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

64–549PDF 2011

DOES THE U.S. HAVE A POLICY TOWARD LATIN

AMERICA? ASSESSING THE IMPACT TO U.S.

INTERESTS AND ALLIES

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

FEBRUARY 15, 2011

Serial No. 112–23

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

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

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina 

VACANT 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

DENNIS CARDOZA, California 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

FREDERICA WILSON, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

YLEEM D.S. POBLETE, Staff Director 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

CONNIE MACK, Florida, Chairman 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESS 

The Honorable Arturo Valenzuela, Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of 

Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State .................................. 11

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Arturo Valenzuela: Prepared statement ...................................... 14

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 50

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 51

The Honorable Connie Mack, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere: 

Prepared statement .............................................................................................. 53

Questions for the record submitted to the Honorable Arturo Valenzuela ....... 55

(1)

DOES THE U.S. HAVE A POLICY TOWARD 

LATIN AMERICA? ASSESSING THE IMPACT 

TO U.S. INTERESTS AND ALLIES 

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:24 p.m., in room 

2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Connie Mack (chairman 

of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. MACK. The subcommittee will come to order. I first want to 

thank everyone, especially our witness, Assistant Secretary 

Valenzuela, for joining us for the first of many hearings from the 

Western Hemisphere Subcommittee. After recognizing myself and 

the ranking member, Mr. Engel, for 7 minutes each for our opening 

statement, I will recognize the members of the subcommittee for 5 

minutes each for their opening statements. We will then proceed 

directly to hearing testimony from our distinguished witness. The 

full text of the written testimony will be inserted into the record, 

without objection, members may have 5 days to submit statements 

and questions for the record. 

After we hear from our witness, individual members will be recognized for 5 minutes each to question our witness. First, if I could 

take a moment, I want to thank all of you for being here today and 

especially thank my good friend, Mr. Engel, who I look forward to 

working with in a bipartisan way as much as we can. We share a 

lot of the same goals and interests in the Western Hemisphere. We 

may disagree occasionally on how we get there, but we have a 

great working relationship and I look forward to that continuing 

and I look forward to working with you. 

I now recognize myself for 7 minutes. President Santos of Colombia, a long-time ally of the United States, recently referred to a 

quote by Henry Kissinger, saying, ‘‘To be an enemy of the United 

States is bad, but to be a friend is fatal.’’ Given that there is neither a strategic nor reliable policy coming from the administration 

toward the region, I can understand the frustration of President 

Santos and our allies in the region. It is my goal to show the entire 

Western Hemisphere that it is better to be a friend of the United 

States than to be an enemy. We will focus on various countries, key 

threats, and opportunities from within our hemisphere throughout 

my tenure as chair. Many of which will be addressed at future 

hearings. 

2

Today, however, I want to get to the bottom of key issues, where 

U.S. policies have failed both U.S. citizens and important U.S. allies in the region. Regarding the Free Trade Agreements, the administration’s lack of action is killing U.S. jobs. The failure to move 

forward on our promises is hurting important allies in the region. 

I want to know the exact benchmarks for the Panama and Colombia Free Trade Agreements and when the President will send them 

for a vote. 

Colombia was signed on November 22, 2006 and then renegotiated to include more stringent environmental and labor standards. 

It was signed again on May 10, 2007. Panama was signed on June 

28, 2007, and South Korea on June 30, 2007, with a renegotiated 

version signed last December. I want to warn the administration 

that they should send these agreements up in the order that they 

were signed to ensure the swift passage of each of the agreements. 

Regarding Honduras, the Assistant Secretary and the Secretary, 

for that matter, are very familiar with my position. Honduras has 

been a great ally of the United States. The Hondurans managed to 

escape the target placed on their country by Chavez when the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress legally removed Zelaya from 

power. And the U.S. administration has been punishing them ever 

since. I want to know when the visas that were revoked over the 

past 11⁄2 years will be approved for reapplication and at which 

board meeting this year the MCC will provide Hondurans with 

their next compact. 

The fact that Nicaragua, a nation ruled by a corrupt dictator that 

invaded Costa Rica is still receiving MCC funds while Honduras 

was cut off is a disgrace. Current U.S. policies are weakening Honduran governance and democracy, negatively impacting the Central 

America region and harming U.S. interests. 

Regarding Venezuela, Hugo Chavez is in violation of U.S. sanctions on Iran, actively supporting terrorist organizations, working 

directly counter to democracy and freedom in Venezuela and the 

region, and aggressively opposing U.S. interests. We need to stand 

with the Venezuelan people who are fighting daily for their freedom and make it clear to Chavez that like other dictators around 

the world, that he does not get a free ride. One place to start is 

the Keystone XL pipeline. Exports of Venezuelan heavy crude to 

the United States are Chavez’s main source of income. Without 

them, he may have to learn to be more responsive to the needs of 

Venezuelans. The State Department must approve the Presidential 

Permit for the pipeline as soon as possible to cut our reliance on 

Venezuela oil. Regarding Cuba, it is in the U.S. interest to maintain a hard line against dictators who are committed to violating 

human rights. 

Last month, the administration further loosened travel and remittance restrictions on Cuba allowing more money to flow to that 

country. Shortly thereafter, Cuban officials announced they are 

seeking a 20-year sentence for a USAID contractor, Alan Gross. 

Case in point, rewarding dictators only hurts U.S. interests. Additionally, by sending the wrong message on Cuba, we could soon see 

a relationship between Venezuela and Iran that is starkly similar 

to one pursued by Russia and Cuba. 

3

I believe we are much closer to this reality than the administration is willing to admit. Before providing the Castros with any reward, we need to see real democratic reform. These include free 

and fair elections, the release of all political prisoners and a free 

and independent press that is allowed to operate without fear of 

oppression or violence. Additionally, regarding Mexico, while the 

administration has made trips to Mexico and we have funded the 

Merida Initiative over the past 3 years, it isn’t enough. I will be 

concentrating the time and energy of this subcommittee on determining where a proactive approach from the U.S. can be most effective in fighting the deadly path of the drug trade. To start, we 

need to double border patrol agents from 20,000 to 40,000 while 

fully funding needed border protection equipment. This should include additional unmanned aerial vehicles and the completion of 

the security fence in urban hard-to-enforce areas of the border. 

We also need to utilize the full resources of the U.S. intelligence 

community aligned to the mission, while coordinating closely with 

Mexico to ensure swift justice on both sides of the border. A central 

piece of the strategy includes a focus on governance reform, economic development, community stabilization, and ensuring access 

to essential services. We must stop the drug trafficking organizations and illegal armed groups that threaten the security of Mexico, 

the United States, and beyond. 

In conclusion, policies of shaking hands with our enemies while 

ignoring our friends is making us neither a force to be reckoned 

with nor a friend of value. You can rely on me to engage the administration on a very regular basis to ensure we develop a strategic relationship toward Latin America. This is the only way to 

ensure freedom, security and prosperity for the United States and 

our allies. I now would like to recognize the ranking member, Mr. 

Engel for his opening statement. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, it is going to 

take some getting used to because for the last 2 years, our roles 

were reversed with myself as chairman and Mr. Mack as ranking 

member. But during those 2 years, we worked very closely together 

and I believe share a very similar vision of what needs to be done 

in the Western Hemisphere. And I look forward to working with 

Mr. Mack in his role as chairman and I am glad that we are working together again. 

Mr. Mack cares deeply about the Western Hemisphere and I 

wish him well as he assumes the gavel and I was particularly impressed that he gave himself 7 minutes and there are only about 

9 seconds left over when you finished your remarks. So that was 

pretty good, Connie. As the leaders of our country look around the 

world and analyze the challenges our Nation faces, they often point 

to the never ending array of crises in the Middle East, Asia, or 

elsewhere. While those areas receive the most attention from the 

world’s media, they are certainly no more important to the United 

States’ national interest than what happens in Latin America. This 

is the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. We are in the 

Western Hemisphere and obviously the Latin American and Caribbean countries are also in the Western Hemisphere, so the United 

States is geographically close to Latin America and the Caribbean, 

millions of recent immigrants are from this region, most of our imVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:27 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\021511\64549 HFA PsN: SHIRL
4

ported energy is from Canada and other countries in the hemisphere. In fact, from illicit narcotics to cultural influences, to so 

many other areas, the Western Hemisphere remains crucial to the 

United States. 

That is why I am glad that next month President Obama will 

travel to Brazil, Chile and El Salvador. These visits will help demonstrate that the administration sees our region as vitally important to the United States. His very first stop, Brazil, is, in so many 

ways, like the United States. It is a very large, very diverse democracy. I have long been of the belief that U.S. and Brazilian interests converge on a wide array of issues. And frankly, I was disappointed with some of the choices of the Lula government which 

led to a cooling of our relations. 

However, there are already signs that under the new government 

of Dilma Rousseff, U.S.-Brazilian relations are on the mend. I hope 

that continues. It is very encouraging. Chile will be the second stop 

on President Obama’s regional excursion. 2010 was quite a year for 

Chile. They experienced a terrible earthquake from which Chile is 

still rebuilding and lived through a mine cave-in from which the 

miners emerged almost miraculously after more than 2 months 

under ground. Our relationship with Chile is already quite close 

and mature and the President’s visit can only further solidify these 

strong bonds. 

Finally, President Obama will stop in El Salvador, a key country 

in Central America. In the 1980s, El Salvador was the site of a terrible civil war, but today that fight has long ended and the Salvadoran people live in a democracy. However, significant challenges 

still face El Salvador. Drug trafficking, criminal gangs, high unemployment and a soaring murder rate make life in El Salvador difficult. President Funes is charting a center left course and in the 

face of pressure, wants to continue historically close ties with the 

United States. I was at his inauguration and I am glad the President, our President, will be there to support him. 

