bank’s Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF) incentive program.

Answer. Donors continue to define specific criteria related to Tokyo commitments. 

Once we have determined what conditions will be attached to civilian assistance—

over and beyond the incentive structures already in place in the ARTF and other 

similar programs—we will coordinate with you to ensure full transparency. The mutual accountability framework includes specific, measurable reform goals for the 

Government of Afghanistan and the international community. Progress toward 

these goals will be regularly evaluated through the JCMB and other meetings with 

participation from Afghan civil society, and findings will be made available to the 

public. The international community was clear at Tokyo that lack of progress on 

these reform goals, especially those related to the rights of women, would make it 

difficult to justify large assistance budgets and could result in decreased levels. Our 

regular consultations with Congress about the annual assistance requests for 

Afghanistan will include a discussion of specific progress toward the goals of the 

Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework.

Question. How much of FY 2011 funds was obligated to the ARTF’s incentive program? How much is planned to be obligated for FY 2012? FY 2013?

Answer. In FY 2011, the United States provided $371 million to the ARTF; $166 

million of that contribution was not ‘‘preferenced’’ to specific programs, and will be 

distributed among the existing ARTF incentive program, recurrent cost funding, and 

program funding. In 2011, the World Bank’s ARTF did not provide incentive proFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

531

gram funding to the Government of Afghanistan due to the absence of an IMF country program. For 2012, the U.S. plans to contribute $300 million to the ARTF, and 

the fund is planning a $50 million incentive fund, increasing to $150 million in 

2013, with the intent of applying more funding toward incentive-based approaches 

in coming years.

Question. Please describe the plans to manage Afghanistan’s fiscal gap starting 

in 2016.

Answer. The Tokyo Declaration recommends holding a Ministerial to review 

progress on Tokyo mutual accountability in 2014. At that conference, we expect that 

we will also review Afghan efforts to prioritize fiscal needs, as well as Afghan efforts 

to increase revenue generation. Now, and particularly post-Transition, the Afghan 

Government will define how to best address its fiscal gap based on an assessment 

of its needs at that time, as it describes in its pre-Tokyo strategy ‘‘Towards Self Reliance.’’ At Tokyo, donors were clear that civilian assistance levels would diminish 

through the Transformation Decade, as the Afghan Government increasingly takes 

responsibility for its own fiscal sustainability.

Question. Beyond the extractive industries sector, what are the Afghan Government’s plan to raise and collect revenue?

Answer. The IMF country program for Afghanistan calls for the application of a 

Value Added Tax (VAT) in an effort to capture additional revenues for the Afghan 

Government, with a goal of reaching 15 percent of GDP by 2015. For the first time, 

the Afghan Government recorded revenues of over $2 billion this year. The Afghan 

Government also realizes that it must make reforms that attract private sector investment and encourage economic growth. As Afghanistan’s economy grows, the 

country should collect more revenues in real terms.

Question. What is your perspective on the Afghan Government’s recent rejection 

of the mining law? What implications does it have for U.S. support to develop the 

extractive industries sector?

Answer. We understand that the Afghan Cabinet has reviewed proposed revisions 

and additions to the mining law, and that Cabinet members requested additional 

time to review and understand these complex laws and amendments. We understand that many of the proposed amendments to the current mining law, if approved, would create a more attractive business environment for potential international investors. We are encouraged that the Cabinet is closely reviewing the law, 

with the understanding that the passage of a widely accepted law is important to 

attract foreign direct investment to the mining sector and the Afghan economy. This 

is an Afghan-led process and we recognize the Afghan Government’s desire to ensure that revenues from the extractive sector benefit the Afghan people in a transparent manner.

Question. What has the United States accomplished in its goal of reducing corruption in the Afghan Government? If confirmed, what approach do you intend to take 

on this issue, and how, if at all, would your approach differ from that taken previously?

Answer. We and the Afghans recognize that corruption challenges loom large in 

Afghanistan. It is in Afghanistan’s own interest to aggressively pursue anticorruption policies and we continue to underscore the importance of these efforts in our 

engagements with the Afghan Government. 

Before the Tokyo Conference on July 8, the Afghan Government published a strategic vision for the transformation decade entitled ‘‘Towards Self-Reliance,’’ in which 

governance issues play a prominent role. In this strategy, the Afghans Government 

pledged to meet 17 governance indicators defined at Tokyo in five key areas: governance capacity and accountability; anticorruption; budget planning and execution; 

rule of law; and economic governance. Many of these pledges are defined in the 

Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework, which the international community and 

the Afghan Government are working to make specific and actionable. 

Just recently, on July 26, President Karzai issued a Presidential decree detailing 

an expansive plan to combat corruption with specific instructions. This follows a 

June 21 speech to a special session of Parliament during which President Karzai 

made clear that he would like anticorruption to be part of his legacy. 

Afghanistan is making progress on key transparency reforms to facilitate economic growth in specific areas. Afghanistan has made significant progress toward 

Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) compliance and World Trade 

Organization accession. EITI compliance will be important for Afghanistan in the 

coming years to ensure that it equitably and transparently uses the significant revenues it expects from the mining and extractives sector. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

532

The Afghans have also taken steps toward holding accountable those responsible 

for the Kabul Bank crisis, permitting the IMF to restart its relationship with 

Afghanistan in November of last year. This decision was reaffirmed in late-June by 

the IMF Executive Board. The Afghan Government has affirmed its commitment to 

hold those involved in the Kabul Bank scandal accountable and has instituted a 

process that requires all shareholders to take part in a combination of civil and 

criminal proceedings. This process should result in continued asset recoveries and 

prosecutions. The Afghan central bank is also in the process of implementing wideranging financial sector reforms as defined under the IMF country program. 

If confirmed, I will continue to hold the Afghan Government accountable to the 

pledges made in the Mutual Accountability Framework. I will encourage the 

Afghans to make meaningful progress on anticorruption efforts and I will do everything possible to ensure that U.S. assistance funds are used appropriately.

Question. According to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruc- tion’s July 30, 2012, report, the U.S. Congress has appropriated more than $52 billion to support the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). Current projections to 

sustain the ANSF exceed $4 billion a year.

• Through what security assistance authority does the administration plan to 

fund the ANSF in years to come? • As the U.S. mission in Afghanistan slowly transitions to a civilian-led effort, 

will the administration continue to request funding through the Afghan Security Forces Fund or will it seek to shift assistance toward traditional mechanisms such as Foreign Military Financing and International Education and 

Military Training?

Answer. No decisions have been taken on future funding that would change the 

current model with the Department of Defense taking the lead in the training and 

funding of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). As transition progresses, 

we will make assessments on whether and when State should seek a greater role 

in funding the ANSF and make appropriate requests.

Question. Although the ANSF has shown progress in certain capabilities, there 

are still serious questions about its ability to operate autonomously, without the aid 

of coalition forces. The ANSF still confronts significant problems of illiteracy, high 

attrition, and corruption. U.S. Government assessments and metrics are focused on 

creating the force rather than on transition. NTM–A has not issued a useful public 

report on ANSF development since 2011.

• Please explain how the administration’s current assessment metrics determine 

whether the ANSF has the will to fight and the ability to hold together a coherent force representing the central government.

Answer. Regarding metrics, the Department of Defense (DOD) provides metrics 

that assess capability milestones across the Afghan National Army (ANA) and 

Afghan National Police (ANP). DOD also provides a quarterly Progress Report on 

Stability and Security in Afghanistan that assesses the ability of the ANSF. Overall, 

we have seen growing confidence of the ANSF during this 2012 season in responding capably and largely independently to complex insurgent attacks in Kandahar, 

Wardak, Kabul province and Kabul city. The ANSF are also increasingly capable 

of taking the lead for some of the most complex missions—including a recent successful night air assault planned and led by Afghans, comprising over 50 Afghan 

commandos and four MI–17s flown by Afghan pilots. While the ANSF continues to 

need ISAF support in enablers, their operational effectiveness is increasing and the 

352,000 ANSF target later this year will provide a solid foundation as the transition 

of provinces continues through December 2014. As the coalition continues the drawdown to our sustainment level, the NATO Training Mission Afghanistan (NTMA) 

is developing the leadership and technical skills within the ANSF that can support 

independent operations by the end of 2014.

Question. What do recent assessments of the Afghanistan Local Police (ALP), the 

Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF), and the Counter Narcotics Police of Afghanistan (CNPA) say about their effectiveness, and what are the plans to sustain these 

forces?

Answer. The Afghanistan Local Police (ALP), the Afghan Public Protection Force 

(APPF), and the Counter Narcotics Police of Afghanistan (CNPA), on the whole, 

have performed admirably and continue to develop capabilities to secure Afghan. 

The majority of Afghans have a favorable view of the ALP program, which is providing security in rural regions that lack regular ANP or ANA. As it stands, the 

Ministry of Interior and DOD approved manpower ceiling is 30,000 ALP in a program to last no more than 5 years. There are currently less than half that number 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

533

of ALP operating in Afghanistan. The Afghan Ministry of Interior will formalize the 

continuation of ALP beyond 2015. 

With regards to the APPF, we respect the sovereignty of the Afghan Government 

and its right to regulate the provision of security services within Afghanistan. The 

APPF is part of the overall transition to Afghan security lead by 2014 and the program has taken longer than expected to develop the institutional support for the 

APPF, while guard hiring, training and employment are steadily increasing. 

Although APPF is overseen and managed through the Ministry of Interior, the 

APPF operates as a State-owned enterprise, under which its own revenues will support the force in the future. 

As a law enforcement component of the Ministry of the Interior, the CNPA follows 

a strategy, codified within their Ministry Development Plan (MDP) that was developed and is being implemented by DOD-funded entities (NTM–A/CSTC–A). The U.S. 

Government focuses its evaluation and assessment activities of the effectiveness of 

its programs in building capacity, and in enabling an independent CNPA. As such, 

the current monitoring and evaluation activities take into account measures of both 

the transfer of knowledge to the specialized investigative personnel, as well as to 

the CNPA administrative personnel. Oversight of the infrastructure components of 

the programs is conducted by an onsite Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) 

and Government Technical Monitor (GTM). These individuals are continuously 

reviewing and evaluating the contractor’s performance in maintaining the basing 

facilities so that when the Afghan’s are ready for a full transition, they receive the 

high-quality platforms necessary for success.

Question. With the continued drawdown of coalition forces, how will the United 

States sustain a coherent and competent ANSF? What actions is the administration 

undertaking to ensure the international community shares in continued burden of 

sustaining the ANSF?

Answer. As pledged at the NATO summit in Chicago, NATO will continue to lead 

a post-2014 Train, Advise and Assist mission designed precisely to develop a competent and coherent ANSF as they take the lead throughout the country. At Chicago, ISAF Allies and Partners also joined the Afghan Government in pledging 

around $1 billion so far in financial support to a post-2014 ANSF. The Afghan Government has pledged to provide at least $500 million a year beginning in 2015 and 

progressively increasing its share over time. We will continue to urge countries, particularly those in the region who have a strong stake in Afghanistan’s security, to 

provide funding to the ANSF. This will be critical to secure the gains the ANSF has 

made and ensure a sustainable future for the security force.

Question. What is your assessment of the political sustainability of the ANSF post 

2014, given the difficulties of recruiting and retaining Pashtun officers and the overwhelming dominance of non-Pashtun groups within the ANA officer corps?

Answer. Within the ANA officer corps, the NATO Training Mission Afghanistan 

(NTMA) has directed recruitment in a way that reflects the ethnic and regional demographics of Afghanistan, including Pashtuns. As NTMA continues to train officers 

over the next years, they will continue to seek these targets and develop a cohesive 

ANA officer corps, reflective of Afghan society. 

RESPONSES OF RICHARD G. OLSON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, commonly known 

as the Leahy amendment, provides guidance for U.S. embassies regarding the collection, use, and public disclosure of information relating to gross violations of human 

rights by units of foreign security forces. Among other things, the law requires that 

if the Secretary of State has credible information that such a unit has committed 

such a violation, U.S. training, equipment, or other assistance to that unit must 

cease, unless the foreign government is taking effective steps to bring the responsible members of the unit to justice. The law has a mandatory provision that requires the U.S. Government to notify the foreign government if the United States 

decides to withhold training, equipment, or other assistance pursuant to the law. 

The law also requires the Department of State to take affirmative steps to piece together available information and to work to identify security force units responsible 

for violations.

• (a). If confirmed, please describe the steps you would take: (1) to ensure that 

the law is implemented effectively, including to vet units to determine their eliFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

534

gibility to receive training, equipment, or other assistance; and (2) to ensure 

your Embassy receives information that such a crime may have occurred.

Answer. The Department of State ensures full compliance with the Leahy law in 

Pakistan. Embassy Islamabad has a process in place to vet security force units and 

individuals before they receive U.S. assistance to ensure they are not implicated in 

any gross human rights violations. This process is led by an in-country vetting coordinator and an interagency team, which reviews all potential recipients, including 

security force units, of training and other assistance.

• (b). If confirmed, please also describe the steps you would implement to ensure: 

(1) that the people of Pakistan are aware of the law and the commitment of the 

United States to avoid providing training, equipment, or other assistance to 

units that commit human rights violations; (2) that persons in Pakistan with 

credible information about human rights violations have a means to provide 

that information to the U.S. Embassy so it can be considered in vetting units; 

and (3) that the Embassy staff is affirmatively seeking to identify security force 

units responsible for human rights violations and not simply waiting to receive 

information?

Answer. Addressing human rights abuses by Pakistan’s security forces continues 

to be a key part of our bilateral dialogue with Pakistan. We regularly engage the 

civilian government and Pakistani military and police officials on human rights 

abuses, including any report of extra judicial killing. We have been clear with the 

Pakistanis that such practices will not be tolerated and that we expect Pakistan to 

investigate credible allegations of human rights abuses and take appropriate action 

to deal with these abuses. If confirmed, I will continue to press the Government of 

Pakistan to take action against human rights violators. I will also continue to ensure Embassy Islamabad’s compliance with the Leahy law, including offering assistance to the Government of Pakistan to help identify and prosecute members of security forces who commit violations.

• (c). The law also requires that if any training, equipment, or other assistance 

is withheld the U.S. Government offer assistance to the maximum extent practicable to help identify and prosecute members of security forces who commit 

violations. If confirmed, will you fully implement this requirement of the law 

and help Pakistan end impunity for human rights violations?

Answer. Regarding the vetting process, Embassy Islamabad has a Human Rights 

Officer who actively collects information on reported human rights abuses, which is 

reported in the Department’s annual Human Rights Report and is incorporated into 

the vetting process. Embassy Islamabad, in coordination with the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights & Labor (DRL), complies with a vigorous vetting system to ensure that security force recipients of U.S. assistance have not committed human 

rights abuses. The International Vetting and Security Tracking (INVEST) system is 

used to monitor all requests for assistance to members of foreign security forces. 

The vetting process is as follows:

• Embassy Islamabad enters those individuals or units nominated for training or 

assistance into the INVEST system, and uses governmental, nongovernmental, 

and media resources on human rights abuses in Pakistan to vet the candidates. 

The Embassy also undertakes checks with local police and government for other 

derogatory information. Should any credible derogatory information be uncovered, the Embassy may deny or suspend the individual or unit from assistance. 

• If there is a need for further review of information, DRL assembles a broader 

team of Department representatives to determine the credibility of the information and determines whether assistance should be denied or authorized. Posts 

are automatically notified of final Leahy vetting results through INVEST.

If confirmed, I plan to continue this process and will look for opportunities to improve the effectiveness of our procedures.

• (d). If confirmed, we ask that you provide this committee along with the Senate 

Appropriations Committee on Foreign Operations (SACFO) the steps you have 

taken to implement the steps you have identified in response to these questions 

after you have been at the Embassy for 6 months.

Answer. If confirmed, I will also look for opportunities to expand our efforts to 

engage the Pakistani public about credible human rights violations by its security 

forces and explore how we could increase the mission’s ability to proactively seek 

information regarding potential violations. I will continue U.S. support for bolstering Pakistani institutions that are responsible for investigating and prosecuting 

these allegations. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

535

I will continue to keep the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate 

Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Foreign Operations informed of our 

progress.

Question. The Center for Global Development’s July 2012 report ‘‘More Money, 

More Problems: A 2012 Assessment of the U.S. Approach to Development in Pakistan’’ found that ‘‘despite improvements in individual projects and agencies, the government-wide development strategy for Pakistan still lacks clear leadership, mission, transparency, and adequate exploitation of nonaid tools.’’

• (a). If confirmed, please describe the steps you will take to clarify the mission, 

increase transparency, and measure progress.

Answer. There are significant challenges to implementing U.S. assistance to Pakistan. We have recognized, however, that we can and must do a better a job of informing the United States and Pakistani public of the accomplishments and goals 

of our civilian assistance program. One of my top priorities, if confirmed as Ambassador, would be to work closely with USAID, the Department, and other interagency 

partners engaged in international development in Pakistan to further increase 

transparency and ensure our assistance is deployed effectively. 

We have already taken extensive steps to clarify our mission. In February 2011, 

State and USAID reviewed all civilian assistance to Pakistan and streamlined our 

investment to have maximum impact on our national security objective of supporting a stable, secure, and prosperous Pakistan. Following consultations with the 

Government of Pakistan on its top development priorities, the result was a concerted effort to focus our assistance into five priority sectors: energy; economic 

growth, including agriculture; stabilization, mainly of the border areas; education; 

and health. This framework is available online in strategic documents such as the 

‘‘Afghanistan and Pakistan Civilian Engagement Status Report,’’ available at: http:/

/www.state.gov/documents/organization/176809.pdf. 

We are identifying key goals for each of these five sectors and quantifiable metrics 

so that we can concretely measure progress. These metrics will be available online 

in the coming weeks. USAID has already increased the amount of detailed programmatic information available on its website to include disbursement data and 

will be increasing the amount of detail on the Web site over time. 

I also appreciate the work of think tanks in informing our efforts in Pakistan, including that of the Center for Global Development. If confirmed, my team and I will 

review their ideas for performance improvements and adapt as appropriate.

• (b). Would you support establishing a multilateral trust fund to channel some 

Kerry-Lugar-Berman funds? Please explain why or why not.

Answer. The United States has previously contributed funds to the Multi-Donor 

Trust Fund (MDTF) in Pakistan, a mechanism to fund projects in Pakistan’s border 

regions. In the past, the Government of Pakistan has expressed some reservations 

about establishing MDTFs for assistance to the rest of Pakistan, but we would consider channeling U.S. civilian assistance into a MTDF if the Government of Pakistan were supportive.

• (c). Would you support cofinancing with other donors that have proven track 

records, such as the British development agency (DFID) on education projects? 

Please explain why or why not. What steps would you take to amend USAID 

regulations to allow for greater flexibility to use funds for cofinancing?

Answer. The United States has previously cofinanced assistance initiatives with 

other donors. For example, following the 2010 floods, the United States contributed 

$190 million to Pakistan’s Citizens’ Damage Compensation Fund. We have discussed the potential for additional cofinancing opportunities with organizations like 

DFID and if confirmed, my team and I will look for logical opportunities to do so 

in the future. USAID regulations are not an obstacle to cofinancing arrangements.

• (d). If confirmed, what steps would you take to encourage longer staff rotations, 

hire more experienced development staff, and hire experienced Pakistanis at the 

Embassy and USAID Mission in Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi, and Peshawar?

Answer. I recognize that shorter tenures of service in Pakistan create challenges 

in achieving all aspects of the mission’s work. If confirmed, I am personally committed to recruiting and retaining top talent for the entire Pakistan country team, 

including recruiting for key positions staff who will agree to serve for longer tours. 

Currently, approximately 20 percent of USAID staff extend their tour to two or 

more years. I will work with the State Director General and USAID’s Deputy Assistant Administrator for Human Resources to encourage longer rotations and hiring 

experienced staff. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

536

As an example of progress already achieved, USAID/Pakistan’s top three employees—the Mission Director and his two Deputies—all acquired extensive experience 

serving as Mission Directors in other countries before they came to Pakistan. 

USAID/Pakistan has also undertaken extensive efforts to hire experienced local staff 

in Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi, and Peshawar to take on critical positions. However, 

harassment and security issues pose challenges to our ability to recruit and retain 

talent for mission local staff for all agencies, including USAID.

Question. The administration recently released more than $1.1 billion in reimbursements through Coalition Support Funds to the Government of Pakistan. Pakistan also receives security assistance through mechanisms such as the Pakistani 

Counterinsurgency Capability Fund, Foreign Military Financing, International Military Education and Training, and Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and 

Related Programs. Given the often strained bilateral relationship between the 

United States and Pakistan, how will the administration continue to leverage security assistance to ensure that the Government of Pakistan is acting in the best security interests of the United States?

Answer. Pakistan’s cooperation on our key counterterrorism concerns has continued despite the turbulence of the past year. Sustained U.S. and Pakistani 

counterterrorism efforts have seriously impacted the leadership of al-Qaeda (AQ) 

and degraded the organization’s ability to operate against us and our troops. Pakistan has continued to conduct counterterrorism operations in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, including ongoing missions in North 

and South Waziristan, Mohmand, and Orakzai. Pakistan military liaisons continue 

to staff border coordination centers in Afghanistan and work with their U.S. and 

Afghan counterparts to improve the effectiveness of border operations against militants. The Pakistan Navy also participates regularly in multinational maritime security operations. 

U.S. security assistance strengthens the counterterrorism and counterinsurgency 

capabilities of Pakistan’s security forces, and promotes closer security ties with the 

United States. Specifically, we are using security assistance to enhance Pakistan’s 

ability to secure its borders and increase its counter-IED capabilities. These capabilities are central to promoting stability in the region post-transition, and critical 

to U.S. national interests. As we begin to draw down coalition forces in Afghanistan, 

it is vital that Pakistan security forces have the ability to conduct targeted operations against insurgent safe havens that remain a threat to the United States, 

Pakistan, and the region. 

As a matter of policy, we continue to review and calibrate the delivery of security 

assistance to Pakistan to ensure it is in line with our shared objectives and commensurate with levels of Pakistan’s cooperation. This allows us to responsibly deliver security assistance to Pakistan in support of our key national security interests 

and shared interests with Pakistan. If confirmed, my team and I will continue to 

regularly monitor all security assistance programs to verify that they are consistent 

with the broader U.S.-Pakistani relationship, and reflective of the level of Pakistani 

cooperation, including with the U.S. military presence on the ground.

Question. India and Pakistan have taken some encouraging steps in recent 

months to improve relations and to reduce the risk that disputes between the two 

countries could spark a nuclear showdown. But as long as those arsenals exist, that 

risk continues. Please identify concrete actions that you believe the United States 

should take in the coming months and years to build greater confidence and transparency between the two countries regarding their nuclear arsenals, and to further 

reduce, if not eliminate, the risk that future crises could result in nuclear use.

Answer. We welcome the steps that India and Pakistan have taken toward improving their bilateral relations and encourage continued progress. We see great importance in both countries taking steps to reduce the risk of nuclear weapons use. 

Indian and Pakistani officials met in December 2011 to discuss conventional and nuclear confidence building measures as part of the wider dialogue between the two 

countries. 

These are actions that ultimately India and Pakistan must take themselves, but 

we continue to encourage both sides in their efforts. There are also many opportunities for cooperation on this issue through ‘‘Track Two’’ channels that enable experts 

from India, Pakistan, and the international community to share ideas and best practices, and to engage in informal diplomatic dialogue. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

537

RESPONSES OF RICHARD OLSON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. While teetering on the brink of insolvency, Pakistan appears to forgo 

considerable revenues, including those associated with transit trade. Though Pakistan has signed a Transit-Trade Agreement with Afghanistan that was intended to 

allow direct transit of goods between Central Asia and South Asia there has been 

little progress in actual trade across Pakistan and thus considerable revenue and 

jobs continue to be lost.

• (a). What is the status and prospect of trade finding permanent alternative 

routes, such as through Iran?

Answer. We have seen progress in working with our Pakistani counterparts to 

promote transit trade with Afghanistan. While South Asia is poorly integrated economically, the Pakistani Government has realized that future economic prosperity 

depends on greater economic integration with Afghanistan and India, and has made 

efforts to expand its trade and investment relations with both countries. In 2010, 

Pakistan and Afghanistan reached agreement on the Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit 

Trade Agreement (APTTA), which is meant to expedite transit and customs processing for trade between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Despite entering into force in 

2011, both sides have struggled to implement APTTA because of technical and political challenges. In January 2012, the Afghan and Pakistani Finance Ministers 

agreed to a framework for resolving the remaining issues. Recently, the two sides 

indicated their intention to convene technical level coordination meetings to discuss 

treaty implementation. Additionally, the joint statement released by Prime Minister 

Ashraf and President Karzai in late July announced the intent of the two sides to 

pursue the extension of APTTA to include Tajikistan. 

We continue to support Pakistan’s economic integration in the region through the 

New Silk Road and are encouraged by the concrete steps India and Pakistan have 

taken to normalize trade relations. Pakistan’s cross-border trade with India has increased to $2.7 billion per year from just $300 million per year a decade ago. To 

further this growth, the Pakistani Cabinet approved in February a 1,209-product 

‘‘negative list’’ of goods from India, replacing the previous ‘‘positive list’’ which had 

allowed import of fewer than 2,000 tradable items. 

The implementation of APTTA should help Afghanistan and Pakistan recover 

trade that was diverted through other countries including Iran while the ground 

lines of communication were closed by enabling faster border processing and by improving the predictability of transit along the routes. Businesses and commercial 

carriers in Pakistan and Afghanistan have indicated that if the situation were to 

improve, they would prefer to resume or expand their trade across Pakistan because 

it covers a shorter distance over less difficult terrain.

• (b). Is the road/rail infrastructure through eastern Iran fully operational and

capable of transferring the vast iron ore India and others will seek to export 

from rich mineral deposits in Afghanistan?

Answer. However, we have not assessed Iran’s road and rail capacity for this purpose. We continue to work with the Government of Afghanistan to promote the 

development of infrastructure required for the exportation of its resources.

• (c). What is the total estimate of revenue lost by Pakistan during the closure 

of the NATO/ISAF resupply routes (GLOC)?

Answer. We do not have a good estimate of the revenue lost by Pakistan due to 

the GLOC closure. All of the cargo that travels along the Pakistani GLOCs is transported by privately owned Pakistani freight forwarding companies. While it is clear 

that the Government of Pakistan lost revenue by the closure, private businesses 

were more directly impacted.

Question. According to the 2011 State Department Country Reports on Terrorism, 

brutal and deadly terror attacks within Pakistan itself have amounted to well

over 3,000 Pakistanis killed in 2011. The threat of violent militant groups is pervasive, and no part of the Pakistan is spared. Suicide and armed attacks occur in the 

coastal city of Karachi, the business capital of Lahore, the frontier capital of Peshawar, as well as in the tribal areas adjoining Afghanistan.

• How do the Pakistan Government and the people of Pakistan classify this 

threat? 

• How has the Pakistan Government worked to address the internal threat to life 

and governing institutions that these terror groups represent? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

538

• Distinguish to the extent possible between our efforts to support Pakistan

efforts to combat internal terror threats, and the effort toward the regional 

threat emanating from Pakistan safe havens? Which is our primary concern?

Answer. The United States and Pakistan have vital, shared strategic interests in 

the fight against terrorism and, since the 9/11 attacks, Pakistan has been an important counterterrorism partner of the United States. Pakistan recognizes the threat 

that extremists pose to its own security and to regional security; more than 35,000 

Pakistanis, including over 14,000 Pakistani security personnel, have been killed or 

injured by terrorist attacks or in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations. 

There are over 120,000 Pakistani troops deployed to the Afghanistan-Pakistan 

border region conducting counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations to address the threat posed by groups such as al-Qaeda and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The Pakistani Government is also working to improve the capacity of 

Pakistan’s security forces and the capacity of the Pakistani Government as a whole 

to combat terrorism and to conduct counterinsurgency operations. To this end, the 

U.S. Government has provided training and assistance, for example, through our 

Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund and the Antiterrorism Assistance program. This includes training for bomb detection, crime scene investigation, airport 

and building security, and maritime protections. We also assist with judicial and 

prosecutorial training, to bolster the ability of the Pakistani legal system to deal 

with terrorism cases. 

More broadly, Pakistan generally continues its cooperation with us on al-Qaeda—

whose defeat is our core national security objective in Afghanistan and Pakistan. 

As President Obama has said, ‘‘We have been able to kill more terrorists on Pakistani soil than just about any place else. We could not have done that without Pakistani cooperation.’’ The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. As both the 

President and Secretary Clinton stated after the death of Osama bin Laden, our 

close counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan has put unprecedented pressure 

on al-Qaeda and its leadership. 

We are focused on doing more with Pakistan, including helping it implement the 

April 2012 Parliamentary recommendation that Pakistani territory is not to be used 

for attacks on other countries and all foreign fighters are to be expelled. We are also 

seeking greater cooperation with Pakistan on addressing the threat posed by improvised explosive devices (IEDs) which pose a significant threat to Pakistani civilians 

and security personnel as well as to U.S. and partner forces across the border in 

Afghanistan. 

At the same time, we have to continue to apply pressure on the Pakistanis to go 

after groups like the Haqqanis and Lashkar-e-Taiba, which are a threat to regional 

stability. We will continue to insist on improved cooperation to eliminate the continuing threats emanating from Pakistan. We are using our diplomatic and assistance tools to press that point.

Question. While the Haqqani network has been implicated in attacks on U.S. entities in Afghanistan, including the Embassy in Kabul, and multiple diplomatic entreaties of the Pakistan Government by U.S. officials have yielded little assistance, 

there is an obvious gap in our ability to address this threat.

• What role and function does the Haqqani network play in the tribal areas, including from a social and economic perspective? • Is targeting the Haqqani network a redline that has been explicitly expressed 

by Pakistan authorities? • Have there been any inferences by Pakistan officials that some agreement can 

be made regarding the Haqqani? If so, what are the terms? • Under what conditions would the Haqqani network be targeted? • Similarly, why is the Quetta Shura able to operate so openly in Balochistan? 

Is targeting Queta Shura explicitly redlined by Pakistan authorities?

Answer. The Haqqanis have an extensive business and criminal network which 

operates primarily in the Loya Paktia region of Afghanistan and portions of North 

Waziristan, Pakistan. This includes legitimate business activities, for example those 

related to the construction sector (some of which are also used as fronts for illicit 

activities), and criminal activities, such as extortion and kidnapping. The diversity 

and extensiveness of the Haqqanis’ activities makes it both an influential powerbroker and a feared actor. 

In April 2012, Pakistan’s Parliamentary Committee on National Security stated 

that Pakistan’s territory shall not be used for any kind of attacks on other countries 

and all foreign fighters shall be expelled from Pakistani soil. We have underscored 

to the Pakistani Government the importance of following up on these recommendations with concrete steps to squeeze the Haqqanis, the Quetta Shura, and other 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

539

groups to include sharing intelligence about Haqqani operations, taking action to 

close and dismantle extremist camps and operational locations, and controlling its 

movement along the border with Afghanistan. At the same time, ISAF continues to 

target Haqqani operatives on the Afghan side of the border, such as Sher Mohammad Hakimi on August 4.

Question. The Pakistan Business Council submits a list of suggested reforms to 

the Pakistan Government through the Finance Minister each fiscal year.

• To what extent are the United States and other donors, including the 

multilaterals, supportive of this effort and what, if any, similar efforts are recognized? • What is the U.S. assessment of these efforts in mobilizing reform? • What sectors and what percentage of the economy are assessed to be significantly influenced by the Pakistan military?

Answer. Pakistan’s economy remains resilient but unstable. Economic reforms, especially in energy, revenue collection, and fiscal management, must be implemented 

to unlock its potential. We support the reforms proposed by the Pakistan Business 

Council to change the tax structure and widen the taxation base, which if enacted, 

would revive business confidence and help put the Pakistani economy on track to 

achieve the consistent growth needed to provide employment for its growing population, more than half of which is under 25 years of age. Engagement on economic 

reform is therefore an important part of our relationship with Pakistan. For example, we are currently negotiating a Bilateral Investment Treaty with Pakistan, 

which we believe will spur U.S. investment and encourage transparency in Pakistani Government decisionmaking. We also support the efforts of business associations and civil society to encourage economic reform. 

In addition to our bilateral efforts, the IMF and the multilateral development 

banks remain actively engaged in Pakistan, and work to advance economic reforms 

needed to support stabilization and development. We participate in the Friends of 

Democratic Pakistan (FODP) group, which has produced reports and roadmaps for 

the reform on post-conflict reconstruction requirements in the tribal areas and the 

energy sector. 

While the Pakistani Government has made some progress toward implementing 

necessary reforms to achieve more market-based electricity prices, reduce subsidies, 

and expand revenue collection, these steps are not enough to resolve Pakistan’s 

macroeconomic instability. Political will is necessary to overcome entrenched interests. While business associations have spoken in favor of reform, they traditionally 

have not been strong advocates. We support efforts by the U.S. Chamber of 

Commerce through its NGO affiliate to strengthen the voices of these business 

associations. 

The Pakistani military is both a significant employer and consumer in Pakistan, 

and as such plays a central role in driving Pakistan’s economy, particularly in the 

energy, agriculture, and transportation sectors. We do not have an estimate of the 

percentage of the economy influenced by the military, but it is significant. Two wellknown examples of state-owned and ‘‘private’’ service providers are: (1) the National 

Logistics Cell, a military-controlled logistics company that manages transportation 

and border infrastructure, and (2) the Fauji Foundation, one of the largest energy 

conglomerates in Pakistan, with interests in fertilizer, cement, food, power generation, gas exploration, financial services, employment services, and security services. 

These entities, and others like them, employ retired military personnel.

Question. The United States declaration of intent to shift its focus toward Asia 

and the Indo-Pacific region as introduced by the President in January and reinforced in the region by the Secretary of Defense recently provided considerable 

opportunity for India’s important role.

• What if any increased commitment has India made to help regionally, especially 

in Afghanistan, as it relates to this opportunity? 

• What if any redline does the U.S. assess exists in Pakistan as it relates to 

India’s assistance and investment in Afghanistan? 

• What impact has been noted in Pakistan by the SECDEF encouragement of 

India to act in Afghanistan?

Answer. India shares our goal of a stable, secure, and prosperous Afghanistan, 

and has made significant commitments toward that end. As South Asia’s largest 

economy, India is a natural partner to promote long-term stability and economic development in Afghanistan. 

India’s commitments were formalized in the Indo-Afghan Strategic Partnership 

Agreement (SPA) signed in October 2011. In May, Indian External Affairs Minister 

Krishna and Afghan Foreign Minister Rassoul launched the India-Afghanistan PartFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

540

nership Council to implement the SPA. The council is comprised of joint working 

groups on economic cooperation, political and security issues, capacity development 

and education, and civil society. 

On the security front, India provides training to several Afghan National Security 

Forces (ANSF) officers each year. As Secretary Panetta noted during his June trip 

to India, we appreciate India’s ongoing training of ANSF officers in India, and we 

hope India will continue its support for the ANSF up to and beyond the 2014 security transition. 

We also appreciated the Indian Government’s role in hosting the June 28 New 

Delhi Investment Summit on Afghanistan, which attracted broad participation from 

companies in the region and around the globe to promote stronger commercial ties 

and regional integration along the New Silk Road. A number of American companies 

attended the summit. 

India has pledged a total of around $2 billion in economic assistance to Afghanistan since 2001. During President Obama’s November 2010 visit to India, he and 

PM Singh announced joint projects in the areas of agriculture and women’s development. Indian assistance has focused primarily on agriculture and infrastructure 

projects—including the Parliament building in Kabul, the Salma dam, and several 

roads and power lines. An Indian state-owned consortium plans to invest over $10 

billion in developing the Hajigak iron ore deposit in Bamiyan Province. In July, 

India announced that it will offer 600 scholarships to Afghan students over the next 

5 years to study at Indian universities. 

Now that both the United States and India have signed Strategic Partnership 

Agreements with Afghanistan, we aim to enhance coordination and cooperation with 

both countries through the new India-Afghanistan-United States trilateral mechanism announced by Secretary Clinton and EAM Krishna at the June 13 U.S.-India 

Strategic Dialogue. 

Some Pakistanis have voiced concerns about India’s role in Afghanistan, including 

after Secretary Panetta’s visit to India. Pakistan is principally concerned with 

India’s security-related assistance and training of ANSF, and fears that India’s military will one day put ‘‘boots on the ground’’ in Afghanistan. Even so, we are encouraged by the ongoing dialogue between India and Pakistan on a wide range of 

mutual priorities, and note that Pakistan has significantly improved its own commercial relations with India over the past year and a half, which we believe is an 

important element of deepening regional economic cooperation in the wider South 

and Central Asian region. 

RESPONSES OF JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. With the upcoming Afghanistan elections as the preeminent governance 

milestone in Afghanistan’s national reemergence as a sovereign and independent 

country there are considerable steps that remain in achieving a reasonably free and 

fair election.

• (a). Will the U.S. Embassy elevate and prioritize the preparation for national 

elections upon which international donor assistance so depends?

Answer. We will continue to support the democratic process in Afghanistan in 

accordance with the Afghan Constitution. An orderly and legitimate constitutional 

political transition through Presidential elections in 2014 is critical to future Afghan 

stability.

• (b). With regard to the next national election cycle in Afghanistan, where will 

the U.S. focus its assistance and according to what agreement and milestones 

with Afghan officials?

Answer. The 2014 political transition is first and foremost a question for the

Afghan Government and people, but we stand ready to support and assist them. We 

recognize the importance of strengthening Afghanistan’s democratic institutions in 

the lead up to the 2014 political transition and beyond, and it is a key component 

in our U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement. 

The Strategic Partnership Agreement describes Afghanistan’s commitment to free, 

fair, inclusive and transparent elections, as well as recognizing its need for electoral 

reforms to reinforce democratic development. The Tokyo Declaration and President 

Karzai’s July 26 Executive order both outlined that the Presidential election will 

take place in 2014, and the Independent Elections Commission (IEC) has indicated 

its plans to hold the elections on time in spring 2014, as mandated in the Afghan 

Constitution. President Karzai also assigned the IEC to prepare an election platform 

and comprehensive electoral schedule within 3 months, which will enable sufficient 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

541

preparation time for security, logistics, and candidates well before the 2014 Presidential election. 

The U.S. Government made significant contributions to the 2009 and 2010 elections, including programming to strengthen the IEC and Election Complaints Commission (ECC). For 2014, we plan to continue support for these election management institutions to strengthen their capacity to administer legitimate elections, 

including hiring qualified and impartial election officials; providing logistics support 

to the IEC; assisting the IEC in establishing a credible and cost-effective voter registry; and assisting in identifying and allocating polling locations in accordance with 

Afghan laws. In addition, the U.S. Government will continue its support for Parliament, civil society organizations, election monitors, political parties, media, and 

women’s organizations to help build their capacity to understand and participate in 

the electoral process.

• (c). Given your response to the question above, what will other partner entities 

and donors likewise be responsible for in preparation for the elections?

Answer. While this is an Afghan-led process, we will continue to work with international partners to coordinate our support, including to Afghanistan’s electoral institutions, as well as ensuring civil society organizations, election monitors, political 

parties and media play a role to ensure elections are fair and inclusive. Additionally, 

United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) will be central in coordinating the international community and engaging with Afghan authorities on 

the elections.

• (d). Given the integral role in transition of power of independent electoral complaints and adjudication mechanisms such as in Mexico, it appears the Afghan 

Electoral Complaints Commission is facing a loss of its independence and will 

thus lose the important positive influence it had in detecting fraud in the past. 

Will the U.S. Embassy work to maintain such a capable and independent entity 

in Afghanistan?

Answer. An independent electoral complaints mechanism is critical for advancing 

the credibility and legitimacy of the elections. Under current Afghan law, the Elections Complaints Commission is established 120 days prior to the election and its 

activity ends 2 months after the certification of election results. The Independent 

Elections Commission submitted its recommendations for the draft electoral law, 

which includes a revision of the electoral complaints mechanism, to the Ministry of 

Justice on June 11. Under his July 26 Executive order, President Karzai ordered 

the Ministry of Justice to complete its review of the electoral law within 2 months. 

The U.S. Government is following this process closely. Afghans have a strong interest in a credible complaints process as a component of free, fair, inclusive and transparent elections.

Question. The transfer of the Mazar e-Sharif consulate building from our own use 

to that of a leased facility has left in question the likelihood of establishing a consulate in that part of the country.

• (a). How important is it to our national interests to establish a full-fledged consulate in this part of Afghanistan?

Answer. In 2009, Secretary of State Clinton approved the opening of a consulate 

in Mazar-e Sharif. The city is a stronghold of the former Northern Alliance and is 

comprised largely of Tajik, Uzbek, and Turkmen ethnic communities. Along with its 

political influence, Mazar is also a major commercial, energy, and industrial center. 

Mazar sits on a strategic transportation hub linking Afghanistan and Uzbekistan 

by road and railroad. The ethnic communities, which include members of the political opposition, have come to expect a U.S. permanent presence in the North. 

Neglecting this region would alienate traditional allies who are concerned that U.S. 

support for reconciliation with the Taliban will result in the abandonment of minority rights in favor of majority Pashtun interests. India, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, 

Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan all have consulates in Mazar. 

We understand Germany, which has had a robust role in northern Afghanistan in 

the last decade, is also considering opening a consulate there.

• (b). What role would each proposed/existing U.S. consulate play in our relations 

with Afghanistan and the region?

Answer. The Department of State’s enduring presence plan for Afghanistan’s civilian mission post-2014 consists of the Embassy in Kabul and four regional platforms 

in Kandahar, Herat, Mazar-e Sharif and Jalalabad. This residual civilian presence 

will be a visible sign of American resolve and vigilance. An enduring presence countrywide is the most effective way to further our strategic goals of disrupting and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

542

1Southern Pashtuns are defined as belonging to the following tribes: Ghilzai, Durrani, Zirak, 

Mohammadzai, Barakzai, Alikozai, Achakzai, Popalzai, Panjpao, Alizai, Ishaqzai, Tokhi, Hotaki, 

Khogiani. 

defeating terrorists, promoting regional stability, fostering good governance, and 

ensuring economic growth. The ‘‘hub and spoke’’ mission will promote the reintegration and reconciliation of former insurgents, monitor and report on political and 

social trends that impact Afghan stability and democracy, and work to strengthen 

the Afghan Government’s capacity to govern, deliver services to the population and 

enforce rule of law.

• (c). What is the timeline and prospect for the U.S. consulates in Afghanistan 

as we observe and glean lessons from our Iraq experience, including the continuing contraction there?

Answer. Drawing on lessons learned from Iraq, the Department of State has utilized a ‘‘whole of government’’ approach in planning our enduring presence with a 

goal of leveraging all U.S. Government capabilities across all agencies to avoid 

duplication and redundancy. In each location we have colocated or will colocate with 

interagency partners.

• (d). How does our relationship in Afghanistan over the next 10–20 years compare with Iraq over the same period?

Answer. Our planned relationship with Afghanistan is well described in the Strategic Partnership Agreement, which is echoed by international agreements reached 

at the NATO summit in Chicago and Tokyo Conference on Afghanistan, which lay 

out mutual commitments between the Government of Afghanistan and the international community for continued reform and sustained international assistance. On 

our likely relationship with Iraq over the next 10–20 years, I am not in a position 

to reflect upon that. However, I can say that we are applying lessons we have 

learned from Iraq to Afghanistan.

Question. The United States has had the preeminent responsibility for the training and equipping of the Afghan National Security Forces.

• (a). Provide a breakdown of current ANA capacity in defense of Afghanistan, including the number and ethnic makeup of the enlisted, senior enlisted and officer corps; the critical equipment and respective shortfalls in critical equipment; 

the current general dispersal of the force around the country and their responsibility for current operations. Extract further the ethnic breakdown by faction 

and identify their region of influence within Afghanistan and neighboring areas. • (b). Provide a breakdown of the current ANP capacity in securing the population of Afghanistan, including the number and ethnic makeup of the enlisted 

and officer corps as well as that of the Ministry of the Interior. • (c). Provide a breakdown of the LDP by province, including the number and 

associated training of forces. Include any additional formal security elements 

trained or being trained to cooperate with the Government of Afghanistan.

Answer. The NATO-led NATO Training Mission Afghanistan (NTM–A) has the 

lead for the training, advising, and equipping of the Afghan National Security 

Forces. NTM–A is led by a three-star U.S. general who is dual-hatted as the commander of the U.S. training command, Combined Security Transition Command–

Afghanistan (CSTC–A).

(a). The Afghan National Army (ANA) currently has approximately 185,000 personnel as of June, 2012. Overall, the ethnic breakdown reflects the demographics 

of Afghanistan and NTM–A supports the Afghan Ministry of Defense’s (MOD) recruiting efforts to maintain the balance throughout the forces. According to the U.S. 

Department of Defense’s April 1230 Progress Report on Security and Stability, 

NTM–A and the MOD also continue efforts to recruit southern Pashtuns as well as 

improve the overall ethnic balance of the ANA. Using the MOD and NTM–A-agreed 

definition for Southern Pashtuns,1 this ethnic segment comprised 6.6 percent of enlisted recruits during the reporting period. Despite persistent efforts, the impact of 

the initiatives in the south remains marginal due to the security situation. 

NTM–A and CSTC–A continue to procure equipment and invest in capital and infrastructure expenditures through 2014, when investment funding requirements are 

expected to finish and costs will revert solely to recurring equipping needs. As additional equipment becomes available, NTM–A will continue to fill corps units to 100 

percent. 

The ANA is regionally disbursed throughout Afghanistan, but mobile in order to 

respond to operational needs as they develop. Their regional placement is based on 

MOD coordination with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to target 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

543

the insurgency and provide critical Afghan National Security Force (ANSF) units to 

lead operations and security in three tranches of transitioning provinces and districts, covering 76 percent of the Afghan population.

(b). The Afghan National Police (ANP) have an estimated 146,000 personnel as 

if June 2012. NTM–A/CSTC–A work closely with the Ministry of Interior to ensure 

the ANP generally reflects the ethnic makeup of local communities, which is enhanced by the fact that ANP often serve in the area where they join the force. However, when aggregated at the national level, Tajiks are significantly overrepresented 

in the force, Pashtuns are represented proportionally to the Afghan population, and 

Hazara, Uzbeks and others are underrepresented to varying degrees.

(c). At this time, State, the Department of Defense and NTM–A are not involved 

in a force known as Local District Police (LDP). The Afghan Local Police (ALP) are 

village-based security forces administered by the Afghan MOI and trained through 

U.S. Special Operations Forces. As of April, the ALP totaled 12,660, with an approved ceiling of 30,000 police. The MOI has approved 99 districts for ALP units, 

largely focused along the ring road in the south and east, but also operating in the 

north and west.

Question. The ‘‘New Silk Road’’ effort by the USG has shown some prospect for 

attracting economic development interest around the idea of moving goods/trade 

overland between central and south Asia.

• (a). What infrastructure requirements are there to facilitate such a trade corridor and through what transit points in Afghanistan and Pakistan are there?

Answer. The State Department views the New Silk Road vision as an organizing 

principle for long-term development and sustainable economic security for Afghanistan with a focus on regional integration and private sector engagement. It does not 

consist of a single list of projects, but is rather a framework used to inform broader 

decisions about U.S. assistance. Expanded trade corridors are an important regional 

initiative consistent with the New Silk Road vision. 

Infrastructure requirements to implement these trade corridors are planned and 

coordinated between governments and donors through regional initiatives, including 

the Regional Economic Cooperation Conference on Afghanistan (RECCA), the South 

Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), and the Central Asia Regional 

Economic Cooperation (CAREC) program. Afghanistan’s policy paper ‘‘Towards Self 

Reliance,’’ presented at the recent Tokyo Conference, confirmed their commitment 

to apply modern systems and approaches to facilitate transit and trade among regional neighbors. 

CAREC, funded by the Asian Development Bank, has identified six trade corridors in Central Asia, with Afghanistan situated at the heart of two corridors, consisting of existing and planned infrastructure. The State Department and USAID 

will initially focus primarily on Corridor 5 (from India to Pakistan, through Afghanistan, and into Central Asia via Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to China) as a proof of 

concept, while simultaneously looking for opportunities to remain engaged in Corridor 6 (from Afghanistan through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan and on to Europe).