I wanted to also comment on Honduras, which Mr. Mack commented on. I feel very strongly, as he does, that Honduras and the 

United States need to work closely together. And I feel very strongly that the OAS owe it to stop putting Honduras on a list where 

it doesn’t accord it correct recognition while at the same time other 

governments in the region which are much more questionable are 

welcome to the OAS as full fledged members. 

So not only am I ranking member of this subcommittee, but I 

also represent large populations of people whose heritage is in 

Latin America and the Caribbean in my New York congressional 

district. Spring Valley in Rockland County is home to many Haitians and Haitian Americans. They were and are profoundly affected by the cataclysmic earthquake which struck Haiti. I have 

been proud to support them as they seek to support their loved 

ones. It is critical that our subcommittee stays focused on rebuilding Haiti in the weeks and months ahead. 

We also need to follow the issues in Cuba. I have long been critical of the Castro regime and the fact that they do not have—permit political pluralism whatsoever in Cuba. I think that we need 

to continue the pressure on Cuba to make sure it democratizes and 

that the democracy which we have seen the Egyptian people clamor 

5

for can also happen to the Cuban people. Every day, stories fill our 

newspapers and TV about the horrors which drug criminals are inflicting upon Mexico and Central America. While every circumstance stands on its own, we have seen this before and we 

know that a country which stands up to the traffickers can emerge 

even stronger. 

After more than a decade of murders, kidnappings and war, our 

ally, Colombia, finally has gotten the upper hand against the 

FARC, while the acreage under cocoa cultivation has dropped substantially. President Santos, we attended his inauguration as well. 

And we were proud to work with him as well as former President 

Uribe. President Santos is working today to help Colombia’s dispossessed, its Afro-Colombian population and others facing challenges. 

And he and Colombia deserve the strong support of the United 

States. 

I must say, however, how disappointed I am that the majority allowed the Andean Trade Preferences to expire on Saturday. 

ATPDEA is critical to our friends in Colombia and we shouldn’t 

delay it any further. We should extend it. As we work with Colombia, we must work with Mexico and the countries of Central America to strengthen security forces and enhance justice systems. 

These countries are facing a difficult challenge and they deserve 

our backing. 

At the same time, there is more we can do here at home to help 

our neighbors fight narco crime. We should tighten up at the borders, slow gun trafficking and do more to reduce demand for illegal 

drugs. Four years ago when I just started as chairman of this subcommittee, one thing quickly became clear to me, we had multiple 

programs to help fight narco trafficking but they were not integrated. When I raised this with the State Department, it was never 

clear who was in charge or how the efforts were integrated. I inserted language and the House passed Merida legislation to create 

a security coordinator to oversee and make sure our efforts meshed. 

One year ago, Chairman Mack and I met with Secretary of State 

Clinton and urged her to create the security coordinator for the 

Western Hemisphere which I had proposed. I am looking forward 

to Secretary Valenzuela’s testimony today and hope that he might 

discuss this important issue. Again, I would like to wish my good 

friend, Connie Mack, the best of luck as he begins his term as 

chairman. I offer him all of my support and I look forward to continuing our close collaboration in this subcommittee. Thank you. 

And, Mr. Chairman, you did a better job than me because I am 28 

seconds over. 

Mr. MACK. As we all know, that is pretty good for you. Just kidding. Thank you. Now, I would like to recognize the vice chair of 

the subcommittee, the member from Texas, Mr. McCaul for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I am honored to 

serve as a vice chair of this subcommittee. I guess you can say I 

am your right-hand man on this issue. Secretary, thank you for 

being here today. And being from Texas, Mexico and Latin America 

are very important to my constituents and to me. And the issues 

I think have been covered very well by the chair and ranking member. It is clearly the Free Trade Agreements that I think I am inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:27 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\021511\64549 HFA PsN: SHIRL
6

terested in hearing the administration’s position in terms of pushing that forward, the threat, the concern of Venezuela and Hugo 

Chavez, their connection to Iran continues to be of grave concern. 

I think the chair mentioned Cuba. We have an American who has 

been in prison, I think, for over a year—well over a year, Alan 

Gross. And I know the charges were just recently brought and I 

would be very interested in what the administration is doing to address that, what I consider to be a human rights violation. And 

then finally, the border is, certainly anyone from a border state, it 

is one of the biggest issues back home. Over 30,000 people have 

died at the hands of the drug cartels since President Calderon’s 

war began and we overlook that fact. We talk a lot about Iraq and 

Afghanistan, but more people have died than Americans in those 

2 wars. So the Merida Initiative is very important. The ranking 

member when he was chairman I think did an outstanding job 

pushing that very important initiative through. I met with President Calderon many years ago and he was pushing us to adopt the 

Merida Initiative as a showing of support, as solidarity with him. 

And I am pleased that we got that through. However, the funding 

has been bottlenecked at the State Department. I think $1.3 billion 

was appropriated and yet a very small amount of that has actually 

made it through to Mexico. So these are all very, very important 

issues that I look forward to hearing the testimony here today. And 

with that, I yield back. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. Now I would like to recognize Mr. F. I can 

say that because my last name is McGillicutty and it is not always 

easy to pronounce. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. That is alright, Mr. Chairman. If I can pronounce Valenzuela, I should also be able to pronounce Faleomavaega. 

Mr. MACK. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to 

thank you not only for obtaining the chairmanship for this very important subcommittee, but also thanking our ranking member, Mr. 

Engel, who has previously served as chairman of the subcommittee. 

I do want to associate myself with the statements made by you, 

Mr. Chairman, our ranking member, expressing some very serious 

concerns as to the issues confronting the Western Hemisphere. I 

want to thank Secretary Valenzuela for coming before our subcommittee. And having a chance to review his statement, I thought 

it was very comprehensive and certainly an indication also of the 

commitment of the Obama administration toward this important 

region of the world. 

The only thing I want to share with Secretary Valenzuela in reviewing your statement, sir, there is not one thing mentioning 

about the millions, or shall I say, the plight, the sufferings of the 

millions and millions of indigenous people who live throughout 

Latin America, including Canada. The indigenous of Canada and 

the people living in this important region, there is not one mention 

of your statement concerning the needs, economic, social, you call 

it whatever. But the indigenous people living in these regions. 

Mr. Secretary, I say we definitely need to pay more attention. I 

sincerely hope the Obama administration will focus on the needs 

of these people. One particular area that I do want to bring to the 

7

attention of Secretary Valenzuela, is Chile. Now, I know that the 

world has given rise in not only recognizing but also in congratulating the leaders of the people of Chile, what happened with the 

33 miners who suffered tremendously and their being able to be 

saved from this catastrophe that occurred last month I believe as 

it was in Chile. 

But, Mr. Secretary, I wanted to share with you—I sent a letter 

to your office about the plight of the people of Easter Island. There 

is a crisis brewing there on Easter Island, or as the native people 

call it, Rapa Nui. There is presence of the military of Chile there 

forcing the people away from their ancestral land rights, to their 

lands and tremendous, tremendous problems. I have sent a letter 

even to the Ambassador of Chile, Mr. Arturo. I have not had even 

the courtesy of a call or a response from the Chilean Embassy. I 

hope somebody from the Chilean Embassy is here in this hearing. 

Not even a courtesy call to just say, hey, we got your note, let us 

talk about it. Not even a message from the Ambassador of Chile 

to the United States concerning the problems that we are faced 

with on Easter Island. 

Senator Akaka and I have also written to President Pinera expressing our serious concerns about the presence of the military of 

Chile on this little island, 2,300 miles away from Chile. Seventeen 

million Chileans, as opposed to 2,500 Rapa Nuis or Easter Islanders, living on this isolated island. And I must say, Mr. Secretary, 

they are not treated very decently as far as I am concerned as some 

sense of decency on how these people should be treated. 

And I sincerely hope your office will get back to me on this so 

that we can follow up on this. And I will elaborate on it a little 

later during the course of the hearing. But I will want to say that 

I am putting out a little olive branch to the leaders of Chile to let 

us work together in taking care of addressing the serious needs of 

the people of Easter Island. I know it is not as important as Egypt 

or all these other regions of the world, but I think the world has 

caught the attention of these people being able to build these statutes, stone statues, weighing millions of thousands of tons and 

their culture. And I am disappointed in the way the Chilean Government has treated these people. And I am going to be asking the 

Secretary some more questions on this. Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

My time is about to be up and thank you for the time. 

Mr. MACK. I thank the gentleman. Next is Congresswoman Jean 

Schmidt from Ohio, who is new to the committee. And we welcome 

you to the committee and I know you have done a lot of travelling 

and are passionate about the Western Hemisphere. So we appreciate you being here and you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you Ranking Member Engel for holding this very important and timely meeting. And I do want to express my thanks because before I became 

a member of this committee, you afforded me an opportunity to 

travel into the area and back home in Cincinnati. In the second 

district, we have a lot of economic interests in the Western Hemisphere. I would also like to thank the Assistant Secretary for being 

here to address our subcommittee today. Many key issues will be 

addressed, but I really want to focus on one and that is Colombia. 

Colombia has been a strategic ally in Latin America for well over 

8

a decade. Since the establishment of Plan Colombia in 1999, the 

United States and Colombia worked closely to combat drug trafficking and terrorism in the region. Efforts by successive Colombian governments have resulted in a dramatically improved economy and security situation. Under President Uribe, rates in Colombia for murder, inflation, unemployment and poverty fell dramatically, while economic growth, exports and investments flourished. 

President Juan Manuel Santos, who I was afforded the opportunity 

to see sworn in, has built upon the success of President Uribe and 

the economic and security situation in Colombia continues to improve. 

In addition to the improved economic and security situation, 

President Santos has vigorously pursued dramatic and social reforms. Under his administration, the Victims and Lands Restitution Act was passed. This Act assists victims of guerilla and paramilitary violence and coercion and provides an indemnity to victims 

of state security forces. President Santos is also working to address 

and protect labor rights and activists. He has pledged to review 

homicide cases against labor activists. He is in the process of establishing an independent labor ministry and he is committed to additional government resources to protect journalists, labor leaders 

and human rights defenders. Despite these efforts, opponents of the 

Colombian Free Trade Agreement argue that labor unionists in Colombia continue to face violence and intimidation and that the Colombian Government has failed to adequately protect the rights of 

workers to unionize and collectively bargain. And the Obama administration unfortunately appears to be bowing to this pressure 

and has thus far refused to send the Colombian Trade Agreement 

to Congress. 