• (b). What is the status of these infrastructure elements? Roads/rail/terminals/

cold storage/security/customs and duty/fuel etc.

Answer. The Fifth RECCA, held in March of this year, identified a number of infrastructure projects that will improve regional trade links. These include the 

Afghan Rail System, the Salang Tunnel and Bypass Road, the E–W Road Corridor, 

and the Kabul-Jalalabad-Peshawar Highway. These projects are currently in the 

planning or construction phases. The first phase of the Afghan rail system, connecting the economic hub of Mazar-e-Sharif to Uzbekistan, became operational earlier this year. 

USAID, coordinating with the State Department, has begun a process to realign 

its assistance priorities in Central Asia and South Asia to support the New Silk 

Road vision. The primary initial focus of this realignment will be support of crossborder trade and transit along CAREC’s Corridor 5, including through technical 

assistance to improve the regulatory environment and increase private sector engagement. The Department of State and USAID will also work to engage with international financial institutions to encourage investments in cross-border energy 

projects, such as CASA 1000 (involving the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan).

• (c). Describe the existing corridor that runs through eastern Iran and its condition and planned improvements as well as any additional routes?

Answer. Trade routes to Iran through Islam Qala and Zaranj involve greater distances, significant logistical challenges, and higher transit costs relative to comFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

544

parable transit trade routes through Pakistan. However, these routes have seen 

increased use following persistent trade disruptions between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghanistan and Pakistan are in the process of resolving disagreements and 

fully implementing the Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA), 

which will ensure a harmonization of trade policies. The lower barriers facilitated 

by APTTA make routes through Pakistan more attractive for Afghan traders who 

are currently undertaking transit trade through Iran. We will continue to work with 

both sides to encourage these efforts.

• (d). What are the associated revenues for current trade through this alternative 

Iranian route and what are the projected revenues associated with a corridor 

that incorporates the Transit Trade Agreement between Pakistan and Afghanistan?

Answer. While we are making significant improvements in the customs capacity 

for trade across the Iranian border, we have limited data at present. We have not 

performed an analysis of trade revenues comparing the Iran routes with the Pakistan routes under the scenario of a fully functional APTTA, but we expect that 

APPTA, once implemented, will significantly increase Afghanistan’s trade revenues. 

RESPONSES OF JAMES B. CUNNINGHAM TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. As we move toward the 2014 Presidential elections, the Afghan electoral 

process continues to be a major source of concern. In particular, I am concerned that 

neither the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) nor the Electoral Complaints 

Commission (ECC) can be trusted to ensure a fair and transparent process. Afghan 

authorities need to take steps now to reform these institutions and create public 

confidence in the process.

• (a). As Ambassador, how will you work to increase the independence of Afghanistan’s electoral institutions, specifically the IEC and the ECC, in advance of the 

2014 elections?

Answer. We have and will continue to support the democratic process in Afghanistan in accordance with the Afghan Constitution. An orderly and legitimate political 

transition through Presidential elections in 2014 is key to future Afghan stability. 

This political transition is an internal Afghan process, but we stand ready to assist 

them in any way we can. We recognize the importance of strengthening Afghanistan’s democratic institutions in the lead up to the 2014 political transition and 

beyond. As such, it was a central component in our U.S.-Afghanistan Strategic 

Partnership Agreement. Additionally, we will continue to work with international 

partners to provide appropriate support, including to Afghanistan’s electoral 

institutions. 

The Afghan Parliament is currently considering electoral reform legislation that 

would determine how the Independent Election Commission (IEC) commissioners 

are appointed and what their duties are. We support the Afghan legislative process 

and are encouraged that civil society groups and political parties have engaged in 

a debate over what would be appropriate checks and balances to enhance the independence of the IEC and Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC). We also note that 

the Afghan Government has committed to holding ‘‘free, fair, inclusive, and transparent’’ elections in both the U.S-Afghanistan Strategic Partnership Agreement and 

the Tokyo Declaration. 

The U.S. Government made significant contributions to the 2009 and 2010 elections, including programming to strengthen the IEC and ECC. We aim to continue 

this line of effort for 2014. We plan to support the election management institutions 

and strengthen their capacity to administer legitimate elections, including supporting the IEC to hire qualified and impartial election officials; provide logistical 

support; establish a more credible voter registry; and to identify and allocate polling 

locations in accordance with Afghan laws. 

In the Afghan public sphere, a wide-ranging and public discussion is already taking place on the reforms needed to improve the electoral process. Actors across the 

political spectrum are having public dialogues debating electoral reforms, including 

in the Independent Election Commission, political parties, and civil society organizations.

• (b). How will you work to encourage the participation of all of Afghanistan’s

diverse ethnic groups in the electoral process, and how important will this be 

for the success of the political transition and political stability?

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

545

Answer. We recognize that only an inclusive political process, acceptable to all 

Afghans regardless of ethnic background or gender, can bring lasting peace to 

Afghanistan and the region. Everyone must feel they have a stake in the outcome 

and a responsibility for achieving it. 

We have engaged and will continue to engage with all legitimate political actors 

in Afghanistan. We regularly meet with Afghan leaders both in and out of government. We continue to stress to the Afghan Government the importance of inclusive, 

credible, transparent, and constitutional elections as the 2014 elections will be key 

to shaping a peaceful and democratic future for Afghanistan. The Afghan Government includes members of all ethnic groups and backgrounds, including members 

of the former Northern Alliance, the Afghan Parliament, and the High Peace Council. Similarly, a successful political transition will need to equally encompass all 

Afghans—including opposition groups, women, and civil society.

Question. A new report by the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction indicates that two major U.S. funded infrastructure projects, designed to build 

popular support for the Afghan Government, demonstrate a long-term commitment 

to the Afghan people, and improve relations between NATO forces and Afghan civilians, are severely behind schedule and are unlikely to be completed before the 2014 

troop drawdown. In addition to costing taxpayers $400 million, the projects’ delays 

may jeopardize key counterinsurgency goals.

• (a). Why have these projects been so severely delayed, and what additional costs 

will be associated with the longer project timeline?

Answer. Over the last 18 months, the Department of State has worked closely 

with the Department of Defense and the U.S. Agency for International Development 

to identify, design, and execute projects funded by the Afghanistan Infrastructure 

Fund (AIF). The Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund is a new authority designed to 

improve the coordination and execution of infrastructure projects in Afghanistan to 

maximize counterinsurgency and development impact. Establishing the management processes and structures has taken time, but at this point we feel strongly 

that the new authority has greatly improved interagency coordination and communication with the Government of Afghanistan on infrastructure projects that contribute to the future stability of the country. Infrastructure development in a war 

zone is never easy; several projects have been delayed because we took additional 

steps to notify, manage, and execute activities to ensure proper accountability. We 

also revised project procurements to attract cost-effective bids and to ensure that 

implementing agencies had the staffing necessary to properly oversee the work. 

These projects were never tied to the schedule for the troop drawdown. 

Project costs increased from initial estimates following receipt of the first bids 

from qualified vendors. Despite these delays, we expect to complete on time the AIF 

transmission line project for southern Afghanistan.

• (b). What is your assessment of the impact of these delays on the projects’ goals 

of improving public perceptions of the U.S. and Afghan Governments, particularly in light of the planned timeline for drawing down international troops?

Answer. We do not agree with the SIGAR’s assertion that extension of the project 

timeframes will have a significant negative effect on the counterinsurgency and the 

development impact. It has been our experience that all stages of infrastructure 

projects, which provide essential services that the insurgency could never offer to 

the Afghan people, have a positive impact. The planning stage of these long-term 

projects gives clear assurance of the enduring commitment of the United States to 

the people of Afghanistan. The construction phase creates employment and helps 

stabilize conflict areas. Final completion opens the way for greater economic opportunity. 

The United States Government is working hard to make sure our investments in 

Afghanistan are sustainable. In our discussions with the Committee on Foreign 

Relations staff, we have looked for ways to improve the sustainability of projects 

under the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund (AIF). In order to increase ownership 

and develop the capacity of the Afghan Government to sustain these projects, several AIF projects will be implemented on-budget, or through the Afghan Government. Though the AIF was conceived as a counterinsurgency program, it provides 

positive impacts for Afghanistan’s economic development. We believe that the Government of Afghanistan’s involvement in the implementation of these infrastructure 

projects improves sustainability of projects. However, ensuring proper oversight and 

financial accountability for these projects has added time to their implementation. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

546

RESPONSES OF RICHARD G. OLSON TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. 

Question. Haqqani Network.—The Senate approved legislation last week that 

would require the State Department to report on whether the Haqqani network 

should be designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization. I traveled to RC East last 

August where the Haqqani Network has been responsible for the deaths of American service members. The Haqqani Network manufactures IEDs used against our 

troops and has conducted suicide attacks in Kabul. These are terrorist acts. However, the Haqqanis could play spoilers if they are not included in political negotiations to bring hostilities to a close.

• Based on the terrorist activities of the Haqqani Network, should it be designated as an FTO? If the Haqqani Network were designated a terrorist organization, what impact would this have on the negotiation process? Is there really 

any hope that the Haqqanis will come to the negotiating table and play a constructive role post-2014?

Answer. I share Congress’ serious concern about the Haqqanis. In meetings with 

Pakistani officials, we have raised and continue to underscore the importance of further squeezing the Haqqanis, including by limiting its ability to conduct attacks 

from Pakistani soil. We have a whole-of-government effort underway to apply pressure to the Haqqanis. Our troops in Afghanistan continue to pressure the Haqqanis, 

inflicting heavy losses. A key Haqqani leader was killed as recently as July 28 during a joint ISAF/Afghan operation in Paktiya province. State and Treasury have also 

sanctioned key Haqqani leaders under Executive Order 13224.

• Sirajuddin Haqqani was designated by the Department of State in 2008, while 

key members Badruddin Haqqani, Sangeen Zadran, and Mali Khan were all 

designated in 2011. The Department of the Treasury has also designated additional Haqqani members and we have worked with the Department of Commerce to list Haqqani-affiliated businesses on the Department of Commerce’s 

Entity List. With Executive Order 13224 designations, any assets of the designated individual that are in the United States or held by a U.S. person are 

frozen. Further, the U.S. Government can pursue legal action against those who 

conduct unauthorized transactions with designated individuals. 

• The international community has added key Haqqani leaders to the sanctions 

list under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1988. This resolution requires states to impose asset freezes and arms embargos on listed individuals 

and entities and travel bans on listed individuals.

The Department of State is reviewing the possibility of additional sanctions, including a Foreign Terrorist Organization designation for the entire Haqqani organization.

Question. I was privileged to meet with Pakistan’s former Minister for Minority 

Affairs, Shahbaz Bhatti, shortly before he was assassinated last year. His tragic 

death, and the lack of accountability for those who were responsible, has understandably discouraged others from openly opposing Pakistan’s blasphemy law and 

promoting religious tolerance.

• As Ambassador, how would you partner with the current Minister for Minority 

Affairs, Dr. Paul Bhatti, and other minority leaders to combat religious intolerance? How will you work with the Pakistani Government to push for increased 

protection for religious minority groups?

Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Embassy’s engagement with the Government of Pakistan on the deteriorating state of religious freedom in the country. I 

will emphasize the importance of prosecuting those who commit religiously motivated acts of violence, such as the assassinations of Minister of Minority Affairs 

Shahbaz Bhatti and Punjab Governor Salman Taseer in 2011. We will work with 

the current Minister of National Harmony, Dr. Paul Bhatti, and other minority 

leaders to help Pakistan reform laws that unfairly punish Muslims and nonMuslims alike and promote religious discrimination. I will also press the Pakistani 

Government to better protect religious minorities and individuals who defend religious freedom.

Question. The United States and Pakistan have historically had some ups and 

downs in our bilateral relationship, but it is clear that we need to work together 

to address the challenges facing the region. For this reason, I am committed to supporting a long-term multidimensional relationship with Pakistan.

• How can we leverage people-to-people ties with Pakistan, including business 

connections, student exchanges, civil society collaboration, and the large diasFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

547

pora population here in the United States, to forge a lasting, multidimensional 

partnership between our two countries?

Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the work to strengthen people-to-people ties 

between the United States and Pakistan. Over the course of the last 2 years, we 

have worked to significantly expand cultural affairs programs and professional and 

academic people-to-people exchanges. These programs build cooperation between our 

countries and bring Pakistanis together with Americans in meaningful ways. 

Embassy Islamabad, in partnership with the Bureau of Education and Cultural 

Affairs, manages the largest U.S. bilateral academic and professional development 

exchange programs in the world, as well as the largest English Access Microscholarship Program. The exchange and English language programs are among the most 

successful tools we have to foster positive Pakistani opinions about the United 

States and to counter extremist voices. In the past 12 months, the Embassy also 

implemented over 60 speaker programs, reaching more than 15,000 Pakistanis, and 

engaged many more through music programs with U.S. musicians. Beyond the goodwill and understanding these programs generate, they are building a cadre of Pakistanis with a deeper knowledge of the United States and a constituency that is supportive of a strong United States-Pakistan partnership. The Department of State 

and USAID are also working to establish several United States-Pakistan university 

partnerships, to foster lasting cooperation in a variety of academic and research 

sectors. 

The Department of State and Embassy Islamabad continue to nurture relationships with a diverse group of diaspora entrepreneurs and NGOs to advance the 

goals of private sector development and job growth in Pakistan. The Department’s 

growing engagement with young Pakistani entrepreneurs offers an example of how 

private-sector engagement can enhance relations between the two countries. We recently facilitated a series of events for Pakistani entrepreneurs to share ideas and 

explore opportunities with U.S. entrepreneurs, including video-teleconferences that 

have been streamed into dozens of Pakistani universities. This is part of our effort 

to do what Pakistanis have been asking us to do for many years—to build an economic relationship based on trade, not just aid. The Department also recently 

hosted over a dozen leaders of Pakistan’s fastest-rising companies for policy briefings and networking events with members of American companies and diaspora 

groups. These leaders are part of the ‘‘Pakistan 100,’’ chosen by the All World Network (AWN), an organization affiliated with Harvard University that bolsters entrepreneurship in emerging markets. 

In the United States, we have significantly increased our efforts to engage the diaspora community. The Pakistani American community is well accomplished and 

has leaders in the fields of medicine, business, education, the arts, and sciences. 

This community is directly contributing to improving the livelihood and welfare of 

Americans, and also plays an important role in linking business communities in the 

two countries. Pakistan relies heavily on philanthropy and innovative social entrepreneurship to fill in gaps in its social net. We continue to ask the diaspora to help 

push the Government of Pakistan toward vital economic reforms, including on taxation, regulation, and pricing.Our goal through all of our multifaceted outreach and 

people-to people exchanges is to create permanent links between Pakistan and the 

United States that will strengthen our mutual understanding and facilitate progress 

on key interests. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(549)

NOMINATIONS OF JOSEPH MACMANUS, 

SHARON VILLAROSA, AND WALTER NORTH 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Joseph E. Macmanus, of New York, to be Representative of the 

United States of America to the Vienna Office of the United 

Nations and to be Representative of the United States of 

America to the International Atomic Energy with the rank of 

Ambassador 

Sharon English Woods Villarosa, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Mauritius and the Republic of Seychelles 

Walter North, of Washington, to be Ambassador to Papua New 

Guinea, the Solomon Islands, and the Republic of Vanuatu 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:47 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Tom Udall, presiding. 

Present: Senator Udall. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. I would call this hearing of the Senate Foreign 

Relations Committee to order. And let me just—I have just a preliminary statement and something here I would like to do before 

we really get started. And welcome to all of you. 

Today the Senate Foreign Relations Committee mourns the loss 

of four brave Americans in Libya, including our Ambassador, John 

Christopher Stevens. As many of you probably know, Ambassador 

Stevens was very close to this committee. He was a Pearson fellow. 

He worked for Senator Lugar, our ranking member. A Foreign 

Service Information management officer, Sean Smith, and two 

other victims have not yet been officially named out of respect for 

their need to contact their next of kin. 

I strongly condemn what the President has already correctly 

defined as an outrageous attack on our diplomatic facility in 

Benghazi. This is a tragic loss, and our thoughts and prayers go 

out to the families and friends of the victims. 

I, like other members of this committee, had met with Ambassador Stevens to discuss the changes occurring in Libya. He had 

expressed a hope that Libya would emerge a strong democratic 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

550

state which respected the rule of law and the principles of freedom 

and justice that we as Americans cherish. Ambassador Stevens 

knew there was much work to be done. I have no doubt that President Obama has stated that his legacy will endure wherever 

human beings reach for liberty and justice. 

Before we begin this hearing to consider the nominations of three 

other Americans who continue to serve our country courageously, 

I would like to ask the committee to take a moment of silence to 

remember and honor the Americans who were unjustly killed in 

Libya and all other Americans who serve our country overseas 

every day. These individuals have all made extraordinary sacrifices, and their service deserves our recognition. And I would ask 

for a moment of silence here.

[Moment of Silence.]

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much, and thank you to the 

three nominees for being here. Today the committee will consider 

these three nominees—Mr. Joseph E. Macmanus of New York. If 

confirmed, he will serve as Representative of the United States of 

America to the Vienna office of the United Nations, and to be Representative of the United States of America to the International 

Atomic Energy Agency, with the rank of Ambassador. Ms. Sharon 

English Woods—in New Mexico we would say Villarosa. I do not 

know if that is—is that OK? We always do the two ‘‘Ls’’ with a ‘‘Y,’’ 

but you can correct me here—but of Texas, would serve as Ambassador to the Republic of Mauritius and the Republican of 

Seychelles. And Mr. Walter North of Washington would serve as 

Ambassador to Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands and 

the Republic of Vanuatu. 

All three nominees are very well qualified and will be serving in 

areas of world importance for national security and the long-term 

diplomatic goals of the United States. 

The United States mission at Vienna and the International 

Atomic Energy is a position which focuses on some of the most serious issues confronting the world, including the work to prevent the 

proliferation of nuclear weapons. In addition to this work, the 

United States mission to international organizations in Vienna 

works with the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, the Preparatory 

Commission of the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty Organization, 

and the U.N. Office of Outer Space Affairs, and the U.N. Commission on International Trade Law. 

Mr. Macmanus is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service. 

His previous positions include work as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs, and Executive Assistant to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Secretary of 

State, Condoleezza Rice. He has served as the consular for public 

affairs in Brussels, Belgium, the public affairs officers in Krakow, 

Poland, as well as positions in El Salvador Mexico. 

He has a bachelor’s degree from the University of Notre Dame, 

as well as an MLS from the State University at Buffalo. 

Mr. Macmanus will need to bring his years of experience to bear 

to work on some of the most critical issues facing the United States 

and our allies. His work with IAEA will bring him to the forefront 

of our efforts to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, 

preventing the proliferation of nuclear materials and technology 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

551

from North Korea and Pakistan, and meeting the peaceful objectives of the IAEA. 

With regard to Iran, the President is making a strong effort to 

prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The sanctions are 

putting pressure on the Iranian regime, and the administration is 

working with our allies to tighten those sanctions. Continued negotiations and access for IAEA inspectors are critical tools to prevent 

Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. 

While the administration has reportedly concluded that Iran is 

‘‘not on the verge of achieving a nuclear weapon,’’ it is important 

to remain vigilant about the threat. Thus far, the main concerns 

center around Iran’s continuing enrichment of uranium to levels up 

to 20 percent. While not weapons grade, the enrichment to such 

levels has rightly raised the concerns of the international community and the IAEA. I concur with the administration that there is 

time and space to continue to pursue a diplomatic path. I also 

agree with the IAEA that Iran should immediately open all sites 

to IAEA’s inspectors in order for the IAEA to fully resolve its outstanding issues. 

Mr. Macmanus, your work representing the United States at the 

IAEA will be critical to achieving these goals. 

In Mauritius and the Seychelles, Ms. Villarosa will work with a 

country actively working to protect the sea-lanes against piracy. 

Mauritius recently agreed to open its courts and jails to aid the 

prosecution of pirates who operate with impunity inside Somalia. 

This work is important for global trade and the U.S. economy and 

the local economies of Mauritius and the Seychelles. The Seychelles 

and the United States military have also been increasing partnerships to help patrol sea-lanes and counter piracy in the region. 

Ms. Villarosa has years of experience as a Foreign Service officer. 

She has served as Deputy Coordinator for Regional Affairs in the 

Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the Department 

of State, Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Rangoon, and 

Director of the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Singapore 

Affairs in the Department of State’s East Asia and Pacific Bureau, 

and numerous other positions. 

She holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a law degree from William and Mary 

School of Law. 

Mr. Walter North will also be serving U.S. interests in multiple 

island countries. If confirmed, he will serve in Papua New Guinea, 

the Solomons, and Vanuatu. These Pacific nations are known to 

most Americans because of the deadly battles which occurred in 

and around these islands during World War II. The United States 

has been a long-time friend, and we remember the efforts to free 

the islands from Japanese control. 

Today one of the biggest threats to the Solomons is not from

foreign militaries, but from the growing threat of rising sea levels 

due to climate change. Mitigating against sea-level rise and protecting the livelihood of inhabitants is one of the most important 

priorities for the Solomons, as well as Vanuatu. Small island developing nations are extremely vulnerable to climate change. Many of 

the low elevation islands in the Pacific and other regions may disappear over the next century, causing mass migrations, conflict, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

552

and disruptions to trade and the global economy. I believe that this 

and maintaining sustainable economic development is one of the 

most important challenges facing the next Ambassador to the 

region. 

Mr. Walter North is currently the United States Agency for 

International Development Mission Director in Egypt, and previously served as USAID Mission Director in neighboring Indonesia 

as well as India and Zambia. Posts at USAID in Washington headquarters have included Interim Assistant Administrator for the 

Bureau for Africa, Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Bureau 

for Policy and Program Coordination, and Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Bureau for Asia and the Near East. 

Before joining USAID in 1980, Mr. North was a project manager 

for the nonprofit organization, CARE, in India and Bangladesh, 

and a Peace Corps Volunteer in Ethiopia. He received his bachelor’s degree from Lawrence University, a law degree from Washington University Law School, and an MPA from Harvard University. 

And as all of you can see, we have three very capable individuals 

before us. 

Senator UDALL. Since I started with Mr. Macmanus and then 

work down the line here. Mr. Macmanus, why do we not start with 

you on your opening statement, and then we will move to Ms. 

Villarosa, and then to Mr. Walter North. Thank you for being here, 

and please feel free—we know how important your families are to 

you and how—I know in the foreign service they really back you 

up. In all of my travels, it has been a remarkable thing to see how 

much family is involved. So please feel free whoever is here to 

introduce them and give a shout out to them. 

Mr. Macmanus. 

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH E. MACMANUS, OF NEW YORK, TO BE 

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO 

THE VIENNA OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND TO BE 

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO 

THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, WITH THE 

RANK OF AMBASSADOR 

Mr. MACMANUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the 

opportunity to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee for the position of Chief of Mission to the U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Vienna and as the U.S. Permanent Representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency, also in 

Vienna. I am grateful to the President and to the Secretary for 

their trust and support, and to this committee for your consideration of my nomination. 

I am joined today by my wife, Carol Krumback Macmanus, and 

our son, Chris Macmanus. I am forever grateful for their love and 

support throughout our long career in the Foreign Service. I will 

refrain from mentioning all of the Macmanuses who populate the 

rest of the country, sir. It would take too much time. [Laughter.] 

Mr. Chairman, I have submitted to the committee a written 

statement for the record. I would like to briefly summarize some 

of the points covered there, if I may. 

Briefly by way of introduction, I have been a Career Foreign 

Service officer for the past 26 years and a member of the Senior 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

553

Foreign Service since 2003. During this time, as you noted, I have 

served abroad in Central and Western Europe and in Latin America, as well as in Washington. 

At the Department, I have held successive positions of increasing 

responsibility as an office director, deputy assistant secretary, principal deputy assistant secretary, and, most recently, as Acting 

Assistant Secretary in our Bureau of Legislative Affairs. In these 

positions, I have managed foreign policy portfolios that have included every major region and issue, including those appropriate to 

the work of the U.S. mission to the international organizations in 

Vienna, the position for which I have been nominated. 

For the past 5 years, I have been a senior aide and advisor to 

two Secretaries of State—for Secretary Clinton from 2009 until the 

present, and previously for Secretary Rice from 2008 until 2009. As 

the Secretary’s executive assistant, I participated in daily policy 

meetings and bilateral and multilateral meetings in Washington, 

and traveled extensively with both Secretaries on official travel 

abroad. 

In this capacity and in the 5 years prior while serving in leadership positions in our Bureau of Legislative Affairs, I coordinated 

policy and strategy across the broad spectrum of foreign policy 

issues, and participated in senior-level discussions on these issues 

in the Department, in interagency meetings and processes, and of 

course with the Congress. 

If confirmed as the chief of mission, I will provide policy direction 

and leadership to our political and public diplomacy efforts in 

Vienna in close coordination with other international affairs agencies in Washington, with the White House, and in consultation 

with the Congress. I will also lead an impressive interagency team 

of technical and political experts assembled in Vienna, who advocate for U.S. national security and foreign policy interests there. 

The work of the U.S. mission in Vienna, and, Senator, you 

touched on this, pursues many important foreign policy purposes 

crucial to our national security. I will highlight just a few. 

At the IAEA, the U.S. mission encourages the strengthening of 

nonproliferation capabilities, such as integrated safeguards, the 

securing of nuclear facilities and materials against the threat of 

terrorism, and the resolution of serious concerns related to nuclear 

programs in Iran, North Korea, and Syria. 

The UNVIE mission—the short form of that long title that we 

deal with—assists in the establishment of standards and practice 

in the safety of nuclear facilities and materials, and in the development of normative standards that guide and instruct memberstates in their management of nuclear technology. The mission also 

assists in the development of monitoring networks that provide an 

increasingly sophisticated capability to deter nuclear detonations 

around the world. 

As a benefit of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, this 

international monitoring system is a key instrument in tracking 

treaty adherence, and confronting treaty violations, and in deterring states that fear the risk of such detection. The IMS, or International Monitoring System, has also contributed to nuclear safety 

monitoring by providing valuable data about the spread of radioacFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

554

tivity following most recently the Fukushima nuclear power plant 

disaster. 

Finally, in the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, the UNVIE mission provides leadership in coordinating counternarcotics efforts 

around the world, principally in Central Asia, and in addressing 

the continuing harassment and damage caused by modern-day 

piracy. 

If confirmed, I will apply my Foreign Service experience to the 

purpose of leading our mission in Vienna as we address the serious 

challenges of nonproliferation, nuclear security, and nuclear safety, 

while promoting the potential benefits of nuclear technology. 

Mr. Chairman, it is worth noting that while we meet here, the 

IAEA Board of Governors is also meeting in Vienna to take up 

many of the same issues I have touched on here and in my written 

statement. These issues will continue to be the specific focus of our 

concern and our diplomacy and will continue to be the subject of 

deliberation by the Congress. 

I appreciate the committee’s consideration of my nomination, and 

if confirmed I look forward to working closely with the members

of this committee and with Congress on the careful work of securing peace and security in a world safe from the proliferation of

nuclear weapons, and advancing the peaceful benefits of nuclear 

technology. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I welcome your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Macmanus follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOSEPH MACMANUS

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. It is an honor for me 

to appear before this committee as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the 

United States Representative to the Vienna Office of the United Nations (UNVIE) 

and to be the United States Representative to the International Atomic Energy 

Agency (IAEA). I am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the confidence they have placed in me. 

This is a critical time for our Nation and for our allies and partners. We face 

unprecedented challenges in the areas of nuclear nonproliferation, terrorism, 

transnational crime and corruption, the environment, and the peaceful utilization 

of outer space. Increasingly interrelated global challenges mean that our sustained 

engagement with specialized international organizations such as those in Vienna is 

vital to helping us to protect and advance our national interests abroad and the 

well-being of Americans at home. 

I have been a Career Foreign Service officer for the past 26 years, and a Senior 

Foreign Service officer since 2003. During this time, I have served abroad in Central 

and Western Europe and in Latin America, as well as in Washington. At the 

Department, I have held successive positions of increasing responsibility, as an 

Office Director, a Deputy Assistant Secretary, a Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, and as the Acting Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Legislative Affairs. 

In these positions, I have managed foreign policy portfolios that have included every 

major geographic region and issue, including the Bureau of International Organizations, which oversees the work of the U.S. Mission to the U.N. in Vienna. 

For the past 5 years, I have been a senior aide and adviser to two Secretaries 

of State—for Secretary Rice from 2008 until 2009, and for Secretary Clinton from 

2009. In both cases, as the Secretary’s Executive Assistant, I participated in daily 

policy meetings, provided expert foreign policy guidance and advice on key issues 

in bilateral and multilateral meetings in Washington, and traveled with the Secretaries on official trips abroad. In this capacity, and in the 5 years prior while serving in leadership positions in our Bureau of Legislative Affairs, I coordinated policy 

and strategy across the Department, participated in senior-level discussions on a 

wide range of national security matters in the Department and the interagency, and 

liaised with the Congress. If confirmed, I will use this broad multilateral background and experience to provide policy direction and leadership to our political and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

555

public diplomacy efforts in Vienna, in close coordination with other agencies in 

Washington, the White House, and the Congress. 

In Prague in 2009, President Obama outlined a robust agenda on nuclear nonproliferation and arms control. Significant progress has been made in fulfilling that 

agenda, including two productive Nuclear Security summits in Washington and 

Seoul, a successful Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference in 

2010, and the successful launch of a new NPT Review cycle in 2012. But much work 

remains. Recent challenges and geopolitical changes underline the importance of 

U.S. engagement and leadership in multilateral institutions, including those in 

Vienna. Today, we face threats from states who seek to acquire nuclear weapons 

and delivery systems and from nonstate actors who may seek nuclear material. The 

IAEA is essential to our efforts to counter these threats, and the U.S. Mission in 

Vienna is central to our efforts in the IAEA. Through the NPT and international 

safeguards, the IAEA is uniquely positioned to report to the international community with authority on the status of compliance by Member States—and in particular Iran and Syria—with regard to their nonproliferation obligations under the 

NPT. 

With regard to Iran, if confirmed, I will continue efforts to bring that country into 

full compliance with their international obligations. In 2011, the Director General 

of the IAEA informed the Board of Governors of the status of his investigations into 

Iran with a frank assessment of the lack of cooperation with which his efforts had 

been met as well as the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program. In 

August 2012 the Director General issued his latest report on Iran, highlighting the 

ongoing lack of transparency, cooperation, and concrete steps toward resolving outstanding concerns. The United States supports the IAEA in its efforts to obtain full 

cooperation from Iran, including access to the locations, documents, and personnel 

that the IAEA requires to determine whether Iran’s program is exclusively for 

peaceful purposes. The IAEA will be a key player as the international community 

assesses what next steps must be taken on Iran. 

The United States recognizes the essential role that the IAEA should play in the 

complete and verifiable denuclearization of the DPRK. The international community 

has consistently called on the DPRK to cease immediately all nuclear activities and 

to permit the IAEA to resume its sustained presence to monitor and verify these 

understandings and requirements. We stand firmly behind the IAEA’s efforts to 

maintain readiness for resumption of its monitoring and verification activities in the 

DPRK. 

If confirmed as the United States Representative to the IAEA I will encourage 

strong support for IAEA safeguards activities, including strengthening the 

verification authority of the IAEA to ensure that it has the tools it needs. The mission, in tandem with U.S. diplomatic approaches in capitals, has worked tirelessly 

to promote Member States’ adoption of the highest standards of nuclear safeguards, 

and, as a result, 117 states now have the Additional Protocol in force. While we 

have made progress, if confirmed I am committed to leading the mission’s ongoing 

efforts to achieve the goals of universal adherence to the Additional Protocol. Furthermore, if confirmed, I will make it my priority to continue strong U.S. support 

for the IAEA’s safeguards mission, including appropriate funding to support necessary upgrades to IAEA capabilities such as the Safeguards Analytical Laboratory, 

and to seek full support from other Member States in this regard. 

Beyond the important work of nuclear safeguards, our efforts in the IAEA seek 

to support and protect U.S. national interests in other areas. The international community looks to the IAEA for technical information, guidance, and recommendations 

on matters of nuclear safety and security. This was most clearly demonstrated during the March 2011 Fukushima crisis and in the months that followed, when the 

IAEA played a pivotal role in helping Japan and other countries assess the crisis 

and disseminate needed information. If confirmed, I will continue active U.S. leadership in the IAEA in helping to ensure the broadest application of safety standards 

internationally in a market that is open and competitive for the U.S. nuclear industry. We must also strengthen the IAEA’s capacity to support and coordinate national 

and international efforts to secure nuclear materials and prevent nuclear terrorism. 

Promoting access to the peaceful benefits of nuclear energy remains a central purpose of the IAEA and one which the United States has long supported. The IAEA 

is uniquely placed to help states access peaceful nuclear energy applications and 

techniques in a way that is fully consistent with U.S. safety, security, and nonproliferation goals. This includes not only nuclear power but also applications in 

food security, water resource management, and advances in human health such as 

cancer treatment. Many Member States—particularly those in the developing world 

with little capacity to develop or access such peaceful benefits on their own—view 

this as the IAEA’s most important mandate. Technical cooperation and assistance 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

556

through the IAEA strengthens the global nuclear nonproliferation regime by building broad support for the NPT, its safeguards obligations, and the normative understanding that all nuclear cooperation must be accompanied by nonproliferation 

responsibilities. It was in this context, during the 2010 NPT Review Conference in 

New York, that Secretary Clinton announced President Obama’s well-received IAEA 

Peaceful Uses Initiative campaign, which includes the goal of raising $100 million 

to further expand and accelerate implementation of technical cooperation projects. 

If confirmed, I will work to continue the U.S. mission’s strong leadership in supporting the IAEA’s work in peaceful uses, while ensuring that the provision of 

assistance continues to adhere to the highest standards of safety, security, and nonproliferation. 

The spread of sensitive technology related to the fuel cycle, including enrichment 

and reprocessing, has always been of particular concern to the United States. In December 2010, the IAEA’s Board of Governors voted to approve establishment of an 

IAEA ‘‘Low Enriched Uranium fuel bank,’’ in line with President Obama’s Prague 

proposal to establish an assured international nuclear fuel supply to enable countries to access nuclear fuel without the need to develop their own nuclear enrichment capabilities. If confirmed, I will work with the IAEA and its Member States 

to ensure that the necessary political, operational, and management decisions are 

reached to make the bank a reality. 

Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will be responsible for key U.S. priorities in other 

multilateral bodies such as the Preparatory Commission for the CTBT Organization 

(CTBTO PrepCom) and The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 

as well as U.S. participation in multilateral regimes, including the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement. 

As laid out in President Obama’s Prague Agenda, the United States has actively 

reengaged with the CTBTO PrepCom to support the completion of the International 

Monitoring System, the global network of over 321 monitoring stations and 16 laboratories which, at Entry into Force of the Treaty, would contribute critical data to 

verify compliance with the CTBT. Beyond their treaty uses, these facilities currently 

contribute enormously valuable, real-time seismic and environmental data to the 

global community. This data was vital to the international community’s response to 

the Fukushima crisis. 

UNODC aids in the prevention of terrorism by assisting countries in strengthening legal frameworks to fight terrorism and frustrate terrorist financing. UNODC 

continues to focus on providing states with the tools they need to fight money laundering and the financing of terrorism and drug trafficking in Afghanistan and Central Asia, coordinating and implementing international counterpiracy efforts in East 

Africa and off the Horn of Africa, and raising awareness of international prohibitions on trafficking in persons. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with 

UNODC and its Member States to enhance further its effectiveness in these and the 

other areas of its mandate. 

The Vienna-based Nuclear Suppliers Group promulgates guidelines to help prevent nuclear trade from contributing to proliferation or providing proliferant and 

terrorist access to nuclear materials and equipment. The Wassenaar Arrangement, 

also headquartered in Vienna, coordinates efforts among 41 partner states to implement export controls to prevent destabilizing arms buildups and terrorist access to 

conventional weapons. If confirmed, I will continue to provide robust support for 

these multilateral arrangements that constitute a strong and effective network to 

fight proliferation of materials that give substance to the most dangerous terrorist 

threats. 

In addition to the above, there are other smaller organizations in Vienna that are 

nevertheless important to U.S. interests, including the U.N. Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), and the Office of Outer Space Affairs, which supports the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS). 

Finally, in light of the current financial situation, ensuring strong management 

of the Vienna organizations will remain a critical feature of U.S. stewardship. The 

United States has worked intensively with partners to ensure improved fiscal and 

management practices, notably at the IAEA. If confirmed I will work closely with 

these organizations to ensure that they adhere to the highest standards of management and transparency. 

Mr. Chairman, during the past few years U.S. engagement in multilateral institutions and with the International Organizations in Vienna has resulted in significant 

successes, some of which I have outlined today. These achievements highlight the 

force-multiplying effect in both political capital and financial resources that multilateral engagement can produce. If confirmed, I will pursue an active political and 

public diplomacy agenda in support of U.S. national interests at the IAEA, the U.N. 

and International Organizations in Vienna.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

557

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much for that excellent statement. And your full statement will be put in the record, and the 

same is true of the other two witnesses. So you can shorten them 

or read them, whatever you would like. 

Mr. MACMANUS. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Ms. Villarosa, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF SHARON ENGLISH WOODS VILLAROSA, OF 

TEXAS, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS AND THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES 

Ms. VILLAROSA. Thank you, Chairman Udall, for the opportunity 

to discuss my nomination to become the Ambassador of the United 

States to Mauritius and the Seychelles. I also wish to thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for the honor of this nomination. 

This is a particular honor for my family, which is proud of its 

long history of service to this country, to help keep our Nation free, 

prosperous, and secure. My international travels as an Army brat 

began at the age of 6 months. I have also experienced firsthand the 

amazing breadth and diversity of the United States living in or visiting all but 2 of our 50 States. 

My Foreign Service career provided me a broad range of responsibilities. In Burma, I was a vocal advocate for human rights and 

democracy, and am proud of our contributions there to the opening 

we are now seeing. I also set up our Embassy in the newly independent nation of East Timor. Most recently, I was responsible for 

building political will and capacity around the world to confront 

critical terrorist threats from actors in Asia, Africa, and the Arabian Peninsula. We regard Mauritius and Seychelles as strong 

partners in this effort. 

I am very excited at the prospect of serving in Mauritius and 

Seychelles should the Senate confirm me. These countries, while 

small, are geostrategically located in the Indian Ocean. Their 

Exclusive Economic Zones cover 3.2 million square kilometers, and 

possess vast maritime resources. They share our values in support 

of democracy and free markets. They are outward looking, which 

has enabled them to gain prominence on the international stage by 

their willingness to exercise leadership. 

I wish to thank the bipartisan work and support of the Senate 

Foreign Relations Committee, the Finance Committee, and the 

Senate leadership to extend the Africa Growth and Opportunity 

Act’s Third Country fabric provisions, which are important to regional trade and our bilateral relationship with Mauritius. Mauritius is one of the leading beneficiaries of this important law. If I 

am confirmed, I would like to increase U.S. exports to this healthy, 

thriving market economy, making better use of 21st century means 

of communication and transportation. 

Mauritius has also been a good partner with us in the United 

Nations, and is willing to provide police as part of U.N. peacekeeping efforts to help other nations build the foundations for 

stable, civilian-led government that respects the rule of law. 

Seychelles has also taken on important leadership responsibilities 

in confronting piracy that poses serious risk to global commerce. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

558

Seychelles stepped up to try pirates and hold them accountable for 

their crimes, which helps restore maritime security for all. 

Through our cooperation on counterpiracy and counterterrorism, 

Seychelles has become one of the U.S. Government’s best partners 

in Africa. Seychelles shifted away from one-party rule in 1991 to 

institute a multiparty system of government. It also shifted away 

from socialist policies to pursue market-oriented policies, which 

have enabled the country to significantly reduce its debt, run a 

budget surplus, and grow at a time when much of the world has 

been in recession. If I am confirmed, I will encourage Seychelles’ 

continued progress in implementing sound political and economic 

reforms and respect for human rights. 

I am joined in my efforts by my family, which is very supportive—they are back in Colorado and Texas—and my broader 

Foreign Service family that has joined me today. Everything that 

I have done has been with the terrific support of these people. I 

would specifically like to mention Julie Dorsey and Marisol Brady, 

who are present today, as the second generation of Foreign Service 

officers that I hope will join the Foreign Service. And we will benefit greatly from that. 

In conclusion, I am honored to be nominated to serve as the 

United States Ambassador to Mauritius and Seychelles. If confirmed, I will do my best to strengthen our relationship with both 

nations to advance democratic and free market principles, as well 

as to confront any threat to these principles, thereby increasing 

United States and global security. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to 

responding to any questions you may have at this time. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Villarosa follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SHARI VILLAROSA

Thank you, Chairman Udall and members of the committee, for the opportunity 

to discuss my nomination by President Obama to become the Ambassador of the 

United States to Mauritius and the Seychelles. I would like to thank President 

Obama and Secretary Clinton for the honor of this nomination. 

It has been a particular honor for my family and me personally to defend and advance our interests around the world to help keep our Nation free, prosperous, and 

secure. My family’s long history of service to this country dates back to the Revolution. My father, both grandfathers, and every preceding generation fought for this 

Nation so we could live in freedom. My international travels as an ‘‘Army brat’’ 

began at the age of 6 months when I accompanied my parents serving in Germany. 

I have also enjoyed the opportunity to experience firsthand the amazing breadth 

and diversity of the United States, living in or visiting all but 2 of our 50 States. 

My Foreign Service career provided me a broad range of responsibilities, working 

closely with many other U.S. Government agencies in Washington and overseas. I 

have served twice as Charge ́ d’Affaires. I was a vocal advocate in Burma for human 

rights and democracy and hope that I contributed to the opening we are now seeing. 

I also set up our Embassy in this millennium’s first new independent nation, East 

Timor. Most recently, I was responsible for building political will and capacity 

around the world to confront critical terrorist threats to our country from actors in 

Central Asia, East Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Sahel. We have developed 

strong partnerships with many nations around the world, including Mauritius and 

Seychelles, to eliminate terrorist safe havens, disrupt terrorist plots, and dry up the 

pools of potential terrorist recruits. 

I am very excited at the prospect of serving in Mauritius and Seychelles, should 

the Senate confirm me. These countries, while small, are geostrategically located 

along important sea-lanes in the Indian Ocean. As a result of their expansive Exclusive Economic Zones, covering 3.2 million square kilometers, they have vast maritime resources. They share our values in support of democracy and free markets. 

They are outward looking, which has enabled them to gain prominence on the interFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

559

national stage by their willingness to exercise leadership on key issues. Their 

heterogeneous populations reflect their international focus and should make it easy 

for me, as a product of the melting pot that is the United States, to fit right in. 

Mauritius is a thriving democracy that the Democracy Index ranks as the only 

full democracy in Africa. It also ranks first among all African countries in the 2012 

Ibrahim Index based on effective governance that informs and empowers citizens, 

civil society, and governmental actors. Mauritius has prospered due to its reliance 

on free market economic principles. The World Bank’s 2012 Doing Business Report 

ranks Mauritius first among African economies and 23rd worldwide. The Heritage 

Foundation ranks Mauritius first in sub-Saharan Africa and eighth worldwide in its 

2012 Index of Economic Freedom. 

Mauritius has been one of the leading beneficiaries of the Africa Growth and 

Opportunity Act (AGOA), one of the centerpieces of the administration’s policy toward sub-Saharan Africa. As Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs 

Johnnie Carson remarked in June, the vision of AGOA to spur economic development, trade, and investment is becoming a reality. If I am confirmed, I would like 

to increase U.S. exports to this healthy, thriving market economy, expanding upon 

the links between the two economies forged by Mauritius’ imports to the United 

States under AGOA. In this regard, I would note that congressional extension of 

AGOA’s Third Country Fabric Extension was a great relief to the government and 

people of Mauritius, is important to regional trade, and politically is very important 

to our bilateral relationship. We appreciate the bipartisan work and support of this 

committee, the Finance Committee, and the Senate leadership in ensuring this extension. I think we can make better use of 21st century means of communication 

and transportation to increase our trade with Mauritius. 

Mauritius has been a good partner with us in the United Nations, and has indicated its willingness to provide police as part of U.N. peacekeeping efforts. We 

should welcome its offer to help build stability in fragile countries and offer to assist 

in providing the necessary training so Mauritius can help others build the foundations for stable civilian-led government that respects the rule of law. Seychelles has 

also taken on important leadership responsibilities in confronting a relatively recent 

challenge to global security: piracy stemming from Somalia that poses serious risks 

to commercial trade, particularly sea-borne cargo. 

Seychelles, more than any other government in the region with the possible exception of Kenya, stepped up to try these criminals and hold them accountable for their 

crimes, which helps restore maritime security for all. This is particularly notable, 

considering Seychelles’ relatively small size and resources in comparison to most 

other countries in the region. Through our cooperation on counterpiracy and 

counterterrorism efforts in recent years, Seychelles has quickly grown to become one 

of the U.S. Government’s strongest partners in Africa. 

Seychelles shifted away from one-party rule in 1991 to institute a multiparty system of government. It has also turned away from the socialist policies of the past 

to pursue market-oriented policies, enacting an economic reform program which has 

enabled the country to significantly reduce its debt from 98 percent of GDP to 56 

percent in 2010, run budget surpluses, and in 2011 grow by 6.2 percent at time 

when much of the world has been in recession. 

If I am confirmed, I will try to encourage Seychelles’ continued progress in implementing sound political and economic reforms and protecting human rights. In addition, with the Senate’s help, I hope that we can continue to support the efforts of 

Seychelles to counter piracy and promote better security in East Africa and the 

Indian Ocean. 

In conclusion, I am honored to be nominated to serve as the United States Ambassador to Mauritius and Seychelles. If confirmed, I will do my best to strengthen our 

partnership with both nations to advance democratic and free market principles, as 

well as to confront any threats to those principles, thereby increasing U.S. and 

global security.

Senator UDALL. Thank you. Thank you for your statement. 

Mr. North, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF WALTER NORTH, OF WASHINGTON, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO PAPUA NEW GUINEA, THE SOLOMON 

ISLANDS, AND THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU 

Mr. NORTH. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for having us 

here this afternoon. I just want to build on Sherry’s comments and 

thank you for the kind things that you said about the Career 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

560

Foreign Service and our dedication and service on this rather sad 

day for many of us. 

I am, of course, honored to appear today before you as President 

Obama’s nominee to be the Ambassador of the United States to the 

Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu. I am grateful 

to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton for their confidence and trust in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working 

with the committee and other interested Members of Congress. 

I would not be here today if it were not for the strong support 

of my wife, Dr. Judy Ryon, and our family. And I am happy that 

a special friend, Carla Barbiero, could be with us as well. They 

have always encouraged me, and I deeply, deeply appreciate that. 

It has been my privilege to serve our country as a career diplomat. Prior to my nomination, I served as the director of USAID’s 

mission in Egypt. This followed several assignments with USAID 

throughout the world. 

Of course, many Americans, as you suggested, Mr. Chairman, 

know Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu because 

of World War II. In my own family, my stepfather and two uncles 

served in that theater. I remember well their stories of the generosity of spirit of the people of the South Pacific. 

The events of the Second World War created an enduring bond 

of friendship between the United States and the people of Melanesia. We continue to benefit from that legacy. Today we are deeply 

engaged in confronting new challenges and opportunities, including 

the challenges you mentioned briefly in your opening comments 

related to climate change. 

This is reflected across a broad range of interests. For example, 

we support economic development and effective stewardship of the 

region’s rich natural resources. We encourage inclusive, sustainable, and transparent growth. We advance the status of women. 

We work on a troubling HIV/AIDS epidemic. We assist American 

citizens and promote our business interests. We help our partners 

build strong, responsive democratic institutions, and we cooperate 

on regional security issues, and have a strong military-to-military 

relationship with Papua New Guinea. 

Clearly, the United States has many shared interests and values 

with the government and people of New Guinea, Vanuatu, and the 

Solomon Islands. If confirmed, and with your support, I will build 

on those efforts. 

I want to thank you again for this opportunity to appear before 

you. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have and 

would like to submit my written testimony for the record. Thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. North follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WALTER NORTH

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you 

today as President Obama’s nominee to be the Ambassador of the United States to 

Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu. 