In my view, this is a slap in the face to the Colombian people. 

The Obama administration claims it wants to double export efforts 

within 5 year, yet it refuses to seriously consider a Free Trade 

Agreement with arguably our strongest ally in the region. I believe 

this policy undermines our credibility in the region and it will ultimately result in a diminished ability of the United States to exert 

influence in our own hemisphere. And I would like to add that the 

economic interests in my district and Colombia are very, very 

strong. 

Three of my major corporations have very, very strong ties with 

Colombia. So this Trade Agreement is important to the United 

States, as well as to the citizens of Colombia. I would sincerely appreciate if the Assistant Secretary addressed these concerns in your 

testimony, sir, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. Mr. Payne is recognized for 5 

minutes for an opening statement. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you. Thank you very much. And let me say 

that it is a pleasure to be a member of this subcommittee again 

and I look forward to working with you in your new leadership position. I know that you have the interests and the will, and so we 

look forward to having a good working relationship. Let me just say 

that I think that Latin America, as I have said for 20-some years 

I have been in Congress, it seems that we have lacked what I think 

is a very aggressive policy. 

9

During the 1960s, under the Kennedy administration probably is 

where the most attention was given to Latin America and we had 

programs that really kind of tied us together. Since then, we have 

seen a lack of affirmative programming in my opinion, and as a result, I think we have seen that many countries have elected leaders 

that have different opinions than what we have. I think that it is 

primarily because we have lacked the attention that we should 

have given to our neighbors to the south. 

Having said that, of course, we do have important interests in 

Latin America. I think that our State Department could also do a 

better job, as my friend mentioned, about the indigenous people 

and people of African descent where there are many, many, in 

Latin America. For example, 2011 will mark the international year 

for people of African descent, and I wonder whether it would be a 

wise thing for our Embassies and countries in Latin America to 

have an evening of the international year of people of African descent. 

I think that would show many people who are depressed in their 

country that the U.S. have an interest in them as well as our relationships with the leadership of the country. I understand that 

funding for State Department’s race, ethnicity and social inclusion 

unit, which administers the Brazil and Colombian joint action 

plans on racial equality and other initiatives that strengthen minority inclusion in democracies throughout the region, the funding 

is going to dry up. 

And once again, I think that it would be an opportunity for us 

to show that we do have an interest where we have seen changes 

and many of the countries, Brazil in particular, Colombia has made 

some steps in the right direction as it relates to minorities. But we 

still have the problem of whether Colombia, as we say, they are a 

great ally. However, 2,800 union leaders have been killed in Colombia over the past 20 years or so. Very few of the cases have been 

solved. So although we embrace the government, we still have to 

be concerned about workers’ rights and the rights of indigenous 

people. As a matter of fact, Colombia has the largest number of displaced people, second largest number in the world because of the 

various activities. 

So although I hear our pleas for the Colombia Free Trade Agreement and I do think Colombia has made some steps in the right 

direction, I think that more can be done and hopefully the new administration and Colombia will make strides to improve the relationships. I think that Brazil is doing an outstanding job. They 

have shown how they have become independent of foreign oil. I 

wish we could study what they have done and perhaps we could 

be less dependent on the lease oil, which could kind of stop the 

transfer of our finances, but secondly, not have us dependent on 

despots and dictators in the Middle East as we see it is a fragile 

area, what happened in Egypt and Tunisia and Algeria starting to 

perk up, we need to be concerned that we don’t allow the same 

things to happen in our neighbors to the south. It is very important 

to us, and I certainly look forward to working with the administration in the future. Thank you very much. I yield back my last second. 

10

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Payne. And it is great to have you 

on the committee, and I look forward to working with you as well. 

Mr. Rivera from Miami, new to the committee, new Member in 

Congress. Welcome. And you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, 

for attending today’s hearing. I am deeply concerned with our current administration’s policy and attitude toward Latin America 

over the past few years. It seems that our foreign policy in the region has been aimed at improving relations with our enemies instead of supporting our friends and allies in Latin America. For example, the recent decision by the Obama administration to make 

changes to regulations relating to travel to Cuba is nothing short 

of a unilateral concession to a dictatorship that continues to oppress its people. I know the administration believes these actions 

are an important step in reaching the widely shared goal of a Cuba 

that respects the basic rights of all its citizens, but I couldn’t disagree more. This loosening of regulations is a concession that does 

nothing to solve the fundamental problems on the island. 

Instead of seeking change from the Cuban dictatorship with regard to human rights and free and open democratic elections, before entering into any kind of compromise, this policy sends a message that the Cuban dictatorship does not have to reform before 

being rewarded by the United States. This policy will not lead to 

a better quality of life for the Cuban people or help grant them the 

freedoms that they so desperately need and want. It only serves to 

enrich the Cuban dictatorship. In addition, there have been reports 

from Cuban state-controlled media that Cuban prosecutors are 

seeking a 20-year jail term for American contractor Alan Gross. 

Gross, an American citizen, has been imprisoned by the Castro 

dictatorship without access to legal representation or a proper trial 

since December 2009 when he was on the island providing humanitarian assistance to Jewish groups. While this administration continues to ease sanctions on Cuba, the Castro dictatorship responds 

by seeking unjustifiably harsh penalties against an American citizen. The situation with Alan Gross demonstrates the futility of 

making unilateral concessions to the Castro dictatorship and shows 

that the Castro regime has no respect for civil liberties, human 

rights or due process of law. 

I believe the administration needs to immediately rescind its recent decision lifting sanctions on the Castro dictatorship in response to this unwarranted action against an American citizen. 

Furthermore, our best ally in Latin America has been Colombia. 

Colombia’s efforts in fighting the drug trade and terrorist organizations should be an example to the world. Colombia also has the potential of being one of America’s best economic engines. In his 2011 

State of the Union speech, President Obama cited the need for 

deals that keep faith with American workers and promote American jobs. The Colombia Free Trade Agreement would help him 

reach these goals. The agreement would slash Colombian tariffs for 

U.S. goods, increase American exports to Colombia by approximately $1.1 billion and increase U.S. GDP by $2.5 billion. 

As many have stated, delaying the Colombia Free Trade Agreement is destroying jobs in America. This agreement has received 

strong bipartisan support from leaders in both parties. We must 

11

come together, pass this agreement and show our neighbors in the 

region that democracy leads to prosperity. Finally, Venezuela is another example of this administration ignoring major threats in the 

region. Iran continues to have a close relationship with Hugo Chavez. Iran is an official Sponsor of State Terrorism as designated by 

our own Government. Should this not be a concern for the administration? In our own backyard, we have two of our prime enemies 

working together on ways to cause harm to our Nation and our allies such as perhaps a terror attack in this hemisphere. 

Already, two have been stopped: One of the U.S. Embassy in 

Santiago. And another to the President of Panama. The U.S. Embassy in Caracas was also closed this month due to a threat from 

Al Qaeda. Cuba works with Chavez and Chavez works closely with 

Iran. I look forward to hearing your testimony on how the administration plans on tackling these growing issues of concern to our national security. I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. And thank you, Mr. Valenzuela, for sitting through and letting us tell you some of the issues 

that we have. We look forward to your testimony. I think my staff 

prepared a nice introduction, but I think we all know who you are 

and your background. We are pleased that you are here today. We 

look forward to your testimony and your answer to questions. But 

most importantly, the committee looks forward to working with you 

and the administration on finding common ground and where we 

have disagreements we look forward to having a dialogue about 

those disagreements with seeing if we can’t find some solutions. So 

with that, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ARTURO VALENZUELA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, BUREAU OF WESTERN 

HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, 

I wanted to thank you for this opportunity to testify before you 

today and for the level of interest that this committee has shown 

now for some time to the issues of the Western Hemisphere and 

U.S. policy therein. I also want to congratulate you on your assignment as chairman of this committee, Mr. Chairman. 

In addition, I would like to note that I have submitted a longer 

statement to be entered into the Congressional Record. I will take 

this opportunity to highlight the main points of my main remarks 

and then I will be happy to answer your questions. 

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to tell you that this administration 

is deeply engaged in the Americas. I note that the title of this hearing asks a rather provocative policy toward Latin America. Rather 

than leave the committee in suspense, allow me to begin with the 

answer yes, we do. And since our earliest days in office, the Obama 

administration has been working very hard to safeguard democratic values, promote economic opportunity, strengthen regional 

security and advance U.S. interests. We strongly believe that the 

United States has important national interests at stake in the 

Western Hemisphere and that the best way to advance these interests is through a proactive engagement with all of the countries of 

the Americas. That is why Secretary Clinton has traveled to the region more frequently than any other Secretary of State in modern 

12

American history, and that is why President Obama chose to use 

the State of the Union address to announce his forthcoming trip to 

Brazil, Chile and El Salvador. 

We believe that the United States has a vital stake in the success of Latin America and Central America and the countries of the 

Americas and that a U.S. policy that contributes to that success 

will benefit all the people of the Americas, including the citizens 

of the United States. 

We also know that Latin America’s future depends on the consolidation of vibrant democratic institutions that are responsive to 

their citizens and capable of expanding the boundaries of freedom, 

creating greater social prosperity, unlocking the economic potential 

of markets and deepening the rule of law. Today we are very optimistic about the state of the hemisphere. 