I am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their confidence and 

trust in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the committee and other 

interested Members of Congress. 

I would not be here today if it were not for the strong support of my wife, Dr. 

Judy Ryon, and our family. They have always encouraged me. I deeply appreciate 

that. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

561

It has been my privilege to serve our country as a career diplomat. Prior to my 

nomination, I served as the Director of USAID’s Mission in Egypt. This followed several assignments with USAID. 

Many Americans know Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu 

because of World War II. In my own family, my stepfather and two uncles served 

in that theater. I remember well their stories of the generosity of spirit of the Pacific 

Islanders. 

The events of the Second World War created an enduring bond of friendship 

between the United States and the people of Melanesia. We continue to benefit from 

that legacy. 

Today we jointly confront new challenges and opportunities in the region. Secretary Clinton has emphasized the need to listen carefully to each other and to 

actively cooperate in addressing the priorities identified by the Pacific Island nations. If confirmed, I will follow this guidance. 

The United States has an enduring commitment to the Pacific which is reflected 

in the depth of our engagement. 

This is richly reflected across a range of interests. For example, I am pleased that 

USAID’s new Office for the Pacific Islands, has prioritized natural resource issues. 

Strong climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies are critical for sustainable, inclusive economic growth. If confirmed, I will work closely with the governments and civil societies of Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu to 

ensure that we support economic development and effective stewardship of the 

region’s natural resources while protecting the fundamental rights and future of 

those who live there. 

The governments of both Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands have 

prioritized improvements in these areas and have moved to improve their management of their countries’ natural resources. Solomon Islands’ decision to participate 

in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative is an important first step. In 

Papua New Guinea, revenue streams for the government are expected to increase 

exponentially in large part due to the ExxonMobil-led construction of a liquefied 

natural gas pipeline. 

Their government has already taken critical steps to ensure that these resources 

are better utilized, including through the creation of off-shore sovereign wealth 

funds that broadly comply with recommendations of the international financial 

institutions. As a next step, Papua New Guinea will need to accelerate movement 

toward full participation in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. In 

tandem with this progress, I am excited about the Department’s Energy Governance 

and Capacity Initiative which is expanding Papua New Guinea’s ability to manage 

the resource flows effectively, and in conformity with international best practices. 

Realizing this goal depends on the development of strong, responsive democratic 

institutions that deliver for all citizens. We welcome the commitment of Papua New 

Guinea’s government and civil society to strengthen the nation’s Parliament, addressing critical gaps in electoral law, and promoting national dialogue on additional ways to strengthen institutional democracy. 

Secretary Clinton has eloquently and consistently reminded us all that a society 

can only progress if it takes full advantage of the talents of all of its citizens. 

Nowhere is this more true than in Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and 

Vanuatu. For historical, social, and cultural reasons, women have been repeatedly 

marginalized in both public and professional life. Despite the well-documented problems of violence and economic marginalization, there remains cause for hope. In the 

recent Papua New Guinean elections, three women were elected to general seats in 

the nation’s Parliament. 

During her recent visit to the Pacific Island Forum in the Cook Islands, Secretary 

Clinton met with leading women from the region. She underscored American support for their ongoing efforts to improve the status of women. To that end, the Secretary joined in the launch of the Rarotonga Partnership for the Advancement of 

Pacific Island Women. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that all of our assistance 

and public diplomacy programs in Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and 

Vanuatu maintain their focus on advancing the status of women. 

As the Pacific island country with the highest rates of HIV/AIDS infection, Papua 

New Guinea remains a partner country for the President’s Emergency Plan for 

AIDS Relief. If confirmed, I intend to work closely with other international donors 

and to focus our limited funding on models that, in addition to having maximum 

impact on control and treatment of the disease, can be replicated by other donors 

and that can have cross-cutting benefits across the government’s health care system. 

As the most populous Pacific Island state, Papua New Guinea has recognized the 

unique responsibility that it has for peace and security in the Asia-Pacific region. 

To that end, its military has been a strong partner of the United States, and we 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

562

have enjoyed a cooperative security assistance relationship that has focused primarily on joint humanitarian exercises, such as the Pacific Partnership, and the 

training of Papua New Guinean military personnel through International Military 

Education and Training and participation in the Asia-Pacific Center for Strategic 

Studies in Honolulu. Papua New Guinean Defence Force personnel were integral 

participants, along with Australia and New Zealand, in the Regional Assistance 

Mission in Solomon Islands. As that successful mission begins to transition security 

operations back to Solomon Islands government institutions, Papua New Guinea has 

agreed to take on new responsibilities as full participants in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations. Its decision to deploy officers to Darfur and South Sudan in 

support of these operations is a laudable accomplishment and one that merits American support. If confirmed, I will work closely with the United States Pacific Command to find ways to expand our military-to-military engagement with the Papua 

New Guinea Defence Force in order to support its continued role in both humanitarian and international peacekeeping operations. 

The United States has many shared interests and values with the Governments 

of Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu. If confirmed, I will work 

closely with Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu to build on our 

existing cooperative efforts and to explore new critical areas of partnership. 

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. I would be happy to answer 

any questions you may have at this time.

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much, Mr. North. And your written testimony—all of your written testimonies will be fully in the 

record. 

Mr. North, why do I not start with you? You know, rising sea 

levels are no joke for the United States. I recently note the New 

York Times, I think, in the last couple of days talked about New 

York City, and the rising sea levels there, and what they were 

doing about it. And obviously no joke for low-lying countries, such 

as island nations in the Pacific. The Solomon Islands and Vanuatu 

are two such vulnerable nations. 

Los Alamos National Laboratories’ Climate, Ocean, and Sea Ice 

Modeling Project is currently working on modeling to determine 

how melting ice in Greenland and Antarctica will impact specific 

regions. While they do not know how sea level will impact specific 

areas, such as the Solomons, they do know that we are quickly 

passing the point of no return, and that sea-level rise is occurring, 

and that the ice melt from Greenland and Antarctica have nearly 

doubled since 2000. 

In your opinion, what should we be doing to help these island 

nations prepare for sea-level rise, and how will this help prevent 

instability in the future? 

Mr. NORTH. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for that question. These are very critical issues which the administration takes 

very seriously. As you know, the Secretary has committed to reengaging more seriously in the South Pacific, with a special focus 

on that issue. And one of the ways that we most effectively cooperate with those countries on these questions is through some of our 

investments through our USAID programs that are based in our 

newly opened USAID office in Port Moresby. 

We have a regional coastal adaptation program that has been 

put in place, and those two countries that you mentioned will be 

primary beneficiaries of it. I certainly believe that contributions 

from the scientific community, like the labs in New Mexico, can 

really make a contribution to a better understanding so that those 

programs can be effective. 

Thank you. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

563

Senator UDALL. Well, I know from our National Laboratories in 

New Mexico, they really enjoy working all around the world on 

these kinds of issues. So we look forward to focusing that scientific 

expertise and moving these countries along in that area. 

You know, agriculture is very important for the long-term economic development of Papua New Guinea, but as you are aware, 

many barriers to development still exist. The May 2010 USAID 

Enabling Agricultural Trade Project issues the agribusiness, commercial, legal, and institutional reform report, found that the 

island is endowed with abundant natural resources to support a 

robust agricultural sector. Yet starting and operating an agricultural business in Papua New Guinea is a risky endeavor. Why is 

operating an agricultural business risky in Papua New Guinea, 

and what can you do as Ambassador to encourage reforms to help 

further economic development and food security? 

Mr. NORTH. Thank you for that question, Mr. Chairman. This is 

a really complicated issue. I think it is ironic that Papua New 

Guinea’s highlands, which were a birthplace of agriculture 9,000 

years ago, have not developed along the same path as we have seen 

in the other centers where agriculture developed initially about 

10,000 years ago. There are a number of reasons for that. Some of 

them related to the extreme biodiversity and biological disparity of 

the geographical configuration of the island of the Papua New 

Guinea. 

As you may know, there are almost 1,000 ethnic groups living 

there, and they are mostly separated from each other by mountains 

and inaccessible terrain. And while in the highland areas that has 

helped to augment the opportunities for agriculture in many parts, 

it has frustrated people’s attempts to have successful agriculture. 

So transportation limitations are ones that farmers face currently. Extreme weather events are another problem. As you may 

have read in today’s paper, there is flooding in the central highlands in Papua New Guinea as a result of some of that extreme 

weather. There are also high costs that are associated with the extractive industry part of the Papua New Guinea economy, which 

draws off jobs and has a Dutch disease-like effect on parts of the 

rest of the economy. There is a lack of education, and there is a 

huge communal land ownership issue, which frustrates the interests of external investors in investing in the plantation economy. 

So it is a complicated issue, but I am thankful that the U.S. Government has engaged with the Papuans in a variety of ways to talk 

to them about what we can do to make it more transparent, to create opportunities for economic growth, and to see some movement 

in the sector. 

Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. Some of your descriptions sounds—

with the tribal entities and the many languages, sounds a lot like 

New Mexico. We have 22 tribes, and I have worked for years and 

years on protecting native languages. And I am wondering, is that 

an issue in terms of—you know, if you look on a big worldwide 

basis, indigenous languages are disappearing rapidly. And with 

indigenous languages disappearing, culture disappears. Do you 

have any thoughts on that? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

564

Mr. NORTH. Yes, sir, I do. I had the good privilege of visiting 

your home State and enjoying some of that diversity. I think that 

one of the things I saw when I was in New Mexico that was most 

interesting to me, and I think about it in terms of Papua New 

Guinea, is that oftentimes it is this very interesting relationship 

between older people and the young that works to preserve those 

traditions. And that is if you get to a space where the young people 

have the education, the intelligence, and the opportunity, there is 

a moment, a sweet spot, if you will, where those two generations 

can come together and work to preserve the past and protect it. 

And you are right, Papua New Guinea has something like 20 

percent of the world’s languages. And so we need to try, I think, 

to encourage them to work with the young people to educate them 

and to do just that. 

Senator UDALL. No, you have hit right on the head. What we do 

in many places in New Mexico on tribal lands is in the Head Start 

Program, in the early education program, we bring the grandmas 

and grandpas together with the 3-, and 4-, and 5-, and 6-year-olds. 

And it is that interaction that allows the language to continue. And 

it is an interesting—very interesting thing to see. 

Thank you very much. 

Ms. Villarosa, Mauritius and Seychelles—and the Seychelles are 

located strategically in the Indian Ocean east of Madagascar and 

the African Continent, and are playing an important security role 

protecting global commerce. 

As you know, according to some estimates, nearly 16,000 vessels 

pass through the Suez Canal a year. The canal, which is north of 

both countries, also carries an estimated 14 percent of the world’s 

shipping and 30 percent of the world’s oil supplies. That being said, 

the ships that traffic the canal are vulnerable to piracy as they 

pass near the Horn of Africa. 

Given that the Seychelles is currently partnering with the 

United States and other countries to help counter piracy, and that 

Mauritius is working to try pirates apprehended by allied navies, 

what should the Embassy be doing to help strengthen this relationship and ensure that Mauritius especially has the judicial capability to prosecute pirates? 

Ms. VILLAROSA. Thank you very much for your question, Senator. 

These are very important issues. And the U.S. Embassy has been 

very active in working with both countries to build their judicial 

and prosecutorial capacity to try these individuals. 

In addition, we are providing support and training and equipment to their coast guards since you can imagine these small countries with these vast amounts of ocean that they need to patrol. So 

we have been providing capacity-building in that regard. 

They are very welcoming of both assistance from us as well as 

from other nations in the world. The British are in the process of 

setting up a rapid action intelligence center based in the Seychelles 

so that we can get the information out to the various ships patrolling in the sea to take quick action, and as well as preserve evidence that can be used in sound prosecutions. 

We are also looking at since—right now Seychelles has prosecuted people and is housing many people, but it has got limitations on how many people they can hold. So we are working to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

565

persuade other countries to take some of these individuals once 

they are convicted. But we will continue to be very active in supporting the Seychelles, and if confirmed, I look forward to working 

with you and discussing other ways where we might be able to 

help. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, and we look forward to working with 

you. The Seychelles is beginning to recover after the worst of the 

pirate attacks scared off fishermen from their shores. This had an 

impact on both the maritime economy, but also the tourist and construction economy. And according to one report, fish supplies at 

local hotels dried up because local fishermen were afraid to set sail, 

and a multimillion port was put on hold because foreign fishermen 

were no longer trawling nearby waters. 

What will the Seychelles need to do to recovery economically, and 

what can the United States do to work with the Seychelles to ensure that as fishermen return, that future fishing is done sustainably so that the people of the Seychelles can have access to 

fishing stocks for multiple generations? 

Ms. VILLAROSA. Thank you, Senator. Again, this is—tourism and 

fishing are the mainstays of the Seychelles’ economy. Piracy has 

had a significant impact on both of them, so these are very important issues. 

With regard to the fishing, it is my understanding that the shortage was temporary. It was immediately felt because fish is a mainstay of the local diet. But according to our Embassy that visits 

Seychelles regularly, the fish supplies are plentiful in the markets, 

in the restaurants. 

The Seychelles has actually a very good oversight regime of commercial fishing vessels in its waters and does not have a serious 

problem with illegal fishing. In fact, I just read a newspaper report 

that they were able to identify an illegal trawler in their waters 

and take action. But they are very interested and committed to 

managing their resources in a sustainable manner. 

The artisanal fishermen are more vulnerable to the pirates and 

are beginning to return now as the incidence of piracy have somewhat abated. 

Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Right. Yes, thank you. 

Mr. Macmanus, in its latest report, the International Atomic 

Energy Agency determined that it still has significant problems 

with access to sites in Iran. After the report, prior Charge ́ d’Affaires Robert Wood made a strong statement that the agency is 

still unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of 

undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran and, therefore, 

cannot conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful 

activities. 

I am sure that you will bring a similar strong message to the 

international community. What in your opinion will be the first 

steps you will take to help increase the pressure on Iran to open 

its sites to inspectors, and what can we do in Congress to support 

you? 

Mr. MACMANUS. Thank you, Senator. The Iran issue clearly is 

the most prominent and the most serious issue confronting the 

IAEA and, therefore, our representation there. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

566

Senator, the report the Director General issued in August that 

is being discussed in the current Board of Governors meeting was, 

in effect, a report card on how well Iran had responded to the 

Director General’s report from approximately a year earlier in 

November 2011, when the Director General issued a very thorough 

presentation on the Iran nuclear program, and the questions that 

attend that program, and the inability of the IAEA, because of lack 

of access, to fully investigate the Iranian nuclear program to ensure that it, one, Iran was fully representing its nuclear activities 

to the IAEA, a responsibility that it carries under the statutes of 

the IAEA itself, and as a treaty member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. 

And also to determine what other activities Iran had been or was 

engaging in that would fall under the heading of a possible military 

dimension to that program. In that case, some of those activities 

are not in and of themselves related to the enrichment or reprocessing of nuclear material, but would be activities that would indicate a possible military intent to use the nuclear technology that 

Iran has available to it. 

This report card, which was fairly brief—this was the report that 

the Director General gave this month—this week, in fact, to the 

Board of Governors—describes the failure of Iran to take the basic 

steps that have been laid out. Those steps are not unclear. They 

are fairly transparent, I think, to anyone who follows this issue. 

They are easily determined by reading in plain language the U.N. 

Security Council resolutions that have called on Iran to suspend its 

enrichment program, suspend its heavy water research and development activities, become transparent in its activities, and allow 

full safeguards to be applied, which would include the Iranian legislative body ratifying the additional protocol which would permit 

greater access to locations. 

Senator, if confirmed, I would continue to bring both a strong 

political diplomacy and public diplomacy focus on Iran’s responsibility, on the stark difference between Iranian behavior on nuclear 

issues and the behavior of the majority of other countries who participate successfully and fully at the IAEA, and who follow the 

guidance and the requirements of Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much for that answer. During 

the 2010 nuclear summit in Washington, DC, President Obama 

stated that, ‘‘We will advance our goal of securing all of the world’s 

vulnerable nuclear materials within 4 years.’’ Since the summit, 

many notable achievements have been met, including the removal 

of 50 kg of highly enriched uranium from three sites in the 

Ukraine, a shipment of HEU and plutonium in Kazakhstan from 

an aging reactor, and a plan to convert an HEU-fueled research 

reactor in Mexico. In addition, work in the United States included 

the cleaning of excess nuclear materials from Sandia National Laboratory in New Mexico. 

What, in your opinion, will be the biggest challenges to achieving 

the goal by 2014, and how will you work to make securing vulnerable nuclear materials a priority? 

Mr. MACMANUS. Thank you, Senator. Senator, first, if I could, I 

would frame the President’s call for the securing of nuclear material in a 4-year time span as being the necessary call to attention 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

567

and to action. Nuclear security, which in the IAEA context, and 

that is the framework in which I will address my remarks, nuclear 

security and nuclear safety have traditionally been talked about 

together as a similar kind of process. 

Increasingly, it is recognized that nuclear safety is also a state 

responsibility, one that does reside with states and should be based 

on changes that they make to their legislative and regulatory 

framework in order to truly provide use of safe nuclear technology. 

Similarly, nuclear security, which has a much broader implications—nuclear security is not simply limited to the proper handling 

of nuclear material, but touches on aspects of nuclear terrorism 

and proliferation. Nuclear security was identified by the President 

in the 2009 speech in Prague. This became an initiative that resulted in a nuclear security summit here in Washington in 2010, 

and was followed on by a nuclear security summit hosted by South 

Korea in 2012. 

The IAEA has similarly kept pace with these changes. It understands that it plays an important role in nuclear security and has 

provided both greater resources and a greater focus for member 

states in responding to the challenge of nuclear security, and itself 

will host a high-level nuclear security conference at the IAEA next 

year. 

All of this shows, Senator, a proper focus and development of an 

international concern about nuclear security. As I stated earlier, 

these are always going to be state responsibilities. Each state is 

going to have to address the problems that it has internally, but 

many of the solutions in the examples that you cited do involve 

international cooperation, the support of other states in order to 

secure and remove material from insecure environments. 

The 4-year goal is a laudable one. It provided focus and direction 

and a certain push to approaching these issues. I do not know that 

a 4-year goal is absolutely rigid. I do know that in that 4-year 

period, more has been done on nuclear security issues than had 

previously been done. And I think that as a laudable achievement 

is one that is worth noting. 

Senator UDALL. And I do think it is real clear we have made 

some real progress on that front. 

Employees from the National Labs are permitted to take government service leave of absences to work at the IAEA and other U.N. 

organizations in Vienna. In addition, IAEA safeguard inspectors 

are trained at Los Alamos for hands-on instruction in measuring 

nuclear materials. Just a month ago, a team from the IAEA 

attended the advanced plutonium verification course. This is an 

important part of our nonproliferation regime. But as our infrastructure at Los Alamos ages, I am concerned that the training 

capabilities will waiver unless we make significant investments in 

our infrastructure at Los Alamos and other sites. 

What can you do to ensure this important relationship with the 

National Labs and IAEA continues, and what, in your opinion, is 

needed to strengthen this relationship? 

Mr. MACMANUS. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate your leadership on this issue. I understand that it would be certainly a purpose of your service in the Senate from New Mexico to raise this 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

568

issue. And it is one that deserves the attention that you are giving 

it. 

Our contributions to the IAEA are often talked about in terms 

of dollars. With international organizations that seems to be the 

initial focus. 

The fact is that our intellectual leadership in this context—both 

in general nuclear technology, in the areas of safety and security 

and in nonproliferation, the American experience, the American 

discipline, and how we address these issues—continues to be pace 

setting. And so a constant interaction and involvement of American 

nuclear scientists and those who are representing these various 

activities in the National Labs is both beneficial to us, but maybe, 

most importantly—and, excuse me, I will be parochial in terms of 

the position for which I am being nominated. But certainly the benefit is directly to the International Atomic Energy Agency. 

Senator, the Americans who participate in positions at the IAEA 

now, without going into an exhaustive list, are there not just 

because they are Americans and because they have particular 

skills, but also because they serve in leadership positions, in important positions in management and in legal affairs, and in safeguards. These are important activities that have to do with the 

management of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and 

where American leadership is crucial. 

I would welcome the opportunity, if confirmed, to work with you, 

to work with other Senators who similarly have investments in 

international labs in their States where this constant conversation 

between our institutions and our specialists and those at the IAEA 

is going to benefit both institutions and do so in a way that does 

deserve full and adequate funding. 

Senator UDALL. You know, you mentioned something that leads 

me to the next question in terms of American serving in IAEA. And 

apparently, you know, we contribute about 25 percent of the 

budget, but I think 12 percent of the employees are American citizens. Do you think there is room for improvement there? I mean, 

I know you talked about what good leadership we provide right 

now. But is there room for improvement in those numbers? 

Mr. MACMANUS. Well, Senator, of course there is. You have identified it exactly as that, and I agree with you. 

Now of course an international organization would, by its nature, 

seek the broadest possible participation from nations, many of 

which are either incapable of certainly providing the kinds of 

resources that we provide. And I am not only talking about financial resources, but I am talking about Americans being placed in 

jobs at IAEA, and I am talking about our consultancies and no-cost 

experts, the general flow of intellectual conversation that takes 

place. 

There are meetings hosted throughout the year in Vienna at 

IAEA where important delegations that include representatives 

from the Labs, from national security elements of the executive 

branch, especially the Department of Energy, attend and engage in 

important work, work that shapes the outcomes that are valuable 

to our leadership in the IAEA. 

Of course, again, I would work, Senator, with you under your 

leadership and with other members of the committee to ensure that 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

569

we were always putting the best candidates forward, that we were 

seeking opportunity to place people in appropriate and important 

positions, and that, you know, if at the end of the day we are never 

going to get the percentage to quite fit, that is all right. That is 

an impetus for a chief of mission to take a hand at seeing if we 

can get those numbers to increase. 

Senator UDALL. Great. Great. Thank you. Now I am changing

direction just a little bit on you here. As you are aware, the agency 

you have been nominated for works closely with the U.N. Office on 

Drugs and Crime. 

Mr. MACMANUS. Yes. 

Senator UDALL. And the United States has embarked on a major 

new strategy for dealing with Afghanistan’s narcotics production 

problem. At the same time, the UNODC has become increasingly 

active in Afghanistan. What role do you see for this U.N. Drugs 

and Crime organization playing in the United States counternarcotics strategy in Afghanistan? 

Mr. MACMANUS. Thank you, Senator. Certainly in Central Asia, 

the contributions that do derive from our working with UNODC 

are important. You know, the State Department has always had an 

active counternarcotics program run out of our Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, INL. That Bureau is certainly the focus for coordinating policy and programs when it comes 

to international cooperation. 

UNODC may not be the sole or best mechanism for cooperation 

in other parts of the world where we have a strong program. But 

in Central Asia, we have a good and productive relationship have 

with UNODC. 

These are difficult endeavors politically. They are, I think, aided 

by international support and not just bilateral activities. And in 

that sense, the UNODC does contribute to what still remain U.S. 

national security goals. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for those answers. 

And let me thank the entire panel. I think your testimony today 

and your answers to questions have been excellent. I really look 

forward to working with you closely on moving these nominations 

along. 

We are going to keep the record open for 24 hours for any questions for the record. And if you can help us with answering those 

as quickly as possible, we can then move your nominations along. 

And so with that, I am going to adjourn this hearing and look 

forward to visiting with you a little bit. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Applause.] 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 3:44 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF SHARON ENGLISH WOODS VILLAROSA TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY

SENATORS JOHN F. KERRY AND RICHARD G. LUGAR

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a Report of Inspection of Embassy 

Rangoon in June 2008 covering the time period for which you served as charge ́

d’affaires at the mission. The ‘‘key judgments’’ section of the report stated as follows:

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

570

Leadership and management of the mission by the [charge ́ d’affaires 

(‘‘CDA’’)] and [Deputy Chief of Mission (‘‘DCM’’)] have been inconsistent and 

have failed to provide the necessary communication, coordination, problem 

solving and fairness to foster a genuine sense of teamwork or address 

morale problems at post.

The ‘‘Mission Coordination’’ section of the report stated as follows:

While most individual elements of the mission function reasonably well and 

manage to work appropriately with each other, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) team found the absence of a genuine sense of teamwork under 

a unified command. The embassy holds one country team meeting per week 

and another meeting of section and agency heads. The CDA and DCM meet 

or converse numerous times each day, but they sometimes send mixed or 

conflicting messages to the staff. They have not conveyed a consistent sense 

of trust or confidence in their staff, but immerse themselves, at times, into 

the details of an issue in an unproductive fashion. In the personal questionnaire administered by OIG, mission staff assessed that the CDA and DCM 

were not performing well in the categories of coordination, communication, 

allowing dissent, problem solving, fairness or feedback. At times of stress, 

the CDA has berated American and [Locally Employed] staff in public. The 

DCM has mostly good interpersonal relations with staff but has failed, at 

times, to accept responsibility for his own statements. In the course of the 

OIG inspection the CDA and DCM acknowledged the perceived weaknesses 

in the leadership and began an intensive set of individual consultations 

with staff intended to listen to staff concerns and staff suggestions on how 

they might improve mission teamwork.

The ‘‘Morale’’ section of the report stated as follows:

Morale within Embassy Rangoon was mixed, only partly due to living in an 

isolated post with poor communications, limited opportunities for travel and 

recreation, and a negative relationship with the host government. In the 

administrative services questionnaire prepared for OIG, embassy personnel 

assessed that the attentiveness of the CDA and DCM to morale was low. 

The CDA and DCM did not effectively address morale problems at post 

because of unclear communication with staff and perceived indifference of 

the CDA to family members in the embassy community. The CDA has 

organized and hosted a number of community events, but she has at times 

not included family members or international school staff in such events. 

The CDA told the OIG team that she recognizes the importance of doing 

more to demonstrate her interest and support for American staff and the 

community.

Question. Do you believe the conclusions reached by OIG in its report are accurate? If not, please comment.

Answer. I appreciate this opportunity to respond to the above questions and to 

detail efforts I have since made to strengthen my leadership and management abilities. I fully understand that, as the chief of mission in Burma and—if confirmed—

Embassy Port Louis, morale and leadership are my primary responsibility. The OIG 

report on Rangoon made legitimate criticisms that served as a powerful wake-up 

call to me on the need to make certain changes. Based on the OIG’s findings and 

suggestions, I immediately took steps to adjust my approach, starting by acknowledging to my staff that I had not been the leader they deserved and committing myself to improve. The DCM and I moved quickly to better clarify our respective roles, 

and I increased my communications with my staff and their families. I believe that 

these efforts paid off 2 months later, after OIG inspectors had departed, during the 

mission’s response to the massive 2008 cyclone. However, I did not stop there and 

have since used my time in Washington to further improve my leadership skills. I 

am committed to making improvements on a continuing basis so that everyone who 

works with me realizes how much I respect their efforts. I will detail further background in my responses below. 

The OIG conclusions accurately identified morale as a serious issue, but I believe 

they failed to describe the difficult circumstances that we faced or our efforts to 

address the problem. I knew that morale was a serious problem and had requested 

a Crisis Management Exercise months before the inspection in order to get a better 

handle on the problems. Unfortunately the Exercise leaders could not obtain visas. 

I also flagged morale as an issue in my Memorandum to the inspectors in the hopes 

that they would have constructive advice to offer. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

571

I did try repeatedly to take steps to address morale. For instance, I worked with 

the Embassy Information Management Officer to set up an Internet cafe at the 

American Club for family members and teachers to have access through our State 

Department system to get around the filters, slow speeds, and blackouts that the 

military regime imposed on Internet access. This is not generally done elsewhere 

in the world and required special permission from the State Department. Additionally, in order to empower our more junior staff, I let them take the lead in developing proposals for our small grants program and followup on the implementation 

and results. 

I fully understood the high anxiety caused by the military regime’s refusal to 

grant or renew visas for more than 6 months, not because people were worried that 

they could not leave, but because they were worried that if they had to leave for 

any reason they might not be able to get back into Burma. I frequently spoke to 

many staff members individually during the 6-month visa hold regarding these frustrations and was able to secure assistance for several. I understood their tremendous dedication our mission’s role in Burma and their desire to be part of it. 

Further, throughout my 3 years in Rangoon, I hosted at least five social functions 

a year that included families and the broader American community in Rangoon. In 

addition, I arranged for regular presentations to the broader American community 

by our Regional Medical personnel to address health concerns and organized wellattended townhall meetings with the entire American community to answer all 

questions after the September 2007 demonstrations and the 2008 cyclone. 

In addition to our attempts to improve morale, I believe the mission’s performance 

in handling multiple crises over time provides a more positive example of my leadership of a unified mission team. It is important to understand that the mission was 

under constant surveillance and high levels of stress by a hostile military regime. 

Yet we managed to keep people motivated and highly productive despite the stress 

level. I am very proud of the outstanding collaboration and teamwork shown by 

every member of our mission team, which went well beyond what duty required. 

They deserve the lion’s share of the credit, but I believe that my leadership was also 

important. 

For example, our move into a new chancery in September 2007 required careful 

leadership by both the DCM and me because we had to ensure that we accomplished our move in 1 day, while still continuing to cover massive pro-democracy 

demonstrations that had begun a few days earlier. The day of the move was further 

complicated by torrential rains and fallen trees that shut streets throughout the city 

and blocked the entrance to the new chancery. After talking with our staff—who 

were most interested in covering the demonstrations—we arranged for them to 

trade off responsibilities so they could both escort classified shipments and cover the 

demonstrations. Their reports enabled us to report back the latest developments to 

Washington even though most of our communications were down. The DCM and I 

had listened to our staff and came up with a fair way to divide the work that satisfied everyone. This team effort helped build everyone’s sense of pride and accomplishment. I considered this was the most impressive display of teamwork that I 

had ever seen until the following May. 

Rangoon and the southern delta were hit by a cyclone in May 2008, 2 months 

after the inspection. This was a massive storm unlike anything experienced in over 

100 years. Several of the American staff sustained major damage to their homes and 

many of our Locally Employed Staff were hit much harder. My first focus was to 

ensure the safety and well-being of my team and our mission. The DCM and I convened a meeting with key staff the next morning to elicit status reports, assess the 

damage, and guide our cleanup. We recognized that communication was critical and 

that most phone lines were down, so we utilized the Embassy radio system to communicate frequent updates to our entire staff throughout the coming days. The entire staff and family members could listen, nonstop, to our discussions if they 

wished and could ask questions and raise concerns as they arose. Guards stayed at 

their posts for up to 3 days straight before replacements could reach them. 

After moving families to safer quarters, we quickly turned our attention to helping the millions of Burmese who suffered terrible losses. Since the military regime 

initially rejected offers of international assistance, and our American and Burmese 

staff wanted to respond, I encouraged them to organize private relief efforts and 

permitted them to deliver the relief supplies to remote villages. We also organized 

a relief fund to help our Burmese staff most harmed by the cyclone that served as 

a model for subsequent efforts elsewhere. Finally, overcoming military resistance to 

outside assistance, we moved quickly to show U.S. leadership of relief efforts with 

almost 200 U.S. military C–130 flights over 6 weeks delivering relief supplies. This 

ended up being a massive undertaking that involved the entire mission. We had 

first-tour officers directing unloading operations at the airport to make sure they 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

572

were not diverted to the military. Our staff accompanied relief shipments to the devastated villages, so that we could report back to Washington on the ultimate destination of the deliveries. The USG response to Cyclone Nargis required a dedicated, 

motivated, and cohesive team to sustain this effort over 3 months. There was no 

way our response could have been effective without strong leadership, clear communications, and careful coordination to overcome the numerous obstacles the Burmese 

military tried to put in our way. It was an honor for me to lead our outstanding 

dedicated staff and keep them motivated over time to creatively overcome the many 

obstacles we faced. 

In sum, I agree that morale was a serious problem and I tried my best to make 

improvements. The ultimate responsibility for mission morale is the chief of mission 

and, before the OIG inspectors had even departed, I assumed personal responsibility 

before the entire mission and reiterated my personal desire to do better at boosting 

staff morale in my individual sessions with them. If confirmed as chief of mission 

to Mauritius, I will do my utmost to support staff morale at all times by making 

sure that I am aware of my staff’s concerns, input, criticisms and thoughtfully discuss with them our approach forward. Although we have a much friendlier relationship with Mauritius than we do with Burma, our staff will still be far from their 

families and friends. During my consultations, I have learned about the resources—

medical, psychological, personnel, education—that are based in the region which I 

can call on for support. I am determined that my leadership will provide the necessary communication, coordination, problem solving and fairness to foster team 

spirit and high morale.

Question. Please describe any steps that you took while serving as charge ́ d’affaires at Embassy Rangoon to address the issues raised by the OIG report.

Answer. I immediately convened a Country Team meeting at the conclusion of the 

inspection and congratulated the entire mission staff for their outstanding work as 

evidenced by the relatively few recommendations. I explained that the inspectors’ 

primary concerns were focused on the Front Office and pledged to improve communication and clarity, and stated my intent to sit down with everyone individually 

to listen to his or her concerns. The DCM and I were able to quickly agree on our 

respective roles and responsibilities, which we then communicated jointly to the 

staff. In addition, we met jointly as needed with individuals to ensure we gave no 

mixed messages. 

Listening to concerns and discussing morale with my American staff, and several 

family members, proved very informative. I learned that most of our American staff, 

and near all of our local staff, had no discussions with the inspectors about morale 

and/or the Front Office. My individual discussions reinforced my positive impression 

of extremely dedicated individuals. They were all very proud of their contributions 

to our mission and pleased to be part of the team. Many offered suggestions on how 

we could do more. Their realization of my openness to their suggestions paid dividends later on, perhaps best evidenced during our response to the May 2008 

cyclone. The staff readily responded during that crisis that affected us all with many 

great ideas on how we could help our families and the Burmese people devastated 

by the cyclone, which we then implemented while publicly recognizing the individual 

initiatives. We also circulated materials for dealing with stress and obtained increased support from the Regional Medical Office in Bangkok to attend to health 

concerns. We also revised bidding materials to give a clearer picture of the some 

of the hardships at Post. 

During these individual meetings, I specifically asked about perceptions of favoritism or unfairness, and only one gave those assertions any credence. Several did 

inquire about my reasoning on particular decisions, which I explained and requested 

their feedback on how I could have done better. 

Finally, I learned that I should engage more with individual staff about decisionmaking and our policies, rather than relying on supervisors to brief their staff on 

my behalf. Accordingly, I made more of an effort to speak regularly to individual 

staff members and actively solicit questions.

Question. Has your management style changed since you left Embassy Rangoon? 

If so, please describe the specific steps you have taken in this regard.

Answer. Thank you for the opportunity to address this issue, as I have worked 

hard to strengthen my management and leadership styles since serving in Embassy 

Rangoon. 

I now make it a point to meet often with my staff on an individual basis in order 

to listen to their concerns and views and to seek out their opinions and feedback. 

I meet almost daily with individual staff members and I make a point of proactively 

seeking them out for conversations. My staff also often regularly drops by my office, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

573

as I have made it clear that they do not need to make an appointment to do so. 

My staff has welcomed the access and my receptivity to their thoughts, which has 

empowered them as they meet with other agencies and bureaus. In addition, these 

personal contacts have given me a much better sense of their concerns and challenges, thus allowing me to step in early on to help address any problems. My current office is a talented mix of civil servants, Foreign Service officers, and detailees 

from other agencies. It is an actively sought-after place to work because people have 

heard that I am a good person to work with. My staff regularly solicit career advice 

from me and I have helped several obtain positions that advanced their career 

aspirations. 

In addition to increasing my outreach to staff, I have also sought out courses to 

help improve my leadership skills. I recently completed a crisis leadership course 

that emphasized the importance of clear communications and listening carefully to 

the concerns of the staff. I also enrolled in an executive mentoring program which 

provided an in-depth look at my leadership and management style as viewed by 

subordinates and peers, and which identified areas where I could further refine my 

skills. In the course of further reading, I have also learned that I should treat everyone as unique individuals and utilize a variety of leadership skills depending on the 

needs of the particular individual. 

I will always be open to suggestions on what more that I can do to lead the talented Americans and local employees on my staff.

Question. You are currently serving in a management position at Main State

Department headquarters in Washington DC, which is a considerably different environment for employees than serving in isolated posts such as Rangoon or Port Luis. 

If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that Embassy Port Luis does not 

suffer from the same sorts of mission coordination and morale problems that were 

identified by OIG as being a problem in Embassy Rangoon?

Answer. I believe that there are key differences between a post like Burma, where 

we must deal with a hostile regime that has actively sought to hinder the mission’s 

activities, and a post like Mauritius with a friendly democratic government. 

That said, I can cite several examples of my successful leadership in small, isolated posts, as well as high stress posts before I served in Burma. For instance, in 

2002 I put together and managed a team of relatively junior officers and volunteers 

to help set up our new Embassy in East Timor. Our team successfully organized 

the visit to East Timor of former President Clinton, Richard Holbrooke, and thenAssistant Secretary of State Kelly. We followed that successful endeavor by securing 

in a matter of months several key agreements which ordinarily take years to negotiate, including a Status of Forces agreement. 

Additionally, the Economic Section I ran in Jakarta in 2001–2004 was broadly 

viewed as having the best morale of any section in the Embassy despite losing twothirds of our staff due to multiple evacuations in response to serious terrorist 

threats over 2 years. 

Some of the lessons that I learned from these experiences, as well as my time in 

Burma, is the importance of clear communication—not just saying something,

but asking questions to see what message was received and also asking for suggestions so that the individual feels invested in the decisions. I also liberally include 

all the interested officers on internal e-mails and transmit policy decisions to the 

entire staff so they have a better idea of other issues that we are working on. This 

later leads to lively discussions with individuals and the group about the other factors that led to the decisions, so they have better insight into senior policymaker 

thinking. 

I also learned that, rather than just proposing solutions for problems, I must also 

make sure to clearly indicate my sympathy and understanding for the challenges 

individuals who work for me face. To improve teamwork and cohesiveness, I have 

learned that it helps if individuals take on different tasks than their usual ones to 

both broaden their expertise and so they better understand the challenges their colleagues face. 

Finally, as a manager of people I have learned that different people require different styles of management. Some individuals desire a great deal of autonomy 

while others require more hands-on guidance. I have learned to tailor my management style to each individual. 

In the course of my Department of State consultations to prepare for my proposed 

assignment, I have learned that the current Charge in Port Louis is very highly 

regarded and presides over a contented, productive Embassy staff. My main responsibility is to keep it that way. I have no plans to overhaul a well-functioning operation. I am sympathetic to the isolation factor there and have explored the possibilities of exchanges with other embassies in the region in order to provide more opporFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

574

tunities for staff to broaden their experiences and learn how larger posts operate. 

Because we have a small staff, everyone will have to cover for each other, which 

also provides further opportunity for the staff to demonstrate their versatility and 

make them more attractive bidders for their followup assignments. I have also 

learned about the resources available in Washington and at other posts in the region that I can call upon as needed in the areas of medical and psychological care, 

educational opportunities, and personnel issues. Fortunately they will be able to 

travel easily should the need arise since visas will not be an issue. 

RESPONSES OF WALTER NORTH TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. The U.S.-Pacific Islands Multilateral Tuna Fisheries Treaty has been a 

major success in fostering a better dialogue between the United States and Papua 

New Guinea (PNG). The recent treaty negotiations in Vanuatu were an important 

step forward and the negotiations appear to be moving in the right direction, but 

the treaty is set to expire in 8 months. Given that Papua New Guinea is a key 

Pacific Island nation in these negotiations and on fishery issues, what steps do you 

plan to take to engage the PNG Government in support of continued progress under 

this treaty and to help conclude negotiations in a timely manner?

Answer. For most Pacific Island nations, including Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, 

and the Solomon Islands, the fishery resources in their waters, in particular tuna, 

provide a key natural resource to support their economic development. The United 

States has a long history of cooperation and collaboration with the Pacific Island 

States to protect these resources for current and future generations, while ensuring 

access to American fishermen. Since 1988, the United States tuna purse seine fleet 

has operated in the Western and Central Pacific under the terms of the South 

Pacific Tuna Treaty. This mutually beneficial treaty has provided access to Pacific 

fisheries for the U.S. tuna fleet and has served as a vehicle for the Pacific Island 

countries to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues, U.S. Government 

economic development funding, and assistance with sustainable fisheries management as well as combating illegal fishing. The United States is negotiating with the 

Pacific Island Parties to extend the treaty beyond the June 2013 end date. 

At the most recent round of negotiations to extend the South Pacific Tuna Treaty, 

held September 5–8,2012 in Port Vila, Vanuatu, U.S. negotiators made good 

progress in closing the gaps on a number of remaining issues. This progress, in addition to the agreement reached in Auckland on access for the U.S. fleet and the 

associated financial package, brings us closer to a final agreement. If confirmed, I 

will engage heavily with the governments of Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, 

and Vanuatu to press for a successful conclusion to the treaty at the next negotiation round in Solomon Islands in November.

Question. Papua New Guinea comprises over 28 million hectares of rainforests. It 

is home to over 200,000 species and boasts a rich and diverse ecosystem. Forest degradation in particular is a critical concern in the region. Forestry and agriculture 

account for 90 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the country. Extensive logging 

and removal of forests for agricultural use are a significant driver of this forest degradation and source of emissions. How do you plan on engaging in addressing the 

drivers of forest degradation as well as conservation of the forest biodiversity in 

Papua New Guinea? How do you plan to work with private sector, nongovernmental 

groups, and other key stakeholders in your efforts?

Answer. Papua New Guinea (PNG) is one of the most richly diverse places on 

earth. There are millions of hectares of rainforests, as well as abundant marine resources. These rich resources provide the livelihoods for a significant portion of the 

population and are particularly important to the poor. 

Regrettably, there are multiple causes driving forest loss and degradation in PNG. 

These include invasive species, slash and burn agriculture, and local conflicts 

related to land use and access. The most challenging issue is weak governance. 

Because of weak governance, there has been extensive overexploitation and poor 

management of forest interests. I believe that there are a number of ways in which 

the United States can work with the government and people of PNG on these issues, 

and, if confirmed, I will work hard to advance the following efforts. 

The United States is addressing the drivers of deforestation in a number of fora, 

from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), to 

the Forest Investment Program (FIP) and Forest Carbon Partnership Facility 

(FCPF), to bilateral programs. Most relevant is a new alliance announced at the 

Rio+ 20 meeting (June 21, 2012) by the United States and the Consumer Goods 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

575

Forum to bring together governments, the private sector, and NGOs to address deforestation associated with commodity production. The first meeting of this alliance 

will be held later this fall; both palm oil and pulp and paper, which are important 

issues in PNG, will be priorities for this alliance. PNG will also submit a Readiness 

Preparation Plan in the next few months to the FCPF, where the United States is 

an active donor and participant; this plan includes strategies to address the drivers 

of deforestation. 

The United States will also continue to work regionally and with key countries 

such as PNG to combat illegal logging and associated trade, and more broadly to 

promote sustainable management of forests, through cooperation in the International Tropical Timber Organization, the U.N. Forum on Forests, and APEC. 

Bilaterally, we are working to encourage commitments by the Government of PNG 

to strengthen democratic institutions to reduce corruption, expand inclusiveness, 

and strengthen law enforcement. In this regard, the intention of the PNG Government to join the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative is a very positive development. If confirmed, I will encourage the PNG government to sustain and build 

on improvements in the management of rich biodiverse protected areas, including 

stimulating ecotourism. I will work to advance the PNG Government’s commitments 

under the representations that it has made to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on forest protection and will work with them 

and NGO partners to monitor progress toward those objectives. 

Finally, the United States will continue to make direct investments through 

USAID. A new Coastal Management Program will focus on PNG’s rich coastal forest 

resources and work with communities in those areas on sustainable management 

of terrestrial and marine resources. Resources permitting, we would augment this 

with support for active on-the-ground monitoring and scientific research. Meanwhile, ongoing programs through the Coral Triangle Initiative engage NGOs, local 

communities, government, researchers and academics in increasing the scale of and 

better managing protected areas, getting local buy-in to these approaches, and working in surrounding areas to better manage them. 

If confirmed, I will seek opportunities to work with NGOs, the private sector, academia, the people of PNG, and other governments to explore further ways to enhance conservation and protection of Papua New Guinea’s incredible biodiversity.

Question. Climate change poses devastating risks to small island nations that are 

particularly vulnerable to sea-level rise because of their geography. By 2008, the sea 

level surrounding the Carteret Island, an atoll of the Autonomous Region of Bougainville, had risen to a point where residents began to relocate to higher ground 

and/or neighboring islands. The impacts of climate change and the threat it poses 

on small island nations is an important issue for our diplomatic missions to address. 

Please describe what you consider to be effective ways to diplomatically address climate change. What in your previous experience lays the foundation for you to be 

successful in working on these issues?

Answer. The United States recognizes that climate change is an urgent environmental, economic, development and security issue for the Pacific region. The United 

States will continue our efforts to assist the people of the Pacific in finding workable 

adaptation solutions to the challenges of climate change. We stand behind our 

pledges in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 

(UNFCCC) to take prompt, substantial action to help vulnerable countries adapt to 

climate change and, if confirmed, one of my priorities is to work with Papua New 

Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu on ways to tackle the problem of climate 

change. Existing programs provide an avenue to open enhanced regional dialogue 

and cooperation on this difficult issue. I hope to develop those channels during my 

tenure, if I have the honor of being confirmed as Ambassador. In addition, the newly 

opened USAID office in Port Moresby extends added opportunities to bring together 

regional and U.S. experts on climate change and environmental degradation. The 

United States currently provides significant climate-related assistance to the region, 

with $40.5 million in appropriated and requested funds for climate programs between fiscal year 2010 and 2013. At the Pacific Island Forum Post Forum Dialogue 

on August 31, Secretary Clinton announced a $25 million USAID program to help 

vulnerable coastal communities in the Pacific region to withstand extreme weather 

events in the short term, plus sea-level rise in the long term. 

As a long-time USAID mission director, I have overseen the development and implementation of successful programs to address a number of comparable challenges, 

particularly in Indonesia where I worked on the Coral Triangle Initiative and significant bilateral terrestrial and marine programs. If confirmed, I will draw on that 

experience in reaching out to actors in the region to do all that we can to build on 

the serious commitments made by the administration. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

576

We want to ensure that our programs in the region not only support adaptation 

efforts related to food security, water resources, coastal infrastructure, and ecosystems, but also address critical governance issues that will help the region build 

institutional and human capacity to access adaptation funds and to understand, 

forecast, and use climate information. If confirmed, I look forward to working with 

the committee on these issues. 

RESPONSES OF WALTER NORTH TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

Question. Mr. North, you have extensive background on a wide range of development issues. What are ‘‘lessons learned’’ during your time in Indonesia that may be 

helpful as you consider development opportunities and challenges in Papua New 

Guinea?

Answer. If confirmed, I believe that I will be able to build on my experiences in 

Indonesia and elsewhere. In Indonesia, by listening carefully to a variety of partners, we were able to build alliances for sustainable change on education, the environment, jobs, food security, health, disaster risk reduction, and democratic governance. We relied heavily on our committed local staff of Indonesians who cared deeply about their country and its future. They and our dedicated American team helped 

us reach out to local communities, the Government of Indonesia, nongovernmental 

partners, academia, business, and faith-based organizations to build interventions 

that could be implemented on a broader scale. The Embassy’s power to bring together stakeholders, the contributions of a number of other U.S. Government entities, and the support of successive strong, creative, and dedicated Ambassadors was 

a huge plus. That combined with ability to draw on the best of American know-how 

and first-rate technical assistance kept the momentum going forward. Finally, we 

had excellent counterparts in the Government of Indonesia who shared a commitment to regular monitoring and rigorous evaluation. When things were not working, 

we changed course or stopped them. And when they did do well, the Government 

of Indonesia was ready to expand them using their own resources. I expect that elements of this approach will be useful in Papua New Guinea, too. I am particularly 

committed to using the influence of the Embassy and my position as Ambassador, 

if confirmed, to advance existing and future initiatives to advance development and 

address critical issues, such as public health, climate, and the environment.

Question. What is the status of the $1.5 million-per-year U.S.-funded HIV/AIDS 

project in Papua New Guinea? Please provide details of the latest evaluation of this 

program’s effectiveness.

Answer. USAID and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) jointly implement the 

U.S. Government’s HIV/AIDS prevention, care, and treatment programs in Papua 

New Guinea. Papua New Guinea suffers from the highest HIV/AIDS prevalence rate 

in the Pacific, and U.S. Government efforts are targeted to reach the most at-risk 

populations in the country. The geographic focus of U.S. Government-funded programs is carefully coordinated with the programs of other bilateral and multilateral 

donors, as well as with the Papua New Guinea Ministry of Health and National 

AIDS Council, to avoid duplication of efforts and maximize coverage. USAID programs focus on building the capacity of the host government to scale up public and 

community-based, fully integrated HIV prevention, care, and treatment programs in 

defined geographic areas to halt the spread of the disease and mitigate its negative 

effects on society. CDC works closely with the Ministry of Health to improve its laboratory testing and surveillance capacity to enable better understanding of the epidemic and support a fact-based public health response. 

U.S. Government programs have been instrumental in raising awareness of HIV/

AIDS transmission patterns, establishing treatment protocols, and pioneering work 

in promoting voluntary testing and counseling among at-risk groups. Indeed, many 

of the approaches adopted by U.S. Government programs have served as models for 

other donors and the national Ministry of Health. Comprehensive reviews of the 

initial 5-year program, which will be completed in December 2012, have been uniformly positive. In accordance with the recommendations of the review, the next 5-

year program will increase focus on the intersection between HIV/AIDS and violence 

against women, while still maintaining the overall focus on an integrated model of 

prevention, care, and treatment in targeted geographic areas. In FY 2012, Papua 

New Guinea received $5 million from the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS 

Relief (PEPFAR) for its HIV/AIDS response.

Question. Please provide details of the model or approach you utilized as USAID 

mission director in Indonesia to review the effectiveness of U.S.-funded assistance.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

577

Answer. In Indonesia, U.S. investments benefited from a legacy commitment to 

evaluation that had been instilled and nurtured in the mission culture over successive directors. This meant that there were staff with requisite skills, tracking and 

monitoring systems in place, resources set aside for monitoring and evaluation, and 

a consideration of monitoring and evaluation at every step of an activity’s cycle. 

Regular portfolio reviews and consultations with counterparts reenforced the importance of the issue. Consequently, when USAID Administrator Shah’s AID Forward 

reform agenda focused on evaluation, we welcomed the commitment and were well 

positioned to participate in it.

Question. Having worked in Indonesia, you are familiar with efforts between the 

United States and Indonesia, to study tropical diseases. Is such a collaborative 

project presently underway in Papua New Guinea? If not, what do you see as prospects for the United States and Papua New Guinea to work together so that tropical 

diseases and other public health issues connected to the country’s biodiversity may 

be studied?

Answer. The National Institutes of Health currently partners with the Papua New 

Guinea Institute of Medical Research in Goroka through a Malaria Center of Excellence. This initiative brings together researchers from both countries to examine 

collaboratively new ways to control the spread of this tropical disease, which is 

endemic throughout Papua New Guinea. Both the National Institutes of Health and 

USAID are examining ways to increase this collaborative work in Papua New 

Guinea through expanded tropical disease research, prevention, and treatment. 

CDC is working to strengthen laboratory and disease surveillance systems in the 

country. The addition of a public health specialist from the Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery to the Embassy staff in October 2012 will help facilitate expanded 

Department of Defense engagement in this area. If confirmed, I will work closely 

with all elements of our health diplomacy team in Port Moresby to identify areas 

for closer partnership and collaboration on tropical diseases and public health challenges in Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu.

Question. When did the latest review of security at the U.S. Embassy in Papua 

New Guinea occur? Were there recommendations for improvement? If so, have the 

recommendations been implemented?

Answer. The last Diplomatic Security Program Management review for Embassy 

Port Moresby was published on June 8, 2011. Two of the recommendations contained in that report have not yet been fully implemented. The outstanding recommendations deal with timekeeping and communication equipment that the local 

guard force contractor has not yet provided to local guard force employees. Embassy 

Port Moresby has been in regular contact with the local guard force contractor to 

press for the deployment of the recommended equipment. The local guard force 

contractor is working to procure its equipment—a difficult exercise in Papua New 

Guinea—and intends to deploy it in the near future. In the interim, Embassy Port 

Moresby has provided U.S. Government-owned equipment to local guard force employees to ensure that there are no gaps in security coverage.

Question. To what degree are the people of Papua New Guinea reliant upon fish 

for their food supply? To your knowledge, have any studies been conducted regarding the longevity of the fish stock supplying Papua New Guinea for domestic consumption as well as export?

Answer. Fish and seafood are an important source of protein in the diet of coastal 

communities in Papua New Guinea. Numerous studies have been conducted both by 

governmental and nongovernmental sources analyzing the sustainability of Papua 

New Guinea’s fish stocks, particularly migratory fish stocks, including various tuna 

species, the country’s principal fish export. In addition, a number of governmental 

and nongovernmental studies have been conducted to determine the impact of climate change on Papua New Guinea’s fish stocks, focusing primarily on various species of reef fish, which are important for domestic consumption. These studies have 

all highlighted the need for careful conservation of Papua New Guinea’s fish stocks 

in order to ensure their long-term viability, as well as the need for measures to protect Papua New Guinea’s coral reefs from the impact of climate change. 

The Government of Papua New Guinea has been a credible partner in efforts to 

ensure the sustainable management of migratory fish stocks in the Pacific. Papua 

New Guinea’s waters contain about 10 percent of the world catch of tuna, the biggest tuna resource base of any country on earth. The South Pacific Tuna Treaty and 

the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention (WCPFC) are the two major 

treaties regulating tuna fishing in the South Pacific region. Earlier this year Papua 

New Guinea revoked its prior withdrawal from the Tuna Treaty, and since then has 

been a constructive partner in the ongoing negotiations on its extension. The United 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

578

States looks forward to working with Papua New Guinea to conclude the remaining 

steps to extend this agreement. 

Both Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands receive USAID support as 

members of the six-nation Coral Triangle Initiative, which also includes Indonesia, 

Philippines, Timor-Leste, and Malaysia. The Coral Triangle Initiative—which is also 

supported by other bilateral donors, multilateral development banks, and international NGOs—works to protect mangroves, coasts/coral reefs, fisheries, and other 

coastal resources within a 5.7 million square kilometer area of ocean and islands 

with the highest marine biodiversity on earth. To complement this work, USAID, 

as part of the regional climate change work being done through its Pacific Islands 

Office in Port Moresby, is establishing a coastal mangrove planting, protection, and 

management program that will assist coastal communities in Papua New Guinea 

and Solomon Islands in protecting reefs and fish breeding grounds. In addition, as 

part of its program to assist communities in Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, 

and Vanuatu to adapt to the realities of climate change, USAID intends to assist 

with sustainable fisheries management in coastal communities.

Question. According to the U.S. Department of State’s Background Notes for 

Papua New Guinea, ‘‘petroleum and mining machinery and aircraft have been the 

strongest U.S. exports. Looking to the future, do you see opportunities for expanded 

categories of U.S. exports to the country? Please elaborate.

Answer. Given the projected expansion of Papua New Guinea’s petroleum and 

mining sectors over the next several years, it is very likely that U.S. exports to the 

country will continue to be dominated by machinery related to these industries. 

There is potential for immediate growth in other categories, however, particularly 

renewable energy technology and construction machinery. The potential for increased export of U.S. food and consumer products to Papua New Guinea also exists. 

The export of such products has, however, been hampered by Papua New Guinea’s 

stringent sanitary and phytosanitary regime and weaknesses in intellectual property protection. To address these barriers to increased U.S. exports, the United 

States has agreed to begin bilateral discussions on trade matters with the Papua 

New Guinean Government. 

If confirmed, I will work closely with all elements of the U.S. Government to identify ways to broaden our exports to Papua New Guinea and will engage with Papua 

New Guinean Government authorities to reduce barriers to the entry of U.S. products in their market. 

RESPONSES OF JOSEPH MACMANUS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT MENENDEZ

Question. Mr. Macmanus, as you assume a key role as the lead U.S. Representative to the IAEA, what are the administration’s top priorities? Where do IAEA priorities differ from those of the United States? Where differences between U.S. and 

IAEA priorities exist, do you have a plan to bring those priorities more in line with 

our own?

Answer. The administration’s top foreign policy priority at the IAEA is to prevent 

Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to support the IAEA’s efforts to monitor 

and inspect both Iranian and Syrian nuclear activities, as the international community continues to pressure these countries to comply fully with its international 

nuclear obligations. As set out by U.N. Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) 

1696, 1737, 1747, 1803, 1835, 1929, and 1984, such cooperation entails access for 

the IAEA to sites, materials, and persons relevant to the effort to ascertain the true 

nature of Iran’s nuclear program, including the possible military dimensions of that 

program. If confirmed, supporting IAEA’s efforts to gain full access to Iranian and 

Syrian nuclear programs and to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon will 

be my top priority. 

Another priority is to support the IAEA’s efforts to maintain readiness to reestablish a long-term presence to effectively monitor and verify the cessation of nuclear 

activities in the DPRK. UNSCR 825 concerns the DPRK’s nuclear activities and 

requires access for IAEA inspectors. 

The 2011 Fukushima tragedy in clearly demonstrated the critical importance of 

international cooperation on nuclear safety and incident response. The administration is committed to supporting IAEA initiatives in this area, including implementation of the Agency’s Nuclear Safety Action Plan which was adopted by member 

states in September 2011. 

Keying off U.S. leadership on nuclear security matters, the IAEA is also exploring 

how it can play a strengthened role in promoting nuclear security and keeping 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

579

nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists. This effort reinforces President Obama’s Nuclear Security Summit Initiative and will help to sustain and 

strengthen international focus on this issue beyond the planned 2014 summit to be 

held in the Netherlands. 

The administration is committed to supporting the Agency in its unique and indispensable role in implementing nuclear safeguards, which provide the technical and 

substantive case for U.N. Security Council and other actions and sanctions. To that 

end, if confirmed, I will do all I can to ensure that the IAEA has the resources to 

carry out the infrastructure improvements and technical upgrades it may need to 

maintain its effectiveness. 

In the same vein, the United States has long been the greatest supporter of the 

Agency’s role in promoting the availability of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy 

through its program of Technical Cooperation. Technical Cooperation projects promote food security, human health/cancer treatment, water management and other 

benefits, particularly for the developing world. U.S. support was demonstrated most 

recently in President Obama’s commitment to the IAEA Peaceful Uses Initiative, 

which was announced by the Secretary at the 2010 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty 

Review Conference and which seeks to raise $100 million to expand and accelerate 

Technical Cooperation. The Peaceful Uses Initiative has made possible such quickreaction projects as the IAEA’s study of the marine environment effects of Fukushima in the Pacific Islands region. 

The administration also strongly supports the IAEA’s ongoing work to set up an 

IAEA LEU fuel bank, which gives substance to member states’ commitment to making the peaceful uses of the atom accessible to all and helps to reduce incentives 

for member states to develop the enrichment and reprocessing capabilities that can 

contribute to proliferation risks. 

Despite overall strong management within the Agency, I believe that more 

progress could be made with respect to transparency and accountability. In 2012, 

the Agency took a welcome advance in transparency by publishing the first ever annual activity report for the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS). The Agency 

has expressed reservations about public disclosure of individual OIOS internal 

audits reports due to concerns that it could impede access to member states’ sensitive technical information and capabilities. 

If confirmed, I will continue to press the IAEA to continue to work to enhance 

fiscal and management accountability. Given the Agency’s positive track record in 

revising procedures for vetting Technical Cooperation projects, and a strong relationship of openness and candor, I remain very optimistic that we will be successful 

in our efforts to encourage the IAEA to continue to review and reform itself and 

its procedures in a way that benefits the overall efficiency and accountability of the 

organization.

Question. Can you tell us more about the IAEA Iran Task Force? Beyond the 

name, how will this task for change the short-term interaction and long-term approach that the Agency takes on Iranian nuclear issues? Has the IAEA had a similar task force before? If so, do you think it was effective, and if not, what will you 

do to ensure that the Iran Task Force produces results?

Answer. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has stood up an Iran 

Task Force. This is the first such Task Force organized to handle an ongoing investigation of a specific country in noncompliance with its safeguards agreement. Given 

Iran’s ongoing and increasing intransigence and failure to cooperate with the IAEA, 

we consider the Task Force to be a positive development and an example of both 

the commitment of the Director General and the seriousness of the IAEA in resolving this issue. Among the first jobs of the task force should be the successful conclusion of discussions leading to a structured approach to resolving outstanding issues 

concerning Iran’s nuclear program as articulated by the Director General’s report 

of November 2011 and subsequent reports. 

The Task Force will consolidate Iran experts into a single unit that will allow 

them to more deeply analyze the information available to the IAEA. This will allow 

the IAEA to put together an even better picture of the Iranian nuclear program and, 

among other things, be better poised to implement a structured approach when Iran 

agrees to doing so. It could also make additional information available to the international community through the Director General’s reports to the IAEA Board of 

Governors. 

If confirmed, I will work to ensure that both the IAEA and the Task Force 

produce positive results on this issue.

Question. Mr. Macmanus, as you know the IAEA plays a critical role in standards 

setting and information-sharing with regard to nuclear energy safety. Following the 

Fukushima disaster this role is more important than ever. What role do you think 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

580

the United States should play in shaping the IAEA’s response to this disaster and 

what lessons, if any, do you think the United States can learn from other member 

nations’ responses to the disaster?

Answer. The United States, along with many other member states, played a key, 

and I believe appropriate, role in supporting the efforts of the IAEA to share-information during the Fukushima crisis. During the crisis, the IAEA was somewhat 

constrained by its regulations that do not permit dissemination of information to 

other member states or the public without the consent of the Government of Japan 

and other countries concerned. While these governments were forthcoming in providing such consent, the additional requirement caused unavoidable delays in some 

announcements and briefings by the IAEA. 

I would note that member state support in the form of extra-budgetary contributions, Cost-Free Experts, and additional technical information and resources provides the IAEA with the considerable expertise and capability it needs. Moreover, 

other organizations also contributed valuable assistance. For example, the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Organization 

(CTBTO) provided real-time seismic data that greatly assisted the IAEA and the 

international community in predicting tsunami and other activities during this crisis period. 

The Fukushima disaster and member states’ responses underscored two important aspects of nuclear safety: First, that preparation for and response to nuclear 

safety incidents remain first and foremost responsibilities of the individual state; 

and second, that international standards of regulation, practice, and response bring 

needed transparency and predictability to disaster preparedness. 

Moving forward, the United States will continue to play an active role in shaping 

the IAEA’s continued response to the Fukushima disaster. The administration commended the efforts of the Agency and its member states in implementing the Action 

Plan for Nuclear Safety and absorbing lessons from the Fukushima Daiichi accident. 

Among the many actions taken, the United States believes self-assessments by national regulators and efforts to strengthen the effectiveness and thoroughness of 

international peer review missions have been especially helpful in assessing and 

providing insights into how national regulatory programs can be strengthened. For 

example, the United States is actively compiling lessons learned from assessment 

mission programs such as the Integrated Regulatory Review Service, which aims to 

make these peer reviews more robust. In addition, under IAEA auspices, the Parties 

to the Convention on Nuclear Safety held an Extraordinary Meeting on August 27–

31, where they identified a number of actions in the ‘‘Action-Oriented Objectives’’ 

document that I understand can and should be taken immediately to enhance 

nuclear safety worldwide. 

These actions focus on implementing IAEA Safety Standards broadly and effectively, strengthening the independence and transparency of national regulatory bodies, employing international peer review missions (such as those already offered by 

the IAEA) to consult with member states on their safety regimes, and increasing 

transparency and public involvement with respect to nuclear safety activities. To be 

truly effective, in my view, states must implement these identified actions in an 

expeditious, thorough, and continuing manner. 

No nuclear program can be verifiably safe without a robust, effective, and independent regulator, like the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) that operates in an open and transparent manner. Contracting Parties to the IAEA Convention on Nuclear Safety are committed to reviewing their national regulatory 

programs to implement the lessons learned after the Fukushima accident, and to 

develop regulations and other mechanisms to anticipate, prevent, mitigate and 

effectively respond to events in the future. 

Immediately following the Fukushima accident, the NRC established a task force 

to review data and actions taken by Japan. The objective of the task force was to 

better understand the accident itself, and to also make recommendations on how to 

enhance the safety of the U.S. nuclear program. The NRC has also participated in 

ongoing consultations with counterpart regulators in Europe to study the criteria established for, and the results of, the nuclear power plant ‘‘stress tests’’ initiated for 

European countries. NRC has had similar consultations with regulators with mature nuclear programs elsewhere in the world to ensure that the recommendations 

provided to the Commission are informed by actions taken by other countries. 

As I understand, governments are committed to assisting and learning from the 

Fukushima accident as they develop technical and regulatory approaches to their 

nuclear activities. If confirmed, I will work to see that this focus on safety remains 

in the forefront of IAEA activities. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

581

RESPONSES OF WALTER NORTH TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. The State Department’s 2012 Trafficking in Persons Report lists Papua 

New Guinea as a Tier 3 country for trafficking due to its failure to meet minimum 

standards for the elimination of trafficking and failure to make significant efforts 

to combat trafficking. Papua New Guinea is a source, transit and destination country for men, women, and children subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor. 

Papua New Guinea had been listed as a Tier 3 country since the 2008 Trafficking 

in Persons Report.

• If confirmed, what would be your new strategy to engage the government in

beginning to seriously combat this crime?

Answer. In the 2012 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Report, Papua New Guinea 

(PNG) was ranked Tier 3 for the fifth year in a row. If confirmed, I will work closely 

with PNG authorities to reverse that trend by adopting and implementing tools 

required to address human trafficking. 

For example, with U.S. assistance the Government of PNG has drafted antitrafficking legislation and has taken tentative action toward enacting this legislation. If confirmed, I will urge the PNG Government to enact this legislation. The 

next step will be to work with the PNG Government to ensure that it enforces this 

legislation by investigating, prosecuting, and punishing trafficking offenders, including government officials complicit in trafficking. I will also work with the Government of PNG to encourage the development and implementation of procedures to 

identify trafficking victims among vulnerable groups and ensure they receive protective services. 

In addition, the State Department’s Office of Trafficking in Persons has provided 

grants between 2010 and 2012 to the International Organization for Migration 

(IOM) to assist PNG in designing and implementing antitrafficking legislation and 

to help launch PNG’s first antitrafficking awareness campaign. If confirmed, I intend to work closely with the government and with the IOM to ensure that the legislation is implemented effectively and other antitrafficking measures are adopted 

and implemented.

Question. What specific benchmarks must Papua New Guinea meet to earn a Tier 

2 Watch List designation? How do you plan on reaching these?

Answer. Each country narrative in the TIP Report includes a list of recommendations, providing governments with a roadmap for addressing deficiencies in their 

antitrafficking efforts and improving their performance and their tier ranking. The 

2012 TIP report on the PNG provided a number of recommendations, such as enacting legislation prohibiting and punishing all forms of trafficking; investigating, 

prosecuting, and punishing trafficking offenders; instituting a formal procedure to 

identify victims of trafficking among vulnerable groups; training law enforcement 

officers to proactively identify victims and refer them to protective services; ensuring 

that victims of trafficking are not arrested, deported, or otherwise punished for acts 

committed as a direct result of being trafficked; and acceding to the 2000 U.N. TIP 

Protocol. 

If confirmed, I will ensure that the Embassy regularly engages with the PNG 

Government to discuss the recommendations, to evaluate progress made to date, 

and to encourage additional actions as needed. 

RESPONSE OF SHARON ENGLISH WOODS TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. The State Department’s 2012 Trafficking In Persons Report lists 

Seychelles as a Tier 2 Watch List country for trafficking. Seychelles is a source and 

destination country for sex trafficking. Currently there are contradictions in existing 

laws relating to the sex trafficking crimes of child prostitution and forced prostitution of adults.

• If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that Seychelles passes clear 

and comprehensive antitrafficking legislation?

Answer. Secretary Clinton has spoken out forcefully against sexual slavery as a 

crime that cannot be tolerated in any culture. If I am confirmed, I will give this 

critical issue increased attention and urge the Seychelles Government to take immediate action to enact clear and comprehensive antitrafficking legislation. I will also 

seek to mobilize Seychelles civil society to protect women and children from this pernicious crime. The Seychelles economy is very dependent on tourism, and absent 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

582

clear legislation, the type of tourists it risks attracting, could negatively impact its 

reputation for high-end tourism. 

To assist in these efforts, if I am confirmed, I will work with Congress and the 

State Department to provide assistance on legislative drafting, and follow that up 

with training of police, prosecutors, judges and civil society to protect women and 

children from further victimization. Our mission in Mauritius has collaborated with 

the Department of Justice to conduct training for the Mauritian judiciary, and I 

believe a similar training program could have significant benefits in combating trafficking in the Seychelles once the appropriate legislation is in place. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(583)

NOMINATIONS OF STEPHEN D. MULL AND

DAWN M. LIBERI 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Stephen D. Mull, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Poland 

Dawn M. Liberi, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Burundi 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m,. in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard Durbin, presiding. 

Present: Senators Durbin and Lugar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS 

Senator DURBIN. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will come to order. Today the committee 

considers two nominations: The Honorable Stephen Mull to be 

Ambassador to the Republic of Poland, and Ms. Dawn Liberi—did 

I pronounce that right? 

Ms. LIBERI. Liberi. 

Senator DURBIN. Liberi—to be Ambassador to the Republic of 

Burundi. Welcome to the nominees, their families, and friends. 

I am pleased to stand in for Senator Kerry, who is unable to join 

us. I will be brief with my introductory remarks, and then turn to 

Senator Lugar. I am glad that he has joined us. And then we will 

give you two an opportunity for opening statements. Please feel 

free at that time to introduce any family members that are here 

with you. 

Congratulations to both of you. I am pleased the President has 

nominated two experienced individuals who, if confirmed, will 

bring years of service to our country to bear in their respective 

posts. 

With the tragic deaths in the last several days of four Americans 

serving in our consulate in Libya, including Ambassador Chris 

Stevens, we are all reminded of the difficult and sometimes dangerous environment in which our dedicated State Department staff 

serve. Over my travels to some of the most remote and isolated corners of the globe, I have always been struck by the talented, dediFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

584

cated U.S. personnel representing America in our embassies and 

consulates. 

Before we take your testimony, I would like to start with the 

introduction of each our nominees. 

Stephen Mull—I have the distinct pleasure of representing Illinois where Chicago is often noted as home to the largest Polish 

community outside of Poland. As Polish-Americans have been 

vibrant and active members of the fabric of our Nation since the 

19th century, many even earlier, so, too, is the relationship between the United States and Poland. 

It was no coincidence President Obama awarded a posthumous 

Presidential Medal of Freedom to Prof. Jan Karski this last spring. 

A member of the Polish underground during World War II, Professor Karski was among the first to provide eyewitness accounts 

of the horrors of the Holocaust. I knew Jan Karski. He was my professor at the Georgetown School of Foreign Service—yours as well. 

What a magnificent man. He was a great teacher and a great individual, and I am glad that he was recognized. He touched the lives 

of so many people in and out of the classroom. His spirit and compassion were displayed many times both in Poland and in the 

United States. 

The strong diplomatic ties between the United States and Poland 

are reflected in every aspect of our efforts to maintain international 

security, support economic development, promote democracy, and 

respect for human rights. Poland’s historic entry into NATO and 

the European Union, its support in Afghanistan, collaboration on 

missile defense, its economic growth in a financial crisis that continues to sweep across Europe, are among the many examples of 

its outstanding progress over the past few decades, and its commitment to democratization and free market. 

Russia, in particular, has too often been a troubling neighbor to 

Baltic and Eastern European states, many times using blustering 

language and energy to bully its neighbors. Next door to Poland’s 

thriving democracy is Belarus. What a contrast: a brutal dictatorship that still uses its own version of a KGB—and that is what 

they call it—to repress its own people and lock up those who dare 

to run against their President, Alexander Lukashenko. 

Poland has been a good friend to the Belarusian neighbors who 

are still struggling for freedom. When I visited Belarus after the 

imprisonment of these Presidential candidates, how many of those 

families said that the only place they could go to speak out about 

what was happening was Poland. Poland allowed them that opportunity to visit and a venue for expressing themselves. 

As the current Executive Secretary of the State Department and 

a diplomat with years of experience in Europe, Ambassador Stephen Mull, if confirmed—and he will be—is praised to confront—

pardon me, poised to confront these many issues in Poland. 

Former Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary for Political 

Affairs, Ambassador Mull is currently Executive Secretary of the 

Department of State. He served previously as Acting Assistant 

Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs. He served as U.S. 

Ambassador to Lithuania from 2003 to 2006, Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Indonesia from 2000 to 2003. He has 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

585

over 30 years of experience at the State Department. He received 

his B.S. degree from the prestigious Georgetown University. 

If confirmed, Ambassador Mull can offer the leadership necessary 

to continue cooperation between the United States and Poland. 

Having traveled to the central African region on many occasions, 

I have seen for myself, as I am sure Senator Lugar has, the significant challenges that countries, such as Burundi, face. Civil war, 

lack of clean water, schools, and jobs, and the need to ensure that 

a true democracy is nurtured, are just a few of the issues that face 

Burundi. 

In addition, the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of 

Congo threatens to spill over and destabilize the Great Lakes 

Region. It is an issue I have tried to address through legislation 

and several visits to the Democratic Republic of Congo. I recently 

worked with some success with my colleagues on both sides of the 

aisle to address the issue of conflict minerals in that part of Africa. 

Dawn Liberi joins us today with many years of experience in 

many challenging countries. She served as senior assistant coordinator in Tripoli, Libya. Before that was the coordinator for Interagency Provincial Affairs and senior civilian representative for 

Regional Command East in Afghanistan. She has also served as 

the executive civil military counselor at USAID. Prior to that, was 

USAID mission director in Iraq, Nigeria, and Uganda. That may be 

where I met you the first time was Uganda. 

Ms. LIBERI. Yes, Senator. 

Senator DURBIN. Ms. Liberi holds a B.A. from Hampshire College 

and a master’s in public health from the University of California 

at Berkeley. A seasoned diplomat with on the job experiences that 

help her serve as a true advocate for U.S. priorities and a comprehensive approach to assistance. 

If confirmed, Ms. Liberi will face enormous challenges in 

Burundi. Her nomination serves as a fitting followup to the assignments she had in the past. If confirmed, Ms. Liberi will be vital in 

helping Burundi continue to rebuild from its years of war and instability, as well as working with the government to contribute to 

the need for peace in the Great Lakes Region. 

I encourage all of you to respond expeditiously to any questions 

that may be forwarded after this committee hearing. The record is 

going to remain open for questions through noon on Friday. 

Senator DURBIN. I want to thank you and all of your families for 

your service, and look forward to your testimony. In the interest of 

time, I will limit your testimony to 5 minutes and then open it to 

questions. 

And before I proceed to your testimony, I would like to turn to 

my colleague, Senator Lugar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I 

thank you for chairing this hearing and to the President and the 

Secretary of State for making these nominations in a timely way 

before we adjourn because the need to fill these posts is obvious. 

I am especially pleased to see Stephen Mull here. I remember 

our visits in Poland and your kindness during one of my travels 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

586

there. And I have appreciated especially your ambassadorship in 

Lithuania. It was a very important time as Lithuania came into 

NATO’s responsibilities, and a good number of other situations that 

are very important to our security. 

And, Ms. Liberi, I am so pleased that you have been nominated, 

as reassuring as you know Uganda will next door. As in the case 

of the chairman, my privilege at the behest of the Department of 

Defense to visit Kenya, Uganda, and Burundi a year ago in November. At that time, really taking a look at laboratories that had dangerous pathogens, but had no guards, and some diplomacy was 

required so there would not be a question of sovereignty, but a 

joint situation. 

Burundi did not have the pathogens. It had arms of all sorts, 

even in the neighborhood of Lawrence, as well as farm fields left 

over from previous wars, and huge problems in terms of health and 

education and problems of youth. 

As our notes committee has posted with our staff, Burundi points 

out has not often been a major focus of United States foreign policy. But it needs to be, and your presence there is likely to highlight that in a very timely way. 

So we are grateful to both of you for your willingness to assume 

these new obligations of service. We look forward to asking questions of you so that we can have our thoughts illuminated by your 

experience. 

I thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for having the hearing. 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

Ambassador Mull, please begin. 

STATEMENT OF HON. STEPHEN D. MULL, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND 

Ambassador MULL. Thank you very much, Senator Durbin, Mr. 

Chairman, and Senator Lugar. It is actually a real honor to be here 

with the both of you, having met not only you, Senator Lugar, but 

I believe I was the control officer for your first visit to Poland as 

a Senator in 1997, Senator Durbin. So it is a nice turnabout to be 

here with the both of you today. 

I would also like to introduce my family, who has joined me 

today: the love of my life and best friend, Cheri Stephan, and the 

light of our life, our son, Ryan, who we agreed to let play hooky 

so he could be with us today. 

Mr. Chairman and Senator Lugar, it is a great honor to appear 

before you as President Obama’s nominee to be the next Ambassador to the Republic of Poland. I am deeply grateful to Secretary 

Clinton and to the President for their confidence and trust. And I 

pledge to you, if confirmed, to work very closely with the Congress 

in advancing America’s interests with this most valuable and 

important ally. 

Beginning with Kazimierz Pulaski’s and Tadeusz Kociuszko’s 

really decisive support for the American Revolution almost 240 

years ago, through daily sacrifices in support of our common objectives in Afghanistan today, the people of Poland have repeatedly 

proven themselves to be among America’s best and most reliable 

friends. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

587

Americans draw great inspiration from the Poles’ stubborn resistance to oppression, whether confronting Nazi occupiers in the 

streets and forests, or exposing the horrors of the Holocaust, as Jan 

Karski did, but also when they were fighting for justice in the shipyards of Gdansk in the 1980s. 

The American people are proud to have supported their Polish 

friends over the years, beginning with President Wilson’s steadfast 

support for Poland’s independence at the end of World War I, 

through our assistance to Poland’s new democracy in the 1990s. 

Our friendship with Poland is based on the very strong ties of 

family, a love of freedom, and a shared vision based on common 

values. Our friendship with Poland has very strong roots in the 

past, but it also has bright promise for the future. Poland has 

pledged to remain with us in Afghanistan through the end of combat operations through 2014, and to continue assisting Afghanistan 

after its troops depart. 

The United States and Poland will strengthen our promising economic relationship through working together to promote solid 

growth through expanded two-way investment, enhanced trade, 

and supporting energy independence, even as we closely cooperate 

in responding to the European financial crisis. Our two countries 

will continue to work to expand the frontiers of freedom through 

a close and hardworking partnership in support of democratic values and human rights around the world. And the United States 

and Poland share an important common agenda in modernizing 

NATO to meet the security challenges of the 21st century. 

If I am confirmed, it will be an extraordinary privilege to lead 

our team of over 140 Americans and more than 350 locally 

employed staff representing a large interagency presence at our 

Embassy in Warsaw and consulate general in Krakow. 

I will work hard, if confirmed, to protect American citizens, to 

deepen and broaden our cooperation with Poland on so many of our 

common issues, and to open new opportunities for American investment in Poland’s growing economy, helping to bring jobs back home 

for Americans. 

Returning to Poland will have a special personal significance for 

me. I fondly remember working there as a junior officer in the mid1980s when I had the honor of carrying messages of support 

between Lech Walesa and President Reagan, and meeting many of 

the activists who would later lead Poland to freedom. I returned to 

serve there in the exciting days of Poland’s new democracy in the 

1990s, where I had the honor of helping to prepare the way for 

Poland’s membership in NATO. Returning to Poland a third time 

as Ambassador would open a rewarding new chapter in my work 

to strengthen this vital and important relationship for the United 

States. 

Thank you very much for the honor of appearing before you 

today, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Mull follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF STEPHEN D. MULL

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it is a great honor to appear before 

you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the next Ambassador of the United 

States to Poland. I am deeply grateful to Secretary Clinton and the President for 

their confidence and trust, and I pledge to you that if confirmed, I will work closely 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

588

with the Congress in advancing America’s interests with this most valuable and 

important ally. 

From Kazimierz Pulaski’s and Tadeusz Kosciuszko’s decisive support for the 

American Revolution almost 240 years ago through their daily sacrifices in support 

of our common objectives in Afghanistan today, the people of Poland have repeatedly 

proven themselves to be among America’s best and most reliable friends. Americans 

have drawn inspiration from the Poles’ stubborn resistance to oppression, whether 

challenging Nazi occupiers in the streets and forests and exposing the horrors of the 

Holocaust, or fighting for justice in the shipyards of Gdansk. The American people 

have been proud to assist our Polish friends through the years, from President 

Wilson’s steadfast support for Polish independence at the close of World War I 

through our support for Poland’s new democracy in the 1990s. Ours is a friendship 

based on the ties of family, a love of freedom, and a shared vision based on common 

values. 

While America’s friendship with Poland has strong roots in the past, it also has 

bright promise for the future. Poland has pledged to remain with us in Afghanistan 

through the end of combat operations in 2014, and to continue supporting Afghanistan after its troops depart. The United States and Poland will strengthen our 

promising economic relationship by promoting solid economic growth through expanded, two-way investment, enhanced trade, and support for energy independence, 

and through close consultation in responding to the European financial crisis. Our 

two countries will continue to work together to expand the frontiers of freedom, with 

a close and hardworking partnership in support of democratic values and human 

rights around the world. And the United States and Poland have an important 

common agenda in modernizing NATO to meet the security challenges of the 21st 

century. 

If I am confirmed, it will be an extraordinary privilege to lead our team of over 

140 Americans and more than 350 locally employed staff representing a large interagency presence in our Embassy in Warsaw and Consulate General in Krakow. I 

will work hard, if confirmed, to protect American citizens, promote even closer cooperation with Poland on our common interests, and open new opportunities for 

American trade and investment in Poland’s growing economy, helping to deliver jobs 

back home for Americans. Returning to Poland will have a special personal significance for me. I fondly recall working there as a junior officer in the mid-1980s, when 

I had the honor of carrying messages of support between President Reagan and Solidarity leader Lech Walesa and meeting many of the activists who would later lead 

Poland to freedom. I served there again in the mid-1990s in the exciting days of 

Poland’s new democracy, when I helped prepare the way for Poland’s membership 

in NATO. Returning as Ambassador, if I am confirmed, will open a rewarding new 

chapter for me in working to strengthen this important and valuable friendship.

Senator DURBIN. Thank you, Ambassador. 

Ms. Liberi. 

STATEMENT OF DAWN M. LIBERI, OF FLORIDA, TO BE 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF BURUNDI 

Ms. LIBERI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Durbin, and Senator Lugar. Senator Durbin, you may recall that I had the honor 

to host you in Uganda, and we visited a women’s financial microenterprise program. And I was very impressed because you actually 

agreed to hold the meeting in a chicken coop, which is where the 

women wanted to have the meeting. So thank you. [Laughter.] 

I am very honored to be here today, and I am honored that President Obama has nominated me to be the next Ambassador to the 

Republic of Burundi. And if confirmed, I will do everything in my 

power to live up to the trust that President Obama and Secretary 

Clinton have placed in me. 

I have spent the majority of my Foreign Service career in subSaharan Africa, as well, as has been noted, in postings most 

recently in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. Serving in Africa over a 

span of 20 years provides me with an understanding of the challenges that Burundi faces, also as well as the opportunities that 

they present. If confirmed, I will work closely with the government 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

589

and people of Burundi to strengthen our bilateral relationship and 

support its burgeoning democracy. 

A friend of the United States, Burundi is also one of the world’s 

poorest countries, and 70 percent of the population live below the 

poverty line. A young, unskilled labor force, high population density, and refugees returning from Tanzania, pose daunting challenges for Burundians’ fledgling democracy and struggling economy. Despite these challenges, it is important to note the steps 

that Burundi has taken toward achieving peace, stability, and 

democratic transition. 

The Arusha Peace Accords, signed in 2000 and codified in Burundi’s 2005 Constitution, created a framework for power-sharing and 

de-ethnicizing political competition. Burundi has held two rounds 

of successful democratic elections in 2005 and 2010, when President Nkurnziza was reelected for a second term. 

However, Burundi’s institutions of democracy are young and 

evolving. There remain very serious challenges to protection of 

human rights, trafficking in persons, political violence, and extrajudicial killings. Endemic corruption, coupled with a lack of judicial 

independence and transparency, create a culture of impunity that 

has lasted for decades. These are challenges that must be actively 

engaged. If confirmed, I am committed to speaking out against 

these serious problems, working to advance the protection of 

human rights, pushing for accountability and real progress on 

establishing independent justice mechanisms, and working in partnership with the Burundian Government and civil society to 

strengthen and protect the gains that have been made with democratic institutions. And this will be a critical step toward successful 

elections in 2015. 

A committed contributor to the African Union mission in Somalia 

since its inception in 2008, Burundi is a critical partner of the 

United States in our collective efforts to fight the al-Qaeda linked 

terrorist group al-Shabab. Currently, six battalions of Burundian 

troops support the AMISOM operations with a strength of over 

5,500 soldiers, making it the second-largest troop contributor to 

this mission. 

Ranking 185 out of 187 countries on the human development 

index, transforming Burundi’s economy to produce sustainable jobcreating growth is the cornerstone toward maintaining long-term 

peace and stability. Reliant on subsistence agriculture, Burundi 

faces high unemployment, food shortages, growing youth population, and historic land disputes. HIV/AIDS and high rates of 

maternal and child mortality also undermine the economy. 

To address these issues, the Burundian Government has adopted 

a poverty reduction strategy plan, and is now implementing phase 

two in accordance with this economic vision, Burundi 2025, which 

was launched last year. This vision focuses on economic diversification with private sector development, strengthening rule of law, 

good governance, and promoting gender equality and access to 

services. A key factor in this will be Burundi availing itself to a 

larger regional market and improved trade and investment regime 

by participating in east Africa community’s trade regime integration. The United States continues to support a development assistFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

590

ance program in Burundi with an emphasis on health and HIV/

AIDS. 

America’s relationship with Burundi has been historically constructive based on trust and shared values. 

If confirmed, I will build on that sold foundation and work tirelessly to successfully represent American values and to pursue 

American interests in Burundi. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I thank you again for 

this opportunity to appear before you. And I would be happy to 

take questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Liberi follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAWN M. LIBERI

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you today. I am honored that President Obama has nominated me 

to serve as Ambassador to the Republic of Burundi. If confirmed, I will do everything in my power to live up to the trust the President and Secretary Clinton have 

placed in me. 

I have spent the majority of my Foreign Service career in sub-Saharan Africa, 

serving in five postings—including as USAID mission director in Nigeria and Uganda, and deputy director in Ghana. Most recently I have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, 

and Libya—countries at the forefront of U.S. foreign policy. Serving in Africa over 

a span of 20 years provides me with an understanding of the challenges that 

Burundi faces and the opportunities they present. If confirmed, I will work closely 

with the government and people of Burundi to strengthen our bilateral relationship 

and support its burgeoning democracy. 

A friend of the United States, Burundi is also one of the world’s poorest countries 

with 70 percent of the population living below the poverty line. A young, unskilled 

labor force, high population density, and reintegrating returning refugees from Tanzania poses daunting challenges for Burundi’s fledgling democracy and struggling 

economy. 

Despite these challenges, it is important to note the steps Burundi has taken 

toward achieving peace, stability, and democratic transition. The Arusha Peace 

Accords, signed in 2000 and codified in Burundi’s 2005 Constitution, created a 

framework for power-sharing and de-ethnicizing political competition. 

Burundi has held two rounds of successful democratic elections; in 2005 and 2010, 

when President Nkurunziza was reelected for a second term. 

However, Burundi’s institutions of democracy are young, and evolving. There remain very serious challenges relating to the protection of human rights, trafficking 

in persons, political violence, and extrajudicial killings. Endemic corruption, coupled 

with a lack of judicial independence and transparency create a culture of impunity 

that has lasted for decades. These are challenges that must be actively engaged. If 

confirmed, I am committed to speaking out against these serious problems, working 

to advance the protection of human rights, pushing for accountability and real 

progress on establishing independent justice mechanisms, and working in partnership with the Burundian Government and civil society organizations to strengthen 

and protect the gains made with democratic institutions—a critical step toward 

achieving successful elections in 2015. 

A committed contributor to the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) 

since its inception in 2008, Burundi is a critical partner of the United States in our 

collective efforts to fight the al-Qaeda-linked terrorist group al-Shabaab. Currently 

six battalions of Burundian troops support AMISOM operations with a total 

strength of 5,542 soldiers, making it the second-largest troop contributor to this important mission. 

Ranking No. 185 of 187 countries on the Human Development Index, transforming Burundi’s economy to produce sustainable job-creating growth is a cornerstone toward maintaining long-term peace and stability. Reliant on subsistence agriculture, Burundi faces high unemployment, food shortages, a growing youth population and historic land disputes. HIV/AIDS and high rates of maternal and child 

mortality further undermine the economy. 

To address these issues, the Burundian Government adopted a Poverty Reduction 

Strategy Plan (PRSP) in 2006, and is now implementing Phase II in accordance with 

its economic plan Vision Burundi 2025 launched by the government in 2011. This 

vision focuses on economic diversification with private sector development, strengthFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

591

ening rule of law, good governance and promoting gender equality, and improving 

access and quality of social services. A key factor in achieving these goals will be 

Burundi availing itself to a larger regional market and improved trade and investment regime by fully participating in the East African Community’s efforts to 

advance regional integration. The United States supports continued development 

assistance to Burundi, with an emphasis on health and HIV/AIDS. 

America’s relationship with Burundi has been historically constructive, based on 

trust and shared values. If confirmed, I will build on that solid foundation, and work 

tirelessly to successfully represent American values and to pursue American interests in Burundi.

Senator DURBIN. Thanks, Ms. Liberi. There will be a few questions for each. 

Ambassador Mull, if I asked the Polish community in Chicago 

their No. 1 concern, it is the visa waiver program. So could you 

please tell me what the position of the administration is and how 

you would explain it to Polish-Americans who wonder why they are 

not getting preferred treatment when it comes to this issue? 

Ambassador MULL. Thank you for the question, Senator. The 

President very much supports the views of the Polish community 

of Chicago and that as well as many Poles who live in Poland. 

President Obama has committed in diplomatic channels to our Polish friends, as well as publicly, his support for bringing Poland into 

the visa waiver program. 

Because of various technicalities associated with previous legislation governing participation in the program, it is quite possible 

that there will be required some legislative fixes to allow Poland 

to take its place. And so I know several of your colleagues are sponsoring legislation on that. And I know the administration and as 

well as I, if I am confirmed, look forward to working very closely 

with you to enact the necessary legislation, and also to work within 

the administration side to make whatever administrative changes 

we need to make it possible. It is a very important goal for our relationship with Poland, and I look forward to working hard on it. 

Senator DURBIN. I am joining as a cosponsor on that legislation. 

My colleague, Senator Kirk, who is away recovering from a stroke, 

is one of the leaders on that legislation, and I think he is right. I 

want to support his efforts in moving toward visa waivers. 

Tell me about Belarus because it is such a stark contrast. Leaving Lithuania or Poland, going into Belarus, you almost feel like 

you are driving onto a movie set. There is very little economic 

development, very little signs of economic activity other than agriculture until you arrive in Minsk, and then there is a flurry of activity in construction. And yet the man known as the last dictator 

in Europe, Lukashenko, still rules over that country. 

So could you comment on our relationship and the Polish relationship with Belarus? 

Ambassador MULL. You are right. Belarus has been a very difficult challenge I think, not only for us as a foreign policy question, 

but really all of our European friends. And it has been so disappointing after the tides of freedom washed over Central and 

Eastern Europe at the end of the Soviet era that there is one island 

of Soviet style repression that remains there. 

I remember when I served in Lithuania, actually traveling over 

to Minsk just to see what it was like, and it was very strange, as 

you say. It is just a 2-hour drive from Vilnius to Minsk. But you 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

592

could not—it is like going into an alternate universe of repression, 

with no freedom of speech, and a very tight, repressive atmosphere. 

Mr. Lukashenko, President Lukashenko, has done a very good 

job at building a repressive structure to keep himself in power. It 

is very clear he has no compunction about jailing his political opponents. The ability of foreign embassies is very much constrained to 

be in touch with the people there. 

But that has not stopped us and countries like Poland in trying 

to keep alive and nurture the very same trends that freed Poland 

and other parts of the Soviet bloc. Poland has a very vibrant relationship with civil society and trade unions in Belarus. They host 

many people to come over to Warsaw, just as Lithuania does, to 

give them a home base to operate and to network, and to strengthen their organization. 

Ultimately, I think democracy is going to come to Belarus just 

as it came to most other corners of the former Soviet empire. We 

are just going to keep working really hard at it to bring it about. 

Senator DURBIN. I always found it interesting in the former

Soviet republics that what drives the relationship with Moscow is 

usually energy. And in Belarus now, the proposal of building a new 

nuclear plant, I am afraid, along the design of Chernobyl, close to 

the border of Lithuania I am sure has raised some concerns in 

Poland as well. Have we taken a position in terms of that nuclear 

plant or nuclear expansion in the area? 

Ambassador MULL. In terms of Belarus, Senator, I am afraid I 

am not very familiar with the proposal in Belarus. But I certainly 

look forward to learning about it. I know on the Poland side of the 

border, there is growing interest in nuclear power as a source of 

energy for Poland as it tries to diversify its supplies. 

And, in fact, the government says that in the near future, they 

plan to offer a tender worth up to $11 billion, of which $6 billion 

can be accessible to American exports. And they are hoping to build 

a couple of reactors in Poland by 2030. I have said that if I am confirmed, one of my very highest priorities is to open the way for 

American exports in that sector. 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you. Ms. Liberi, I remember when you 

hosted us at your residence in Kampala. And then I also remember 

the trip to the nearby village on microcredit issues. And I still 

remember the chicken coop because it turned out that there were 

two, if you will remember. They cleared out one chicken coop and 

scrubbed it clean, and moved all the chickens into the other coop. 

And so they were not happy with my arrival or my visit. [Laughter.] 

But the people could not have been more gracious. That was the 

meeting, Senator Lugar, when I asked one woman how microcredit 

had changed her life, and she said her knees had gone soft. And 

I said what does that mean. She said, I no longer have to crawl 

on my knees to beg my husband for money for the kids. 

Ms. LIBERI. Yes. 

Senator DURBIN. And I have remembered that response ever 

since. So you have been at ground level with these economic development and social justice issues. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

593

Burundi is in a tough neighborhood, the Great Lakes Region, 

which has a lot of instability and a lot of forces at work. I certainly 

see those in DRC, but Burundi has been touched by this as well. 

So the obvious question is, as we fight for stability in this region, 

how do we address the issue you raised and we have read about 

about the repressive tactics of the Burundi Government when it 

comes to journalism and freedom of speech and press? 

Ms. LIBERI. Senator, thank you very much for that question.

Obviously, this administration, yourself, everyone in this room 

places a great emphasis on human rights. And if confirmed, this 

will be among my highest priorities to work with the Burundian 

Government to, again, impress upon them the importance that we 

place on human rights, free media, and obviously religious tolerance as well. 

I think that there are ways in which the Burundian Government 

is in the process right now of engaging with political parties to 

ensure that they are actually part of the political process and the 

opposition parties. And I think that this is one way that they can 

help to move that process along. 

Second, again, addressing these issues relating to civil society 

organizations, ensuring that they have a voice in this process so 

that they can express their interest in human rights. And also as 

you have stated, making sure that the media is free and it is allowed to express itself. 

Senator DURBIN. One of the enduring memories of that trip, and 

it was many years ago, to Kenya and Uganda was the contrast in 

one important respect. Uganda was a government that was facing 

the AIDS crisis directly, showing real leadership when many parts 

of Africa were in complete denial. And it was also a government 

where women played a critical role in leadership. Kenya not so, 

neither at the Cabinet or sub-Cabinet level. That has changed in 

Kenya. I recently met with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court 

with Senator Coons and Isakson just this week. 

So what is the experience in Burundi in terms of the role and 

involvement of women in government leadership? 