In my 51 trips to 23 hemispheric countries as Assistant Secretary, I have witnessed the convergence of two powerful positive 

trends, the consolidation of successful market democracies that are 

making big strides in meeting their people’s needs and the growing 

global integration of Latin America. The greatest regional challenges, including inequality, the impunity of power, lack of rights, 

ineffective institutions, lack of opportunity are receding in most 

countries in the Americas and nations of the hemisphere are realizing their stake in global issues, like food security, climate change, 

transnational crime and economic competitiveness. We recognize 

that achieving our goals will require building stronger institutions 

of democratic governance, their respect for human rights. 

In 2011, several Latin American and Caribbean countries will 

hold Presidential elections. We are always welcoming of elections 

that are credible expressions of the popular will and we encourage 

all countries to facilitate domestic and international observation 

and to establish mechanisms capable of mitigating disputes that 

may arise through the electoral process. 

Given a new spirit of international partnership is especially important at a time when we face a constrained budget environment. 

Now more than ever, our budget choices must be strategic and we 

must align limited funding resources to the areas where our resources can make a critical difference. The President’s 2012 foreign 

assistance request for the Western Hemisphere includes funding 

for critical citizen safety programs to support the hemisphere’s ability to combat drug trafficking and transnational crime. These 

threats to the rule of law in Latin America also threaten U.S. national security and strengthening the region’s capacity to combat 

them is in our national interest. To achieve these goals, we support 

full funding from Congress for the Merida Initiative, with Mexico 

and Central American Regional Security Initiative and the Caribbean Basin and Security Initiative. 

In Colombia, full funding is key to firmly securing the country’s 

democratic and security gains of recent years. We appreciate the efforts of Congressman Engel and Congressman Mack to help us concentrate our efforts more effectively in the security assistance and 

look forward to ways in which we might be able to roll out the idea 

of having a better coordination of this process. 

Mr. Chairman, I am sure that you have questions about specific 

aspects of our policies, especially as it relates to our bilateral relaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:27 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\021511\64549 HFA PsN: SHIRL
13

tions. During the question period, I will be more than happy to address the strong partnership for us with respect to Mexico, Brazil, 

Colombia, Chile, Peru and the Caribbean, as well as to discuss our 

bilateral relationships that have been more challenging. And you 

have alluded to some of those. In conclusion, let me say that the 

Obama administration’s Latin America policy is informed, engaged, 

dynamic and collaborative and optimistic about what the future 

will hold for the countries of the Americas. And I thank you for 

your attention. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Valenzuela follows:]

14


64549a_1.eps
15


64549a_2.eps
16


64549a_3.eps
17


64549a_4.eps
18


64549a_5.eps
19


64549a_6.eps
20


64549a_7.eps
21


64549a_8.eps
22


64549a_9.eps
23


64549a_10.eps
24


64549a_11.eps
25

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. This is the first hearing of the 

subcommittee. And we really want to kind of get at the idea of do 

we have a policy, and as you say in your opening statement, yes, 

then help us understand it because there is a lot of contradiction 

out there, and I think the main problem I am having is we appear 

to be supporting our enemies and kind of turning our back on our 

allies. I don’t know how, and maybe you can answer this question, 

how can we deny Honduras a compact with the MCC but then 

allow the money to keep flowing to Nicaragua? I don’t know—it is 

a pretty stark difference. Honduras has been an ally and a friend. 

Nicaragua is invading other countries. And so I think there is a 

disparity there that needs some explaining. I would also suggest 

that again in Cuba, we relax travel and remittance restrictions, 

and then Cuba turns around and is talking about a 20-year sentence on a USAID, Alan Gross. 

So it seems like our foreign policy is not headed in the right direction in Latin America. If we want to show the people of Latin 

America that we support them and that there is value in being a 

friend to America, then the Free Trade Agreements must be sent 

to the Congress immediately for passage. If we want to show that 

there is value in being a friend to the United States and an ally, 

then the MCC compact with Honduras needs to move forward immediately. We cannot continue to have this kind of mixed messages 

to the folks of Latin America. So if you would like to respond to 

any of that. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Sure, Mr. Chairman. Thanks very much for 

that. Look, I think that the fundamental starting premise is that 

it is in our fundamental interest to have successful governments 

and successful societies in the Western Hemisphere. And that is 

what we are striving for. And what we see now is a situation as 

I alluded to in my testimony where we have overcome many of the 

difficulties of the past. 

It wasn’t that long ago that most of the countries in the region 

were under authoritarian regimes. Only three avoided those during 

the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, authoritarianism. We had civil conflicts in Central America. Today, in fact, as my testimony suggested, the countries of the Americas are weathering well to financial crisis today. They are growing, they are improving their societies. 

There are some significant challenges and we agree about that. 

And there are some countries that oppose specific challenges. I am 

happy to address that more specifically as we move forward with 

this hearing today. But I just want to let you know that when—

when you look at things like statistics that have come out on public 

opinion in Latin America with regard to the standing of the United 

States in the region, the latest polls by Latinobarometro that just 

came out suggested that two-thirds of the population in Latin 

America strongly supports U.S. policy in the region. The standing 

of President Obama is extremely high in the region. That is an increase of 10 to 20 points. 

So in country after country, we are seeing that our engagement, 

and I described it very thoroughly, the Secretary going to all of the 

countries, trying to address fundamental issues that are of concern 

to the peoples of the Americas, such as issues of public security, 

26

such as issues of competitiveness, such as issues of climate change, 

such as issues of how do you strengthen democratic institutions 

and that sort of thing. This engagement is paying off, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Can you maybe respond to the—how we deny Honduras the MCC compact and then we allow the one in Nicaragua——

Mr. VALENZUELA. The compact in Nicaragua is a 5-year compact 

that is ending right now. In the case of Honduras, what was at 

issue was whether there was going to be a renewal of the compact. 

And that goes to a board and the board determined that Honduras 

did not meet standards particularly on indicators of corruption. We 

discussed this with President Lobo and with the Government of 

Honduras. We are committed to continue to work with Honduras 

on this. We are going to provide resources. We hope that we might 

be able to move forward toward a new compact with Honduras in 

the future. And I doubt very much whether there is going to be any 

kind of a renewal of a compact with Nicaragua. 

Mr. MACK. And the corruption that you referred to, that happened under Zelaya’s watch? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. The corruption comes from an earlier period. I 

think that is right. Let me agree with you, Congressman, that Honduras ought to be brought back into the Organization of the American States. We are very impressed with the efforts that this government is making to move forward, to reconcile Honduras after 

the crisis of last year. And he is doing a superb job and I visited 

with him several times. We are really committed to working with 

Honduras and moving forward. We think that they have achieved 

an extraordinary amount of success and we are strongly supportive 

of this—their efforts. 

Mr. MACK. And the last concern there is in Honduras for the 

time being is that there is a lot of visas that have not been—I 

guess that are still being revoked. Is there a movement in State 

Department to see that those that wish to get a visa that have 

been—those that have been revoked, that they will be reauthorized? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Visas are not still being revoked, but we are 

looking into how the visas that were taken away will be restored. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. Mr. Engel, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I begin, let me 

agree with the chairman. I really was disappointed in Honduras 

that the MCC compact was not renewed and I think it is especially 

egregious because a large reason why it was not renewed was because of the corruption that happened in the previous regime. 

So it doesn’t seem fair to penalize Pepe Lobo, who I think is 

doing a very good job in terms of trying to get his country back to 

normal. So I want to add my voice to what the chairman just said. 

I mentioned that ATPDEA—I have long been a supporter of 

ATPDEA. I see the Ambassador from Colombia and the Ambassador from Ecuador are here. Tell me what is going on with that? 

And I know that we failed to renew it, the majority did. I know 

we are going to renew it. It has been my feeling that these things 

27

should be renewed for longer periods of time than they have in the 

past. What can you tell us about the renewal of ATPDEA? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, Congressman, I couldn’t agree with you 

more that this is a really significant priority for the administration 

and it is certainly a very critical priority in our relationship with 

both Colombia and Ecuador. And I think it is essential to try to 

find a way for the Congress to move forward and to renew these 

preferences as soon as possible. And as you suggested for a longer 

period of time, it would be better because it provides a significant 

amount of instability. Investors, exporters and so on cannot plan if 

they are subject to this kind of suspension along the lines that has 

been occurring recently. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. In my opening remarks, I mentioned the 

Western Hemisphere security coordinator and how now Chairman 

Mack and myself met with Secretary Clinton last year. I am calling 

for this. I am wondering if you could tell us what the progress has 

been on it. It didn’t make sense to me when I called the State Department for whatever, nothing seemed to be coordinated as well 

as it should. And we all agreed, including the Secretary, that this 

would be a step in the right direction. So please tell me about the 

progress. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes, thank you for the question and we really 

appreciate—I appreciate—both you and Congressman Mack had 

with the Secretary at the time. And we have been concerned that 

with our efforts in Merida with regard to Mexico as well as for the 

Central American Regional Security Initiatives (CARSI) as well as 

for the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, these three critical initiatives on security issues for Mexico and Central America and the 

Caribbean, that we have this properly coordinated. And in that 

sense, what we have done is we have identified a coordinator, the 

deputy Assistant Secretary and the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs who has probably more experience in this sort of thing than maybe anybody else 

that I know of in the State Department. 

In fact, she was there when I went into the State Department 

as a political appointee in 1994 and has extraordinary standing 

within the State Department. So we are working—and we like to 

work with your committee so we can properly announce this and 

review all of the issues that we are doing—all of the matters that 

we are focusing on with regard to security. 

Mr. ENGEL. I would like to announce it because one of the frustrations that all of us have had on both sides of the aisle, regardless of who the administration is, it has been in this administration, it has been with President Bush, we have seen the frustration 

that Congress moves in one panel and the administration seems to 

move in another place and this is a very good example of the administration listening to both of us and wanting to work in conjunction with us. 

So I look forward to that. And I know I speak for Mr. Mack, we 

would like to have a meeting with the coordinator as soon as possible so that we can tell the coordinator what our views are and 

work together on these issues. So I am happy to hear that. 