Ms. LIBERI. Thank you, Senator. That is a very important question. And the Burundian Government has made a commitment to 

enabling women to have leadership positions. This is codified in the 

2005 constitution. Thirty percent of the seats, both in the national 

assembly as well as in the Cabinet, are for women. And, in fact, 

women are now ministers of health, agriculture, and trade, so I 

think that is very significant. 

There are two areas I think that are very important. There is a 

women’s entrepreneurship association, and there are over 200 

members. These are key, influential women that run their own 

businesses, that employ people. They are seen as leaders in the 

community. And also there is a Burundi business incubator project 

that is now ongoing. And 40 percent of the beneficiaries of that program for entrepreneurship are women. So I think that the Burundian Government has made a commitment to this. And obviously, 

if confirmed, this is an area that I would continue to engage in. 

Senator DURBIN. Great. 

Senator Lugar. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

594

Senator LUGAR. Ms. Liberi, I just want to hear your views on this 

set of situations. When I visited Burundi, I was informed that the 

average life span of a citizen of that country was 50 years of age. 

That is sort of a shocking figure all by itself, quite apart from 

tables that were given of per capita income of people around the 

world. I think there were 175 countries on the chart, and Burundi 

was 173 or something in that neighborhood. Really staggering in 

terms of the economic predicament and health predicament 

reflected by those statistics. 

But there were two factors that were helpful. We had State 

Department and Defense Department officials along, and, as I mentioned in my opening comments, saw these fields filled with arms 

that are sitting there. Now at that time, and I ask you for your 

research, there were some State Department funds to help clean 

this up. We were trying to energize that to occur, even cooperation 

in our own government between State and Defense. 

And I hope that some movement has occurred in that respect 

because Burundi was sort of left as the crossroads of many battles 

of contending parties, and yet in a dangerous predicament. 

The encouraging thing I saw was a university situation in which 

some persons from the Methodist churches in the United States 

that contributed a great deal of money. I visited with the students. 

They even had a radio broadcast in which we could broadcast to 

the citizens, whoever was listening at that hour of the day in 

Burundi. But this was encouraging. And my visit with the President and members of his Cabinet, the assembled, he was very 

pleased we were going to the university. He saw a great hope really 

in these young leaders and the idealism that they represented in 

addition the reflection of all these statistics that I have mentioned 

about health and education. 

I am just curious. Where do we stand with regard to foreign 

assistance either through the State Department, the Defense 

Department, or anybody else? And how effective could that be? As 

Ambassador, how would you be able to at least direct those efforts 

of our departments back here to do some things which some people 

have been thinking about and have committed to for some time? 

Ms. LIBERI. Senator, thank you very much for that question.

Obviously economic development is key for Burundi. And in regard 

to your first question, regional integration is going to be key to help 

increase both the per capita income as well as life expectancy. The 

east Africa community has about 133,000 million people and an 

economy of about $79 billion. So again, if confirmed I would work 

with the Burundian Government to ensure its integration into the 

east African community. 

In terms of the United States, we have been supporting a development assistance program there, as well as through the Department of Defense promoting training for the troops that I mentioned 

that are going to AMISOM. In terms of development, there has 

been economic assistance, and this has been focused on agribusiness and some of the microenterprise programs I mentioned. 

In the future, there is going to be a big emphasis, as I stated previously, on the issues that you just raised in terms of health, helping to address maternal and child mortality, and specifically helping to deal with the HIV/AIDS issue, prevention of transmission 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

595

from mothers to children. So all of these things are going to be very 

key. 

And if confirmed, I as Ambassador would obviously seek to work 

very closely with my Burundian counterparts to enhance these programs to the extent that we can, and to ensure that they are benefiting as much as possible from the programs that we have. 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you. Mr. Mull, I would say that one of the 

things that I have heard about Poland recently that has been most 

encouraging is that they have discovered more shale gas. And I am 

curious as to what your research and findings are about how extensive this is, and what difference this will make in the energy pattern in Poland, giving it a great deal more independence from whoever, as well as perhaps even some gas to sell as far as its own 

economy. What do you see in this development? 

Ambassador MULL. Senator Lugar, you are right. There is a 

great deal of excitement in Poland about the prospects for what 

could be underground in terms of shale gas availability. And the 

U.S. Government has actually been a very close partner with 

Poland in working with not only the government, but, more importantly, with the private sector, in exploring how substantial these 

deposits might be. 

For some years now, we have had some exchange programs with 

Polish industry and government under the Unconventional Gas 

Technical Exchange Program, in which we bring Polish and American experts together to look at best practices in the development 

of shale gas in an environmentally friendly as well as economically 

productive way. 

As part of our discussions with the Polish Government, we earlier this year commissioned the U.S. Geologic Service to do a study 

on what deposits they believe are available in Poland. Their findings indicated much less there than what many Poles were hoping 

for. And around the same time that they announced their findings, 

Exxon-Mobil, which had a presence there in Poland, decided that 

it was not going to be economically viable to remain there. 

However, there are many other companies that have remained 

there. Marathon Oil is there. Chevron is there. A couple of other 

smaller companies are there. They believe that the U.S. Geologic 

Service did not explore all of the places that could have been 

explored, and they are still quite optimistic that this will be a viable enterprise for them. 

So I am going to continue, if I am confirmed as Ambassador, 

working very hard to support that very close technical cooperation 

and providing support to the Polish Government as they try to 

develop this as a source of new energy, because I completely agree 

with you. Not only is it in Poland’s national interests. It is in all 

of our interests to really promote a much greater diversity of 

energy sources. 

Senator LUGAR. This is a quick followup question. What is the 

situation for Polish agriculture? Is it a country that can feed itself? 

To what extent does it rely upon imports from other countries? 

Does it export? In other words, in a world in which the food supplies, I believe, are going to be more and more constricted, how do 

the Poles stand? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

596

Ambassador MULL. Many economists and agricultural analysts 

believe, despite all of the good things that have happened in Poland 

since the end of communism over the last 23 years, that the agricultural sector has lagged behind. I remember actually visiting Poland as a tourist when I worked in Lithuania and found that in 

many of the smaller villages, they still use not the newest kind of 

technology, and things may not be organized in the best possible 

way. 

The Polish Government currently is negotiating for its next 

tranche of structural funds from the European Union, and I know 

the Tusk government is very eager to apply some of that support 

from Brussels to modernize and develop the Polish agricultural 

sector. 

That said, despite the technological progress that they still 

require there, I think most people agree there is enormous potential for Poland as an agricultural exporter. There is a long, proud 

tradition of farming life and cultural life in Poland. And I do not 

have the exact statistics in terms of what percentage of their exports comprise agricultural products, but I would be happy to find 

that out and look into it when I get to post. 

Senator LUGAR. This may be an argument beyond which an

ambassador should be proceed, but I would be hopeful, in a way 

that you could insinuate into the discussion, genetically modified 

processes clearly that lead to magnificent new yields. 

Frequently we are busy focusing on African countries. There is 

the Gates Foundation or USAID, hoping somehow that people 

might be able to feed themselves, forgetting that there are European countries, and Poland is our good friend, who are not getting 

the kind of yields, the kind of production from the same land that 

they could. 

So I ask you to sort of assume the Department of Agriculture 

role and a humanitarian feed the world role in addition to your 

normal duties. Thank you very much, sir. 

Ambassador MULL. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator DURBIN. Thanks, Senator Lugar. And I want to thank 

the two witnesses for coming today and answering the questions. 

As I mentioned, there will be an open opportunity until Friday—

tomorrow—for more questions to be submitted, which I hope you 

can respond to on a timely basis. And I hope the Senate can 

respond to your nominations on a timely basis as well. 

Thank you, I guess it bears repeating, for your service to our 

country, both of you, service overseas. We have been tragically 

reminded of the risk that is associated with that—with the terrible 

events in Libya just a few days ago. So thank you again for giving 

so much of your life to the service of this country. 

At this point, this meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:08 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

597

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF DAWN LIBERI TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY

SENATORS JOHN F. KERRY AND RICHARD G. LUGAR

The committee expects all Embassy personnel to pay special attention to matters 

of ethics and professional conduct while serving abroad, and expects Chiefs of 

Mission and others serving in leadership roles at post to set the highest example 

for Embassy staff in this regard. In your response to question E.1 of the committee 

questionnaire, you indicated that you received a letter of admonishment in 2006 

concerning incidents that took place during your time as Mission Director in Iraq.

Question (a). Please describe the incidents that led to the letter of admonishment 

and why these incidents occurred.

Answer. I understand that, if confirmed as Ambassador, I must lead by example 

and that my personal conduct must be beyond reproach. In this regard, I appreciate 

this opportunity to respond to questions posed by the committee regarding incidents 

during my tenure as Mission Director in Iraq which led to the issuance of a 2007 

letter of admonishment. 

The letter of admonishment addressed specific incidents in the following areas:

(1) Travel issues relating to a February 2006 trip from Baghdad to Washington, DC; 

(2) Compliance with procedures for procuring art for the benefit of the 

USAID’s Mission in Iraq and dispensation of an unsolicited gift of artwork; and, 

(3) Receipt of hospitality (housing and meals) from an outside source and use 

of my official position for the benefit of another in discussing a non-USAID related matter during a July 2006 boating trip. 

1. February 2006 Travel 

I was scheduled to travel from Baghdad, Iraq, to Washington, DC, for USAIDrelated business in February 2006. My departure from Iraq was scheduled for Friday, February 17, 2006, but was delayed for 3 days by a severe sandstorm. I was 

forced to wait out the entirety of the storm at Baghdad International Airport, as 

flights were on standby to leave immediately if the weather cleared. 

Upon arrival for my layover in Amman, Jordan, on Sunday, February 19, I had 

no options for a rest day since I was due in Washington on Monday and therefore 

needed to depart immediately. As the Amman-Washington trip was longer than 14 

hours, I requested approval from the mission in Baghdad to fly business class. I received an e-mail from the USAID/Iraq Executive Officer approving my request prior 

to my departure and was later informed by the Executive office in Baghdad that 

the necessary paperwork justifying business-class travel had been prepared. At that 

point, I believed my travel to have been approved by the correct authorities and documented properly. During my trip, which was comprised primarily of official meetings, I took 2 days of personal leave before subsequently accompanying the Acting 

USAID Administrator back to Iraq. I then spent several days hosting the Acting 

Administrator during his visit, traveling to a number of sites in Iraq. 

I was not aware of any concerns relating to my travel until I was informed by 

the USAID Inspector General (IG) several months later that an investigation had 

been initiated into the trip. Specifically, the IG questioned: (1) the authority of the 

approval given for business-class travel, and, (2) that the 2 days of personal leave 

had not been properly documented in my travel voucher and that I had been erroneously given per diem during those 2 days. I immediately took two steps to rectify 

the situation upon learning of both concerns. 

First, I immediately reimbursed the U.S. Government for full amount of the 2 

days of per diem and adjusted the timesheets my secretary had prepared on my behalf during this period to reflect hours of annual leave taken. In hindsight, I should 

have ensured my secretary in Baghdad received information about my personal 

leave, instead of assuming she had the information based on my schedule. 

Second, since concerns over the legitimacy of my business-class travel revolved 

around the policy interpretation of who had approval authority in this case—the 

statutory requirements for allowing business-class travel had been met based on the 

duration of the Amman-Washington flight—I chose to immediately reimburse the 

U.S. Government for the difference between the economy and business-class ticket. 

2. Artwork for USAID/Iraq Mission 

In approximately May or June 2005, USAID/Iraq Mission management had discussed purchasing Iraqi artwork for the representational office in the Embassy Palace building and the newly constructed building on the USAID compound. Given the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

598

security situation, it was difficult to meet with artists in Baghdad. While on a 

USAID business trip to Amman, I was introduced to Iraqi artists through an Iraqiowned gallery and subsequently purchased several pieces. I planned to keep one 

piece for personal use, while the remaining pieces would hang in the mission. I indicated to the USAID/Iraq Executive office to deduct the value of the piece I kept from 

the reimbursement amount. Unfortunately, due to confusion during the reimbursement process, my understanding is that the reimbursement message was transmitted verbally from the Executive office to the Controller’s office and not made 

clear to the voucher examiner—who approved a payment for the full amount indicated on the receipt—I was reimbursed the full amount for all pieces. Upon learning 

of the mistake, I immediately reimbursed the mission for the piece I had kept. 

USAID IG’s concerns were whether correct procedures were followed in: (1) procuring and (2) reimbursement for the art. 

In my meeting with USAID IG, it was pointed out that the standard practice for 

procuring mission artwork involves a representative committee being formed to select the pieces with direct payment by the mission to the vendors. Having been 

Mission Director in two other posts where that was the practice, I acknowledged 

that I understood that was the case and, had we been able to do so in Iraq, we 

would have followed this practice. However, as noted above, the security and travel 

situation mitigated against this practice. I acknowledge I did not follow the normal 

procedure for procuring Iraqi artwork for the mission and utilized my own funds to 

make the purchase, since the Iraqi vendor in Jordan required immediate payment. 

In doing so, I recognize the mission was under no obligation to reimburse me for 

the artwork. 

Separately, two pieces of unsolicited artwork of uncertain but insignificant value 

were delivered to the mission by an acquaintance working under a USAID contract 

in Iraq, who had previously worked in USAID/Nigeria when I was Mission Director 

there. I informed the Executive office the art was received in an unsolicited manner 

and would need to be disposed of appropriately. Given the urgency of other issues, 

the art work sat on the floor in the mission for several months. Prior to my departure, in order to ensure their final disposition I turned the two pieces of art over 

to the Regional Legal Advisor. In my meeting with the IG, it was pointed out that 

I should have turned the art pieces over to the Controller’s office or Regional Legal 

Advisor from the outset, rather than going through the Executive office, and I acknowledge that would have been the correct administrative course of action. At that 

point the matter was considered closed. 

3. July 2006 Gifts of Hospitality from Outside Source and Discussion of non-USAID 

Matter 

In July 2006, I was scheduled to meet the Canadian Ambassador to Jordan and 

Iraq and his wife, both of whom are close friends, in Paris for the weekend of July 

6–9 to celebrate mutual birthdays. In the interim, the Ambassador and his wife 

were invited to spend the same weekend with another friend and his wife on their 

houseboat in Turkey. I was invited to join. Prior to accepting this invitation, I evaluated whether I was precluded by any USAID regulation from doing so. I had not 

been invited in my capacity as USAID Mission Director for Iraq. The host owned 

a shipbuilding company, so I checked whether he had any current business with 

USAID, or was bidding on or had any potential business with USAID. He did not 

in either regard. Consequently I agreed to join my friends and the weekend in entirety was spent socializing. Subsequently, USAID HR raised the issue of whether 

I needed to report my time on the houseboat—housing and meals—as a gift of hospitality from the host. Upon consulting a USAID ethics official, I did report the hospitality on my SF–278 Financial Disclosure Form and valued it at the USAID per 

diem rate for that region, as advised by USAID’s ethics official. At that point the 

issue was considered resolved by USAID HR. 

The only business related topic discussed during the trip was regarding U.N.-

contracted work performed by the host’s shipbuilding company in Basra, Iraq—to 

be paid from the U.N. Trust Fund—which Canada was chairing at the time. Payment from the Trust Fund was delayed and the host raised the issue with the Canadian Ambassador, who contacted his staff to ascertain the status. Simultaneously, 

the host made a call to the Deputy U.N. Director in Iraq, who was a friend and 

colleague of mine, and I was passed the phone to say hello. During my brief phone 

conversation with the Deputy U.N. Director, which was primarily social in nature, 

the contract paperwork was raised. I made it clear to the host that this contract 

issue was between his company and the United Nations. It did not involve USAID, 

or the U.S. Government. I had also made clear that I would not intervene in any 

way whatsoever regarding his receipt of payment from the U.N. USAID HR raised 

the issue of whether or not my participation in the telephone call regarding the staFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

599

tus of this paperwork might create an appearance of impropriety. However, upon 

my interview with the IG, my admonishment letter concluded that ‘‘[my] participation in the telephone call noted above apparently constituted nothing more than a 

gesture of good will.’’

Question (b). Please describe the steps you have taken to ensure that such incidents will not be repeated.

Answer. I have taken to heart the issues raised above to ensure there are no similar occurrences, and accept responsibility for my actions. The 2007 letter of admonishment indicated the one factor common to each situation was a failure on my part 

to exercise the proper degree of care in ensuring I fulfilled my duties at the first 

opportune moment. I acknowledge and accept this criticism and since receiving the 

letter have made a priority of addressing such issues in a timely manner. As a representative of the U.S. Government charged with executing programs paid for by 

U.S. taxpayers, I take my ethical and administrative responsibilities very seriously. 

I have learned from the incidents outlined above, and have redoubled my efforts not 

to repeat them. 

I have taken several steps to ensure that such incidents will not be repeated, and 

to avoid any appearance of impropriety. I have taken extra care to personally ensure 

proper documentation of all administrative procedures. I now perform personal validation of my time sheets and all travel vouchers, as well as seeking written verification of all relevant regulations. Additionally, I seek to consistently stay abreast of 

best practices for adhering to relevant administrative and ethical procedures and requirements, and consistently reflect on how any potential action could be interpreted from an ethical standpoint. As a leader, I fully recognize the importance of 

modeling all aspects of my position from crisis management to routine paperwork. 

I also recognize that circumstances of assignment do not exonerate inattention to 

administrative detail or adherence to USG regulatory process. Throughout my 

career I have faithfully executed my duties and responsibilities, and that is my priority for any future public service position.

Question (c). Please explain whether you believe matters of ethics and professional 

conduct are important, and how these incidents bear upon your ability to manage 

Embassy personnel successfully with regard to matters of ethics and professional 

conduct.

Answer. I firmly believe that matters of ethics and professional conduct are vital 

and I recognize they directly bear upon my ability to manage personnel successfully. 

I have a deep and abiding commitment to outstanding leadership and recognize that 

in my position I am always a representative of the United States—a charge I take 

seriously. I believe that ethics and professional conduct are the pillars of public 

service, and I have a renewed appreciation of the importance of modeling impeccable 

qualities of leadership, particularly serving as a Chief of Mission in an Embassy. 

I believe that a Chief of Mission must be unimpeachable in his or her actions from 

an ethical and professional standpoint and must lead by example. Ensuring that all 

staff understand the importance of professional and ethical behavior, and that their 

actions must be above reproach, as they represent the U.S. Government, will be my 

highest priority. As a steward of the public trust, I will ensure that my own behavior demonstrates the highest moral and ethical levels, and that my staff understands that is the standard upon which they will be expected to execute their duties. 

In addition, I believe that my experiences will enable me to mentor staff at all levels 

to ensure they understand the importance of their own behavior as Foreign Service 

professionals and representatives of the United States Government. 

RESPONSE OF STEPHEN D. MULL TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. The State Department’s 2012 Trafficking in Persons Report lists Poland 

as a Tier 1 country for trafficking. The TIP report noted that Poles are brought to 

the United Kingdom by organized crime groups and coerced to commit other crimes.

• What steps is the Polish Government taking to prosecute organized crime 

groups which engage in human trafficking? 

• If confirmed, how will you encourage Polish and British cooperation on these 

cases?

Answer. Polish authorities, including the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Polish Border Guards, and the Polish prosecutors’ office, conducted several investigations and prosecutions against human trafficking offenders in 2011. The Polish Government also accelerated antitrafficking training for judges, police, and border 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

600

guards in Poland to strengthen antitrafficking law enforcement activities, including 

against organized groups. 

The British and the Polish authorities have a longstanding relationship in cooperating on trafficking in persons investigations. We anticipate this cooperation will be 

strengthened through activities planned in the new European Union (EU) strategy 

against trafficking, which contemplates more robust cross-border collaboration 

against trafficking within the EU through joint investigation teams and by collaboration with Europol and Eurojust. If confirmed, I will engage the Polish Government 

to encourage continued proactive initiatives both within the EU context and bilaterally to combat modern day slavery. I will also work with the interagency team 

at Embassy Warsaw and with the Department to explore what further we might do 

bilaterally with Poland to complement and enhance Poland’s own antitrafficking 

efforts. 

RESPONSE OF DAWN M. LIBERI TO QUESTION SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR MARCO RUBIO

Question. Burundi was identified as a Tier 2 Watch List country in the State

Department’s 2012 Trafficking Report for its lack of compliance with the minimum 

standards for the elimination of trafficking. In 2011, the government did not collect 

aggregate data on its antitrafficking law enforcement efforts.

• If confirmed, what would be your strategy to encourage the Burundi Government to collect data on law enforcement’s efforts to combat trafficking?

Answer. Trafficking in persons in Burundi remains a challenging issue which 

Burundian officials have acknowledged. The Government of Burundi has made some 

important efforts to address trafficking, including ratifying the Protocol to Prevent, 

Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children 

(‘‘Palermo Protocol’’), supplementing the United Nations Convention against 

Transnational Organized Crime in 2012 and conducting a nationwide awarenessraising campaign. The signing of the Palermo Protocol demonstrated a renewed interest in combating trafficking in persons. 

The current lack of mechanisms in place, however, to collect aggregate data is a 

significant issue that should be addressed. If confirmed, I will work closely with the 

Government of Burundi to strongly encourage implementation of a National Action 

Plan to combat trafficking in persons. A major component of that plan would include 

a formalized collection of data. 

The Children and Ethics Brigade leads antitrafficking efforts within the Burundian Police Force. To effectively combat trafficking and collect accurate data, the 

government should ensure that all police officers within its police force are trained 

to identify trafficking victims and potential trafficking cases within the course of 

their routine enforcement activities. 

If confirmed, I will also support continuing the government’s awareness campaigns that are already underway—another important component of collecting data. 

The Commander of the Children and Ethics Brigade in charge of the TIP awareness 

training program, for example, has visited each region in the country since the beginning of the year to further awareness of trafficking among local police and civil 

society. I will urge the government to continue such awareness campaigns to include 

working closely with civil society, NGOs, and community leaders to raise public 

awareness, which will also support the effective collection of data.

Question. According to the 2012 TIP report, in 2010 Burundi police discovered 

government officials soliciting people in prostitution, including children during raids 

on hotels functioning on brothels. Two years later, the government has yet to prosecute or convict any official for their complicity in trafficking.

• If confirmed, how do you plan to address the issue of government complicity in 

trafficking?

Answer. The United States remains deeply concerned that law enforcement in 

Burundi has identified clear cases of trafficking, including the trafficking of children—which have to date, not led to prosecutions. 

If confirmed, I will strongly encourage the Government of Burundi to comply with 

its 2009 Criminal Code amendments to investigate, prosecute, convict, and punish 

trafficking offenders, including officials suspected of complicity. I would emphasize 

that that these actions are obligatory as a signatory of the United Nations Palmero 

Protocol. 

Within the larger context of human rights, I would also urge the Burundian Government to take concrete steps to address human rights violations and the lack of 

accountability within the judiciary. Members of the police force and intelligence 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

601

services are known to have committed gross human rights violations such as 

extrajudicial killings and torture, as well as complicity in the trafficking and exploitation of children. 

If confirmed, I would strongly and persistently urge the Government of Burundi 

to protect the civil liberties of its citizens, particularly children victimized by trafficking, and to fight impunity by bringing all criminal perpetrators justice. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(603)

NOMINATION OF ROBERT STEPHEN 

BEECROFT 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

Hon. Robert Stephen Beecroft, of California, to be Ambassador to 

the Republic of Iraq 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:42 a.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John F. Kerry 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Kerry, Casey, Udall, Lugar, Corker, Rubio, 

DeMint, and Barasso. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS 

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. Thank you all. 

I apologize to everybody that we are running a little bit late. Even 

though it does not appear as though a lot is happening around 

here, there is actually a lot going on. And I am sorry for the competing process. 

I want to thank everybody for coming. I am very, very pleased 

to welcome Robert Stephen Beecroft, who is a Career Foreign Service officer and nominated by President Obama to be our Ambassador to Iraq. And I think all of us on the committee are pleased 

that the President has nominated somebody of high caliber, great 

experience, who has already been serving as the deputy chief of 

mission in Baghdad for the past year and previously served as Ambassador to Jordan and Executive Assistant to Secretaries of State 

Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. 

While America’s war has ended in Iraq, the struggle for Iraq’s 

future obviously has not ended. Violence is down, but Al Qaeda in 

Iraq remains a very deadly foe. And Iraq may not capture the dayto-day headlines, but no one should make the mistake to somehow 

come to the conclusion that Iraq does not present extraordinary 

challenges. 

This administration has worked tirelessly to assure that it does 

not become a forgotten front. Through the Strategy Framework Initiative Agreement, we have put in place a roadmap to expand our 

relations with Iraq on a broad spectrum of issues: political, economic, cultural, educational, scientific, and military. Our bilateral 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

604

partnership has the potential to contribute, we believe, to the stability in the Middle East. 

But Iraqi leaders have to decide for themselves what kind of 

country they hope to create. And as they do, we need to devote the 

diplomatic energy and the civilian resources necessary to help them 

succeed. 

Ambassador Beecroft, all of your skills—considerable skills—are 

going to be called on in Iraq. And among the many challenges that 

you will face, there are four to which I would personally particularly like to just call your attention. 

As we mourn the tragic death last week—deaths of Ambassador 

Chris Stevens and his three colleagues in Benghazi, we are reminded that our diplomats all around the world serve on the front 

lines of some of the world’s most dangerous places. And they do so 

at great risk to themselves and at great personal sacrifice for their 

families. 

Our Embassy in Baghdad, the consulates in Basra and Erbil, 

other offices supporting the Embassy and Office of Security Cooperation still number about 14,000 people. And that makes it our 

largest mission in the world. We are going to need someone with 

Ambassador Beecroft’s demonstrated management skills to right 

size the mission and ensure that all the appropriate security measures are in place to keep our staff safe and secure. 

Iraq’s leaders have a rare opportunity to consolidate their democracy and build a strong, durable institution or set of institutions 

that can hold the country together. But more will be required from 

the Iraqi Government. 

Questions remain about whether Iraqi leaders, including the 

Prime Minister, aspire to represent a unified Iraq in all of its diversity, or whether they seek to govern narrowly according to ethnic 

and sectarian constituencies. 

To ensure that parliamentary elections in 2014 are free and fair, 

Iraq’s electoral commission must be professional, transparent, and 

impartial. Iraqi leaders across the political spectrum must also be 

willing to make tough compromises and put national priorities over 

personal ambitions. 

It is no secret that we are at a moment of heightened sectarian 

tensions in the Middle East. Iraqi leaders should understand that 

the best way to insulate themselves from the horrific violence in 

Syria is through a meaningful, political compromise in Iraq. As 

Iraq’s leaders work to establish a more stable political order, they 

need to redouble efforts to reach agreement on disputed boundaries, on oil, and on Kirkuk’s final status. If progress is not made 

in diffusing tensions, the window for a peaceful resolution of 

Kirkuk and other disputed territories may well close. 

Baghdad and Erbil must resolve their differences on the Kurdish 

region’s authority to enter into oil exploration and production contracts. And to their credit, the Iraqis have made efforts to resolve 

issues related to revenue-sharing, but the country still lacks an 

overarching legal framework for its oil industry. Without this 

agreement, Iraq will be unable to unleash the full potential of its 

oil sector. 

For years, Iraq has focused on its internal politics, but it now 

must also begin to look outward. It is not surprising that Iraq 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

605

seeks neighborly relations with Iran, but the reports of Iran using 

Iraqi air space to resupply Assad’s ruthless regime are troubling. 

Just this week, the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard 

Corps acknowledged that Iran is providing assistance and training 

to groups inside Syria, begging the question of how else Iranian 

material might get into Syria. This is a problem, and it will only 

grow worse if it is not addressed. 

Iraq’s response to the situation in Syria will also be an important 

test case. The Maliki government should play a constructive role in 

supporting initiatives that bring about a peaceful transition in 

Syria. At a minimum, it should avoid fanning the flames of violence. It will also be incumbent on other countries in the region, 

particularly the Gulf Cooperation Council, to recognize Iraq as 

something other than an Iranian proxy and to work more proactively to normalize relations. 

I continue to believe that Iraq has an opportunity to chart its 

own course as an alternative to the Iranian model and demonstrate 

the vibrant potential of a truly multiethnic, Shia majority democracy. 

Let me just close by reiterating that our Embassy in Baghdad is 

one of our most important today. And what happens there is critical to our bilateral relationship, but also to all of our work in the 

Middle East. This is not a time for delay. There is no substitute 

for having a confirmed ambassador in place and ready to hit the 

ground running, especially at this critical moment in the region. 

It is my hope to move this nomination as rapidly as we can in 

the next 48 hours because we must have a confirmed ambassador, 

and it would be a dereliction of the Congress’ responsibility were 

we to leave here for the next 6 weeks and not have done so. 

I strongly support Ambassador Beecroft’s nomination and intend 

to work for that swift confirmation. 

So, Ambassador Beecroft, we welcome you today. Thanks for 

coming on short notice. I know we appreciate it, and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on the way forward in Iraq. 

Senator Lugar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA 

Senator LUGAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Today’s 

hearing is our first since the attack in Libya that claimed the lives 

of four Americans, including our Ambassador, Chris Stevens. The 

events in Benghazi and ongoing threats to our embassies remind 

us of the dangers and difficulties of performing diplomatic missions. It is almost impossible to be an effective American diplomat 

without exposing oneself to risk. 

In some countries, these risks can be intense, yet exceptional 

Americans, like Ambassador Stevens, continue to volunteer for 

these assignments. We are grateful that you continue to volunteer, 

sir. 

Chris’ life and work resonate especially with our committee, not 

merely because he was a talented diplomat, but also because he 

was one of us. On many occasions during his time as a detailee to 

the Republican staff in 2006 and 2007, he sat directly behind 

where I am sitting now. He staffed hearings on Lebanon, Iraq, and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

606

other Middle East topics. In fact, exactly 6 years ago today, he 

helped staff a hearing on Iran. After departing the committee, he 

stayed in close touch with friends here as he did at every stage in 

his career. We will miss our friend dearly. Our thoughts go out to 

his family. 

Although the death of Ambassador Stevens and three others was 

a blow to the State Department and our country as a whole, it also 

underscored the importance of our diplomacy and the difference 

that an ambassador can make. All of us have read accounts of 

Chris Stevens’ extraordinary service and it should be clear to 

everyone that he was personally instrumental in advancing United 

States interest in Libya. 

We need good ambassadors at their posts providing energetic 

leadership to their embassy teams. I appreciate Ambassador Beecroft’s courage and commitment in taking on an extremely difficult 

assignment that has been complicated even further by violence in 

the Middle East. He has been functioning as chief of mission for 

several months, and I believe we should move with dispatch to confirm him as our Ambassador to Iraq. 

His experience with managing large embassies is especially critical given that the United States mission in Iraq is the biggest 

Embassy in the world. The operation includes the huge Embassy 

Complex in Baghdad, several outlying facilities in Baghdad, about 

10 security cooperation and police training sites, and consulates in 

Basra and Erbil. Employees number approximately 1,600 United 

States direct hires, 240 Iraqis, and thousands of contractors. 

Iraq sits astride the Sunni-Shia divide that has been the source 

of great conflict. Politically, Iraq remains fractured along sectarian 

lines, and those divisions appear to have deepened in the last year. 

Iraq’s stability depends on it being integrated with responsible 

neighbors and the world community. Its long-term future depends 

on its willingness to stand on the side of human rights, democracy, 

and the rule of law. 

Iraq’s political fragmentation and corruption also present fundamental challenges to its economy. An annual World Bank report 

that analyzes the ease of doing business and the protection of property rights across 183 economies ranked Iraq 164th in 2012, down 

five slots from its 2011 ranking. 

Despite Prime Minister Maliki’s claims that Iraq is open for business, most interested investors and trade partners are challenged 

to get a visa or definitive answers from the government about its 

tender and bidding processes. According to the World Bank, Iraq 

last year implemented policies that made it more difficult for Iraqis 

themselves to do business. 

I look forward to hearing Ambassador Beecroft’s insights into the 

security situation in Iraq, as well as his views of the prospects for 

economic improvement and political stability. Beyond reports on 

the current status of Iraq, the administration needs to illuminate 

United States intentions in Iraq for the long term. Though some 

significant downsizing has occurred, the Iraq operation continues to 

be enormously expensive. How does the administration define 

United States goals in Iraq? What are the prospects for achieving 

these goals? And what resources will be required over the long 

term? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

607

I thank the chairman for this hearing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thanks very much, Senator Lugar, and thanks 

for your personal recollections of Chris Stevens. We appreciate it 

very much. 

Ambassador Beecroft, you can tell there is a considerable interest 

here, and we look forward to your comments, and then some period 

for the committee to ask some questions. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT STEPHEN BEECROFT, OF 

CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF IRAQ 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Chairman Kerry, Senator 

Lugar, members of the committee. It is an honor to appear before 

you today as the President’s nominee to serve as the United States 

Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq. I am deeply grateful to the 

President and to Secretary Clinton for this opportunity. With your 

permission, I would like to submit my full statement for the record. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it will be placed in the record. 

Thank you. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you. I would like to begin by taking a moment to acknowledge my colleagues who perished in Benghazi only last week. These four brave public servants represent 

the best of the United States. My thoughts and prayers remain 

with their family and friends. 

I have spent most of my career working on the Middle East, including my assignments in Syria and Saudi Arabia and as Ambassador to Jordan. For much of my career, I have been immersed in 

Iraqi issue, from serving on the Iraq desk in Washington, DC, to 

most recently serving as deputy chief of mission and now Charge ́

d’Affaires in Baghdad, where I have had the honor to work with 

an extraordinarily talented, hardworking, and collegial team, the 

best in the business in my experience. 

Today the United States is engaging with an evolving Iraq. The 

country is only now emerging from over 50 years of isolation, fragmentation, and war. We have a strong relationship with the democratically elected government. This relationship is codified in the 

U.S.-Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement, which lays out a shared 

vision and a concrete common roadmap for our bilateral commitments across the fields of defense, economics, justice, diplomacy, 

education, and energy. Through this agreement, we support and 

assist the Iraqis in building a united, federal, and democratic country that can play a constructive role in the region. 

Of course, challenges abound, and our work is not easy. 

Sectarian frictions remain strong and often threaten to derail 

negotiated accords and institutional progress. Lack of a hydrocarbons law feeds this tension and unsettles Iraq’s oil expert sector. 

Factional feuding in the Council of Representatives has slowed the 

organization of provincial elections scheduled for early 2013. Tensions with Turkey, the conflict within Syria, and Iraq’s relationship 

with Iran all fan anxiety and complicate our relationship with Iraq. 

Nevertheless, developments I have seen in Iraq give me reason 

for optimism. A large majority of Iraqis of all confessions and 

ethnicities remain committed to resolving their differences politically instead of through violence. Iraq’s oil production recently 

passed 3 million barrels per day, a level it had not achieved for 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

608

more than 3 decades. U.S. commercial interests are returning to 

Iraq, and Iraqi students are studying in the United States in

increasing numbers. These are signs of positive change, and the 

United States retains a vital and continuing role in support of 

Iraq’s democratic progress. 

If confirmed, I pledge to continue working with our allies across 

the Iraqi political spectrum to strengthen Iraq’s democracy and its 

democratic institutions. I also pledge to continue engaging with the 

Iraqi Government on a wide range of initiatives to expand economic 

growth, strengthen the justice sector, fight corruption, and protect 

human rights. If confirmed, I assure you that my No. 1 priority will 

continue to be the safety of Embassy personnel and U.S. citizens 

living in Iraq. Nothing is more important to the President, the Secretary of State, or to me personally. 

I will also work to ensure that we have the right personnel and 

resources to successfully carry out our mission. As Charge ́ d’Affaires, I am continuing the GlidePath process begun by Ambassador Jeffrey earlier this year. As part of that effort, we have 

already made significant cuts in our staffing and contractor support, and will further reduce our footprint without compromising 

our mission or our security. We continue to work toward a more 

appropriate posture in Iraq, while even more effectively pursuing 

our policy objectives. 

It is a tremendous honor to have been nominated by President 

Obama to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. Should I be confirmed, I will seek to expand and deepen our collaboration with 

Iraq and its people, and to secure our vital interests. 

I look forward to collaborating closely with you and your staffs, 

and I encourage you to visit Iraq to see the important work we are 

doing there. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I welcome your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Beecroft follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT STEPHEN BEECROFT

Chairman Kerry, Ranking Member Lugar, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is a distinct honor to appear before you today as President 

Obama’s nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq. I am 

deeply grateful to the President and to Secretary Clinton for the opportunity to 

serve my country in this capacity and, if confirmed, I will work closely with you to 

advance our many interests in Iraq and in the region. 

I would like to begin my testimony by taking a moment to acknowledge my colleagues who perished in Benghazi only a few days ago. Those four brave public servants represent the best of the United States and I feel their loss keenly. My 

thoughts and prayers remain with their families and friends. 

Mr. Chairman, I have spent most of my career working on the Middle East, including assignments in Syria and Saudi Arabia and as Ambassador to Jordan. For 

much of my career I have been immersed in Iraq issues, from the Iraq Desk in 

Washington, DC, to recently serving as deputy chief of mission and now Charge ́

d’Affaires in Baghdad. I stand on the shoulders of the thousands of brave and committed Americans who have worked, fought, and died to help the Iraqi people 

achieve our shared goal of a united, federal, and democratic Iraq. If confirmed, I 

would commit to continuing their work to build a lasting partnership with Iraq. In 

so doing, I would labor alongside a team of able and dedicated personnel who understand the importance of achieving success. While the size and nature of our presence may have changed, our interests and commitments remain the same, and Iraq 

continues to be a top priority for the United States. 

Today, the United States is engaging with an evolving Iraq. The country is only 

now emerging from over 50 years of isolation, fragmentation, and war. We now have 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

609

a strong relationship with a democratically elected government. As President 

Obama stated last year, our relationship with Iraq is a ‘‘normal relationship 

between sovereign nations, an equal partnership based on mutual interests and

mutual respect.’’ This relationship is based on a shared vision of the future and a 

concrete, common roadmap of how to get there. This fundamental accord is codified 

in the 2008 U.S.-Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA), a comprehensive document that structures our bilateral commitments across the fields of defense, economics, justice, diplomacy, education, and energy. Through the SFA, we support and 

assist the Iraqis in building a united, federal, and democratic country that is a 

strong partner that can play a vital and constructive role in the region. I am confident that our policy based on the Strategic Framework Agreement offers a new 

window of opportunity for sound relations with Iraq for years to come. If confirmed 

as Ambassador, I will deploy all the tools available to me to this end. 

Strengthening our partnership with Iraq will help us to advance significant U.S. 

national interests, including counterterrorism cooperation against threats to our national security and that of the region, economic growth and the stabilization of 

global energy markets, and the development of democracy during this historic moment of transition in the Middle East. I would like to share with you some of my 

views on the work ahead and on the priorities that we have in Iraq. 

SECURITY AND COUNTERTERRORISM

Terrorists and extremists in the region continue their destructive efforts to hinder 

the great strides made by the Iraqi people to put aside violence. The Iraqi security 

forces are aggressively pursuing and disrupting these enemies, but Al-Qaeda in Iraq 

(AQI) and other militant groups continue to pose a threat to the Iraqi people and 

to U.S. personnel working in Iraq. The Department is taking all possible measures 

to mitigate the threat to our personnel and facilities in Iraq and we continuously 

monitor security conditions throughout the country. However, terrorist violence still 

occurs on a regular basis in Iraq and presents an inherent risk and threat to our 

mission, which will continue to exist for the foreseeable future. 

We share a common goal with the Iraqi people—to ensure that Iraq does not become a land that provides safe haven to those who mean harm and to those who 

seek to reverse the progress that has been made. While some significant attacks 

continue to take place in Iraq, security today is nonetheless far better than in 2006 

and 2007, and we must be mindful of this strong progress as we work to understand 

the reality of the situation on the ground. These gains were achieved through a 

strong partnership with the Iraqi Government and engagement on a wide range of 

counterterrorism and security-related efforts that aimed to provide an environment 

of safety and stability for both the Iraqi people and for U.S. personnel and interests 

in Iraq. This partnership continues to this day. It is in our strategic interests that 

Iraq is now defending itself, as the Embassy’s Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq 

helps train and professionalize Iraqi defense forces, and the Police Development Program and the Anti-Terrorism Assistance Program advises and trains Iraqi law enforcement units. No one wants peace in Iraq more than the Iraqi people, and we 

will continue to work with the Iraqi Government and security forces toward that 

goal. 

ECONOMY

Although security often dominates what we hear and read about Iraq, I would like 

to draw attention to the remarkable progress made to spur the growth of the Iraqi 

economy. Iraq’s oil production recently passed 3 million barrels per day, a level it 

had not achieved for more than three decades. The influx of revenue from increased 

oil production and exports is driving growth in all sectors of the Iraqi economy, 

which is expected to continue to expand at double-digit growth rates in the next few 

years. With the third-largest conventional oil reserves in the world, Iraq’s potential 

is extraordinary, and we are working closely with the Iraqis to help them reach this 

potential. 

We are working with the government and private firms on initiatives to more 

transparently manage Iraq’s oil revenues, enhance Iraqi entrepreneurialism and integration into the global economy, and reduce its dependence on the oil and gas sector. Iraq’s growth and potential also offer exciting opportunities for U.S. firms. We 

are encouraging and working with U.S. businesses, universities, and other institutions to partner with Iraqi organizations and find new opportunities that will bring 

benefit to all sides and to remove barriers to deeper economic ties. The response has 

been strong, both from Iraqis and from Americans. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

610

SERVICES

We are working with Iraq to ensure that the benefits of growth accrue to all 

Iraqis in all corners of the country. The Iraqi people, through their votes and their 

voices, have demanded better access to water, electricity, and other important services. The Iraqi Government, working to address the concerns of its people, created 

a 5-year national development plan that includes more than 2,700 projects valued 

at about $186 billion—including projects to support its utilities infrastructure, 

transportation network, education, health care, agriculture, and telecommunications 

systems. In the 2012 budget alone, the Iraqi Government has allocated $32 billion 

for public investment. Still, there is much more work needed to be done by the Iraqi 

Government to give the Iraqi people what they deserve—a stable, secure nation 

where basic services are readily available and one in which they can build a prosperous future. 

DIPLOMATIC AND POLITICAL SUPPORT

Iraq’s diversity has made it a unique and important nation in the Middle East 

for thousands of years. This same diversity now serves as one of the most important 

tests to democracy in the region. As with all democracies, Iraq’s Government contains myriad differing opinions regarding the rightful direction of the country. Sectarian friction remains strong and often threatens to derail negotiated accords and 

institutional progress. There is no denying the tensions between the Kurdistan 

Regional Government and the central government, even as increased dialogue to 

discuss these issues appears possible. The lack of a hydrocarbon law feeds this tension and unsettles Iraq’s oil sector and thereby its primary source of income. Factional feuding in the Council of Representatives has slowed the organization of provincial elections scheduled for early 2013. Tensions with Turkey, the conflict within 

Syria, and Iraq’s neuralgic relationship with Iran all fan anxiety and complicate our 

relationship with Iraq. My colleagues and I at Embassy Baghdad and its constituent 

posts have no illusions about the difficulty of addressing these challenges. 

Nevertheless, developments in Iraq give me reason for optimism. Despite disputes 

and disagreements, Iraqi leaders have worked within the political process and have 

chosen to use dialogue and negotiation rather than resort to violence. Iraq’s Government institutions, like those of any democracy, are far from perfect, but they have 

become an important space where both agreement and dissent can be raised and 

discussed—a far cry from the dictatorial domination of the past. 

The United States continues to play a central role in facilitating dialogue between 

the various political parties and leaders in Iraq. We assume this role while remaining clearly cognizant of the need to respect Iraq’s sovereignty. We are not in the 

business of telling the Iraqi people what they can and cannot do. Instead, working 

closely with all Iraqis, including ethnic and religious minorities, displaced persons, 

widows, and other populations, we help ensure that all groups in Iraq, no matter 

how large or how small, have a voice. Our efforts seek to promote important issues 

such as human rights, anticorruption, religious freedom, economic development, 

political openness, and opportunities for women. Through a range of programs and 

initiatives, we strive to increase the capabilities of Iraqi Government institutions to 

ensure that the decisions that affect the fate of the Iraqi nation are not made at 

the whim of individuals, but through the deliberative process laid out in Iraq’s 

Constitution. 

REGIONAL RELATIONS

Turning to the region, the U.S. effort in Iraq has far-reaching effects as Iraq remains vital to U.S. interests in the Middle East. Strategically positioned between 

Syria and Iran, bordering regional powers and important U.S. partners in Turkey, 

Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Kuwait, Iraq plays a vital role in a wide range of U.S. 

interests and in major foreign policy priorities throughout the region. 

It is clear that Iraq is growing stronger, and there is no doubt that it will become 

a major power in the region as it continues to ascend. It is developing its own 

unique identity, one that is fiercely protective of its sovereignty. Iran will continue 

to try to exert influence on Iraq but, the stronger and more cohesive that Iraq is 

as a nation, the more resistant it will be to unwanted pressure. Maintaining Iraq 

as a strong, stable, and strategic partner will help the United States maintain visibility and influence in this dynamic and vitally important region for years to come. 

EMBASSY MANAGEMENT

To better achieve our policy goals and to pursue our national interests in Iraq, 

we must maintain a strong, safe presence capable of addressing the many facets of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

611

our strategic partnership. If confirmed as Ambassador, I assure you that my No. 1 

priority will be to ensure the safety of Embassy personnel and U.S. citizens living 

in Iraq. Nothing is more important to the President, the Secretary, or to me personally. 

As we planned and executed the transition to a wholly civilian-led presence in 

2011, we began looking at the next phase of our transition to the post-Security 

Agreement era. We prudently built a robust structure to cope with the enormous 

uncertainties in the wake of the withdrawal, but we always anticipated streamlining and normalizing our operations in a methodical, phased fashion to something 

more consistent with our other missions around the world. 

With our personnel safely in place, we will do our best to carry out the mission 

we were sent to do; the mission I have described in my testimony. Let me speak 

for a moment about the resources required to make all this happen. Earlier in my 

testimony I noted that the U.S. relationship with Iraq is transitioning. Our Embassy 

footprint reflects this, in tandem with our bilateral relationship. As Charge ́

d’Affaires, I am continuing the glide path process begun by Ambassador Jeffrey earlier this year. As part of that effort, we have already made significant cuts in our 

staffing and contractor support and will further reduce our footprint without compromising our mission and security. 

Managing our presence and efforts in Iraq also takes a significant degree of coordination between leadership here in Washington and those working on the 

ground. Our effort in Iraq is still very much a collaborative process with a wide 

range of U.S. departments and agencies working together to provide the expertise 

needed to support our policy and goals. I would like to thank all involved for their 

continued support in Iraq. To succeed in Iraq, it will continue to take a whole-ofgovernment approach to make sure we have the right expertise, the right resources, 

and the right policies. 

If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue the rightsizing effort, matching resources to mission, and will work closely with the Congress to ensure that we have 

what we need to reach our policy objectives and support the national security interests of the United States. 

It is a tremendous honor to have been nominated by President Obama to serve 

as the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. Should I be confirmed, I will seek to expand and 

deepen our collaboration with Iraq and its people and to secure our vital interests. 

We accomplish our work ever mindful that our country has given much in support 

of our objectives in Iraq. Although our troops have departed Iraq, we will never forget their sacrifices and accomplishments. Working side by side with hopeful Iraqis, 

they created an Iraq with a brighter future. And for those who gave their lives for 

this cause and their families who bore the brunt of our Nation’s loss, we will continue to work to build a lasting and successful relationship with Iraq that pays tribute to and honors their sacrifice.

The CHAIRMAN. Thanks very much, Mr. Ambassador. Thank you. 

Can you share with me an answer to the issue I raised about the 

Iranians using Iraqi air space in order to support Assad? What are 

we doing—what have you been doing, if anything, to try to limit 

that use? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. I have personally engaged on this repeatedly at the highest levels of the Iraqi Government. My colleagues 

in Baghdad have engaged on this. We are continuing to engage on 

it. And every single visitor representing the U.S. Government, from 

the Senate—recently 3 visitors—to administration officials, has 

raised it with the Iraqis and made very clear that we find this unacceptable, and we find it unhelpful and detrimental to the region 

and to Iraq, and, of course, first and foremost, to the Syrian people. 

It is something that needs to stop and that we are pressing and 

will continue to press until it does stop. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I mean, it may stop when it is too late. If 

so many people have entreated the government to stop, and that 

does not seem to be having an impact, that sort of alarms me a little bit and seems to send a signal to me that maybe we should 

make some of our assistance or some of our support contingent on 

some kind of appropriate response. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

612

I mean, it just seems completely inappropriate that we are trying 

to help build their democracy, support them, put American lives on 

the line, money into the country, and they are working against our 

interests so overtly—against their interests, too, I might add. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Senator, I share your concerns 100 percent. I will continue to engage, and, with your permission, I will 

make very clear to the Iraqis what you have said to me today, and 

that this is—you find it alarming, and that it may put our assistance and our cooperation on issues at stake. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I think that it would be very hard to—

I mean, around here I think right now there is a lot of anxiety 

about places that seem to be trying to have it both ways. So I wish 

you would relay that obviously, and I think members of the committee would want to do so. 

Can you tell us, with respect to the safety issues, and personnel, 

and our citizens there, are you taking extra steps now? Are there 

additional initiatives in place as a result of what has happened in 

the last week or two? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. For some time now, and all the more so 

in light of recent events, we have taken a very cautious and careful 

look at our security on a regular basis. We have our own security 

at the Embassy. We think it is sizable. It is robust. And we are 

very confident that it is what we need at this time. 

At the same time, we are fully engaged with Iraqi officials, both 

political and security officials, at the most senior levels to ensure 

that they give us the cooperation that we feel we need. And so far 

they have done that. They have pledged to protect us, and we are 

doing everything to ensure that they keep to that pledge, and that 

we meet our part of it by ensuring that we are as safe as can be 

on our terms. 

At the same time, I would comment we enjoy geographic advantages. The Embassy is located inside the international zone, the 

green zone, as you know. And there are a number of checkpoints 

that are closely guarded getting into it. It is not a place where 

demonstrations usually take place. 

The CHAIRMAN. What has the reaction of the Iraqi people been 

to the events of the last week? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. So far compared to other places in the 

region, it has been quite muted. There have been demonstrations 

throughout the country, but they have been low level. And there 

has been nothing that is specifically threatening. There have been 

statements highly critical of the film that is at issue, and statements by some political leaders that they should examine their 

relationship with the United States because of this film. 

But on the whole, we get good cooperation. We continue to engage, and Iraqi officials are meeting with us as regular in going 

about business. 

The CHAIRMAN. Increasingly we are hearing more anecdotal and 

other reports about the increased authoritarianism of the Maliki 

government and the political system itself, perhaps becoming less 

democratic and so forth. Can you share your perceptions of that 

with us, and how you see this trend line moving? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Iraq is a democracy. It does face a lot of 

issues that are challenging to that democracy. It is fragile in many 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

613

ways. We are working constantly with all sides, with the Prime 

Minister, with his party, his bloc, with other blocs and other parties across the political spectrum to ensure that democratic institutions and the democratic process is strengthened. 

In short, what we are doing is pushing them all to engage to pursue their interests in the legislative process, in an independent 

reform process that they have agreed to. In other words, use the 

system to achieve what you need to achieve rather than look outside the system and make it fall apart. 

The CHAIRMAN. So, Mr. Ambassador, I remember sitting downstairs—we in this building on the ground floor in that big hearing 

room when Secretary Condoleezza Rice testified. And I remember 

her saying to us vividly, well, we are just a few weeks away from 

signing an agreement on the oil—on the division of the oil and having an oil agreement—you know, global oil agreement for Iraq. 

I guess we are about 5 years later now, maybe 6. I do not 

remember the precise timing of that. Still no agreement. Still the 

problem with the Kurds. Still the problem with Sunni minority 

feeling divorced, et cetera. 

There is certain skepticism now about whether or not the current 

government actually intends to have a diverse, pluralistic representative government, or whether we are moving toward some 

other form of sectarian division here. I think a lot of people are 

worried about it. Can you share your perspective about that? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. You are right about the hydrocarbons 

law. There still is no hydrocarbons law. We think this, next to 

Iraq’s Constitution, is one of the most important laws that could go 

into place in the country. We are pushing it very aggressively. 

Most recently, Ambassador Carlos Pasqual from the State 

Department, who looks after energy issues there, and a representative from the Department of Energy, came to Iraq, met with Iraqi 

officials. Deputy Secretary Bill Burns followed up last week with 

a visit and pushed the same issue. We are pointing out to them 

this is a way to unify and unite the country, which is what they 

need to do at this time. 

I am pleased to be able to say that there has been some subsequent engagement by the Iraqis on oil issues, and some discussion 

of restarting negotiations on the hydrocarbons law. And we are 

going to continue to push them in that direction. It is a positive 

trend, a positive sign. 

Most recently, representatives from the Kurdish regional government were in Baghdad only a few days ago meeting with the Minister of Oil there. And by all reports what we hear, what we see 

in the press, they did make some progress, and they are moving 

forward on that. So while it is not the hydrocarbons law itself, 

these are issues which should smooth relations and allow for the 

hydrocarbons law to go forward in the future. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, Inshallah. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Inshallah. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Lugar. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, sir. 

Senator LUGAR. Let me just follow on Senator Kerry’s questioning, because what he and you have described is a country 

which clearly is a sovereign country. But without the hydrocarbons 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

614

law, which was anticipated so that the oil, the basic revenue for a 

good part of managing the government, never came to be. Therefore, deals have been made by the Kurds on occasion with companies outside of Iraq, that sort of commerce is proceeding with or 

without the hydrocarbon law. Therefore, there is some dispersion 

of the wealth of the country, quite apart from some questions about 

how the Kurds fit into this Iraq situation. 

The question that Iraqis must have, quite apart from Americans, 

sort of getting back to testimony we used to hear before this committee, in which some people were advocating there really were 

three different countries, or we ought to recognize really the realities of Iraq as opposed to having this fiction that there was one 

country, and somehow or other this oil and constitutional framework representing the three major groups and others would come 

into being. 

How does the country operate given these divisions, granted that 

Maliki has authority. From time to time, there are reports of terrorism in Iraq against Iraqis. And you mentioned these are still 

going to happen, but how do they move toward happening at all? 

Is there an impetus toward unity in the country that we should 

say, given patience and given time, this is going to work out? Or 

is the trend maybe the other way given the events in the Middle 

East, given the ties with Iran, whatever they may be, or problems 

of Shiites and Sunnis everywhere? Is this really a solid country? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator Lugar. Yes, I think 

it is. There’s a solid basis for the country to go forward and succeed 

here. While there are forces that would pull Iraq apart, what we 

continue to see and what is encouraging is that Iraqis continue to 

resolve their differences through dialogue, through negotiation. 

And so when they do have disputes, which they have frequently to 

be perfectly honest, they find ways to resolve them peacefully and 

as part of this democratic process. 

Our job is to continue to encourage that and then continue to 

support them as they do that, and point out ways where they can 

do it more effectively. 

The hydrocarbons law, as you point out, is one way of doing that. 

Strengthening the legislative process is another way of doing that, 

focusing on key—helping them to focus on key laws that they need 

to pass as part of that legislative process. For example, the law on 

the High Electoral Commission, putting new commissioners in 

place. These are things that well help unify the country over time. 

But right now, I think it is headed in the right direction, but 

with plenty of ups and downs on that trend line. We need to keep 

the trend line going and try to minimize the downs. 

Senator LUGAR. Is your counsel appreciated? Our enthusiasm in 

the United States obviously is for a unified Iraq. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. I think by and large, we are listened to 

very closely. Most Iraqis will say the United States continues to 

have a role to play in Iraq. And I think most Iraqis are committed 

to the same thing we are committed to, which is a unified federal 

and democratic Iraq. 

Senator LUGAR. Now you mentioned the relative security of our 

Embassy. In the past, there has been considerable discussion, not 

only among diplomats, but the American public, about the size of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

615

the Embassy in Iraq. There was discussion when this was first 

built, a rather monumental structure to say the least. 

I remember at one conference I suggested that, in fact, this structure was so big, it might really serve as a unifying purpose for Middle Eastern countries, a sort of united forum in which they would 

all come together in this like The Hague. Some people found some 

interest in this even if the Iraqis did not. Some members of our 

government were not fond of this idea since it is our Embassy. 

What is the future of all of the real estate, all of the responsibilities? They are huge, and this is going to be an ongoing debate, I 

am certain, in the Congress, as we come to budget problems in this 

country. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you very much. We recognize that 

this is an issue. We started with an Embassy that was staffed to 

address all possible contingencies, to follow up on the wonderful 

work that the United States military had done in Iraq. Since that 

time, and again starting with Ambassador Jeffrey, and it is something that I personally am continuing and have been very, very 

closely involved in, and that we will pursue. We are calling it a 

GlidePath exercise where we are looking at what our objectives are 

and how we are resourced and staffed to meet those objectives. And 

what we have found is that we can prioritize and focus our mission 

and will continue to do that on what we really need to accomplish. 

And as we do that, we are able to reduce personnel. 

Since the beginning of the year, we have reduced personnel by 

more than 2,000. We are now somewhere between 13,000 and 

14,000 personnel in Iraq, down from over 16,000. Facilities, we 

have given back in the last couple of days facilities we had in 

Kirkuk at an air base up there, and facilities we had in Baghdad 

for a police training center. And we have another facility in the 

next few days, which we will give back also in Baghdad. 

So we are reducing not just the number of personnel, but we are 

reducing the number of pieces of property that we occupy and use. 

And we are very mindful of the costs that it takes to support the 

mission in Iraq. And I personally am dedicated to reducing those 

costs by again focusing our mission on what we really need to 

achieve and to reshaping it so that it best does that. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, we congratulate you on your service. I join 

our chairman in saying we are hopeful we can get action on this 

nomination very swiftly so that you are there and can serve our 

country well during these weeks and months ahead. 

Thank you very much. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Lugar. 

Senator Corker. 

Senator CORKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for calling this hearing. And thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for your willingness to serve here, and what you have been there, and for your earlier comments along with Senator Lugar’s regarding Chris Stevens. 

I was just sitting here thinking. I listened to Senator Kerry’s comments, and, you know, over the last decade there has been quite 

a turn of events in Iraq and for Iran over the last decade. 

I mean, 10 years ago their most major enemy was right next door 

in Iraq. Today they are flying airplanes over Iraq into Syria to help 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

616

one of their allies. And I know that you have mentioned that everyone at every level has talked to Maliki about this, and I know that 

you say you will continue to do that. What I would like to hear is 

what his response is when you say that you would like for him to 

cooperate with us in our interests. What does he exactly say in 

response to our efforts there? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. The response is 

typically to express a lot of concern about events in Syria. And they 

are very clear that both the Prime Minister and other Iraqi officials, that they have no interest in seeing the current government 

continue, the regime continue. That they are no friends of that 

regime; that that regime has been hostile to them in the past and 

allowed terrorists to come into Iraq hostile to democracy in Iraq, 

and the institutions in Iraq, and the people of Iraq. 

What they are interested in seeing, though, is that there is a 

clear outcome in Syria that protects their interests. And they are 

having a little trouble seeing that. 

Senator CORKER. But what about the air space issue? I mean, 

why are they continuing to cooperate with Iran in that effort? What 

do they specifically tell you regarding that? I know we talk with 

them, but what is their response? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. They say they engage with all parties, 

that they will not allow their air space, their land, their ground, 

to be used to transport weapons. And so that they read the manifest closely, and they have instructed that they will not allow 

flights in. We think——

Senator CORKER. Well, they are convinced that the flights are not 

carrying armaments into Syria. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Well, they are taking the manifest at 

face value. And what we are urging them to do is either disapprove 

the flights, or per U.N. resolutions, ask them to land in——

Senator CORKER. And they are taking the manifest at face value. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. And so again, we are pressing them to 

have the aircraft either disapprove the flights or have them land 

and be inspected, which is their right to do. 

Senator CORKER. So I think it really does—you know, I think 

speak to our continuing role there. And I know the first two questioners have asked this, and by the way, again I thank you for your 

service there, and I know it is a heavy lift. 

When Senator Barasso and I first got here, which was 51⁄2 years 

ago roughly, 5 years ago for him, we were talking about this hydrocarbon discussion at that time. And I remember sitting and interact with Khalilazad as he was running back and forth trying to 

work out some hydrocarbon law at that time. Still nothing has happened. There is no constitution. And so I think it does beg the 

question. I mean, we have a situation where obviously our national 

interests in Syria is very different than whatever Iraq is allowing 

to happen. 

I would like for you to point to some of the things that our 

involvement there has caused them to do that is in our national 

interest, and what our continuing role should be in Iraq. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Well, let me point to—thank you very 

much—one particular example. Iraq recently passed the 3 million 

barrels per day threshold production of oil. This is certainly someFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

617

thing, getting more oil on the market; 2.5 million barrels per day 

of that are exported. The rest is used domestically. This is something that is in our interests. 

Senator CORKER. In the world’s interest, right? It is in China’s 

interest. It is in everybody’s interest, right? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. That is correct. 

Senator CORKER. Yes. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. But it is particularly in our interest is 

there are sanctions on Iran, and as Iran’s production has 

decreased, an increase in Iraq’s production helps counter that and 

helps maintain stable oil markets across the world. You might 

imagine——

Senator CORKER. It is very much in Iraq’s interest, too, right? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Yes, it is, but at the same time you 

might imagine that they are under pressure from others not to do 

this, but they are doing it anyway. And it is, again, something we 

work closely with them on. So I take your point, but I did want to 

flag that as one example. 

Senator CORKER. I think it is a serious question. We have had 

ambassadors, really good ambassadors, and I am sure you are 

going to be equally as good. But we have the best of the best in 

Iraq, and as you look at the things that we have encouraged them 

to do, it is really difficult. I cannot really remember anything of 

significance that our involvement there through diplomatic relations has caused them to do that is in our national interest. 

If you could just point to one. I mean, selling 3 million barrels 

of oil is in their interests, OK? I mean, it would be cutting their 

nose off to spite their face not to do that. So I would not say that 

is in our interest. 

So what is it that we have shaped there diplomatically since we 

have been there that has been in our national interest? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Well, it is certainly national interests, I 

believe, that we have a unified Iraq that plays a productive, constructive role in the region. Iraq recently hosted back in March, 

end of March, the Arab League summit, where it brought all the 

Arab leaders, and you had 9 heads of state, and I believe 22 delegations present for that. Again, a sign that it is a unified peaceful 

Iraq, not Iraq that is fractured, broken up, at war with itself, or 

at war with its neighbors. 

It continues to battle al-Qaeda very, very strongly. This is something also that is in our interests, the fight against terrorism. And 

we will continue to work with them on things like this. These are 

our most important priorities, in my view, and we are getting a 

degree of success. 

Senator CORKER. Are there not some border leakages right now 

between Iraq and Syria that are allowing more al-Qaeda folks to 

flow into Syria at present? I mean, is that not an issue? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. The Iraqis have dispatched a whole number of troops to the border to protect the border to stop the flow 

either way into or out of. I read in this morning’s news, for example, sir, that they had killed, I think, three terrorists attempting 

to cross over, AQI, into Iraq from Syria. So they are there. They 

are trying to protect the borders, and again they are trying to stop 

the flow of weapons on the ground and personnel, either way. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

618

Senator CORKER. Well, I know my time is up, and I think you 

have heard from the three questioners so far of different parties 

that, first of all, we thank you for your service, and I do think you 

will be approved very quickly. And we thank you for coming in for 

this hearing. 

We know that the work there is very difficult, and we are dealing 

with folks that obviously, as you would expect, are looking after 

their own interests first. But I think you are going continue to be 

pressured by folks here and other places to see results there with 

our diplomatic actions. I know that they are asking for increased 

aid. I do think that aid is coming under increased pressure. And 

I think people are going to want to see results. 

So I thank you for your willingness to take on this role. I thank 

you for answering in an earnest way our questions. But I think 

there are going to be many, many more. And as you take this on, 

I hope the Government of Iraq understands also that we would like 

to see some movement in a positive direction on issues that have 

been sitting around for a long, long time and left unaddressed. 

Thank you very much. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ambassador, I have to go to another meeting, 

and I apologize to you. Senator Casey is going to chair, and he is 

going to be recognized as the next questioner anyway. But I just 

want to wish you well. As I said, we will try to move this as fast 

as we can. 

I want to thank you for your taking on this tough task, and 

thank your family at the same time for their contribution to this 

effort. We really appreciate it. Thank you very, very much. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Senator Casey. 

Senator CASEY [presiding]. Thank you, sir. We are grateful for 

your willingness to serve yet again, and we appreciate that. 

I have a couple of questions to start with that involve the issue 

of the over flights over Iraq. And as a predicate to that, I wanted 

to ask you about your sense of what we can do to be as vigilant 

as possible. 

A number of weeks ago now, I chaired a hearing on the Iranian 

influence in the region, especially their support for terrorism in the 

region. And one of our witnesses at that hearing was Ambassador 

Jim Jeffrey. And as a predicate to my question, I want to quote 

from something Ambassador Jeffrey said. I asked him about Iranian influence in Iraq, and he said the following, and I am quoting. 

He said, ‘‘At present, our overall strategy in Iraq, including stemming strategy Iranian dominance of the country, has been successful despite a massive cut in our resources committed. That is a policy we should continue, bearing always in mind that this success 

is fragile and should not be placed at risk for wider policies. If Iranian pressure increases, we have tools to counter it.’’ That is what 

Ambassador Jeffrey said at the time, not too long ago. So it is clear 

that Iran has brought to bear great pressure on Iraq as it relates 

to allowing that air space for the over flights. 

I wanted to ask you specifically, What tools do we have to deal 

with that problem? And I know you spoke to this in response to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

619

questions already this morning. But just to put an even finer point 

on it, if you can do that. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. I will answer what 

I can in this setting. 

Senator CASEY. Sure. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. And I am sure that there could be a classified meeting if necessary. But what I want to say is that our 

major tool is to work with the Iraqis. I think the starting point that 

they have their own self-interests that all groups in Iraq recognize 

that they have their own interests, and those are not necessarily 

Iranian interests, and why there is some overlap or some shared 

interests. 

On the whole, Iraqis take the approach that they are a sovereign 

democratic nation, that they are independent of Iran. If their interests happen to coincide, that is fine. But if their interests do not 

coincide, what we see is that they follow their own interests, and 

they do not succumb to pressure. And one example of this is the 

oil example I just gave. 

What we need to do is again strengthen this democracy, that 

there is an Iraq. Make sure that it is not a house divided which 

is easily influenced and pressured, but a house that is united and 

strong by getting all parties to play in the political process constructively. And we need to work with them to show them that, you 

know, we will support them in pursuing their own interests. That 

we will counterbalance the influence that is coming from outside to 

the extent we can, except we can play a helpful role. That we will 

have a strong relationship with them that supports them. 

Senator CASEY. Well, I appreciate that because I have great confidence you will be confirmed. And as you assume your new posting, I hope that you make it very clear to the Iraqi leadership that 

we have great concerns about this. I think people in both parties 

here in the House and the Senate have concerns, first and foremost, about the Iranian nuclear program and preventing them 

from getting a nuclear weapons capability. At least that is my position. I think that is a widely shared belief or point of view. 

But in addition to that, even if there was not this nuclear threat, 

the threat that they pose to the region and beyond is of paramount 

importance to us. So I hope that you continue to reiterate that position. 

I want to ask you as well about the politics of Iraq. We sometimes do not have a chance to spend a lot of time on an issue like 

that. But I was struck when I was there in July 2010 with Senator 

Shaheen and Senator Ted Kaufman from Delaware. Our visit to 

Iraq just happened to overlap with a visit by the Vice President. 

So we had a moment, probably about a 2-hour window, when we 

could actually sit with him. And he had just come from a series of 

meetings with the various Iraqi officials trying to work out the politics and the difficult management of that and doing everything he 

could to bring the sides together. 

As you know a lot better than I, it is one thing to have political 

or ideological differences. It is another thing when it has its origin 

in ethnicity and all kinds of other divisions. So it is particularly difficult to bring the sides together. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

620

I was also struck by how capable the Vice President was in dealing with that because he spent a lot of time with all these players. 

There is still a real concern now that those politics have not 

worked out as well as we had hoped. And in particular, there is a 

concern or maybe an allegation—that might be too strong a word—

that Prime Minister Maliki is becoming more and more authoritarian. And I wanted to get your sense of that and your sense of 

the overall politics, because that, of course, will be the underpinning of the progress. They cannot make progress to the extent that 

we would hope, unless they can manage those political differences. 

So I wanted to get your sense of that and what you could do to 

further advance those areas of cooperation or consensus. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you. There clearly are divisions 

within Iraq and different interests. But what we see and what is 

encouraging is that the parties when they have disputes, when 

they have differences, that at the end of the day, they come 

together to talk and negotiate their differences. And they continue 

to function as a democracy. They continue to work through the legislature and the council of ministers, and outside it in informal 

processes or unofficial processes, to work out their differences and 

find ways forward. 

Now it is oftentimes a slow, protracted process. It certainly does 

not move at the pace that we would like to see or with the efficiency we would like to see. But as I see it, our role is largely to 

continue to encourage this, to be helpful in pointing out ways forward, the ways things might be done, the way they might be able 

to compromise or reach consensus on issues. And then to be as supportive as possible in helping them avoid any backsliding on those 

agreements, and to find ways to help consolidate them. And we will 

continue to do that as best we can. 

But again, I would like to reiterate, the encouraging thing is that 

Iraq has not fallen apart, that it has held together. And there certainly are forces that would like to pull it apart both internally and 

externally. But the Iraqis themselves, much to their credit, have 

found ways to continue to work with each other and continue to 

resolve their disputes. 

And I do not want to minimize the importance of these disputes. 

There have been very serious ones that are of great concern to particular groups in Iraq or to all Iraqis. But again, at the end of the 

day they find a way to step back from the precipice, to talk, and 

find a way forward. And we will continue to work with them on 

that to push them in those directions in the most positive, constructive, and encouraging way we can. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you. I will have another line of questioning, but my time is up. And I think Senator Rubio is next. 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you for your 

service. I, too, anticipate there will be little, if any, objection to 

your nomination. I know you want to get to work quickly. 

So let me touch on three subjects. The first one, there has been 

already discussions about Iran’s influence in Iraq. In your opinion, 

does that influence extend to the judiciary? And I am particularly 

concerned in light of the Vice President’s trial. There is growing 

evidence, at least allegations, that the Prime Minister and others 

have manipulated the judiciary to persecute their political enemies. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

621

Do we have concerns that Iran’s influence in Iraq has now 

reached or extended into the judiciary as well? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. I would say we have 

concerns across the board that any country, Iran or others, not play 

an overbearing or an overly influential role, particularly a negative 

one, in Iraq. We work closely with the judiciary in Iraq and the 

legal community. We do everything we can to ensure that there

is support for rule of law programs. And so far what we see is a 

largely functioning judiciary that, while not—again, I cannot give 

it a 100 percent endorsement as perfect. No country has a perfect 

judiciary. It is something that again continues to function and will 

continue to help it function better to the extent we can. 

Senator RUBIO. My second concern is about the well-being of

the leader of the Democratic Party of the Iraqi Nation, Mithal alAlusi. Have we expressed our concerns about the way he has been 

treated? And I believe he is now in the northern region. He has 

been given—I guess he has been allowed to enter and is living 

under their protection. But I have read a series of accounts about 

how different types of protections have been withdrawn. His life 

has been made a miserable mess in Baghdad. Apparently he has 

to leave Baghdad. 

Have we expressed our concern about his well-being and our concern about how he has been treated? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. I am sorry, Senator. I missed the name. 

Senator RUBIO. Mithal al-Alusi. He is the leader of the Democratic Party of the Iraqi Nation. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Excuse me. Let me just say that first 

and foremost, we have concerns about human rights across the 

board. And we will raise those concerns at every opportunity, as 

well as rule of law concerns to make sure everyone is treated fair 

and freely. 

On this specific individual, I am going to have to go back for an 

answer and get back to you as quickly as I can. 

[The written reply from Ambassador Beecroft to the above question follows:]

Through our ongoing engagement with the Government of Iraq (GOI), we place 

the highest priority on respect for human rights. We will continue to encourage the 

GOI to adhere to the highest standards of human rights and the rule of law in a 

fair and transparent manner, including in the case of Mr. al-Alusi. If confirmed, I 

will personally look into this case with my Embassy colleagues on my return to 

Baghdad.

Senator RUBIO. Well, just so that I can point, he, in addition to 

being the leader of the Democratic Party of the Iraqi Nation, he 

has also been a staunch ally of the United States, courageous in 

many instances, a proponent of a more open society, basically 

everything we hope the region will become in terms of the things 

he stood for. 

I encourage you to look into his case. It is actually well documented and pretty well known. And he has now had to leave to 

northern Iraq for protection because of the way the current government in Baghdad has treated him. I think it sends a terrible message to our friends and to moderate reformers in the region when 

the United States is silent about their well-being. I think it is conFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

622

cerning that, quite frankly, that there is not more awareness about 

his plight. 

But let me just to add to that. What is your view of our relationship with the regional government in the north, the Kurdish 

regional government? There have been accounts about how well 

they have developed. Certainly it is a safer region than the rest of 

Iraq. They have certainly progressed economically quicker than the 

rest of the nation. How is our relationship with them? How do you 

envision our relationship with them moving forward as far as their 

own aspirations, et cetera? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. On the first case, I 

will look into the case personally and we will get back to you and 

your staff. 

Regarding the north, we are very supportive of the autonomous 

region of the north, and you are absolutely right, has progressed 

in many ways, and in many ways sets an example for not just the 

country, but the region, and what it can be. We will continue to 

support them and work with them as part of a unified, federal 

Iraq. And we have the best of relations with them, and we will continue to have those relations. 

Senator RUBIO. I have heard concerns that the closer we get to 

them, the more we risk alienating the Prime Minister, and the less 

cooperative he may be with us. Do you share that view? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. We have excellent relations also, sir, 

with the Prime Minister and we are going to continue to keep 

those. And so long as people understand this is part of a unified, 

federal Iraq, our work with the north should not be objectionable, 

and it so far has not been objectionable. 

Senator RUBIO. Right, but I have heard some commentators say 

that we have got to be careful how we deal with them and not to 

appear too close to them because it may alienate or make the 

Prime Minister less cooperative with us. I think—and I do not 

want to put words in your mouth, but I think what you are saying 

is that there is nothing necessarily that would stand in your way 

of reaching out to them, and working with them, and having a 

close relationship with them. You do not view it as a zero sum 

game. You think you can have a good relationship with both. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. That is absolutely right. 

Senator RUBIO. OK, thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Senator Casey. 

Senator CASEY. Senator Udall. 

Senator UDALL. Are you our chairman here? 

Senator CASEY. You just arrived. I want to make sure you are 

OK for questioning. 

Senator UDALL. Great. I am ready to go here. 

Senator CASEY. Senator DeMint is ready, so I want to warn you. 

Senator UDALL. OK. Thank you for being here, and we very 

much appreciate your service, especially in light of all of the things 

we have seen over the last couple of weeks. And so we are pleased 

that you are willing to serve. 

According to the Special Inspector General for Iraq Construction, 

in its report of this year, the inspector said, ‘‘Antigovernment forces 

continue to target prominent Iraqis for assassination. Thirty-two 

senior government officials were killed from April until July of this 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

623

year. Not only are government officials being targeted, but judges 

and military offices have been targeted by assassins.’’

How have these tensions impacted governance in Iraq, and are 

people becoming reluctant to participate in the system? And if so, 

how does this impact the long-term political health of Iraq? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. Violence is certainly 

at the top of our list of concerns in Iraq, and we are doing everything we can to cooperate with Iraqis in confronting violence, and 

reducing it, and holding those responsible for it accountable. 

While a serious threat, we have not seen that it keeps Iraqis 

from continuing to work in the system. And not just that, but 

Iraqis from going out on the street and participating in normal life 

out on the street. While there may be some examples of Iraqis opting not to serve, most Iraqi are more than happy to serve and take 

government positions, judicial positions, and to vigorously carry out 

their jobs and responsibilities. 

That is something we will encourage. It is something we have 

worked with the Iraqis on in the past is protecting their officials, 

and we will continue to do that very much with them so that these 

people can carry out their jobs safely without fear of retribution 

assassination. 

Senator UDALL. And some of this, as you know, has been attributed to Al Qaeda in Iraq. And I was just wondering about your 

assessment of that. How much are they involved? Is there a resurgence there? How big of an impact are they having? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. You are absolutely right. Al-Qaeda is a 

huge concern. They continue to perpetrate violence in Iraq. The 

Iraqis are focused on it. Fortunately, we are finding that the violence has not led to the things that al-Qaeda is hoping to achieve. 

It is not leading to sectarian conflict. It is not undermining the government in a way that people have lost complete confidence in it. 

It is something that again is a major concern that we need to help 

Iraqis deal with. 

They have asked for our help, and we are going to help them as 

much as possible. But, yes, it absolutely remains a concern, and it 

needs to be dealt with. 

Senator UDALL. And do you believe that the Iraqi military and 

intelligence services are focused on that, and that they are putting 

their maximum effort there? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. They are focused. They have good people 

that are working this issue. We talk to them regularly about it, and 

they assure us that they are strong in their commitment. 

What they have also asked us for frankly is assistance; assistance in providing information that we have, and we are doing that, 

and assistance in providing equipment. And we are also doing that 

as well. 

Senator UDALL. Ambassador, I know it is not on the same level 

as in Afghanistan, but corruption is still a very big issue in Iraq. 

And I am just wondering, what do you believe they have done to 

effectively deal with this? Are there efforts that you would take 

when you get there to kind of move this whole effort along. I mean, 

how are we dealing with the corruption issue? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Corruption is a large issue. I think 

Transparency International’s last report had Iraq ranked eighth in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

624

the world on corruption, not something you want to be. Iraqis are 

aware of this, and the government is focused on it. We are continuing to work with them. We have people in the Embassy that 

work on corruption issues and engage with them regularly. It is a 

concern. 

What we would like to point out—what we do point out to them 

and what they are perfectly aware of is that this hurts the things 

they want or diminishes the opportunity for those things—business 

investment first and foremost. People find it not just a difficult 

environment to operate in because of other reasons, but because of 

corruption by and large. And it makes it very, very difficult. And 

it discourages businesses from coming forward. So we will continue 

to work with them to try to deal with the problem and improve it. 

Senator UDALL. One of the major criticisms that has been leveled 

against our participation was the signing of the agreement between 

Iraq and the United States as we left. Do you have any thoughts 

on that in terms of where we are today? Have we been able to function effectively with them? Has that set back our efforts? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Let me start by saying that United 

States military did fantastic work in Iraq. And I think most Iraqis 

today recognize that and appreciate it. 

Let me also say that we put in place the Strategic Framework 

Agreement, which we are working through with the Iraqis to engage in a whole range of issues, everything from justice, to diplomacy, to economic issues, education issues. And this is the framework we are pursuing to ensure that we are fully engaged with 

them on issues that are of concern to us and also of concern to 

them where we can make some traction. 

I think we continue to see this function well, and it continues to 

make progress, the progress that we want to achieve and that we 

want to see Iraq achieve. 

Senator UDALL. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much, and 

once again, thank you for your service. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator Udall. 

Senator DeMint. 

Senator DEMINT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Beecroft, I also 

thank you for your service and your willingness to continue to 

serve in Iraq. We have got a lot of our blood and treasure invested. 

Frankly, you have encouraged me today just as I have heard you 

talk. You have answered a lot of questions I have had, because I 

have heard a number of folks say that Iraq is unraveling, that it 

is just coming apart. The fact that we did not leave a stabilizing 

force in Iraq makes it virtually impossible for us to impact policy. 

And some of the things you have said suggested otherwise. 

I have to admit that I am a little cynical because over the last 

10 years I have gotten a number of reports that were very rosy, 

only to find out that was not the case at all. But you seem to be 

very credible and knowledgeable, so I am encouraged by what you 

said. 

But I will just ask a few questions as a followup, and you have 

answered some of these to some degree. Clearly there is a growing 

anti-American sentiment throughout the Middle East. How pervasive is that in Iraq? And do you think the manipulated rage I think 

that we have seen in other countries, can that take hold in Iraq? 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

625

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. Starting with manipulated rage, we have seen reactions recently in Iraq. While 

there have been demonstrations, they have not been of the size or 

severity that we have seen in other countries. And the Iraqi Government has handled matters in a very calm and peaceful way as 

well, and has not sought, for the most part at least, from what I 

have seen, to inflame things. 

I think, and going to the larger question that you ask, that there 

is increasing good will toward the United States in Iraq, and 

increasing recognition of the positive role that the United States, 

starting with the United States military, has played there. It is our 

job to capitalize on that and make the most of it, and build a partnership and a relationship with Iraq. 

And I do not want to minimize the difficulties that Iraqis face 

and that we also face. But I do want to stress that there are signs 

that are encouraging. There are rays of light and hope. And we will 

continue to work to increase the number of encouraging signs, 

increase the successes. And a large part of that is building the 

partnership that we have with Iraq and making it stronger. And 

this is the platform we have been left by the excellent work of the 

U.S. military. 

Senator DEMINT. You mentioned a house divided, and this question has already been asked. But we have seen a number of reports 

that both Sunni Arabs and Kurds are fearful of a power grab by 

the Prime Minister. Some sectarian division going on there. How 

serious is that? 

And you mentioned that it is seems to be working out in a democratic way rather than a violent way. Is that the good news is there 

is division, but it is being worked out? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Sir, yes, you are absolutely correct, that 

is the good news. There are divisions. There are disputes. There 

are disagreements. Interests vary from issue to issue. But what we 

see is that Iraqis continue to talk, and, more importantly, they continue to channel their concerns through the democratic process and 

handle things as part of the democratic process. 

So if it comes to, let us say, recently there was talk of a no confidence vote. Again, that no confidence vote was allowed in the 

Iraqi Constitution. And again, it was a democratic procedure which 

people were looking at and considering. It was not something that 

was outside the democratic framework. 

Senator DEMINT. Just one other question, just religious freedom. 

You mentioned human rights. We get a lot of reports, particularly 

from Christian missionaries that the religious freedom is not being 

protected by the Iraqi Government. Is this a priority of theirs or 

something they try to sweep under the rug? Is there hope that the 

different faiths can operate within Iraq? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. I think there is hope. That said, it is one 

of the concerns that the Embassy and that the State Department 

and others are very focused on in Iraq. We have received I think 

since 2008 three directives from Congress to spend $10 million 

each, so $30 million. We have actually spent $72 million pursuing 

religious freedom and looking for ways to protect minority religious 

groups in Iraq. We are going to continue to do that. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

626

We engage with them regularly. We will continue to engage with 

them regularly. And while the Iraqis have shown that not only do 

they have laws protecting religious freedom and minority religions, 

they have taken steps in the past in response to attacks to protect, 

for example, Christian churches. And when there are holidays for 

minority religious groups, they frequently will increase the security 

presence to protect these people. 

These are things that, again, we need to continue to encourage 

and to see expand so that all people can practice their religion 

freely. 

Senator DEMINT. Thank you. I look forward to meeting with you 

a little bit later. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you, Senator DeMint. Mr. Ambassador, I 

just have a couple more questions. I may be the last questioner, so 

you can get a sense of the light at the end of the tunnel for the 

hearing. 

I have two lines of questioning, one on the special immigrant 

visas, which we know are a program that allows Iraqis who have 

helped American forces and helped our efforts in Iraq to have their 

visas expedited. As you know better than I, these are people of

uncommon courage and who were of great assistance to us. They 

obviously live under threat of death or something very serious in 

terms of a threat to their safety. 

I realize as well that these have been expedited, and there is 

some good news about the numbers. I am told that in fiscal year 

2012, that there was enough expediting that the United States 

admitted more SIV applicants in 2012 than we did in 2011. That 

is encouraging, but there is a backlog, and I wanted to have you 

address where we are with that. How many applicants are in the 

pipeline and how can you, upon assumption of your new duties, 

move that forward? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. This is an issue 

that we at the Embassy, working with Washington, are very 

focused on. I do not have off the top of my head—I mean, I will 

have to go check the exact number in the pipeline right now. But 

you are absolutely right that numbers in 2012 have exceeded numbers in 2011 already. 

[The written reply from Ambassador Beecroft to the above question follows:]

A total 707 SIVs were issued to Iraqis in FY 2011 and 3,802 have been issued 

in FY 2012 through August 31. As of August 31 a cumulative total of 11,165 SIVs 

have been issued to Iraqis since 2007.

We are going to continue to do everything we can to process 

these as quickly as possible. And as we get the approvals from 

Washington, we will expedite them. 

Let me also assure you that what I have seen happen at the 

Embassy, and something we will continue to do, is when there are 

particular individuals that are suffering or under a particular 

threat and their case is urgent, we go out of our way. Our consular 

section has done a brilliant job on this, of going out of its way to 

make sure these people get immediate service as fast as possible, 

and make sure that they are as reassured as possible. We stay in 

touch with them. We get back to them. We do everything we can 

to help these people, because as you rightly point out, they have 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

627

risked their lives on our behalf, and we need to do everything we 

can to repay that. 

Senator CASEY. Thank you. And finally, I know that you have

addressed this, and it has been raised before, but I want to discuss 

Syrian refugees. I think there are so many of us that, even as we 

introduce, as I have, legislation to try to move forward in terms of 

humanitarian and other assistance to the Syrian people, we have 

a real concern about refugees. And there has been news in the last 

couple of days about denying men coming in, allowing women and 

children in in one instance. 

I think there is a real concern, and you can understand how difficult it is for the Iraqis to be able to handle a lot of new refugees 

coming in. I remember going back—way back to 2007 when I was 

in my first visit to Iraq and hearing stories when we went to Jordan, a place you are familiar with, about the number of Iraqi refugees into Jordan, and how big a number that was, tens of thousands. So it is a difficult problem to manage. 

But I would ask you if you can, in a broad way, assess the Iraqi 

refugee policies that relate to Syrian refugees. And maybe in particular, how many, if you know that number or a ballpark figure 

on that. And also what kind of support they have, what they can 

expect when they get there, and what kind of challenges there are. 

If you address those questions as broadly or as specifically as you 

can. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you, Senator. The figures I saw 

earlier this morning, and I check these regularly, there were a little over 27,000 Iraqi refugees now in Jordan. The majority of those, 

roughly 23,000, are in the north, and these tend to be Syrian Kurds 

who have come across into the Kurdish area of Iraq. 

Senator CASEY. You said 26? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Twenty-seven thousand, roughly a little 

over 27,000 total. 

Senator CASEY. Oh. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Twenty-three thousand of those are up 

in the north. 

Senator CASEY. OK. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Around 4,000, a little over 4,000, are in 

the south or center of the country. They come across largely at border crossing between Syria and Iraq, the Iraqi side known as alQaim. And the ones there, that border crossing has been closed. 

Only 2 days ago it reopened. This was very encouraging. It is something that we have been urging the Iraqis to do for some time. I 

think it closed around the middle of August. They let in, I believe, 

about 121 people yesterday. We expected more to be let in today. 

The Iraqis have been constructing camps for refugees, but a lot 

of them that are cross are still in Iraqi Government institutions or 

with friends, families, and others. 

What we are doing as the U.S. Government is we have contributed heavily to UNHCR and its efforts in the region. I cannot 

break down specifically the amount of money that goes for 

UNHCR’s work in Iraq. I do not know that. But we do work closely 

with UNHCR and in touch with them on a daily basis about this 

issue. And we are providing all possible support for their efforts to 

help address the refugee inflows into Iraq. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

628

Senator CASEY. I know this is a generalization, but do you feel 

positive about the Iraqi Government’s and either the government 

or other support systems, their capacity to handle the inflow, or do 

you think that there are some pretty significant challenges they 

have to surmount? 

Ambassador BEECROFT. I think they can handle the inflow if they 

focus on it and prioritize it. And we have seen evidence that they 

have done that at times. They need to continue to do it. And again, 

this is something that we engage regularly with them on, and 

something our visitors from the administration and, most recently, 

three from the Senate, have engaged with them on as well. 

This is an important issue. Many Iraqis were refugees in Syria, 

and this is something that many Iraqis see as something positive 

they can do for Syrians in return. And we will continue to work 

with them to make sure that they do the right thing, and that they 

have the support they need to do it the right way. And we will continue to work with UNHCR also so that it is out there able to 

assist and provide support to the refugees that come in. 

Senator CASEY. Well, Mr. Ambassador, we want to thank you for 

your testimony today and your presence here in answering our 

questions. But also in a much more significant way, thank you for 

your commitment to the country. This is a tough assignment even 

for someone who has spent a lot of time there as you have. And 

we know you will do well, and I know I will and a lot of members 

of this committee will do everything we can to move your nomination as fast as possible so that we can get you started. 

But thanks for your commitment and that of your family. 

And unless there is anything further, we are adjourned. But I do 

not have a gavel, so I will just pound the table. 

Ambassador BEECROFT. Thank you very much, sir. 

[Whereupon, at 11:56 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF ROBERT STEPHEN BEECROFT TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. The State Department has long promised faster action to resolve the 

issues surrounding the delays in approving Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for 

Iraqis who supported the U.S. effort in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.

• (a). How many SIVs have been issued, by fiscal year, since the inception of the 

program?

Answer. The chart below details how many SIVs we have issued to Iraqi applicants under both the section 1059 and section 1244 programs since implementation 

in FY 2007. FY 2012 numbers are through August 31, 2012.

Principal Derivatives Totals 

2007 .................................................................................................................................... 431 383 814

2008 .................................................................................................................................... 518 449 967

2009 .................................................................................................................................... 1,448 1,385 2,833

2010 .................................................................................................................................... 951 1,091 2,042

2011 .................................................................................................................................... 322 384 706

2012 .................................................................................................................................... 1,627 2,175 3,802

5,297 5,867 11,164

• (b). How many applications have there been, by fiscal year?

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

629

Answer. The chart below details the number of approved I–360 immigrant visa 

petitions received by the State Department’s National Visa Center (NVC) from U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for Iraqis applying for the section 

1059 and section 1244 SIV Programs:

Iraqi Section 

1059 Approved I–360s 

Iraqi Section 

1244 Approved I–360s 

Combined 

Total 

FY 2007 ................................................................................................................... 650 0 650

FY 2008 ................................................................................................................... 149 48 197

FY 2009 ................................................................................................................... 139 1,614 1,753

FY 2010 ................................................................................................................... 10 1,025 1,035

FY 2011 ................................................................................................................... 2 2,398 2,400

FY 2012* ................................................................................................................. 1 873 874

Totals ......................................................................................................... 951 5,958 6,909

* Applications to August 31, 2012. 

• (c). How long is the average processing time (as measured by application filing 

date until the date visa issuance or notice of denial) for such applications, by 

fiscal year?

Answer. Processing SIVs involves a number of different steps to ensure a complete security check is performed on each applicant. Several different U.S. Government agencies are involved in this process. We do not maintain average processing 

times year by year for SIVs. The SIV process begins with the individual applying 

to Embassy Baghdad through NVC for a chief of mission letter confirming his/her 

eligibility for the SIV program. If the individual is found eligible for the SIV program, s/he files an immigrant visa petition with USCIS. Upon approval, USCIS 

sends the approved petition and supporting documents to NVC, which schedules the 

applicant’s visa interview at the embassy or consulate of his/her choice. At the interview, the consular officer reviews the case, and if everything is in order, requests 

the required security vetting for all adult applicants from our interagency partners. 

The security vetting has been the principal delay in processing these cases since the 

end of 2010, but we have made great improvements since spring 2012. This improvement is reflected in the FY 2012 visa issuance numbers, which are the highest 

since the program’s inception. 

Addressing delays in security vetting of Iraqi SIV applications remains a priority 

for the State Department. We have streamlined the application process—which 

must conform to the preexisting immigrant visa process under current law—as 

much as possible, eliminating redundant requirements and working with our interagency partners to accept electronic submissions wherever possible. This progress 

allowed us to cut the backlog of Iraqi SIVs pending final action (issuance or refusal 

of the visa application) by 50 percent since March. In late February, 2,832 Iraqi SIV 

applications were pending security vetting; as of September 19, that number was 

reduced to 1,348.

• (d). How many are pending as of September 19, 2012?

Answer. As of September 19, 2012, there were 1,348 Iraqi SIV applications pending security clearances.

• (e). How many have been denied by fiscal year? Please list the reasons for

denial and the corresponding number of visas denied for each reason, by fiscal 

year.

Answer. To provide this information, we need to run a customized query. We are 

proceeding, but it will take a few days to generate the date for a response. We will 

transmit this information as soon as we have it.

Question. The security situation in Iraq has improved since the worst days of the 

civil war, but the terrorist attacks in July remind that extremist groups are still 

active and demonstrate the country’s fragile peace.

• (a). What is your assessment of the current security situation? Where do you 

see the major threats?

Answer. The security environment in Iraq continues to present challenges, and we 

are supporting the Government of Iraq’s (GOI) efforts to confront threats and build 

long-term security and stability in Iraq. It is clear that AQI remains a dangerous 

threat. While there has been clear and measurable success against AQI over the 

years, recent attacks make clear the security situation warrants attention. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

630

While there are formidable security challenges, the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) 

have made impressive gains in combating terrorism. We are confident the ISF will 

continue pressuring AQI—and others—to further diminish their capabilities. 

Although Iranian backed militias have largely been quiet since the departure of U.S. 

Forces, they remain capable of launching attacks against the residual U.S. presence. 

The United States continues to stand with the GOI and is ready to work within the 

scope of the Strategic Framework Agreement to ensure that the capacity and ability 

of extremists to carry out attacks is diminished.

• (b). How are the Iraqi Security Forces developing and do you think they are capable of addressing the threats?

Answer. We are encouraged by the GOI’s continuing commitment and progress in 

developing the capacity of Iraqi military and police forces. In February, the GOI 

passed a budget for 2012 that included $15 billion in defense and security spending—15 percent of their total spending. 

While the GOI is increasingly capable and effective in addressing the various 

security threats, we are working with it through our security assistance office, 

Police Development Program, and other programs to further improve the capacity 

of its security forces to counter terrorism, insurgency, and external threats.

• (c). Given the military withdrawal, how is the security situation impacting our 

Embassy’s access to places beyond Baghdad? What measures are in place to 

support diplomatic efforts to remain engaged with all cross-sections of Iraqi 

society? What more, in your assessment, is needed?

Answer. Engagement is a cornerstone of our relationship with Iraq and we are 

meeting on a regular basis with all levels of Iraqi Government and society including 

the Prime Minister, the President, Cabinet and Parliament members, politicians, 

and civil and social leaders. The Department places the highest priority on the protection of our personnel and we take extraordinary protective security measures to 

enable mission staff to engage outside of secure chief of mission facilities. Every protective security detail movement is assessed from the standpoint of threat and security conditions, prioritized on the basis of available resources. Only if necessary, 

moves are restricted or postponed. 

In the first two quarters of this calendar year, more than 6,000 protective security 

detail missions were carried out. Only a small number of requests have been postponed or cancelled due to threat or lack of resources. 

There has been no diminishment of our ability to meet with our Iraqi counterparts since U.S. Forces left Iraq and in some areas the level of engagement is higher 

today than it was before the withdrawal took place.

Question. When it comes to human security, what are the ongoing challenges 

faced by the most vulnerable groups, including women, children, and religious 

minorities as Iraq struggles to establish lasting peace? What specific programs 

would you as Ambassador support to assist these populations?

Answer. Iraq’s vulnerable communities face ongoing threats of violence and discrimination as well as a lack of economic opportunities. If confirmed, I will ensure 

that we continue to utilize all Embassy assets to advance a human rights agenda 

that includes the elimination of violence and discrimination based on gender, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. 

If confirmed, I will continue to work closely with: the Government of Iraq; the 

Department’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq, Barbara Leaf, who 

serves as the Secretary’s Coordinator for Iraq’s Religious and Ethnic Minorities; the 

Department’s Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom, Suzan 

Johnson Cooke; and Ambassador at Large for Women’s Issues, Melanne Verveer, to 

help improve conditions for Iraq’s vulnerable groups. 