Let me ask you one last question. And that is—well, I have been 

very unhappy with many of the South American countries recogVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:27 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\021511\64549 HFA PsN: SHIRL
28

nizing unilaterally the State of Palestine. I think it is unhelpful, 

frankly, in Middle East peace. I think such unilateral efforts undermine the Middle East peace process. The Middle East peace between Palestinians and Israelis can only happen, in my opinion, if 

both parties sit together in face to face negotiations and I think 

this unilateral recognition of Palestine is a disincentive for the Palestinians to come to the negotiating table because they feel that if 

they just sit back and do nothing, all this recognition will fall in 

their lap. 

So what are we doing in these countries to relay our displeasure 

with these decisions in South America and what are we doing to 

prevent other countries in the hemisphere to do the same? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, thank you for the question. 

Mr. MACK. Be quick, because his time is almost up. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Let me just simply say that we agree completely with your approach and your analysis on this. This is not 

helpful. It is up to the parties to negotiate this and we shouldn’t 

be encouraging anybody to recognize Palestine, and we have made 

that very clear, Congressman, to all the countries at the highest 

levels. We have spoken to Foreign Ministers, we have spoken to 

Presidents, and we have gone across the region. So we have made 

a real effort in that regard. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

Mr. McCaul is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. I appreciate your 

testimony. 

Five years ago, the Colombia Free Trade Agreement was negotiated. Four years ago, the Free Trade Agreement with Panama 

was negotiated. Now we are in 2011. I remember meeting with 

President Uribe, a staunch ally, supporter of the United States. 

President Bush negotiated in good faith with him to get the Free 

Trade Agreement, and it just seems to me continuing to hold up 

this agreement is a real slap in the face to an ally of ours. 

What is the administration’s position on these two Free Trade 

Agreements, and when is the President going to submit these to 

the Congress? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, look, thank you for the question, Mr. 

Congressman. We agree completely with the fact that we have to 

move forward on both of these. 

And let me just say in some ways I am in a fairly special position, because I was at the White House in 1999 and 2000 when we 

started working on Plan Colombia, and it became the single most 

important thing that I was involved in as the Senior Director for 

Western Hemisphere Affairs at the National Security Council. It 

was a long slog, and at first it didn’t come out. And it turns out, 

I think, to have been one of the most successful policies of the 

United States in recent time in the Western Hemisphere and had 

the added, and I think extremely important, aspect of being a bipartisan foreign policy. 

And in that sense I would like to go back to Congressman Mack’s 

suggestion. The more we can look at trying to do our foreign policy 

in the Americas, it is a bipartisan foreign policy, the better our interests are served. 

29

With regard to Colombia, I think that the Colombians have made 

extraordinary progress. I think that this current administration, 

the subsequent administration, has moved even further with regard to addressing many of the questions that had been raised by 

others. 

And so I think that we would agree with you that it is time to 

move forward on the Colombia and the Panama Free Trade Agreements. I can’t tell you exactly how that is going to happen today, 

but that is certainly our commitment. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Because, you know, we talk a lot about jobs and 

the economy, and these two Free Trade Agreements, in my judgment, will create jobs in the United States. It will be a good, positive thing for our economy and good for our relations with our allies in this hemisphere. So I hope the administration will move 

quickly on that issue. 

You mentioned Plan Colombia, and I agree that was a very successful operation, and I applaud you for your efforts from the very 

beginning. As we look at Mexico, I have often advocated that 

maybe we need to do something similar in Mexico. Whatever we 

are doing right now, whatever President Calderon is doing is not 

working. The situation seems to be getting worse, and I would hate 

to see our friend just south of our border go into a state of collapse. 

So I was interested in your thoughts on that. 

On the Merida Initiative, why, I mean, it has been years now 

since we appropriated that funding, and yet it has been 

bottlenecked up, and we can’t seem to push it through the State 

Department. What is the problem? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Congressman, we are very comfortable with 

the fact that much of the Merida funding is now flowing very well. 

In fact, some of the original funding that focused much more on the 

hard side, on the security side, is now being complemented much 

more by some of the other things that need to be done as well, particularly, for example, the standing up of effective police institutions and strengthening the judicial system particularly at the local 

level, where a lot of these challenges are taking place. 

So the commitment and the congressional response to it was substantial, as you suggested. I think that we are moving forward on 

this, and we are making progress. 

Mr. MCCAUL. The number—$1.3 billion appropriated, and the 

number I saw was something like $350 million has actually made 

it out through State to Mexico. Is that accurate? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes. I don’t have the figures right in front of 

me. I will get them to you, but I think it is substantially more than 

that has been able to flow now. 

Mr. MCCAUL. If you could give me that information, I would appreciate that. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I will do that. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Lastly, I think, something that was very well, eloquently stated by Congressman Rivera. You know, we have an 

American in jail in Cuba since 2009, and this is one of the biggest 

human rights violations going on, in my judgment, and yet we do—

we tend to give this dictator more and more concessions. 

What is this administration doing to secure Alan Gross’ freedom? 

30

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, we would agree with you, Congressman. 

It is an outrage that they kept him for a year without charging 

him. Now they have turned around and charged him, and the 

charges are going to be 20 years, and we are continuing to demand 

his immediate release. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Well, I think we need to do everything in our 

power to free him, but thank you very much for your testimony. 

Mr. MACK. Next, Mr. Faleomavaega—how did I do—is recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. You did excellent, Mr. Chairman. I thank 

you very much. 

Mr. Secretary, I know I haven’t traveled throughout Latin America as often as you have, and I am curious, does the State Department currently have statistics or data or information concerning 

the political, educational and social problems addressing the problems of the indigenous peoples of these countries living in Central 

and South America? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Congressman, I am very pleased that you have 

raised this issue, because, in fact, this is one of the most important 

efforts that we have been focused on more recently is to try to address some of the—in partnership with countries in the Americas—

some of the lingering social issues that are so important. 

And what we are doing is we are working together with countries 

to try to improve their own treatment of their own populations to 

get better protections. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Well, let us address this specifically, indigenous peoples in their own populations. I mean, I am addressing 

this issue directly. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Indigenous Indians living in these countries 

in Latin America. Does the State Department have relevant information and data? 

You know, it is like taking a census. If you are not counted, you 

don’t exist, and it seems that over the years, in the times that I 

have traveled throughout Latin America, I have seen the scourge 

and the sufferings of the indigenous peoples. And I think there 

seems to be a little sense of just pretending like the problem 

doesn’t exist. 

I visited the Indians of the Amazons, I have visited the people 

of the Incas. Yes, they participated in some extent. But correct me 

if I am wrong. Are they not the worst economically, educationally 

and socially throughout Latin America? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, absolutely, you are correct on that. The 

indigenous populations are the ones that are at the bottom of the 

rung, that have suffered historically with human rights abuses, 

and they have gotten trapped in civil conflicts and that kind of 

thing. 

There are large indigenous populations in some countries, as you 

well know, Bolivia, Peru, Guatemala. The administration is committed to working with these countries to try to come up with more 

effective programs to provide for not only support, but greater respect and respect for the rights of indigenous peoples. And, yes, it 

is an important emphasis. 

31

You know what? We are also looking at issues of Afro-descendants in this Year of the Afro-descendants. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Yes, Mr. Payne has addressed that. You 

know what is ironic about this—and I don’t know if the chairman 

and our ranking member are aware of this—the George Washington of Mexico was a pure Indian from the Yucatan Peninsula. 

His name is Benito Juarez. And the irony of all of this, and, interestingly enough, people don’t realize, but he was a pure Indian. He 

was the one that provided and set the independence of Mexico from 

its rulers. I guess the fellow’s name was Napoleon or something. 

Anyway, it was during that period of time. 

I notice also with interest that the first elected Inca Indian, indigenous Indian, was Alejandro Toledo of Peru. The first elected 

native indigenous leader elected as leader of Bolivia is Evo Morales. 

Now, despite this development politically, I am still interested in 

wanting to find out if we have seriously addressed the issues affecting the needs and the blight of these native peoples, and I wanted 

to know if the Obama administration is committed in this effort? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes, we are committed to this effort. And as 

you suggest, the fact that in many of these countries you now have 

indigenous leaders that are being elected President, it shows also 

how much has, in fact, been overcome. The democracy is not just 

for a few. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I apologize. I only have 50 seconds left. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Sure. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I would like to give you copies of the letters 

that I sent to your office, to Secretary Clinton, to President Pinera, 

concerning the plight of the Easter Islanders. There are only 2,500 

of them, and I would like to appeal to the good people of Chile, 17 

million good Chilean people, sending a military against these natives who live on Easter Island, it just blows my mind how it would 

be a national security problem for the Government of Chile just to 

address seriously the needs of these native people. 

The reason why I am really concerned about this, Mr. Secretary, 

is that there are only 2,500 of them. It is not against the 17 million 

Chileans that I am talking about. And I am sure there are good 

people of Chile, but please pay attention to the problems that I am 

describing. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. We will answer your letters. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

The gentleman from Florida Mr. Rivera is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, my questions will start off with respect to the 

Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, otherwise known as 

Helms-Burton, suspension of Title III of Helms-Burton allowing 

U.S. citizens the ability to seek legal redress of grievances and access to U.S. courts to remedy claims against the Castro dictatorship 

in particular. The justification for suspending that provision for 

U.S. citizens is the promotion of democracy as determined by this 

government. 

32

How has the suspension of Title III of the Cuban Liberty and 

Democratic Solidarity Act by this administration promoted democracy in Cuba? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. On that, the specifics of Title III, I will have 

to get back to you, Congressman. I can’t answer that question right 

now. 

Mr. RIVERA. You are familiar with the Helms-Burton Act. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I am familiar with Helms-Burton and what 

Title IV and Title III are, but I am not sure—if your question is 

what is the ramifications of that, I would not be able to fully answer that right now. 

Mr. RIVERA. No, no, no. I don’t want to know the ramifications. 

The administration has to claim the justification for suspending 

Helms-Burton as the promotion of democracy. How has suspending 

Title III promoted democracy in Cuba? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. As I said, I will have to get back to you on 

that. 

Mr. RIVERA. Alright. Let us go on to lifting of some other sanctions, and let us talk about the recent lifting of the recent sanctions. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Sure. 

Mr. RIVERA. Can you provide any other example where unilateral 

concessions, unilateral concessions, have been met with democratic 

reforms by a totalitarian dictatorship? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Look, let me explain to you, and we probably 

have a fundamental difference of opinion, these are not concessions 

to the Cuban Government. These people-to-people programs are 

programs that we believe are important in advancing our fundamental interests with regard to Cuba, and that is to promote a climate in Cuba that will allow the Cuban people, in fact, to make 

their own——

Mr. RIVERA. Let me rephrase the question. Can you cite any concession by the dictatorship for democratic reform that has ever 

been made in the 52 years of its existence? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. As far as I know, there have not been similar 

kinds of legislation regarding other countries. But I can tell you 

this——

Mr. RIVERA. I am only talking about Cuba right now. Let me 

make sure the question is clear. Can you cite any concession toward democratic reform that has ever been made by the Castro dictatorship in the——

Mr. VALENZUELA. Can I cite whether there is concession? 

Mr. RIVERA. One more time. Can you cite any concession for 

democratic reform that has ever been made by the Castro dictatorship? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I can’t think of any, no. 

Mr. RIVERA. Okay. Then let us go to the specifics of what happens with these concessions. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Alright. 

Mr. RIVERA. Travel and trade. In terms of the final disposition 

of trade and travel-related finances, meaning the money that is 

generated from this activity, where do these funds end up? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, I think that where you are going, Congressman, is that some of the money may, I suspect, in your view, 

33

support the regime, but it is our view that the overwhelming interest——

Mr. RIVERA. I am not judging. I just want to know where the 

money ends up. I want to see if it supports the regime or doesn’t 

support the regime. Where does the money end up? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. In the hands of the people that are going to be 

benefiting from this, the Cuban people. 

Mr. RIVERA. And when they spend it, where does it end up? 

When they spend it in a diplomatic store, when they spend the 

money in Cuba, where does it end up, when it leaves their hands? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. It goes into buying goods. They buy goods in 

state commissaries. In that sense it does go into the state commissaries. But as we see right now, Congressman, there is an enormous opportunity with the increasing trend toward privatization in 

Cuba. 

Mr. RIVERA. Let me ask you about that, because you say state 

commissaries. Are there any private banks where this money goes 

into? Is there a private-sector entity to make investments, or does 

money, when it is spent in Cuba, end up anywhere else but in the 

hands of the state in its final disposition? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. The objective of the reforms is for the money 

to essentially benefit the Cuban people. If there is an ancillary support for government institutions, that is minimal compared with 

what our objective is in trying to empower the Cuban people 

through an increase in——

Mr. RIVERA. Money ending up in the hands of the Cuban Government is minimal, okay. 

Do you believe Alan Gross is a hostage? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I think that he was unduly detained, incorrectly detained. He was held for a year, as I said earlier, and that 

was unconscionable. And now he has been changed with 20 years, 

and we demand his immediate release. 

Mr. RIVERA. Can you tell me if you believe he is a hostage? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I don’t think he is a hostage, no. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you. 

Mr. MACK. The gentleman’s time is expired. 

Mr. Sires is recognized for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. 

Valenzuela, for being here today. 

I just want to associate myself with some of the comments that 

were made by the chairman, the ranking member and my friend 

from Florida. 

You might not call them concessions, but this is how we see it. 

You know, I was born in Cuba. I came here when I was 11 years 

old. I was probably the only Member of Congress that lived there 

for 11 years, and I know what it is. So you may not call it concessions, but we do. 

You know, we work very hard here to set some of the policies 

that we have here, and then it goes to the State Department, and 

concessions are made. So I am not going to belabor the point, but 

I think Mr. Rivera did a good job on what he did. 

But I want to talk a little bit about Colombia. Who set the trip 

to Colombia? I assume the State Department, right? Excuse me, 

the trip to South America by the President. 

34

Mr. VALENZUELA. No, it is determined by the White House. 

Mr. SIRES. Is there a reason why he is not stopping in Colombia? 

I mean, I have been in this Congress now 4 years, and I keep hearing what a great supporter Colombia is, what a friend it is, what 

a great job they are doing. Yet the President is willing to fly right 

over Colombia and land someplace else. I mean, to me, I would 

have gone to Colombia before I go to Brazil. 

And the other thing that bothered me was that when the President of Colombia was sworn in, I was there. I was there with a couple of other Congresspeople. I didn’t see too many high-ranking Department members there from the Department of State, I have to 

tell you. It was a little embarrassing that this—for 4 years I keep 

hearing what a great ally Colombia is, and yet when you look 

around, if it wasn’t for the delegation that went, there would have 

been very little support, it seems. 

So, you know, I don’t know why the President just seems to fly 

over Colombia. Can you——

Mr. VALENZUELA. Look, let me say this. We are extremely 

pleased that the President is going to the region. It is an indication 

of the commitment that the administration has to the Americas. 

Obviously there are quite a few countries. Some have to be chosen. 

It made sense to go to Brazil, the largest country in the region, in 

South America, and it made sense to go to a country in South 

America, and it made sense then to go to a country in Central 

America. 

Now, there are a whole host, Congressman, of criteria that I am 

sure were used by the White House as they looked at this. One example for concern was, you know, are there elections taking place, 

and would the President going to a particular country, for example, 

get involved in the internal elections? And so that probably excluded some countries. 

And in the case of Colombia, the President will be attending the 

Summit of the Americas, you know—that is the expectation at 

least—that is going to take place in Colombia next year. So there 

is travel by the President that we would hope will take place next 

year. 

I can’t speak for the White House. 

Mr. SIRES. You hope that it goes to Colombia next year. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I hope it goes to Colombia next year. 

Mr. SIRES. Yes, so do we. So you might want to relate to the 

President that, you know, we would hope that he would consider 

stopping in Colombia. After all, they are our best friend, our best 

supporter. We always sing their praises, and yet we ignore them. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. The Ambassador of Colombia is right here. 

Mr. SIRES. He knows me because I have been to Colombia many 

times, and he knows exactly what I am talking about. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Right. 

Mr. SIRES. In terms of Venezuela and the situation in Venezuela 

with Iran, I met a group of people at a dinner, and they told me 

that Iran has the largest, in terms of personnel, Embassy in Venezuela in the world. Is that accurate in terms of the amount of people working at this Iranian Embassy? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I could not say. I don’t know whether that is 

accurate. I could find out for you. 

35

Mr. SIRES. But there are flights twice a week, is it, into Venezuela from Iran, back and forth? And from what I gather, the people have come to my office, it just seems that Iranians are bringing 

boxes, bringing all sorts of merchandise, never really checked, and 

it just goes right through. 

So I can’t—I mean, I am assuming the worst. Obviously this guy 

Chavez is a nut, you know, in so many words. And so I was just 

wondering if you have heard anything differently in terms of the 

amount of people that are working at this Embassy, because obviously that adds a great mischief. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I don’t know what the size of their Embassy 

is in Caracas, and I could try to find out and get back to you on 

that. 

Obviously, Congressman, we are concerned about the relationship between Venezuela and Iran. Iran is, you know—has been designated as an exporter of terror. They are in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions on issues of nonproliferation. And so we 

have let both the Venezuelan Government and PDVSA know that 

they are probably in violation of CISADA commitments that don’t 

permit entities to commercialize with Iran. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you very much. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. You are welcome. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

Mr. Payne, you are recognized for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. 

There is an international agreement that—and this kind of has 

a question about human rights—I am sure that you are aware that 

El Salvador, the smallest country in South America, is being sued 

by two corporations via the Central American Free Trade Agreement, you know, CAFTA. Citizens, communities leaders and 

churches have uniformly said ‘‘no’’ to corporations that will jeopardize their water supply, ecosystems and environment. One of 

these companies, Pacific Rim Mining, is actually a Canadian-based 

company, went on to register itself in Nevada, was denied, sued in 

Canada. Now they are suing as a U.S. affiliate. 

Is the State Department aware of issues like this, and do we 

tend to try—of course, we can’t dictate what a country should do 

internally, but do we side, take an advocacy position to the government, at least, suggesting that they should take the will of the people in consideration? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes. Thanks, Congressman, for the question. 

And the answer is yes, that we often work with corporations, and 

we work with governments, particularly when it comes to extractive industries, to make sure that the practices that extractive industries use are not only respectful of human rights and environmental issues, but also the rights of indigenous populations that 

might be affected significantly by this kind of activity. 

So it is something that we do take very seriously and that we 

try to work with companies. Many are now much more committed 

than in the past to corporate social responsibility understood in a 

broad sense. 

Mr. PAYNE. There is a particular issue in Peru, just the reverse. 

This was a company, U.S.-based company, Doe Run Peru, called 

36

DRP, which is in New York, so I know about the company. And 

they had—the government said they had to clean up in an environmental issue. They have invested $315 million in their clean-up. 

The government was supposed to do the other half. The government has refused to do it. 

So this company cannot operate, and I wonder if you could have 

your—and I will give you some direct information. We have already 

sent a note to the Secretary, but I would appreciate it if you could 

follow up on it, because it appears that we have to have these countries know that we are serious about American companies getting 

a fair shake. 

Secondly, we have got to let American companies know that they 

don’t have a right to pollute and make it difficult for people in 

those countries, because in many instances, as you know, they are 

vulnerable people. So I will get that to you before you leave. 

And as you know, as I mentioned before, labor unions have had 

a very difficult time in Colombia; 2,800 union activists have been 

killed since 1986. Now we hear about the fact that we ought to 

have this Free Trade Agreement, and I think we should, but has 

the State Department raised the issue? And the problem is that 

there is no prosecution. You know, the murders go unsolved. Have 

we had any concern with that? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes, absolutely we have had concern, and I am 

pleased to say that we are moving ahead in a very constructive 

fashion with the Colombian Government to address these issues. I, 

myself, took part directly in the high-level dialogue that we have 

established with the Santos administration on a whole range of 

issues. 

When we deal with Colombia, what is encouraging now is that 

we are not just talking about security concerns, we are talking 

about broader issues that have to do with other elements, whether 

they are social issues and things like that, or how we can work together in Central America and other parts of the hemisphere. So 

we have a very broad dialogue, and I chaired, myself, co-chaired 

with the Vice President of Colombia, I chaired our side in this dialogue on human rights and labor rights. And, as you know, the 

Vice President is a former labor leader and has taken this very, 

very seriously. 

So I think that we have seen tremendous progress in this regard, 

even though there are some issues that are out there. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you. My time has expired, but I wonder if you 

could look into the funding on the State’s Race, Ethnicity, and Social Inclusion Unit, which expires, and administers to Brazil and 

Colombia joint action plans on racial equality. If you could get back 

to us on whether the State Department will continue that very 

noble program. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Let me just say that we value that program 

enormously, and we thought it to be extraordinarily important, and 

what we want to try to do is expand it. In fact, we have a discussion with the Colombians on Afro-Colombian issues and looking at 

Central America to maybe look at the Atlantic coast. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Payne. 

37

Now I am very pleased to recognize the ranking member of the 

full committee Mr. Berman for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BERMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I won’t take 

that long. I wanted to thank you for yielding me this time. 

Secretary Valenzuela, I want to thank you for all the good you 

have been doing in your position. 

The President announced in the State of the Union that he is 

going to travel to Brazil, Chile and El Salvador in the second half 

of March, and I want to just particularly express my appreciation 

that El Salvador is included in the President’s upcoming trip. 

It seems strange to say it, I mean, El Salvador has been through 

incredibly difficult times, but it truly—I guess it says something 

about the region, but it has actually emerged as an anchor of stability in Central America. And I think President Funes deserves 

our support and the recognition for the role that he is playing by 

the trip there. 

And I was wondering if you could just use this opportunity to explain a little bit. I mean, people could understand Brazil and Chile, 

obviously, but why El Salvador? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, thanks very much for the question, and 

thanks very much for coming to this hearing and for your interest 

in Latin America. 

I was in El Salvador just last week for 2 days, and there is a 

lot of excitement in El Salvador about the President’s visit. 

And as you say, we are particularly delighted to be engaged with 

a country that has come so far from the tremendous difficulties 

that we saw in the past. 

It is the Central America wars, and today it is a country that 

strikes me has democratic processes, where there is a greater dialogue across the political divide in the past. There is still a degree 

of polarization, but there are elements on both sides that are making an effort to try to overcome that and also to try to get the country moving ahead. 

They have great challenges, and the problem with public security 

and citizen security continues to be a really significant problem. 

But they are kind of an anchor, as you suggest, in the northern tier 

there in Central America, and thereby they are also absolutely critical for our Central America strategy on security issues and, more 

broadly, on engagement with Central America. 

So the choice of El Salvador, I think, was a very solicitous one, 

I think, on the part of the White House in that regard. And we 

agree with you that President Funes is doing a very good job of trying to work through a situation to build a consensus to make sure 

that the country can move forward. 

I might end my comment by saying that I was down there in particular because we have also started a program with four countries 

in the world, the Philippines, Ghana, Tanzania, and the White 

House also picked El Salvador on what is called the Partnership 

for Growth, and that—what we are working with El Salvador is to 

seek how we can work more effectively to identify constraints to 

growth. And this is very much on the economic side, because, you 

know, the proof of the pudding as we move forward is the ability 

of these societies to generate viable economic systems that produce 

jobs and that make for better lives for their people. 

38

Mr. BERMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. 

If you don’t mind, I think have another round of questions for 

you. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I would be happy. 

Mr. MACK. Wonderful. 

As stated in section 7 of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996, the Secretary of State may issue an advisory opinion explaining whether 

an action is in violation of the sanctions. Recent reports show that 

Venezuela is sending shipments of gasoline to Iran that are in clear 

violation of sanctions against Iran. 

So my question to you very specifically, is Venezuela violating 

the sanctions against Iran? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Let me say that we are looking at that issue; 

that we have raised this with both, as I said earlier in my testimony, with the state oil firm, with PDVSA, as well as the Venezuelan Government, because we are trying to determine whether 

or not there is, in fact, a violation of those sanctions. 

Mr. MACK. Then I would follow up with that, should we anticipate an advisory opinion regarding Venezuela’s violations? Is that 

something that the committee should expect? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I can’t tell you right now, but we are certainly 

looking into this. 

Mr. MACK. I want to go back. There are a lot of questions about 

the Free Trade Agreements and the trade preferences. And all 

along we have been hearing that there are—you know, there are 

certain benchmarks, or they are—almost like we are holding out, 

the United States is holding out for something. 

Can you tell me exactly what it is that we are waiting for that 

the administration is waiting for to send those agreements to the 

Congress? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I can’t tell you exactly. What we are doing is 

we are continuing to have a dialogue with the Colombians, as I 

suggested to you earlier, which includes addressing many of the 

lingering issues that some folks do have of concern and that we 

still have a concern on some of these matters. But let me make absolutely clear that our position is that we really need to move forward with the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. 

Mr. MACK. And the frustration is we keep hearing that, but nobody knows what it is that you are waiting for. In other words, 

when you say that there are things that you are talking about, 

what are those things? You should put those out on the table. 

Could you tell us exactly what it is—it is hard to have dialogue 

about an issue if you are unable to articulate the problems that you 

are trying to address. So can you tell us what the problems are 

with those Trade Agreements that are keeping them from coming 

to the Congress? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. As I say, you know, we are committed to moving these forward. And in the dialogue that we have had with the 

Colombians, we continue to explore some of the areas that are of 

concern to some Members and to others in this country specifically 

on issues of labor rights and the issue of the killing of labor leaders. But let me——

Mr. MACK. Let me—real quick. 

39

Mr. VALENZUELA. I don’t have a specific metric, Congressman. So 

that is about——

Mr. MACK. Now, some of those were questions that came up 

early on that have been addressed. And it just feels like, you know, 

that we are jerking them around a little bit because no one is able 

to really answer the question what are the other benchmarks. And 

may I suggest that if there are one or two Members of Congress 

that continue to put up these—or stopping the State Department 

or the President from sending these Trade Agreementqs, then they 

should put those out on the table publicly. But the majority of the 

Members—it is my understanding that the majority of Members 

are ready, willing and able to pass these Trade Agreements. 

The harm that is being done in Latin America is huge because 

we are not able to move these things. So, you know, if you wouldn’t 

mind, if there are some specific issues that the State Department 

has or the administration has, if you would bring them forward so 

we can try to get those answered, because it just feels like we are 

waiting them out. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Okay. I will get back to you on that, but let 

me reiterate that we feel the same way that you do, that we have 

to move forward on it. 

Mr. MACK. Well, I have heard the President say that he supports 

it. I have heard the Secretary of State say that she supports it. I 

have talked to my colleagues; they support it. So it is frustrating 

when everyone you talk to says, we are for them. And then when 

we ask, well, what is held up, we don’t seem to get any real answers. So it just seems to me that, again, I think that goes to the 

whole purpose of this hearing, do we have a foreign policy, because 

it appears that if we do, it contradicts itself. And this is one way 

that we can show our friends and allies that we support them. 

So I would encourage you to get those questions answered, and 

let us move forward with those Free Trade Agreements. 

Mr. Engel is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, Mr. Secretary, let me personally thank you for the 

wonderful job that you have done. You and I have talked a great 

deal, and I do appreciate everything you are doing for our country. 

I want to touch on a bunch of points in the 5 minutes I have. 

Many members here have mentioned Venezuela. I am very concerned as well, as you know, with their relations with Iran, Iran 

being the greatest exporter of terrorism. We constantly, or periodically, get reports of Iranian or Hezbollah agents traveling through 

Venezuela. Have you heard any of those reports lately? Is there 

any validity to that? 

And also, Venezuela, just a couple of months ago, formally rejected distinguished career diplomat Larry Palmer to be the next 

U.S. Ambassador. What is the current status of efforts to exchange 

ambassadors with Venezuela? I happen to think that they have 

some nerve rejecting him, quite frankly, and so I want to know 

about the status of that. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, thank you for your kind words, Mr. 

Chairman—see, I am used to calling you Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ENGEL. You can keep doing it. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I can keep doing that with your permission? 

40

Mr. MACK. That is fine. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. With regard to Venezuela, yes, as I said earlier 

in my testimony, we are concerned about the links with Iran precisely because of Iran’s violations of so many of these international 

dispositions, particularly the U.N. Security Council resolutions, and 

it is something that we continue to monitor very closely. And I suspect that we are going to look at some other additional determinations on this. 

With regard to the naming of the Ambassador, yes, we strongly 

supported a superb career ambassador, and we were disappointed, 

very disappointed, that the Venezuelan Government withdrew the 

agreement for his designation as Ambassador to Caracas. 

Mr. ENGEL. Talk to me about the Government of Haiti. The government of Preval has finally accepted the OAS recommendations 

of the top two candidates, and we now have Baby Doc Duvalier 

coming there and possibly Aristide coming there. Tell he me how 

confident we are that there will be a peaceful transition of power. 

And in terms of the relief effort, where does it stand? It seems to 

be still a lot of people homeless and sleeping in, you know, makeshift tents. And what is the status of our help to the Haitian people? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, look, we were pleased that the CEP finally came out with a determination of the first round of the election that tracked the observer mission of the Organization of American States, and we look forward to the second round of the election 

that is coming up on March 23, I believe. And I think this moves 

the process forward. 

I think it is important for this electoral process to take place. 

The legitimacy of institutions is very important in Haiti, and so the 

legitimate electoral process is critical. And I think we are moving 

in that direction, so that is, I think, helpful. We continue, we must 

continue, to support them. 

Secondly, with regard to the aid and relief effort. If I might take 

advantage of just one of your minutes to simply compliment the 

work that MINUSTAH does, the United Nations effort, and particularly some of the countries from the Western Hemisphere that 

have worked so much with regard to MINUSTAH. And I think that 

they provide security there. 

As you know, this is a mission that is headed up by a Guatemalan diplomat, but with strong support on the security side from 

Brazil, countries like Uruguay, Chile and others. And this is a notable example, I think, of hemispheric solidarity. 

And then thirdly, with regard to the specifics, I think we are 

moving ahead. It was frustrating at the beginning to get the relief. 

The immensity of the catastrophe is something that is really beyond words, and so the task of having to sort of—you know, that 

the international community faced with Haiti was also enormous. 

But I think that we are seeing now more rubble removed, more 

progress in terms of trying to be able to rebuild the society. 

Mr. ENGEL. I am going to ask the chairman’s indulgence because 

I want to ask you—and perhaps we can talk about it later if you 

don’t have time to answer—what the heck is happening with Argentina with all the stuff happening? I know that they are unVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:27 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\021511\64549 HFA PsN: SHIRL
41

happy that the President is not visiting there. I wonder if you can 

comment on that. 

But my question is really this: Brazil has recent interest in the 

U.S. offer to sell fighter aircraft, the F–18, the Super Hornet, as 

a part of a Foreign Ministry sales transaction between our two 

countries. I am glad that they are seriously considering it. There 

are ongoing concerns, however, about the level of U.S. commitment 

to support the terms of this sale in the area of technology transfer. 

These are concerns that are raised. 

So to what extent do you believe that such a sale promotes the 

cooperation in interoperability and shared security interests with 

the U.S.? And what is the administration doing to assure Brazil of 

our commitment to the terms of this sale and the sharing of associated technologies? And will this be raised by Secretary Clinton in 

her upcoming consultation with her counterpart Mr. Patriota? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes. Well, look, let me make clear that we have 

made clear through various different entreaties with the Brazilians 

that we do support the Super Hornet, and that we think it is a far 

superior aircraft. And we are pleased that, you know, the new 

President has given some wiggle room to the competition and try 

to see whether there is a possibility that we might engage. 

For further details, I would refer you to our friends at DOD and 

others on that, but it is something that we are definitely pushing. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to go back to the case of Alan Gross, because I think it goes to the larger issue of treatment of American 

citizens generally in Cuba and our Government’s response to it. 

Are you familiar with the upcoming date of February 24 and its 

significance in U.S.-Cuba relations? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Remind me. 

Mr. RIVERA. February 24, 1996, to be specific? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Oh, yes. Are you referring to the—right. 

Mr. RIVERA. I am referring to the date in which four Americans——

Mr. VALENZUELA. The shoot-down. 

Mr. RIVERA [continuing]. Were murdered over international waters by the Cuban dictatorship, four Americans murdered on February 24, 15th anniversary coming up. I suspect your Department 

will be issuing a statement, or the White House will be issuing a 

statement, once again condemning that inhumane and brutal act. 

With respect to Alan Gross, I am wondering, you don’t consider 

him to be a hostage. Do you consider his incarceration lawful? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I think it is unlawful. 

Mr. RIVERA. So how would you describe him, as a detainee, unlawful combatant, prisoner? How would you describe Alan Gross? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I haven’t thought about it semantically. He is 

a detainee, I guess. 

Mr. RIVERA. Has the Castro dictatorship made any effort—I 

know they have discussed publicly links between Alan Gross and 

other issues such as the Cuban Five. Have they privately, or in any 

42

discussions, any negotiations, made any effort to link the Alan 

Gross case with any other issue whatsoever? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. No, they have not, not to my knowledge. 

Mr. RIVERA. Every discussion that has come up regarding Alan 

Gross has never made reference to any other issue related to U.S.-

Cuba relations? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, we have had our conversations with them 

on things like the migration talks, and we have raised the issue of 

Alan Gross. They have complained about—they have a long litany 

of complaints against the United States, but there has never been, 

on our part or any part, any specific linkage. 

Mr. RIVERA. Such as, in that litany? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Such as? 

Mr. RIVERA. Has the Cuban Five ever been raised? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. No, not that I am aware of. I haven’t been in 

all conversations with the Cubans. 

Mr. RIVERA. Have any sanctions against the government been 

raised? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. No, we have not discussed sanctions with the 

Government of Cuba. 

Mr. RIVERA. So when you say they have raised a litany of issues, 

what was an example of the litany? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Concerns over the embargo. 

Mr. RIVERA. Sanctions. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Embargo is sanctions. 

Mr. RIVERA. Okay. So they have discussed the lifting of sanctions 

in connection with discussions about Alan Gross. Recently I know 

Alan Gross’ wife was able to visit Mr. Gross. At the same time, I 

believe, one of the wives of the Cuban Five spies was able to visit. 

Was that a coincidence? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. There were two wives were able to visit, or 

one—I can’t remember—and this was—that particular discussion 

with them was not coincidental. You are right, Congressman. 

Mr. RIVERA. It was not coincidental. 

And in that case, let me refer you to Webster’s dictionary and the 

definition of ‘‘hostage’’: A person held by one party as a pledge 

pending the fulfillment of an agreement, or a person taken by force 

to secure the taker’s demand. 

Now, you have told me that there was no coincidence in the visitation. You have told me they have raised the issue of sanctions in 

discussion with Alan Gross. So I will ask you again, based on this 

definition of ‘‘hostage,’’ do you believe Alan Gross is a hostage? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Actually I am going to backtrack on my comment, Congressman. There was an effort made earlier to have 

those visitations, and that did not go through. So the timing on 

that was not directly linked to Gross because we had made—there 

was an effort earlier to try to look at the visitations. 

And if you want to call it ‘‘hostage,’’ I am happy to agree with 

you if you want to call it a ‘‘hostage.’’ I think he is a detainee. 

Mr. RIVERA. Well, if you agree with me that he is a hostage, perhaps a detainee, you said earlier in response to my colleague’s 

questions on efforts to release this hostage that we continue to insist he be released. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Exactly. 

43

Mr. RIVERA. Is that the extent of the administration’s efforts to 

release an American hostage named Alan Gross in Cuba? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. We continue to insist that they release him. 

That is right. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

And the gentleman Mr. Faleomavaega is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I deeply appreciate your patience and wanting to give me another opportunity 

again to ask Secretary Valenzuela a couple of questions. 

Mr. Secretary, I realize in fairness to you, because it is difficult 

for me to raise these questions with you concerning Easter Island, 

or Rapa Nui, because apparently you may have never received my 

letter, and maybe the paper shuffling that goes on with the bureaucracy, so you are not aware of the concerns and the problems 

that I have raised concerning this problem. 

I appreciate the definition by my good friend Mr. Rivera what a 

hostage is, because this is exactly what is happening in Easter Island with the presence of some 100 police, military police, members 

of the Chilean military forces now in prisons there. 

Again, this little island, Mr. Secretary, is well renowned, and 

pretty much despite its small size, it is known throughout the 

world for these native people who built these statues called akuaku, or moai, human statues weighing tens of tons culturally. And 

I say this because there is a kinship and relationship between the 

people of Easter Island and me. 

Now, whether it be the needs of Mr. Gross or the 2,500 people, 

they are human beings, and in the advent of the recent military 

dictatorship of Mr. Pinochet and Chile, I will say that Chile has 

come a long way not only in obtaining democratic reforms, but the 

elections that have taken place. And I know that I am also aware 

that Chile is one of our outstanding trading partners. And I have 

to give credit to the leaders and the good people of Chile that they 

have become one of the shining stars of Latin America economically 

and even politically. 

But I will say, Mr. Secretary, that I just am at a loss, maybe because these people are so small. They are members of the Province 

of Valparaiso that makes up Chile. They bear no economic difference politically—I mean, militarily and economically. These are 

just people that just want to lay claims to their ancestral homeland 

or their lands. 

And I must say that the Chilean Government has been very unfair, and I say measures of brutality, because people have been 

wounded seriously by these rubber bullets, have been shot at, in 

the course of the past couple of weeks. And I don’t know if your 

office has been aware or our Embassy in Chile has been made 

aware of the problems arising out of Easter Island, but I will deeply appreciate your assistance in seeing that these issues are addressed. 

I wanted to ask you, on the question of the historical relationship 

between Chile and these people, seriously question how they came 

about taking control of this island that is apparently 2,300 miles 

44

away from Chile, no cultural relationship whatsoever between the 

people of Easter Island and those of Chile. 

I know we have talked about economic exclusive zones, and this 

is really nice, and talking about fishing rights and all of this, but 

no questions, despite the appeals made by the Easter Island Parliament, the leaders, in trying to provide some kind of consultations with the Chilean Government. It has been just really don’t 

care. I don’t appreciate that, and I wanted to know if your office 

will look into this. 

And before I finish, I just wanted to request from the State Department whatever information or data that the administration has 

or the State Department has concerning the economic, social and 

educational standings of the indigenous Indians or indigenous peoples living in these countries throughout Latin America. And I say 

in the millions, the number of people, but I am just hazarding a 

guess here, and I would deeply appreciate if you could submit that 

and be made part of the record. If it is alright, Mr. Chairman, I 

ask unanimous consent that this be done. 

Mr. MACK. Without objection. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. And send it also to my office. I would deeply 

appreciate it. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time is up. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. 

A few more questions, if you don’t mind. 

I want to talk a little bit about—go back to Hugo Chavez a little 

bit and Venezuela. Isn’t it a fact that Hugo Chavez supports terrorists in Venezuela? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. There has been some concern, Congressman, of 

the support that Hugo Chavez has given to elements of the FARC. 

Mr. MACK. Some concern, or is this——

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, no, real concern. This