To date, we have provided over $72 million in targeted assistance to Iraq’s minority communities. Projects have provided short-term humanitarian assistance as well 

as long-term economic development initiatives to help create and secure the environment for these communities to remain in Iraq and play a meaningful role in Iraqi 

society. We are continuing to work with the GOI to improve security conditions for 

its vulnerable communities, including by urging the GOI to continue its efforts to 

provide additional security for places of worship and during religious holidays. 

Other examples of our ongoing programs for vulnerable groups include: support 

for microfinance institutions to provide economic opportunities for at risk populations including women and minorities; a legal advocacy program for assistance to 

minorities in pursuing legal remedies through legal clinics; a ‘‘Minorities Caucus’’ 

within Iraq’s Council of Representatives; and the Iraq Women’s Democracy Initiative and Secretary’s War Widows Program to strengthen political participation, ecoFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

631

nomic empowerment, women’s rights advocacy, media skills, as well as negotiation 

and capacity-building for women’s NGOs. 

If confirmed, I will continue the good work that has been done to help create conditions for these communities to remain in Iraq and bring their concerns to the 

highest levels of the GOI.

Question. On September 16 the last major relocation of residents from Camp 

Ashraf to Camp Hurriya was successfully completed. But there remain concerns 

about the long-term safety of this group. What are the major humanitarian challenges for finding long-term solutions for the residents, and how can the U.S. 

Embassy and the Iraqi Government work together to overcome those obstacles?

Answer. The relocation of former Ashraf residents out of Iraq will not be easy or 

a quickly accomplished process. However, the United Nations (U.N.) and international community are turning their full attention to the task now that the major 

relocations from Ashraf have been completed. At Camp Hurriya, the Office of the 

U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) continues an identity verification 

and refugee status determination process for the relocated residents. Embassy 

Baghdad, in support of the UNHCR process, is working closely with the diplomatic 

community in Baghdad to intensify efforts and if confirmed. I would be personally 

involved in these engagements, if confirmed as next Ambassador to Iraq. My 

colleagues in the Department are also working diligently with foreign governments 

to encourage them to help in the permanent resettlement of the former Ashraf 

residents. 

With regard to their current situation, the Government of Iraq, the U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI), and UNHCR—all with our support—continue to cooperatively address humanitarian concerns raised by the residents. For example, 

Iraqi authorities managing the relocation efforts have facilitated the transfer of a 

variety of property from Ashraf, ranging from televisions and computers to water 

storage tanks and other life support items. Additionally, in response to residents’ 

concerns over access to a sustainable water source, Iraqi authorities are working 

with the residents to connect Camp Hurriya to a nearby reservoir. Also, Camp 

Hurriya residents have access to U.N. human rights monitors around the clock. 

My colleagues at Embassy Baghdad have worked tirelessly to see the relocation 

effort from Ashraf to Hurriya concluded peacefully and safely. We will continue to 

visit Hurriya regularly, and, if confirmed, I will remain committed to seeing this 

issue through to humane and secure solutions for the individuals at Camp Hurriya. 

RESPONSES OF STEPHEN BEECROFT TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JAMES M. INHOFE

Question. Considering that under the Saddam regime, minority and opposition 

groups were attacked using Soviet aircraft and helicopters, many Sunni, Shia, and 

Kurd communities fear it will happen again with U.S.-made aircraft. What safeguards has the United States placed on U.S. arms transfers to Iraq to prevent U.S. 

origin weapons and equipment from being used against Iraqi minority and opposition groups? What controls have been placed specifically on U.S. origin aircraft and 

associated munitions to ensure misuse does not occur?

Answer. We have encouraged and continue to encourage Iraqi leaders to settle 

their differences through the political process in accordance with the Iraqi Constitution without resorting to violence. 

To achieve our strategic objective of a sovereign, stable, and self-reliant Iraq that 

contributes to peace and stability in the region, we will continue to responsibly support Iraq’s efforts to develop capable Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) that adhere to the 

rule of law and respect human rights. We support Iraq’s efforts to purchase defense 

equipment to meet its legitimate defense needs, in line with its domestic spending 

priorities and in accordance with its budget laws and procedures. 

In reviewing security assistance programs and export licenses for U.S.-origin 

defense articles to any country, the United States takes into account a full range 

of foreign policy, national security, and human rights considerations. We consider 

a variety of factors, including consistency with arms control initiatives and agreements, appropriateness of the transfer in responding to legitimate U.S. and recipient security needs, internal political stability, and regional stability interests. 

In addition, all equipment provided under our security assistance programs or 

sales is subject to end-use restrictions and conditions. Embassy Baghdad has implemented robust End Use Monitoring programs: ‘‘Blue Lantern’’ (State program) and 

‘‘Golden Sentry’’ (DOD program). These programs require routine inspections to ensure there are no unauthorized transfers of arms and equipment.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

632

Question. What initiatives or programs has the United States continued with

minority security forces, such as the Kurdish Peshmerga, now that all U.S. forces 

have withdrawn from Iraq?

Answer. The Department of State is continuing a Department of Defense (DOD) 

effort to professionalize security forces in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region and to integrate them into the central government’s Iraqi Security Forces. Earlier this year, 

the Department approved a program, fully funded by the DOD’s Iraq Security 

Forces Fund (ISFF), to train and equip the Kurdistan Regional Government’s (KRG) 

Regional Guard Brigades (RGBs). 

Additionally, the Department of State’s Police Development Program (PDP) and 

its Anti-Terrorism Assistance (ATA) program provide assistance to the KRG’s police 

forces. The PDP provides training on criminal investigations, information technology 

and communication, professional development, and border security. The ATA program provides training in VIP protection, critical incident management, and explosive incident countermeasures.

Question. Recent reports indicate Iran has been using Iraqi airspace to transfer 

weapons to the Assad regime because the Iraqi Air Force doesn’t have a capability 

to defend its territory. What confidence does the United States have that the Iraqi 

Government will use its newly acquired F–16s to protect its airspace and enforce 

U.N. sanctions against Iran and Syria? Is the Department of State providing foreign 

military aid for border patrol and air sovereignty training that includes arms smuggling scenarios?

Answer. The sale of F–16s and other military equipment is part of our long-term 

vision for a strategic partnership with Iraq. Iraq’s F–16s are currently scheduled for 

delivery in September 2014. These aircraft will play a key role in helping Iraq protect its airspace, defend its sovereignty, and deter or counter regional threats. We 

believe the Government of Iraq can play an increasingly positive role in preserving 

regional stability, and this is one of the points that we stress to the Iraqis in pressing them to fully implement U.N. sanctions against Iran. 

Air sovereignty and border security are legitimate defense requirements for Iraq. 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) subject matter experts, through the Police 

Development Program, continue to support key ministries responsible for border security, including the Ministry of Interior, to achieve a level of self sufficiency in 

their operations and relevant training requirements. Should the Iraqis request additional border patrol or air sovereignty training aimed at arms smuggling scenarios 

in the future, the Department would review such a request under our Conventional 

Arms Transfer Policy, taking into account a number of factors ranging from regional 

security and nonproliferation to human rights. Some of the equipment which Iraq 

has purchased through a combination of host nation funding and Department of 

Defense-provided Iraqi Security Forces Funds (ISFF) will help Iraq confront a variety of security challenges including arms smuggling.

Question. Now that the last major group of residents from Camp Ashraf, home 

to 3,200 members of the Iranian opposition group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), 

have relocated to Camp Liberty, what specific steps is the United States taking in 

ensuring the safety and security of the residents now in Camp Liberty?

Answer. In my capacity as Charge ́ d’affaires in Baghdad, my colleagues and I are 

fully engaged in ensuring the safety and security of the residents at Camp Hurriya 

(Liberty). Embassy Baghdad officers continue to visit Hurriya regularly and speak 

with the residents. My colleagues and I also work closely with U.N. and Iraqi officials regarding Hurriya. If confirmed, I will remain attentive to the situation at both 

Ashraf and Hurriya and remain in active, regular contact with both the U.N. and 

the Government of Iraq in support of completing a peaceful and safe relocation process. In addition, Embassy Baghdad officials will continue to observe movements at 

both Ashraf and Hurriya and to monitor relocations as they take place.

Question. As one of your first acts as Ambassador, if confirmed, will you convey 

to the Maliki government, that the Iraqi Government must ensure the safety, security, and dignity of all the residents of Camp Liberty so long as they are in Iraq?

Answer. In my capacity as Charge ́ d’affaires in Baghdad, I have personally engaged with Prime Minister Maliki and senior Iraqi officials to work to ensure the 

safety, security, and dignity of the residents of Camp Hurriya (Liberty). The United 

States has publicly supported a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the 

Government of Iraq and the United Nations Assistance Mission to Iraq (UNAMI) 

that in part calls on the Iraqi Government to provide for the safety and security 

of Hurriya. If confirmed, I will continue to urge the Government of Iraq at the highFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

633

est levels to continue to abide by the MOU and ensure the security of the residents 

of Hurriya.

Question. As one of your first acts as Ambassador, if confirmed, will you focus and 

work toward a permanent and just resolution to the MEK issue?

Answer. In my capacity as Charge ́ d’affaires in Baghdad, I take the greatest interest in working toward a permanent and just resolution to the MEK issue. My colleagues and I at Embassy Baghdad are fully engaged in the relocation process and 

in ensuring the safety of the residents of Camp Hurriya (Liberty). If confirmed, I 

will continue to work with all sides at the highest levels to bring this issue to a 

peaceful resolution. 

RESPONSES OF ROBERT STEPHEN BEECROFT TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR ROBERT MENENDEZ

Question. Mr. Beecroft, as you assume the critical role of Ambassador to the 

Republic of Iraq, what are the administration’s priorities as we transition from a 

military to civilian assistance role? How do we continue to encourage the Iraqi people to follow the path toward democracy and religious tolerance?

Answer. Progress in Iraq remains critical to U.S. national security. We are dedicated to supporting a sovereign, stable, and self-reliant Iraq that can be a partner 

to the United States. 

Our relationship with Iraq is one of our most strategically important bilateral 

relationships. Our direct engagement with the Iraqi Government and people has remained robust since the departure of USF–I. As Charge ́ d’affaires, I have regularly 

engaged with President Talabani, and Prime Minister Maliki and my colleagues 

meet with cabinet ministers, parliamentarians, and civil society leaders throughout 

Iraq. 

The administration’s priorities in Iraq include supporting a unified federal democratic Iraq, fighting AQI and supporting human rights. We are working with Iraq 

to help develop their economy and Iraq’s oil resources while promoting and increasing U.S. business engagement in Iraq. If confirmed, I will do my best as Ambassador to further these objectives. We remain focused on strengthening Iraq’s democratic institutions and ensuring that their voices determine the future direction of 

their country. Part of our work to help build Iraq’s democratic institutions is our 

continued support for the Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC). We continue to work closely with the government and with IHEC in preparation for provincial elections in 2013 and parliamentary elections in 2014. 

As part of our larger effort to promote religious freedom in Iraq, Secretary Clinton 

appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq, Barbara Leaf, to serve as 

the Coordinator for Iraq’s Religious and Ethnic Minorities. DAS Leaf has traveled 

to Iraq to meet with these communities and, along with the Ambassador at Large 

for International Religious Freedom, Ambassador Suzan Johnson Cook, has engaged 

Iraq’s Christian diaspora communities in the United States. Our Embassy in Baghdad continues to meet frequently with minority religious and community leaders to 

discuss their concerns and to determine ways the U.S. Government can assist. To 

date, we have provided over $72 million in targeted assistance to Iraq’s minority 

communities. Projects have provided short-term humanitarian assistance as well as 

long-term economic development to help create and secure the environment for 

these communities to remain in Iraq and promote their rightful place in the social 

fabric of Iraqi society. We have also focused on strengthening the ability of Iraq’s 

minority communities to receive the full attention and support of their own government through the Iraqi Minority Parliamentary Caucus. We believe these efforts are 

critical to strengthening the relationship between minority communities and their 

government and are critical to helping these communities secure their rightful place 

within Iraq’s social fabric.

Question. For over 25 years, Camp Ashraf in Iraq was the home to more than 

3,000 Iranian refugees. As provided for under the Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) with Iraq last December, the residents of Camp Ashraf began the transition 

to Camp Hurriya early this year, with the seventh convoy arriving on September 

16. It is my understanding that, over the coming weeks, the small group temporarily 

remaining at the former Camp Ashraf will soon be making the final trip to Camp 

Hurriya. 

It has come to my attention that there remain unresolved and legitimate concerns 

regarding the humanitarian conditions at Camp Hurriya.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

634

• As Ambassador, will you commit to visiting the facilities at Camp Hurriya and 

meeting with its residents? Will you ensure that their concerns are addressed, 

to the best of your abilities?

Answer. We take the greatest interest that the residents of Camp Hurriya have 

access to facilities that meet international humanitarian conditions. At Camp 

Hurriya, the High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) continues a verification and 

refugee status determination process for the relocated residents, and U.N. monitors 

are accessible round-the-clock. UNHCR and the U.N. Human Rights Office in Baghdad have determined facilities at Camp Hurriya, the previous home of U.S. troops 

stationed in Baghdad, to be in accordance with international humanitarian standards. A recent tour of the facilities found adequate electricity to power flat-screen 

televisions, sufficient water (residents receive on average in excess of 200 liters per 

person per day of water), landscaped grounds and fresh produce. There continue to 

be some complaints by the residents at Hurriya, but we have seen progress between 

the residents and the GOI on finding practical solutions to these issues. 

U.S. Embassy Baghdad officers continue to visit Hurriya regularly and speak with 

the residents, and with U.N. and Iraqi officials regarding Hurriya. If confirmed, I 

will ensure that we remain attentive to the situation at both Ashraf and Hurriya 

and remain in active, regular contact with both the U.N. and the GOI in support 

of completing a peaceful and safe relocation process. I will make every effort to personally visit Camp Hurriya at the earliest, appropriate opportunity. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(635)

NOMINATIONS OF ROBERT F. GODEC AND 

DEBORAH ANN McCARTHY 

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2012

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC 

Hon. Robert F. Godec, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Kenya 

Deborah Ann McCarthy, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the 

Republic of Lithuania 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:25 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher A. 

Coons, presiding. 

Present: Senators Coons, Lugar, and Isakson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE 

Senator COONS. I call this hearing to order. 

I am honored to chair this hearing for the ambassadorial nominees to serve this Nation in Kenya and Lithuania, Ambassador 

Robert Godec and Ms. Deborah Ann McCarthy. Both nominees 

have impressive and long records of service and accomplishment in 

the Foreign Service of the United States, and I look forward to 

hearing about their priorities for advancing U.S. policies and interests in the countries to which they may soon go as our Ambassadors. 

I am also very pleased to be joined by my good friend and ranking member, Senator Isakson, of Georgia, and particularly honored 

that Senator Lugar, the ranking member of the full committee, has 

joined us today; and I understand Senator Durbin, of Illinois, may 

as well join us shortly. 

I apologize for the delay in getting started. We had a vote on the 

floor of the Senate. 

As some know, Kenya has particularly important meaning for 

me. The first time I ever set foot in Africa was as a undergraduate 

spending a semester at the University of Nairobi, and I later volunteered at an orphanage in Ngong. My experience there was transformative, and changed my perspective on the world, and gave me 

a new sense of purpose and focus. And I returned to Kenya, for the 

first time in 25 years, just a few months ago. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

636

In Nairobi, I had the opportunity to speak at the Kenyan 

National Prayer Breakfast, as Senator Isakson has, as well, this 

year, with President Kibaki and others, where I affirmed the centrality for the United States of the upcoming elections and our sincere hope that the violence and chaos of the 2007 elections can be 

averted. The United States, in my view, is, and should be, closely 

watching the process surrounding this election, and we’ll work 

closely with Kenyan officials to ensure the elections are peaceful, 

credible, and transparent. And I emphasized then, as I will again 

today, that we do not favor any particular outcome or candidate, 

but, instead, a free and fair process. 

Kenya has made remarkable progress in recent years in reforming its constitution, building democratic institutions, expanding 

press freedoms, and improving its economy. I was particularly impressed, during that visit with the younger generation of Kenyans, 

in the great potential that exists amongst entrepreneurs. 

There are many other things to be concerned about in the process toward the election, and I look forward to hearing about them 

in more detail from Ambassador Godec. 

Several factors may well influence the outcome of the election—

ethnic tensions, the balloting registration process, the behavior of 

the police and security services, messaging of the candidates—all 

of which I hope we will get into in some more detail. 

The other main area of concern for me regarding Kenya is its 

military involvement in Somalia, the ongoing security challenges, 

both within and without Kenya and its borders. 

Kenya is home to the largest diplomatic mission in Africa, from 

which a host of government agencies oversee bilateral and regional 

programs, and serves as a base for humanitarian relief, food security, and global health initiatives, and I’m eager to talk about that, 

as well as the potential for trade and investment in the region. 

To serve as our next Ambassador in this critical post, in my view, 

President Obama has chosen wisely in nominating Ambassador 

Godec, who has served as Charge ́ in Nairobi since August and has 

been received positively by government, civil society, and NGOs. 

Having built a strong career as the former Ambassador to Tunisia, 

he recently served as Principal Deputy Counterterrorism Coordinator in the State Counterterrorism Bureau. Prior to his service in 

Tunisia, he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern 

Affairs. This is Ambassador Godec’s second time in Nairobi, following a posting from 1996 to 1999 as Economic Counselor. 

Just as Kenya has worked hard to improve and reform its democracy and economy, Lithuania, too, serves, in my view, as a model 

of democratic transition since the cold war, the first former Soviet 

Republic to declare its independence, on March 11, 1990. Moscow, 

however, did not recognize this proclamation until the following 

year. Since then, Lithuania has experienced a smooth transition, 

democratic elections, a restructured economy, and has joined NATO 

and the EU. Having just completed its own elections in October, 

our incoming Ambassador there, if she is confirmed, must work 

with the new Lithuanian Government to encourage economic 

growth, greater cooperation on energy security, and many other 

regional issues relating to both Russia and other regional actors. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

637

Ms. McCarthy, the nominee to serve as our Ambassador to Lithuania, has a long and distinguished career, having served for 30 

years in the Foreign Service, currently as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, 

and previously as Deputy Chief of Mission in Embassy Athens, 

Special Coordinator for Venezuelan Affairs, Senior Advisor for 

Counterterrorism, and Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau 

for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement. 

Now, I very much look forward to hearing from both nominees, 

and will encourage them, in time, to introduce their families, as 

well, who, as we all recognize, are the often unsung true heroes, 

in terms of supporting through sacrifice and service, but let me 

first turn to my friend and ranking member, Senator Isakson, for 

his opening remarks. 

Senator ISAKSON. Out of respect for the chairman, I’m going to 

defer my remarks to the Chair and let him make the opening statement. 

Mr. Chairman. 

Senator COONS. Senator Lugar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA 

Senator LUGAR. Likewise, I will ask that my comments and opening be put in the record. 

I simply come, as all of us do, to try to affirm how important 

these two ambassadorial positions are and how important it is we 

act promptly so that these positions are filled. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Lugar follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. LUGAR,

U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA

It is a pleasure to welcome Ambassador Godec once again before the committee, 

in this case as the President’s nominee to be Ambassador to Kenya. His stewardship 

as Charge ́ over the last several months comes at a very challenging time for our 

large and important East Africa Embassy. He has brought deft and experienced 

management to Nairobi and effectively sustained our varied interests and priorities 

with Kenyans and the Kenyan Government at a critical time. 

Among the most important interests is United States support for a free and fair 

electoral process leading up to national elections in 2013, the first since the abhorrent violence that followed the 2007 elections. United States interests extend 

broadly in East Africa and recognize the commitment Kenya has made in Somalia 

under the AMISOM umbrella, as well as its long support for regional peace initiatives. Kenya also has been a key counterterrorism partner in a variety of areas that 

are of mutual concern with broad global potential for impact. These include Kenyan 

efforts fighting al-Shabab and building its own counterterror capabilities in maritime and border security. Our extensive cooperation extends to providing a regional 

platform for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the Center for Disease Control in securing biological materials that pose a threat to millions if neglected. I 

would like to thank Ambassador Godec for his expeditious review of a longstanding 

request incorporating DTRA into a large Embassy country team. 

I am also pleased to welcome Deborah Ann McCarthy, who has been nominated 

to represent the United States in Lithuania. Lithuania remains a key strategic 

NATO ally, and I am hopeful that Ms. McCarthy, if confirmed, will advance several 

key U.S. foreign policy priorities. Among other objectives, it is critical that the 

United States advance energy security for Lithuania and the entire region by supporting interconnections and the development of alternative sources of energy. We 

must also reaffirm NATO’s Article Five commitments in the region through support 

of NATO’s Baltic Air Policing mission and other means of reassurance. 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

638

Senator COONS. Thank you very much, Senator Lugar. 

Senator Isakson, did you have an opening comment you’d like to 

share? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON,

U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA 

Senator ISAKSON. Just echo your comments about the importance 

of both countries to the United States of America. And I, too, have 

been to Kenya, though I did not go and study or live there, but 

have been there to visit, understand the importance of it. And, of 

course, Lithuania, their relationship with Russia and the particular 

challenges that, economically, they have had, are of tremendous 

importance to the United States, and I look forward to questioning 

both Ms. McCarthy, as well as Mr. Godec. 

We appreciate your accepting the responsibility of these nominations. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Senator Isakson. 

I’d now like to turn to our nominees for their opening statements, starting with Ambassador Godec, followed by Ms. McCarthy. And again, I invite you to introduce your families or other 

loved ones or supporters you might have with us today, as well. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. ROBERT F. GODEC, OF VIRGINIA, 

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA 

Ambassador GODEC. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Senator 

Lugar, I am honored to appear before you today as President 

Obama’s nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Republic 

of Kenya. 

I want to thank the President and Secretary Clinton for their 

confidence in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you 

and the other Members of Congress to advance U.S. interests in 

Kenya and the East African region. 

Mr. Chairman, I’d like to introduce to you, today, my wife, Lori 

Magnusson. Lori has been a constant source of strength, support, 

and wisdom to me throughout my career. I’d also like to introduce 

my mother, Nancy Dietrich, and to express my profound thanks to 

her for all she has done for me over the years. 

Kenya is a strategic partner for the United States. Our two countries are linked by history and shared values. Kenya is a positive 

and constructive leader in a region that faces major challenges, 

including conflict, violent extremism, and poverty. 

For 50 years, as friends, Kenya and the United States have stood 

together to face these challenges. Meeting them is in the interest, 

not just of Kenya and its neighbors, but of the United States and, 

indeed, the world. As a consequence, our relationship with Kenya 

is both broad and deep. We work together with Kenya to resolve 

regional conflicts, combat terrorism, and provide humanitarian 

assistance. As a partner, we have a commitment to a strong Kenya 

and are assisting with Kenyan efforts to reform their political institutions, accelerate economic growth and development, and improve 

health and education systems. If confirmed, I will continue our 

work on these challenges, and will engage with Kenyans from 

across the country to do so. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

639

A democratic Kenya, which embraces national reconciliation and 

rejects corruption and impunity, is critical for the future of East 

Africa. Since the deadly violence that swept Kenya following the 

disputed December 2007 Presidential elections, the United States 

has focused on supporting political and constitutional reform in 

Kenya. 

Kenya’s new constitution, adopted in August 2010, is one of the 

most progressive in Africa, and envisions nothing less than the 

complete overhaul of the political system. It holds the promise of 

anchoring Kenya’s democracy firmly in the rule of law. 

Facing many other challenges, including internal political disagreements, drought, and the global economic crisis, Kenya has 

made significant progress passing the legislation necessary to 

implement the constitution. Kenya’s judicial reforms have been a 

particular bright spot. 

The upcoming March 2013 election is the next key moment for 

Kenya in the implementation of its constitution and in advancing 

political reform. The responsibility for the election rests squarely 

with the Kenyan Government and people, and success, frankly, is 

not assured. 

If confirmed, one of my top priorities will be to support Kenyan 

efforts to make the election free, fair, and peaceful. We have a 

strong and varied set of programs in place to assist institutions 

charged with carrying out the most complex election in Kenya’s 

history. We’re working with the government, with civil society, religious leaders, community leaders, and youth across the country to 

promote peaceful participation in the election. We are also coordinating closely with the international community and other partners 

on our election assistance to ensure the wise and effective use of 

taxpayer resources. 

Beyond the election, Kenya faces many other internal challenges, 

including devolving power to new county governments, carrying out 

land reform, improving environmental protection, combating HIV/

AIDS, and strengthening its institutions. Kenya needs to make 

progress to address these challenges, and, if confirmed, I will continue our mission’s work to assist the Kenyans to do so. 

I will also seek to deepen and strengthen our economic and commercial ties, including the promotion of U.S. exports and the protection of U.S. investment. 

Kenya’s security remains a major concern. It is inextricably 

linked to our own, as was clearly illustrated in the 1998 bombing 

of our Embassy, carried out by al-Qaeda, which left 218 people 

dead and thousands injured. Kenya has borne a heavy burden from 

the insecurity and from extremist violence and humanitarian challenges associated with the conflict in Somalia. 

As a troop-contributing country to AMISOM, Kenya has helped 

to establish the security necessary for the new government in 

Mogadishu to begin serving the needs of the Somali people. In taking a higher profile in Somalia, however, Kenya increasingly has 

become a victim of violent attacks by terrorists. If confirmed, I will 

continue to support Kenya’s efforts to secure its borders and to protect its citizens while working to ensure that Kenya respects 

human rights and international law as it fights terrorism. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

640

Kenya also hosts more than 600,000 refugees, primarily from 

Somalia, which places a burden on its limited resources. The 

United States will continue to assist Kenya to meet its international obligations with respect to refugees. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, a tangible indicator of Kenya’s importance to the United States is the fact that the United States mission in Nairobi is now our largest in Africa. The staff at the 

Embassy has recently weathered a period of transition and uncertainty. In my brief time as Charge ́ d’Affaires, I’ve been impressed 

by the professionalism, dedication, and integrity of the mission 

staff, both Kenyan and American. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, if confirmed, I would 

be honored to serve as the next United States Ambassador to the 

Republic of Kenya and to lead the capable and committed public 

servants at our mission there. 

I’d be pleased to answer any questions you might have today. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Godec follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. GODEC

Mr. Chairman, ranking member, and members of the committee, I am honored 

to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the next United 

States Ambassador to the Republic of Kenya. I want to thank the President and 

Secretary Clinton for their confidence in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working 

with you and the other Members of Congress to advance United States interests in 

Kenya and the East African region. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce to you my wife, Lori Magnusson, who 

is here with me today. Lori has been a constant source of strength, support, and 

wisdom to me throughout my career. I would also like to introduce my mother, 

Nancy Dietrich, and to express my profound thanks to her for all she has done for 

me over the years. 

Kenya is a strategic partner for the United States. Our two countries are linked 

by history and shared values. Kenya is a positive and constructive leader in a region 

that faces major challenges, including conflict, violent extremism, and poverty. For 

50 years, as friends, Kenya and the United States have stood together to face these 

challenges. Meeting them is in the interest not just of Kenya and its neighbors, but 

of the United States and, indeed, the world. 

As a consequence, our relationship with Kenya is both broad and deep. We work 

together with Kenya to resolve regional conflicts, combat terrorism, and provide 

humanitarian assistance. As a partner, we have a commitment to a strong Kenya 

and are assisting with Kenyan efforts to reform their political institutions, accelerate economic growth and development, and improve health and education systems. 

If confirmed, I will continue our work on these challenges and will engage with 

Kenyans from across the country to do so. 

A democratic Kenya, which embraces national reconciliation and rejects corruption and impunity, is critical for the future of East Africa. Since the deadly violence 

that swept Kenya following the disputed December 2007 Presidential elections, the 

United States has focused on supporting political and constitutional reform in 

Kenya. Kenya’s new constitution, adopted in August 2010, is one of the most progressive in Africa and envisions nothing less than the complete overhaul of the 

political system. It holds the promise of anchoring Kenya’s democracy firmly in the 

rule of law. Despite facing many other challenges, including internal political disagreements, drought, and the global economic crisis, Kenya has made significant 

progress passing the legislation necessary to implement the constitution. Kenya’s 

judicial reforms have been a particular bright spot. 

The upcoming March 2013 election is the next key moment for Kenya in the 

implementation of its new constitution and in advancing political reform. The responsibility for the election rests squarely with the Kenyan Government and people, 

and success, frankly, is not assured. If I am confirmed, one of my top priorities will 

be to support Kenyan efforts to make the election free, fair, and peaceful. We have 

a strong and varied set of programs in place to assist institutions charged with 

carrying out the most complex election in Kenya’s history. We are working with government, civil society, religious leaders, community leaders, and youth across the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

641

country to promote peaceful participation in the election. We are also coordinating 

closely with the international community and other partners on our election assistance to ensure the wise and effective use of taxpayer resources. 

Beyond the election, Kenya faces many other internal challenges, including devolving power to new county governments, carrying out land reform, improving environmental protection, combating HIV/AIDS, and strengthening its institutions. 

Kenya needs to make progress to address these challenges and, if confirmed, I will 

continue our mission’s work to assist the Kenyans to do so. I will also seek to 

deepen and strengthen our economic and commercial ties, including the promotion 

of U.S. exports and protection of U.S. investment. 

Kenya’s security remains a major concern. It is inextricably linked to our own, as 

was clearly illustrated in the 1998 bombing of our Embassy, carried out by alQaeda, which left 218 people dead and thousands injured. Kenya has borne a heavy 

burden from the insecurity, extremist violence, and humanitarian challenges associated with the conflict in Somalia. As a troop contributing country to the African 

Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), Kenya has helped to establish the security 

necessary for the new government in Mogadishu to begin serving the needs of the 

Somali people. In taking a higher profile in Somalia, however, Kenya increasingly 

has become a victim of violent attacks by terrorists. If confirmed, I will continue to 

support Kenya’s effort to secure its borders and to protect its citizens, while working 

to ensure that Kenya respects human rights and international law as it fights 

terrorism. 

Kenya also hosts more than 600,000 refugees, primarily from Somalia, which 

places a considerable burden on its limited resources. The United States will continue to assist Kenya to meet its international obligations with respect to refugees. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, a tangible indicator of Kenya’s importance to the United 

States is the fact that U.S. Mission Nairobi is now our largest in Africa. The staff 

at the Embassy has recently weathered a period of transition and uncertainty. In 

my brief time as Charge ́ d’Affaires, I have been impressed by the professionalism, 

dedication, and integrity of the mission staff, both American and Kenyan. Mr. 

Chairman and members of the committee, if confirmed, I would be honored to serve 

as the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of Kenya and to lead the 

capable and committed public servants at our mission there. 

I would be pleased to respond to any questions you might have.

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador Godec. 

Ms. McCarthy. 

STATEMENT OF DEBORAH ANN MCCARTHY, OF FLORIDA,

TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA 

Ms. MCCARTHY. Thank you. 

Members of the committee, it is indeed a privilege and honor for 

me to appear before you today. 

I am very grateful to the President and the Secretary for their 

confidence in nominating me as the United States Ambassador to 

Lithuania. If confirmed, I pledge to represent the United States to 

the best of my ability, and to work with this committee, your staff, 

and your congressional colleagues to advance U.S. interests. 

With your permission, I would like to introduce my daughter, 

Natalia; my sisters, Linda Malone and Diana Bernard; and my 

brother-in-law, Paul Malone, as well as my extended Foreign Service family, which includes colleagues at the Foreign Service Institute and new members of the United States mission in Lithuania 

who are here today. 

Over the last 14 years, I have served in a number of positions, 

which you mentioned. I believe that these experiences have prepared me well, if confirmed, to lead our mission and to exercise 

American leadership in Lithuania. 

We enjoy a close relationship with Lithuania. It’s a relationship 

founded on 90 years of unbroken diplomatic relations, transatlantic 

ties of the many American citizens of Lithuanian ancestry, and the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

642

energetic engagement of Lithuania with the United States in 

addressing challenges to freedom and security worldwide. 

Since it established its independence in 1990, Lithuania has embraced democracy and the principles of a free market. In addition 

to its active role in NATO and the EU, Lithuania successfully has 

chaired the Community of Democracies and the OSCE in 2010–

2011, demonstrating its growth into a leading promoter of democratic values, on a global scale. Moreover, the fact that Lithuania 

has one of the highest rates of voting with the United States at the 

U.N. is evidence of the principles it shares with us. 

Lithuania’s particularly dedicated to advancing democracy in the 

countries of the former Soviet Union, sharing the experience and 

expertise it has during its hard-won reintegration into the West. It 

is actively helping the Belarusian people to build civil society in the 

face of terribly difficult circumstances. It is vigorously supporting 

Georgia’s territorial integrity and accession into NATO. And it’s 

working, on the grassroots level elsewhere in Eastern Europe, to 

build stronger democratic institutions. 

When Lithuania takes on the presidency of the European Union 

in July of next year, it plans to make the EU’s Eastern Partnership 

Initiative a key priority in that very region. Lithuania is a committed ally of the United States, sending troops to Afghanistan, 

leading a Provincial Reconstruction Team, deploying Special Operation Forces, and it has pledged to help financially sustain the 

Afghan National Security Forces beyond 2014. It is doing this as 

it has also undergone an economic downturn through the global 

economic crisis. It lost over 14 percent of its GDP in 2009, alone. 

However, the economy has rebounded and has become one of the 

fastest growing in the EU. The energy sector, in particular, has 

been growing as it seeks to diversify its sources of power. This presents opportunities to support the President’s National Export Initiative and help create jobs in the United States. I’ve spent the last 

2 years in the Economic Bureau directing State’s efforts to carry 

out the National Export Initiative, and, if confirmed, I will work 

actively with United States businesses to expand their opportunities in Lithuania and the region. 

Addressing issues that linger from the days of war and totalitarian occupation has been difficult for Lithuania, but, during the 

past several years, the government has made significant progress 

in doing so. To name a few developments: the Lithuanian authorities have granted protection to a historic cemetery considered 

sacred by Jews worldwide, dedicated 2011 to the remembrance of 

Holocaust victims, passed legislation to compensate for Jewish 

communal property seized, and approved the resumption of the 

International Commission for the Evaluation of the Crimes of the 

Nazi and Soviet Occupation Regimes in Lithuania. 

If confirmed, I will work closely with the government to monitor 

and encourage effective implementation of these agreements, as 

well as to promote tolerance and historical understanding. 

Thank you, again, for the opportunity to appear before you today. 

Should the Senate confirm my nomination, I will dedicate myself 

to protecting and advancing United States interests in Lithuania. 

And I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may 

have. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

643

[The prepared statement of Ms. McCarthy follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DEBORAH A. MCCARTHY

Members of the committee, it is a privilege and an honor for me to appear before 

you today. I am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their confidence in nominating me to be the United States Ambassador to Lithuania. If confirmed, I pledge to represent the United States to the best of my ability and to work 

with this committee, your staff, and your congressional colleagues to advance U.S. 

interests. 

With your permission, I would like to introduce my daughter, Natalia, and my sister, Diana McCarthy Bernard. 

Over the last 14 of my 30 years of government service, I have served as Deputy 

Chief of Mission in Nicaragua, consul general in Montreal, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Narcotics, Deputy Chief of Mission in Greece, and now Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs, responsible for 

global economic engagement. I believe that these experiences have prepared me 

well, if confirmed, to lead our mission—and to exercise American leadership—in 

Lithuania. 

The United States enjoys a close relationship with Lithuania. It is a relationship 

founded on America’s 90 years of unbroken diplomatic relations with Lithuania, the 

transatlantic ties of the many American citizens of Lithuanian ancestry, and the 

energetic engagement of Lithuania with the United States in addressing today’s 

challenges to freedom and security worldwide. 

Since Lithuania reestablished its independence in 1990, it has embraced democracy and the principles of a free market. In addition to its active role in the North 

Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU), Lithuania successfully chaired the Community of Democracies and the OSCE in 2010–2011, demonstrating Lithuania’s growth into a leading promoter of democratic values on a 

global scale. Moreover, the fact that Lithuania has one of the highest rates of voting 

with the United States at the United Nations is evidence of the principles it shares 

with us. 

Lithuania is particularly dedicated to advancing democracy in the countries of the 

former Soviet Union, sharing the expertise it gained during its hard-won reintegration into the West. It is actively helping the Belarusian people build a strong civil 

society in the face of terribly difficult circumstances, vigorously supporting Georgia’s 

territorial integrity and accession into NATO, and is working on the grassroots level 

elsewhere in Eastern Europe, including in Ukraine and Moldova, to build stronger 

democratic institutions. When Lithuania takes on the Presidency of the European 

Union in July of next year, it plans to make the EU’s Eastern Partnership Initiative 

a key priority, hosting the Eastern Partnership Summit in November 2013. 

Lithuania is a committed ally of the United States, volunteering to send troops 

to Afghanistan even before joining NATO. It leads a Provincial Reconstruction Team 

in Ghor province, deploys Special Operations Forces to Regional Command–South, 

and has pledged to help financially sustain the Afghan National Security Forces beyond 2014. 

The global economic crisis had severe effects on Lithuania. GDP shrank by 14.8 

percent in 2009. Through the government’s implementation of strict austerity measures and active trade and investment efforts, the economy has rebounded and become one of the fastest growing in the EU, with a 5.9 percent increase in GDP in 

2011 and 2.5 percent forecast for 2012. The energy sector in particular has been 

growing as part of the Lithuanian Government’s strategy to diversify its sources of 

power. Such growth offers opportunities to support the President’s National Export 

Initiative (NEI) and help create jobs in the United States. I have spent the last 2 

years in the Economic Bureau directing State’s efforts to carry out the NEI and, if 

confirmed, I will work actively with United States businesses to expand their opportunities in Lithuania and the region. 

Addressing issues that linger from the days of war and totalitarian occupation has 

been difficult for Lithuania, but during the past several years, the government has 

made significant progress in doing so. To name a few developments: the Lithuanian 

authorities granted protection to a historic cemetery considered sacred by Jews 

worldwide, dedicated the year 2011 to the remembrance of Holocaust victims in 

Lithuania, passed legislation to compensate for Jewish communal property seized 

under Nazi and Soviet rule, and approved the resumption of the International Commission for the Evaluation of the Crimes of the Nazi and Soviet Occupation Regimes 

in Lithuania. If confirmed, I will work closely with the government to monitor and 

encourage effective implementation of the afore-mentioned agreements as well as to 

promote tolerance and historical understanding. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

644

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. Should the Senate confirm my nomination, I will dedicate myself to protecting and advancing United 

States interests in Lithuania. I will be pleased to answer any questions you may 

have at this time.

Senator COONS. Thank you very much, Ms. McCarthy and 

Ambassador Godec. 

I’ll now begin—5-minute round? Seven minutes. How about 7-

minute rounds? Fine. 

Senator Lugar, do you need to leave us early? Should I defer—

I welcome you to ask the first round of questions. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, thank you. I thank the Chair. 

And, first of all, I appreciate the testimony of both of the 

witnesses. 

Ambassador Godec, a year ago, at Thanksgiving time, it was my 

privilege to accompany Ash Carter, of the Defense Department, and 

Kenny Myers, of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, to Kenya 

and Uganda for the purpose of working with the governments of 

those two countries in behalf of the security for laboratories in 

which they were collecting blood samples from farm animals, 

attempting to create pathogens that might be of assistance in

the event of an Ebola epidemic, or Marburg, or Anthrax, with the 

fear that al-Shabaab personnel, or others, might come into these 

wooden laboratories, scoop up the pathogens, and create problems 

in those countries, or perhaps even in our own. We were successful, 

in terms of gaining the cooperation, in terms of mutual assistance. 

And I believe that that has occurred. But, I would appreciate it if 

you, after your confirmation, would check on the progress of that 

security, and familiarize yourself—you may already be familiar, 

but—with the progress that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

has had. Because one of these laboratories was on a hillside—overlooking very low-cost housing for about 300,000 people, in which 

even the residues from the laboratory might be a risk to that population. 

And I mention all of this because there are ways in which we can 

provide security assistance to each other in this particular case, 

even as we work on the democratic institutions that you already 

have fostered so well and have mentioned in your testimony today. 

And so, I simply mention this as we have an opportunity to visit 

during this hearing. 

Now, I’m hopeful the transition, now—how long has the Ambassador been away, in Kenya? Have you been—you’ve been serving, 

obviously, over in that country now, but has been there been no 

ambassador for a period of time? 

Ambassador GODEC. Senator, the previous Ambassador left in 

July. Another Charge ́, Steve Nolan, was sent out immediately after 

Ambassador Gration’s departure, and then I arrived at the end of 

August, and have been there since then. 

Senator LUGAR. Yes. 

Ambassador GODEC. I might just add, on the issue of DTRA and 

the threat, I am quite concerned about the risks, as you suggest, 

that some of these pathogens could fall into the hands of terrorists. 

I have discussed this issue with our team, our staff there. I have 

also approved the stationing of a representative, of an official from 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

645

DTRA, at the mission in Nairobi to work with CDC, and I promise 

you that we will be focused on this issue. 

Senator LUGAR. I thank you. I thank you very much. 

Ms. McCarthy, you’ve emphasized, in your testimony, the energy 

situation in Lithuania; likewise, progress there. This has been a 

critical problem for some time. I was in Poland over the Thanksgiving weekend. And, of course, they are attempting to do a number of things there that would make them less vulnerable from the 

days in which the natural gas cutoff, which affected a number of 

countries in the area, really imposed a severe dilemma; and still 

does, for that matter. What percentage of—after all of the activities 

you described are achieved, to what extent will Lithuania have a 

degree of energy independence? What percentage will be independent? What will still be dependent on somebody else? 

Ms. MCCARTHY. Senator, you raise a very important question. 

Lithuania, like many other countries in the region, as you mentioned, is heavily dependent, still, on Russia for electricity and gas. 

Heavily dependent. It has been seeking, through its own national 

strategy, but also through EU directives, to unbundle and to diversify. We have worked in the Baltic region on that issue as various 

options are considered, and support the EU directive, which, as I 

said, is forcing them to unbundle. And, in fact, it’s led to a number 

of lawsuits that are taking place, and legal issues. And it is a key 

factor for that country’s future, and for linking it to the West. It 

has, right now on its electrical grid, no connection to the West. So, 

if confirmed, that would be a key issue to focus on, for myself and 

working with my colleagues in the region. 

Senator LUGAR. Well, I appreciate your testimony. And, very 

frankly, as you pointed out, no ties to the West—and that that is 

something that would be a major achievement, if you are able to 

move that situation onward, because the dilemma for, not only the 

Baltic States, but still for Poland and maybe for others, is obvious. 

Many of us have been working for years, through the Baku-Ceyhan 

pipeline or through various other situations, to try to think how 

our European allies and NATO could come out from underneath 

what really could be a critical hobbling situation, in the event of 

conflict, or even a misunderstanding. So, I wish you every success, 

and, likewise, Lithuanians, because until that is solved, the problems for that country will be enormous, and I just simply hope that 

we, in the Congress, will understand that, and will be able to work 

with you, as you have suggested. 

I thank the Chair very much for giving me this opportunity. 

Senator COONS. Of course. Thank you, Senator Lugar, for your 

leadership and service, and for those insightful questions that 

reflect your personal engagement with both countries over a very 

long period of time. And I know you’ve got commitments from both 

potential ambassadors to follow through on the areas that you’ve 

raised. 

If I might now move to some questions for Ambassador Godec. 

The upcoming elections in Kenya, as you mentioned, are essential. 

They have one of the most progressive and sweeping constitutional 

reform efforts on the continent underway, both the devolution of 

power to counties and the election of completely new county leadership, and some very real challenges, in terms of the dynamics of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

646

registration and police accountability, and so forth. What’s your 

perspective on the pace of preparations for the March elections, 

what additional challenges remain, and what we can and should be 

doing to help prevent violence in the upcoming elections? 

Ambassador GODEC. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Those are all 

very important questions. 

The pace of preparations. First, the IEBC, the electoral commission in Kenya, faces a major challenge getting ready for this election. This is the most complex election in Kenyan history. They 

have been moving forward. 

They have just started, a little over a week ago, biometric voter 

registration, and they’ve been moving to put in place a number of 

the systems which are necessary. That said, there is little room left 

for slippage in the schedule. They face a number of major challenges, including identifying all of the final polling places, doing all 

of the preparatory work related to the ballots and other challenges 

along the way, in addition to the security issues which surround 

the election. 

So, there are a number of challenges in front of the IEBC to get 

this election right. It is critically important that they do so. They 

are receiving significant support from the international community, 

generally. They’re receiving significant support from the United 

States. The total donor support for this election will be over $100 

million, of which the United States is currently over $30 million. 

We are assisting the IEBC directly, through IFES, with technical 

support in a wide range of areas. We’re also assisting with the 

process of putting together a domestic election observation team. 

There is a domestic organization called ELOG, which will do 

domestic observation. And we’re also planning for international 

observers, as well. 

In addition, we are assisting with civic education and voter education, contributing to it in a variety of ways, and there are some 

ongoing campaigns to help educate Kenyans. We have done training of, now, more than—or now roughly 1,000 party members, on 

issues like how to draft a platform, how to actually put together 

a set of policies for a political party. We’ve also trained journalists, 

in the media area, to help them cover the elections. So, there’s a 

variety of things that are underway to assist in getting the election, frankly, as good as it can be—make it as good as it can be, 

make it free, fair, and peaceful. 

As I said, though, at the end of the day, this election rests 

squarely on the shoulders of the Kenyan people and the Kenyan 

Government. We can assist. We are assisting. There are a number 

of things that we are doing, and will continue to do in the coming 

months, but, at the end of the day, the Kenyans are responsible for 

the election. And it’s important, frankly, for the country, and for 

the entire region, that the election be a success. 

Senator COONS. In my view, the Kenyan judiciary—and some of 

the recent reforms there have been a bright spot—there needs to 

be more and greater progress toward security-sector reform and 

police accountability. The new Independent Police Oversight Authority is also somewhat encouraging. What are you doing, or what 

do you think the mission can and should do, overall, between now 

and next year, to provide more support to ensure that both judicial 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

647

reforms and police reforms continue? And would you agree they 

are, in some ways, essential to the integrity and success of the elections? 

Ambassador GODEC. Mr. Chairman, I agree, entirely, that both 

judicial reform and police reform are essential. And judicial reform 

is, as you said—and as I indicated, as well, in my statement—it is 

a bright spot, it is an area of, frankly, significant change; it’s one 

of the success stories since the passage of the new constitution in 

2010. 

We are doing a variety of things to assist the judiciary, everything from training for personnel in the judiciary to, for example, 

assisting them with the computerization of their records. I visited 

a courthouse in Mombasa, a few weeks ago, and saw the paper files 

in the courtroom in Mombasa. It was quite extraordinary. And I 

think the computerization, putting this into electronic form, will be 

a significant advance in, frankly, the ability of the judiciary to do 

its job. 

The Chief Justice there, Willy Mtunga, is an extraordinary individual, who deserves, I believe, considerable praise for his work. 

He’s expanded the number of judges. He is putting in place reforms 

to make the judiciary more efficient. And I think that the success 

of the judiciary is both critical and, I think, offers some hope, the 

progress that has been made so far. 

On the police front, the police have significant problems. Frankly 

they have been implicated and involved in human rights abuses, in 

some instances. There are a lot of concerns about the things that 

have happened over the course of many years. We are providing a 

range of assistance to them. I think it’s critical that we continue 

to do so. The new constitution did reform the police, in the sense 

that it created a new civilian oversight structure, which is beginning to operate. And we’re providing assistance, for example, on 

the standup of an internal affairs unit, which will help to review 

police abuses—potential abuses or things that may have been 

abuses. 

So, we’re doing a number of things to assist with the police 

reform, as well, but it is a critical area, because, at the end of the 

day, the Kenyan people need to have confidence in their police 

force. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Ambassador. 

Senator Isakson. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank 

you for your acknowledgment of Chairman Lugar, at the outset. 

And I’ll take the same liberty, if I can. 

I wouldn’t be the ranking member of this Subcommittee on 

Africa, had it not been then-Chairman Lugar’s decision to offer me 

the opportunity, which has been a great opportunity, and one I’ve 

enjoyed a lot. But, I think the committee will greatly miss the leadership of Dick Lugar, but I want to thank him, publicly and personally, for what he’s done for me and what he’s done for the country. 

So, with that said, Ms. McCarthy, you are the current Under 

Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs at the State Department. Is that right? 

Ms. MCCARTHY. Sir, I’m the—I’m lower down in the rank—I’m 

the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary. So, two ranks below. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

648

Senator ISAKSON. But, it is of Economic and Business——

Ms. MCCARTHY. Correct. 

Senator ISAKSON [continuing]. Affairs? 

Ms. MCCARTHY. Correct, sir. 

Senator ISAKSON. I appreciate your humility, but your qualifications for this job, given Lithuania’s economic situation, probably is 

very helpful. 

Senator Lugar’s question on energy—energy is a huge problem in 

Lithuania, but also, the most recent election, the overturning of the 

old Parliament and the center-right government to a—I think, a 

four-party coalition government, and they—the whole issue was 

over austerity programs the previous administration had put in 

place, as I understand it. I fear, with countries in Europe and in 

the EU moving away from austerity back to old practices—it’s 

going to compound the problems of the economic demise in Europe. 

Would you comment on that? 

Ms. MCCARTHY. Certainly, Senator. 

In the case of—in the larger context, yes, Europe has moved, particularly in the eurozone, to a situation where key issues of growth 

and creation of jobs are extremely important. That is why our new 

U.S./EU High Level Working Group, that is looking into these 

issues and is seeking to deepen the relationship to address those 

issues, is going to be a valuable discussion. In that context, 

obviously, Lithuania will participate, especially as it takes on the 

presidency. 

Lithuania itself managed to go through the trough and begin to 

take off again, balancing out growth and austerity measures, which 

were actually quite interesting to review, in my preparation. So, 

unlike some other countries, it is poised for new growth. It’s actually doing quite well. And the challenge that it will face, as others 

are facing, is: export markets are declining as demand decreases in 

areas such as China and so forth. 

So, it will be something that I will be closely following, drawing 

on my expertise, noting that, as I said, this new High Level Working Group is a great opportunity for us to speak to all of the EU 

members the challenges of creating growth in jobs in both in the 

United States and in Europe, because it is a long-term challenge, 

I agree with you, and I will be working on this issue, should I be 

confirmed. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, good luck, and we appreciate your accepting the challenge. 

Ambassador Godec, how is the morale of the Embassy staff, 

given the transition, so far this year? 

Ambassador GODEC. Senator, the morale of Mission Nairobi is 

obviously a very important concern for me, and would be, going forward, if I am confirmed by the Senate. 

Obviously, the morale of the mission is really, at the end of the 

day, best assessed, or best evaluated, by the members of the mission itself, both Kenyan and American. I will tell you, though, that, 

since my arrival, I have focused on this issue and made it a priority. Within 24 hours of my arrival in Nairobi, I had met with the 

full country team and held a townhall meeting with all members 

of the mission staff. Since then, I have met with every section and 

agency head, and their senior staffs. I have walked the entire 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

649

mission, greeting people in their workplaces. I’ve visited the staff 

at our Peace Corps offices in Nairobi and at CDC in Nairobi, and 

I traveled to Kisumu to visit with CDC and MRU officials there. 

I’ve met with the FSN, the local employee committee. I met with 

our first- and second-tour personnel. I’ve attended a number of 

community events. 

My objective in all of this is really to build a team at Embassy 

Nairobi, to give a sense of a mission, as a whole, that’s operating 

together. Obviously, we have many objectives, many goals that we 

have to accomplish, but, at the end of the day, we have to be part 

of one team, all working there on behalf of the U.S. Government 

and the U.S. people. That’s been my goal, and I hope I’ve been successful in starting that process. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, I appreciate your answer. And the reason 

I asked the question is, the morale of the Embassy is critical to the 

mission of the Embassy. And I know they’ve been through a difficult time, and I want to compliment you on the leadership you’ve 

initiated, since you got there, to actually touch those people, to 

understand their job, and call them in to have them comment on 

the mission of the Embassy. And that’s good leadership, and if 

you’ll continue that, that Embassy will continue to be a critical 

part of our State Department. 

As I expressed to you before the hearing, I have a real concern 

with Dadaab. I’ve been to Darfur and seen what can happen in 

these camps that become permanent isolation places, if you will, for 

folks. And we’ve had a part of the drought that’s taken place in 

Ethiopia and Somalia—it’s gone down as far as Dadaab. There’s a 

lot of hunger, food shortage. Although Somalia is trying to stabilize, certainly, many of the people in that camp are not going 

back to Somalia. 

Is there a working group, or is there a—is the Kenyan Government and the United States Government and the African Union 

working together for a Plan B, in terms of a transition, eventually, 

out of Dadaab, for those people? Because, if not, it runs the risk 

of becoming another Darfur. Maybe not—some of the elements that 

are around Darfur aren’t there, but it still has the potential, and 

I worry about a half a million people struggling in that tiny camp, 

with all the hunger and famine they’ve got going right now. 

Ambassador GODEC. Senator, thank you, that is a very important 

question, and it’s a very important issue. It’s one I have discussed, 

on many occasions, with senior Kenyan Government officials. 

The conditions in Dadaab are, indeed, very difficult. It also, I 

think, is not a place that anyone would want to stay long term. 

Nevertheless, the conditions there have been better, in many 

instances, of course, than inside Somalia itself. 

The Kenyan Government has been quite welcoming, over time, of 

the refugees, and has served as a place of first asylum, obviously 

enough, and we encourage them to continue to do so, as long as is 

necessary. 

We are discussing—UNHCR, the Kenyans, the United States, 

others—the question of what might come next, at some point. Obviously, the refugees cannot go back to Somalia until the conditions 

permit that. Any return would have to be under circumstances 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

650

where there was adequate security in Somalia and where the 

return was voluntary. 

But, efforts are underway to begin to discuss the question; in 

some small programs, to provide training and the like to some refugees, to perhaps give them an opportunity to have a livelihood, if 

and when they were to choose to return. 

But, this is an issue that is a focus. There is concern about it, 

and there is ongoing discussion about how to address this in the 

long term, because—I agree with you, Senator—ultimately, I don’t 

think it’s in anybody’s interest to have that camp stay where it is. 

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Chairman. 

Senator COONS. Thank you, Senator Isakson. 

I’ll start a second round of questions, if I might. 

First, Ms. McCarthy, I was interested and encouraged to hear 

about your very active role in the National Export Initiative, and, 

as Senator Isakson referenced, eager to hear about the leadership 

you may be able to bring to the Embassy in Vilnius and in Lithuania to export opportunities for the United States and to helping 

Lithuania with energy development opportunities. What sort of 

opportunities are there for United States economic partnership or 

exports to Lithuania? 

And do you know whether the United States plans to be an 

active participant in the Center of Excellence on Energy Security 

that, if I understand right, NATO is standing up in Lithuania? 

Ms. MCCARTHY. Thank you, Senator. 

I’ll respond to your question in two ways. One, in terms of supporting U.S. business overseas, often we are looking at a regional 

model instead of just focusing on one country. So, if confirmed, I 

would use my knowledge, energy, to look to regional opportunities, 

and then beyond, as Lithuania, as other countries, is looking to 

make itself a hub for activity going even further east—much further east, in fact. So, that would be one aspect. 

The Center of Excellence, yes, we are participating in the Center 

of Excellence, which we think was a valuable addition for looking 

at the challenges of uses of energy within the NATO context. It has 

been approved as an official Center of Excellence. And, to my 

knowledge—and I will confirm this with you, Senator—I believe we 

are going to billet someone there. But, I will confirm that. So, 

therefore, we definitely will be participating. 

Energy, as I note, is an area, but there are other exports that 

take place—cars and other things. 

So, again, when I get there, I’ll get the full breakdown of everything. But, it’ll be focused regionally, as the individual markets are 

quite small. 

Senator COONS. Being from a modestly scaled State, myself, I 

think I understand the importance of regional integration. The 

economy of Delaware would probably scale comparably to Lithuania. 

Ambassador Godec, I’d be interested in the same question, or 

topic, if I might, with regard to Kenya. It’s one of the more promising diversified, robust economies in Africa. What are we doing to 

promote U.S. direct investment in Kenya, a vibrant export/import 

relationship between the United States and Kenya with the East 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

651

African community? And, in particular, how well is AGOA being 

utilized? And, beyond the third-party fabric provisions and the 

apparel that’s going on now, what else might we do, through 

AGOA, that would help with this relationship? 

Ambassador GODEC. Mr. Chairman, Kenya is an important trade 

and investment partner for the United States, an important partner in Africa. Our two-way trade, last year, was about $850 million, and the United States did enjoy a trade surplus. The Kenyans 

have taken strong advantage of AGOA, particularly the third-party 

fabric provisions, where they’re manufacturing apparel and shipping it on to the United States. And I think that the Kenyans 

would certainly welcome the renewal of that provision in AGOA, 

generally. I think it would be helpful, broadly speaking, to the Kenyan economy. 

The promotion and, frankly, the support for U.S. trade and investment, and Kenyan trade and investment here in the United 

States, would be, if I was confirmed, a very important priority for 

me. It is an area where I worked before, when I was in Kenya, as 

economic counselor, and I have a lot of experience and background 

in that area. I’ve already engaged with the American Chamber of 

Commerce there on a number of occasions, and would continue to 

do so. 

We do get, in Kenya, an interest from a lot of American businesses. Just a couple of weeks ago, we had a trade delegation from 

Florida that I met with—was looking at doing trade and investment. Acting Commerce Secretary Blank is, in fact, visiting Kenya 

today, and will—actually, it’s tomorrow and Friday, excuse me—

and will be there to help deepen the U.S. trade and investment relationship with the country. And I understand that this is the first 

visit by a Secretary of Commerce in quite some time—about a decade or so—and so, I think it’s a very important development. 

The East African community is obviously a focus of attention. 

We’re providing considerable support to the East African community through USAID at the moment, in a wide range of areas, to 

include trade and investment. And part of Acting Secretary Blank’s 

visit to Kenya is focused on the EAC, and she’ll be doing some 

EAC-related events there, some signing ceremonies. 

But, I think there are a number of things that the mission is 

doing to support business, whether it be sort of the concrete advocacy efforts that our commercial section is undertaking or whether 

it be the work that our economic section is doing, for example, to 

improve the business climate in Kenya. There are a number of 

issues there with, obviously, nontransparency, corruption, poor 

business practices that, frankly, do impede business. 

So, there’s a range of things, I think, that need to happen. And, 

if confirmed, I would certainly pursue all of them, whether it be 

assistance to U.S. business, working on the business environment, 

encouraging our companies to come, and assisting them, as they 

need it. 

Senator COONS. Great. I know Senator Durbin had hoped to join 

us. I understand he may not be able to. He has particularly focused 

on the role of the Foreign Commercial Service and the promotion 

of exports from the United States to Africa. That’s been an area of 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

652

great and persistent interest from him. He may well submit questions for the record. 

Last question, if I might. In terms of monitoring, you made a 

somewhat passing reference, in the first round of questions, to 

National Democratic Institute. I also understand the Carter Center 

might be involved. There’s a multinational election monitoring 

effort, both domestic and foreign. But, what else needs to happen? 

What other steps might the Embassy take to fund and facilitate 

foreign election observers, and to sustain them through what may 

well be a second round, what may be a fairly complex election, both 

at the national and at the county level? 

Ambassador GODEC. Mr. Chairman, election observation is critically important, I think, for this upcoming election, and it’s something I’ve been very focused on in my time as Charge ́ d’Affaires out 

there. 

I really see sort of three, kind of, components to the election 

observation effort: 

The first is the Kenyan domestic election observation effort that 

I mentioned earlier. And we, through USAID, are supporting the 

Kenyan civil society group, ELOG, which is organizing the domestic observation. We’ve arranged for training for 9,500 election 

observers—short-term election observers—another 450 long-term 

election observers. And we’re doing a variety of things to support 

them. 

The second component of this is the—kind of, the missions that 

are in Nairobi—the U.S. mission and other partners plan to organize, are working toward doing direct election observation; and not 

just the election itself, in March, but also the party primaries, 

which will take place in January, and, of course, any runoff that 

might take place, if there is one, in April. So, there’s a robust effort 

underway to do that. 

The U.S. mission is chairing a group in Nairobi, a coordination 

group among donors, to put that together. And I’m actively engaged 

in that particular effort. I see the U.S. mission field itself fielding 

perhaps as many as 50 teams on election day. 

And the third part of this is the international observation component. And we are in the process—USAID is in the process of potentially soliciting for an international group. And there are some possibilities—you mentioned two of them; there may well be others 

that might be interested. We see putting perhaps 25 or 30 fairly 

long-term observers, international individuals of stature who have 

some experience in this area, out in the field to observe the elections. Again, I think this is a critical component. There are other 

groups, of course—the EU, various African groups, and others—

which will be doing election observation. So, it looks set to be a 

fairly robust effort. 

Senator COONS. Great. Thank you, Ambassador. 

And I note the Kenyan Ambassador has joined us. 

If I could, Senator Isakson. 

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have a couple of quick questions. 

One, the largest investment of the American taxpayer on the continent of Africa has been the PEPFAR program, which has been a 

hugely successful program, too. There was a problem, in Kenya, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

653

with a lot of the funds getting backed up in the pipeline, and the 

deployment of some of that aid not going smoothly; in fact, backing 

up in the pipeline, as I understand it. How is that working now, 

in terms of PEPFAR programs? That’s part one. 

And part two is: Is the Kenyan Government doing its share of 

the job of taking over the delivery-system responsibilities of the 

PEPFAR program, in terms of the antiretrovirals going to the 

people? 

Ambassador GODEC. On the PEPFAR pipeline, you’re quite correct, there had been some backup. There’s been a robust effort to 

address that, and I believe it’s been addressed. We will be spending 

down some of the funds that have been backed up in the pipeline. 

I believe we were over the, kind of, 18-month limit that we were 

supposed to be at. So, we have been very focused on that, the 

PEPFAR team out in Nairobi and, I know, the folks here, as well, 

in Washington, as part of the PEPFAR operation here. So, I believe 

it’s been addressed, but obviously it’s something that is worth keeping a close eye on; and, if confirmed, I would do so. 

The second part of this is—I agree entirely about the importance, 

ultimately, of the Kenyans assuming responsibility for this program. That has got to be, and is, a long-term goal. It is a subject 

I have discussed with the PEPFAR coordinator and with others in 

Nairobi, and it is something that we will continue to focus on. 

I will say that this particular challenge is further complicated by 

the fact that under the devolution of power to the county system, 

responsibilities for health care is going to be moved from the central government down to the county level. At the same time, there 

has been a fair amount of planning by the Ministries of Health, 

two of them, on this issue, already, of devolution, and there are ongoing discussions about how to handle this, this problem, to ensure 

good delivery of—frankly, of PEPFAR services. 

But, PEPFAR has been a big success. There are 600,000 Kenyans 

on antiretrovirals, as a consequence of the program. 

Seven million Kenyans have received treatment or counseling, 

and—well, received counseling or some sort of assessment under 

the program. And so, I think it is a—it’s a very important program 

for the Kenyans, it’s a very successful program, but it is something 

that requires continued attention and, ultimately, transition. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, as I mentioned to you earlier, I hope 

you’ll take a moment to go up to the Nyumbani Orphanage, in 

Nairobi, where a wonderful lady named Sister Mary, is making life 

wonderful for some kids who were born to AIDS-infected moms, 

but, because of PEPFAR, they were born without the virus, and 

they’re living a healthy, happy life, and she does a great—it’s a 

good example of an American NGO that’s delivered quality service. 

Ms. McCarthy, my worst subject, in college and in high school, 

was foreign language. I almost died on French. [Laughter.] 

I just didn’t have the connection. 

You speak six languages, I noticed, if you include English as a—

which I know you speak well, because you did it. What do they 

speak in Lithuania? Lithuanian? 

Ms. MCCARTHY. Sir, they speak Lithuanian. I have had five lessons. The two people who are going to get me to, hopefully, the 

level I have in others are with me today, and watching. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

654

Senator ISAKSON. Well, when you gain a seventh language, you’ll 

be seven times smarter than I ever was in foreign language. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator ISAKSON. Congratulations on your nomination. And best 

of luck to both of you. 

That’s all I have. 

Senator COONS. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Isakson. 

And thank you, to Lori and Nancy, to Natalia and Diana, to 

Linda and Paul, and everyone else who has joined us here today 

who are friends, family, and supporters. 

To Ms. McCarthy, to Ambassador Godec, you go to take on a 

great challenge and a great opportunity to represent this Nation in 

countries that are long allies of ours, but where they are in the 

midst of vital transitions. So, know that you’ve got our enthusiasm 

and—I speak for myself—support as you move forward. 

There may be other members of other committee who were not 

able to join us today—I’ll keep the record open for a week, in the 

event that they choose to submit questions for the record. 

But, I’m grateful for the opportunity to have been joined by Senator Lugar and Senator Isakson in today’s hearing. 

And we are, thereby, adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

RESPONSES OF HON. ROBERT F. GODEC TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question. Kenya is approaching Presidential elections in March 2013 and there 

are significant concerns about the potential for civil unrest. Electoral violence represents a unique subset of mass atrocities in that major milestones are actually 

posted on the calendar months in advance.

• What are the most important steps that the Kenyan Government, Kenyan civil 

society, and the international community can take to avert electoral violence? 

• What do you see as the role of the United States in supporting free, fair, and 

peaceful elections? 

• What are the potential flashpoints that most worry you? 

Answer. The March 2013 elections represent an important next step in the process of political reform in Kenya, and it is crucial that they be free, fair, and peaceful. Responsibility for carrying out a successful election rests squarely with the Kenyan Government and people. The Kenyan Government must ensure that technical 

and security preparations for the most complex election in Kenya’s history are in 

place, and the Kenyan people and politicians must be committed to peaceful participation in the political and electoral process. Kenyan civil society is playing an 

important role in supporting civic education, election observation, and a variety of 

local and national efforts to create effective early warning and early response mechanisms to prevent or mitigate tension or violence. 

In support of Kenya’s efforts, the international donor community has pledged 

approximately $100 million to assist with the elections and electoral reform. Of this 

amount, the U.S. Government has contributed approximately $30 million for elections preparation and civic voter education programs, including assistance to the 

Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission to enable the Kenyan Government, civil society, and the Kenyan people to engage peacefully and constructively 

in the election process. We are supporting local community efforts to put into place 

mechanisms and lines of communication to prevent and mitigate violence in several 

potential hotspots. We have also intensified our diplomatic and communications 

efforts to highlight the importance of the election to Kenya’s future stability and 

prosperity. 

Independent election observation is a key element in ensuring free, fair, and 

peaceful elections. We are supporting the Kenyan Election Observation Group, a 

coalition of Kenyan nongovernmental organizations, which plans to field 9,500 obFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

655

servers for the actual election, including to conduct a parallel vote tabulation, and 

approximately 450 observers to monitor developments for a longer period of time 

before and after the election. In coordination with international donors, the U.S. 

Embassy will monitor party primaries and the election environment over several 

months, and provide Embassy staff to serve as observers. 

Major challenges and potential flashpoints include: the potential for technical 

problems in conducting the elections; tension at local levels from contests for power 

under the newly decentralized government; political hate speech; a court decision on 

the eligibility of individuals indicted by the International Criminal Court to run for 

the Presidency; and continuing security threats from both within Kenya and abroad. 

We constantly monitor progress and adjust our programs, as needed.

Question. Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 imposes restrictions 

on assistance to any unit of a foreign country’s security forces for which there is 

credible evidence that the unit has committed gross violations of human rights. U.S. 

Embassies are heavily involved in ensuring compliance with this requirement. In 

August 2012, an Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report identified two specific 

weaknesses in Embassy Nairobi’s Leahy vetting process: the political section only 

checked names against the 2008 Kenya National Commission on Human Rights and 

not more updated sources, and there was no reporting mechanism to verify that individuals who are vetted and cleared are the same persons who receive training.

• If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy effectively 

implements section 620M and rectifies the weaknesses cited by the August 2012 

OIG report? 

• In particular, what actions will you take to ensure, in a case in which there 

is credible evidence that a gross violation of human rights has been committed, 

that assistance will not be provided to units that committed the violation? 

• What steps will you take to ensure that the Embassy has a robust capacity to 

gather and evaluate evidence regarding possible gross violations of human 

rights by units of security forces?

Answer. Embassy Nairobi already has taken steps to address the issues regarding 

Leahy vetting that the Inspector General’s Report raised. In consultation with the 

State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the 

Bureau of African Affairs, the Embassy has developed new standard operating procedures (SOP) for Leahy vetting that address the OIG recommendations. The new 

SOP has been in full operation since mid-October. 

The Embassy, through its extensive network of government and nongovernment 

contacts, continually monitors and evaluates allegations of human rights violations 

on the part of Kenyan security forces. The Embassy’s political section maintains a 

dynamic database of credible gross human rights violations. Sources for this database include the Kenya National Human Rights Commission report on Post-Election 

Violence, the State Department’s Annual Reports on Human Rights, credible reports 

from nongovernmental organizations, and names provided by other Embassy agencies. As part of the new SOP, the political section updates the database on a continuous basis, when credible allegations of human rights violations come to light. Other 

agencies and sections provide updates to the political section’s vetting database on 

a quarterly basis. 

In cases in which there is credible evidence that a potential beneficiary of U.S. 

training or equipment has committed a gross violation of human rights, we exclude 

that individual or unit from participating in or benefiting from U.S. training and 

equipment. If confirmed, I will ensure that the mission remains vigilant in this 

effort. The State Department maintains database records of individuals and units 

who have undergone vetting. This centralized database enables us to identify individuals or units that have been excluded, should they be proposed in the future as 

candidates for training or receipt of equipment. 

Consistent with the new SOP and section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 

1961, no training or assistance funded by the U.S. Government can commence until 

vetting is completed. Agencies that carry out training of Kenyan security forces are 

responsible for verifying the identities of the trainees and ensuring that only those 

individuals who have been vetted receive training.

Question. The August 2012 OIG report also raised concerns that the Embassy is 

not fully informed of U.S. Africa Command’s Combined Joint Task Force for the 

Horn of Africa (CJTF–HOA) civil affairs activities in Kenya and is not positioned 

to make decisions on how to focus civil affairs projects.

• What can the Embassy do to better coordinate and integrate U.S. efforts in 

Kenya? Specifically, how can we measure the impact of projects such as those 

undertaken by CJTF–HOA?

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

656

Answer. Coordination of all activities in a large mission that includes many U.S. 

Government agencies is a challenge, but one that Embassy Nairobi has been working to address for some time. Embassy Nairobi has a ‘‘3D’’ (Diplomacy, Development, and Defense) coordination process in place to ensure that CJTF–HOA civil 

affairs activities are fully integrated into the mission’s broader diplomatic and 

development objectives. The 3D committee, chaired by the Deputy Chief of Mission, 

meets at least monthly to review proposed and ongoing civil affairs projects. Members of the committee include the Department of Defense (CJTF–HOA and the 

Kenya-U.S. Liaison Office), USAID, the Department of State political, economic, and 

public affairs sections, and the Centers for Disease Control. The 3D committee submits recommendations on proposed civil affairs projects to the Ambassador for his 

approval. If confirmed, I will work to further strengthen interagency coordination 

to ensure that we pursue an integrated, whole-of-government approach. 

In support of the 3D process, USAID and CJTF–HOA have also taken a number 

of steps to coordinate and integrate civil affairs projects with U.S. foreign assistance 

programs. Upon arrival in country, new civil affairs teams receive a comprehensive 

orientation and a briefing from the interagency country team, to understand fully 

U.S. diplomacy, development, and defense objectives in Kenya. Civil affairs teams 

are provided contact information for USAID project teams active in their area of 

operations, to facilitate civil affairs team networking with local communities and 

officials and to shape project development. In reviewing civil affairs teams’ project 

proposals, the Embassy 3D committee places high priority on projects that are 

linked directly to USAID longer term projects. For example, the 3D committee tries 

to ensure that a civil affairs team school renovation project will be at a school participating in USAID’s longer term education assistance program. USAID and CJTF–

HOA conduct regular partnership and planning meetings in Nairobi and Djibouti to 

ensure full information-sharing and to explore opportunities for joint programming, 

both in Kenya and the region. For example, CJTF–HOA-organized medical capacitybuilding missions in Kenya now include a full array of USAID health partners, 

which has both increased community participation and enhanced the missions’ 

impact. 

To assess the effectiveness of its civil affairs projects, CJTF–HOA conducts regular visits to sites of previous activities to determine whether the projects are still 

being used as proposed. Advisory teams perform assessments of CJTF–HOA activities in the communities. These teams coordinate with the political section and 

USAID, whose staff members accompany the teams on such missions, when possible. CJTF–HOA has an assessments branch to assess the effects of civil affairs and 

other efforts in Kenya and the region, which works closely with these advisory 

teams. 

RESPONSES OF HON. ROBERT F. GODEC TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED

BY SENATOR RICHARD G. LUGAR

POLICING AND POLICE PROFESSIONALISM

Repeated reports indicate that the Kenyan police have a history of excessive force 

and abuse of authority to include political and criminal acts.

Question. What can the Embassy do to support the newly independent prosecution 

service (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions or ODPP) and the Independent 

Police Oversight Authority (IPOA) in their efforts to increase accountability for the 

use and abuse of police power?

Answer. The United States Government supports both the Office of the Director 

of Public Prosecutions or (ODPP) and the Independent Police Oversight Authority 

(IPOA) through a variety of programs and partnerships. Under the new constitution, 

the Kenyan ODPP has become an independent agency. The U.S. Embassy supports 

efforts of the ODPP to improve its ability to investigate, prosecute, and try complex 

cases, including money laundering, terrorism, and terrorism financing offenses. For 

example, we have provided ODPP new hires ‘‘induction’’ training that included an 

intensive trial advocacy workshop for lawyers with little or no trial experience, emphasizing case preparation, courtroom skills, and ethics. In December, we are cosponsoring a colloquium that will bring together Kenya’s 84 prosecutors, 26 new 

hires, and selected guests. Topics covered will include elections preparedness, using 

technology to promote effective prosecutions and international security, interagency 

collaboration and cooperation, the role of the police and prosecutor, and new legislation. 

As the ODPP works to implement its 5-year strategy, we are assisting it with 

efforts to strengthen engagement with civil society, track and handle complaints, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

657

develop key documents, such as prosecutorial guidelines and manuals, and formulate an information and communications technology strategy and implementation 

plan. We are also partnering with U.S. judges and nongovernmental organizations 

to provide training for prosecutors on key aspects of Kenya’s National Prosecution 

Policy, case management, and advocacy skills. 

The IPOA is a newly established entity that will provide independent civilian 

oversight of the police. The United States Government is already helping IPOA to 

establish operational capability; create public awareness of IPOA; establish realtime police abuse tracking through a digital platform; and conduct a study to understand the nature and degree of police abuse in Nairobi. We support police reform 

and accountability through a contribution to the U.N. Office of Drugs and Crime 

and through a 5-year, $3.5 million dollar program to support internal and external 

accountability mechanisms for the police in accordance with the new constitution. 

If confirmed, I will work through our country team to help build IPOA’s organizational structure and investigative staff, support development and implementation of 

complaint-taking mechanisms within both IPOA and the Police Internal Affairs Unit 

(IAU), and assist with coordination between IPOA and the IAU. The project will 

help develop public awareness campaigns that inform the public about filing complaints against the police and will develop an effective referral mechanism between 

police oversight bodies and the judiciary.

Question. The Kenyan Executive appears to be dragging its feet on forming the 

constitutionally mandated National Police Service Commission. The Executive has 

not followed the nominating process, which is meant to give the police more independence from the President and his Cabinet. It is vitally important that the police 

are independent of the Executive in light of upcoming elections. What can the 

United States do or what is it doing to push the Kenyan Executive to facilitate the 

establishment of the National Police Service Commission?

Answer. While there were delays and political wrangling surrounding the formation of the National Police Service Commission (NPSC), the commissioners were formally appointed in early October. They began their work immediately, interviewing 

candidates for police leadership positions. The NPSC has already forwarded to the 

President and Prime Minister for their consideration a list of recommended candidates for the Inspector General and the two Deputy Inspector General positions. 

We are providing technical assistance to the NPSC to help it refine its mandate 

and organizational structure and to define its relationship with the National Police 

Service (NPS). We emphasized at a recent meeting with police leadership and members of the Internal Security Ministry that, while we are willing to support the 

NPSC, the Government of Kenya must do so as well, and must provide funding and 

access so that the NPSC can do its job. 

If confirmed, I will continue the mission’s engagement with the NSPC and will 

press for further action on election security and continued support for ongoing police 

reforms. I will explore options for providing additional support, as appropriate. 

ARBITRARY ARREST AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT IN PARALLEL TO CRIMINAL IMPUNITY

One of Kenya’s most serious human rights problems is the detention of hundreds 

of innocent men in remand centers with no legitimate evidence to support the 

crimes police have charged them with. They may spend years in jail before they 

come before a judge, at which point they are released. In the meantime, actual 

crimes go unsolved by police. Police misconduct and judicial incapacity or unwillingness is at the heart of Kenya’s increasing lawlessness which poses a threat not only 

to the human rights of Kenyans but also to U.S. antiterrorism and security 

interests.

Question. What can the United States do to work with the prosecution service 

(ODPP) and IPOA to review records of existing detainees and release those for 

whom there is no credible evidence?

Answer. Unjustified detention of Kenyans is a symptom of the need for broad 

criminal justice reform and strengthening of the rule of law, which we are supporting through U.S. programs and diplomacy. Provided reforms move forward, over 

time they will lead to increased police accountability and a reduction in illegal detention. If confirmed, I will continue to press the Kenya Government to implement 

meaningful reform of the criminal justice sector to help ensure that the rights of 

Kenyan citizens enshrined in the constitution are protected. 

On the specific issue of reviewing records of existing detainees, the United States 

has provided a grant to the International Justice Mission, a nongovernmental organization that is helping the Office of the Director for Public Prosecutions (ODPP) 

increase capacity to screen cases, so that cases of individuals held without evidence 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

658

supporting detention are disposed of quickly. The U.S. Government also provides extensive training for the ODPP.

Question. Recognizing the link between public confidence in its law enforcement 

institutions and the stability of the government, what can the United States do to 

help the Kenya Government make law enforcement more accountable for its exercise 

of power?

Answer. There is a broad recognition in Kenya of the need for police reform. Decades of poor management and abuses have undermined the credibility of the institution with the Kenyan people. Police were both ineffective in preventing and 

complicit in carrying out the 2007–2008 post-election violence. Consequently, the reform agenda of the 2008 National Accord that both President Kibaki and Prime 

Minister Odinga endorsed explicitly included police reform. 

After a slow start, Kenya is implementing the framework and institutions necessary for police reform. Parliament has passed key legislation to underpin police 

reform and the Kenyan Government has put in place the National Police Service 

Commission that will oversee the reform process. A Police Service Internal Affairs 

Unit will investigate allegations of police misconduct and corruption by other police 

officers and misconduct against civilians. The government has also formed an Independent Police Oversight Authority Commission (IPOA), a civilian-led oversight 

body. IPOA’s mandate includes investigating all deaths and serious injuries caused 

by police or as a result of police action; receiving and investigating complaints from 

members of the public as well as from police officers; investigating police misconduct 

on its own initiative; and making recommendations for disciplinary action or prosecution and recommendations to prevent future misconduct. 

In September, we signed a letter of agreement with the Government of Kenya, 

in which we anticipate providing $3.5 million over 5 years to support Kenya’s internal and external accountability mechanisms for the police in accordance with the 

new constitution. We are also providing support to the Internal Affairs Unit through 

a contribution to the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime. 

In addition to this direct support for new accountability mechanisms for the police 

services, several U.S. agencies and offices at Embassy Nairobi, including the State 

Department (Bureau of Diplomatic Security), the FBI, Department of Homeland 

Security, and Department of Justice, provide training to improve the capacity and 

professionalism of the police services. Such capacity-building is essential to improve 

effectiveness and to prevent abuses from occurring in the first place. U.S. training 

for Kenyan police officers covers a broad range of skills from basic crime scene investigation, to human rights awareness, to specialized skills, such as managing a 

bomb scene and conducting maritime operations. Our training, while important, 

reaches only a small percentage of working level police officers. Achieving fundamental reform and accountability in the police services will require structural 

changes such as those underway, committed leadership and the political will to 

carry out reform, and continued monitoring and support from Kenyan civil society 

and the international community. 

PARLIAMENT AS ENRICHMENT SCHEME

Since quadrupling their salaries in 2003 and providing for luxury vehicles and 

residences for themselves, the Members of Parliament have repeatedly increased 

their salaries to rival or exceed most other parliamentarians around the world. In 

a troubling repeat of past efforts to enrich sitting Members of Parliament, the 

National Assembly’s recent ploy to increase Members’ salaries yet again, were met 

with public fury and was withdrawn. Given that Kenya remains a poor country with 

significant internal political and social tension, it is incumbent upon the donor community to guard its resources from fueling such excess and irresponsibility.

Question. How does the United States monitor and modify its assistance, and how 

does it condition such assistance on blatant misuse of government resources?

Answer. The oversight of U.S. assistance is a top priority of the U.S. Mission in 

Kenya. As Charge ́ and, if confirmed, as Ambassador I want to ensure that U.S. taxpayer funds are used only for their intended purposes and in accord with U.S. foreign policy goals in Kenya. 

The U.S. Government does not provide direct budget support to the Kenyan Parliament; rather we provide assistance through implementing partners. For example, 

our Parliamentary Strengthening Program is implemented through the State University of New York (SUNY). We take very seriously our role as a steward of U.S. 

foreign assistance funding, particularly in a challenging implementation environment such as Kenya, where corruption is pervasive. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

659

We apply a variety of measures to ensure that our funding is fully protected and 

that we fulfill our fiduciary and oversight responsibilities, in line with U.S. Government rules and regulations and the expectation of implementation results. These 

measures include:

• Conducting pre-award financial and management assessments to determine an 

implementing partner’s internal control structure and overall ability to effectively manage U.S. Government funds; 

• Throughout the life of the activity, performing regular field monitoring visits to 

review the progress of programs and compliance with U.S. Government rules 

and regulations; 

• Requiring periodic audits of implementing partners and sharing the audit

results with the Regional Inspector General/Pretoria for audits and the Regional 

Inspector General General/Cairo for investigations; 

• Carrying out comprehensive risk assessments of Kenya’s overall public financial 

management system and specific government entities to determine opportunities and constraints to moving toward a government-to-government assistance 

framework; 

• Structuring the implementation of programs and the flow of funds from the U.S. 

Government to the Kenyan Government in a manner that minimizes and mitigates fiduciary risk; and 

• Requiring performance plans with indicators and benchmarks that must be 

achieved by the implementing partner before we can disburse funds, thereby 

holding the partner accountable.

In cases where there have been indications of fraud or lack of performance, the 

U.S. Government has taken actions to recover funding, modify procurement instruments, or, as appropriate, terminate activities. If confirmed, I will ensure that we 

continue to exercise strong oversight of the use of U.S. taxpayer resources.

Question. What parliamentary programs provide any assistance to National

Assembly or its Members’ offices?

Answer. The U.S. Government supports Kenya’s Parliament through a 10-year, 

$9.8 million program scheduled to end in March 2014. The program is designed to 

strengthen Parliament’s capacity to perform its legislative and oversight role effectively, build the capacity and skills of parliamentary committees, and support 

engagement with civil society and public participation in the legislative process. 

The program has produced a number of important results. For example, U.S. 

assistance and training facilitated new House Rules that transformed the way Parliament does business by enhancing the independence of the legislature, improving 

Parliament’s oversight role, and providing greater access for civil society organizations and private citizens to their parliamentarians. The program supported internships for 100 young professionals, who gained valuable experience and provided 

much-needed assistance to parliamentary committees. The U.S. Government supplied television and radio broadcast equipment to the Kenyan Parliament in 2009 

to support public broadcasting of all parliamentary proceedings, and built a media 

center inside the Parliament building so that press conferences could be held in a 

dedicated space. Live audio and television broadcasting of parliamentary proceedings is now commonplace and widely followed by the Kenyan public.

Question. What can the United States do to ensure the donor community is not 

fueling such legislative activity and is actively countering the tendency to destabilize the environment through such budgetary manipulation?

Answer. Donor coordination is strong in Kenya. The United States engages formally and informally with international development partners and multilateral institutions to ensure that the international community speaks with one voice on key 

issues and that donor programs are fully coordinated. 

The donor community discussed the recent attempt to embed salary increases for 

Members of Parliament within the Finance bill. In light of President Kibaki’s strong 

public statement rejecting the proposed pay raise, the donor community agreed that 

public statements on our part or confrontation were not warranted. The group 

agreed that bilateral diplomatic engagement with key Kenyan leaders was the best 

strategy to register our concerns about parliamentary salaries and to emphasize the 

need for continued transparency in the budgeting process in Kenya. In my role as 

Charge ́ d’Affaires, I raised with senior Government officials and Members of Parliament our very serious concerns about the proposed, new pay increase. If confirmed, I will continue to stress to Kenyan officials the importance of transparent 

budgeting processes and the need to manage the country’s limited resources in a 

responsible and effective manner that benefits all Kenyans.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

660

Question. What organizations does the United States work with to empower civil 

society to build its capacity to hold their government accountable?

Answer. Kenya’s new constitution envisions robust and active engagement of civil 

society in public discourse, and facilitating such engagement is an essential component of the U.S. Government’s activities in Kenya. Through direct and indirect 

assistance to U.S. and Kenyan nongovernmental organizations, we work with and 

support the activities of hundreds of civil society organizations in Kenya. Our work, 

which is facilitated primarily through USAID, helps strengthen Kenyan civil society’s ability to advocate for democratic reforms, provide input on key legislation, and 

hold the government accountable. Among the many organizations the United States 

works with and supports are the following:

• Well Told Story, Inuka Trust, and the International Rescue Committee, which 

carry out civic and voter education; 

• Internews, which is strengthening the capacity of Kenyan media to understand 

key issues and report objectively; 

• The Elections Observation Group (ELOG), a consortium of Kenyan nongovernmental organizations that will field more than 9,000 elections observers in 

March 2013; 

• Mercy Corps, which is helping to strengthen District Peace Committees 

throughout the Rift Valley; and, 

• Transparency International, which is promoting accountability and transparency through active citizen engagement.

Through USAID’s Office of Transition Initiatives, we have made more than 100 

small grants to support the work of individuals and civil society at the national and 

grassroots level to hold the Government of Kenya accountable. An important example of this work was the effort to return to the public in Kisumu an illegally seized 

private park. USAID support to the Nyanza Youth Coalition engaged thousands of 

Kisumu residents, especially youth, to conduct a non-violent campaign to reverse 

the illegal acquisition. The title for the land has since been returned to the city and 

the park is available for public use. The successful campaign sent the government 

a clear signal that corruption and impunity would not be tolerated. 

TRADE AND INVESTMENT

Kenya is at the juncture of a critical region as it relates to its neighbors and the 

rest of the continent as well as its ability to leverage investment for broader economic growth. U.S. private investment interest is significant.

Question. What role does Kenya play in the massive regional infrastructure planning and execution associated with International Financial Institution and MultiLateral Development Banks?

Answer. Kenya is the economic and transportation hub of East Africa. Its Vision 

2030 development plan foresees major infrastructure development within Kenya 

and, through improved road and rail linkages to neighboring countries, in support 

of regional integration and economic growth. International Financial Institutions 

play a key role supporting Kenyan and regional infrastructure development plans 

through projects such as the World Bank-funded National Urban Transport 

Improvement Project for Kenya and the African Development Bank-funded Power 

Transmission Improvement Project.

Question. What if any specific U.S. assistance for Kenya or the region is intended 

to develop the national/regional infrastructure, including transport/logistics, energy, 

etc.

Answer. Infrastructure development is critical to Kenyan and regional economic 

development. The International Financial Institutions such as the World Bank and 

the African Development Bank, in which the United States is a major shareholder, 

undertake significant infrastructure development investment in Kenya. The United 

States is encouraging U.S. private sector investment in infrastructure, including 

through trade missions and dialogue with Kenya and East African governments on 

putting into place the regulations and business climate necessary to attract private 

sector investment in infrastructure. As detailed below, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) recently made a $310 million financing facility available 

to support geothermal energy development in Kenya. Further, the United States is 

diligent in efforts to ensure that these infrastructure projects are environmentally 

and financially sustainable. In the transport and logistics sector, we are supporting 

efforts in Kenya and the region to make procedures at border crossings more efficient and transparent in order to facilitate trade and reduce transactions costs. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

661

In the energy sector, the United States is supporting Kenya’s efforts to broaden 

sources of generation, specifically renewables, attract private investment, and to extend the grid to the 85 percent of the population without electricity. One of our programs has provided capacity-building assistance, including advisory assistance for 

its negotiations over the commercial arrangements, to the government-owned Kenya 

Electricity Transmission Company Limited (KETRACO) as it builds a new transmission line to move power from the 300-megawatts (MW) Lake Turkana Wind 

Power Project (LTWP) in northwestern Kenya to the population centers. Program 

assistance will facilitate the LTWP in generating up to 25 percent of Kenya’s electricity needs from renewable energy and potentially displace 650,000 tons per year 

of CO2 generation. 

Renewable energy, especially geothermal, offers attractive investment opportunities for U.S. companies. OPIC recently provided $310 million in financing to 

Nevada-based Ormat Technologies for a two-phase 52 MW expansion of its existing 

geothermal powerplant in Kenya. Of Kenya’s roughly 200 MW of geothermal capacity, 48 MW is produced by OrPower4, a subsidiary of Ormat Technologies. 

In the coming days, we expect to sign a Memorandum of Cooperation with the 

Kenya Geothermal Development Company to provide capacity-building support. In 

addition, through USAID Development Credit Authority (DCS) funding we are promoting lending for small-scale clean and renewable energy opportunities.

Question. What are the goals in terms of Kenya’s development and in terms of 

regional development? Please include a timeline and a list of associated reports.

Answer. In recognition of Kenya’s critical role in the Horn of Africa and in line 

with the President’s new U.S. Strategy Toward Sub-Saharan Africa, our engagement with Kenya focuses on advancing key political and governance reforms 

through implementation of the new constitution and by fighting corruption and impunity, boosting health, education, economic growth and food security, and assisting 

youth empowerment. We support Kenyan efforts to strengthen its democracy, establish conditions for long-term stability, improve economic and social opportunities for 

all Kenyans, and increase the country’s capacity to provide basic services for its 

people. 

U.S. Government foreign assistance goals are fully aligned with the Government 

of Kenya’s long-term development goal of transforming the country into a middleincome nation by 2030, as foreseen in Kenya’s Vision 2030 strategy. 

Regional integration is a key issue in Kenya and throughout the East Africa Community (EAC). As President Obama’s Strategy Toward Sub-Saharan Africa directs, 

we are working through various government agencies, including USAID, to advance 

the U.S.–EAC Trade and Investment Partnership to promote regional economic 

growth and integration and rising incomes by removing barriers to trade, improving 

transit facilitation, linking producers to markets, encouraging free competition, and 

promoting improved agricultural policies, standards and practices. Since 2009, 

USAID has had a bilateral assistance agreement with the EAC Secretariat. To date, 

the U.S. Government has provided almost $10 million directly to the Secretariat to 

address health, trade and investment, agriculture, environment, and climate 

change. The agreement has been extended to 2017, with a new ceiling of $18 million 

that the United States will provide over the next 5 years to support regional economic integration. 

On November 30, 2012, as part of the U.S.–EAC Trade and Investment Partnership, Acting Secretary of Commerce Dr. Rebecca Blank will launch a new EAC–U.S. 

Commercial Dialogue in Nairobi. The Commercial Dialogue will create important 

new paths for U.S. and EAC governments to jointly engage private sector leaders 

in conversation about both the opportunities and challenges that they experience as 

they do business.

Links to associated reports and timelines: Kenya’s Vision 2030: 

http://www.vision2030.go.ke/cms/vds/PopularlVersion.pdf. 

Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification: 

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/185014.pdf. 

EMBASSY MANAGEMENT

It is well understood that the Nairobi mission is the largest in Africa in terms 

of its range of U.S. agencies and offices represented. As a regional hub and key partner in peace and security, Kenya provides an unrivaled environment for a significant footprint in the region. However, there are limits to the efficacy and efficiency 

of such an outsize commitment in such a developing country.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

662

Question. What are the primary inhibitors to mission size and growth as experienced by the mission over the last several years?

Answer. A lack of office space is the primary constraint to adding U.S. and local 

staff personnel to augment our capacity to carry out our mission in Kenya. The 

Chancery offices have been reconfigured to accommodate mission growth over the 

past few years, but we have reached the limit on what we can do to use space efficiently; the space in the Chancery is completely filled and there is minimal potential 

to increase space in the USAID Annex. 

As non-State Department agencies have grown in the Embassy, the State International Cooperative Shared Services (ICASS) positions that are necessary to support them administratively have not increased proportionately. This limits the 

amount of support services that can be provided to the Embassy personnel and creates morale issues for them and their dependents. Agencies are reluctant to fund 

additional ICASS positions in the current budgetary environment, and the Embassy 

lacks office space for them. 

In addition to physical space and other resource limitations, Nairobi remains a 

critical threat Post for crime and terrorism. The mission takes into account the ongoing threat of crime and terrorism as it makes decisions about increasing staffing.

Question. What can be done to mitigate the challenges? Would increased operational funding, administrative funding, technical assistance, personnel, expertise, 

physical construction, resolve the issues or are there fundamental structural impediments in Kenya?

Answer. Additional office space is essential to any further expansion of Mission 

Nairobi. A planning effort has been initiated to ensure we are making the best possible use of existing space, identify future requirements, and develop options for 

growth, should a decision to do so be made. New office space at the mission will 

almost certainly require additional facility funding. With additional space, Mission 

Kenya could grow as necessary to support U.S. Government priorities in Kenya and 

East Africa. Once space issues are resolved, growth in staff would require increased 

operational funding, administrative funding, personnel, and training. While there 

are always going to be challenges working in a developing country, with adequate 

resources these challenges are not insurmountable.

Question. Has or does the mission expect to see deteriorating effect due to its size, 

and if so, would it be in the area of security or bilateral cooperation, etc?

Answer. Our Embassy in Nairobi is currently our largest in Africa. Its size is a 

clear indicator of Kenya’s importance to the United States and the broad scope of 

bilateral and regional responsibilities assumed by mission personnel. Despite facilities’ challenges, we engage effectively with our Kenyan and regional counterparts 

in a secure environment. 

Managing an embassy the size of Embassy Nairobi is a significant challenge, but 

it can be done effectively. We must constantly balance a range of goals, including 

ensuring security for our staff while maintaining our outreach in Kenya. Mission 

personnel currently do an excellent job of reviewing and anticipating security 

needs—and making adjustments as needed—and are committed to working together 

to support our core U.S. Government objectives. 

If confirmed, I will exercise inclusive leadership and keep open lines of communication to all Embassy elements to ensure we maintain high standards of security 

and work seamlessly together to support U.S. foreign policy objectives. If confirmed, 

I will also be committed to ensuring that U.S. Government resources are used 

wisely. I will regularly review staffing levels and operating procedures to ensure we 

operate as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible, and will request the level of 

resources necessary to provide appropriate administrative support and secure working and living space for all Embassy personnel.

Question. How has State incorporated the experience of the Chief of Mission into 

a ready and useful resource for existing and prospective Chiefs of Mission and deputies?

Answer. New Chiefs of Mission (COM) and deputies have extensive consultations 

and training in Washington (including a 2-week course for COMs run by the Foreign Service Institute) before going to post. This allows them to talk to experts 

familiar with all the internal challenges a post faces, including personnel, facilities, 

and country infrastructure, as well as experts who can provide a thorough review 

of the substantive issues the new COM and/or deputy will face at post. The briefings

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

663

cover both current issues as well as lessons learned from previous COMs. This 

allows each COM to develop his or her own game plan and discuss issues with their 

peers before arriving at post. In many cases the Deputy Chief of Mission (DCM) who 

will work with the new Ambassador is already at post and he or she will ensure 

the new COM has a smooth transition upon assuming his or her ambassadorial 

duties.

Æ

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER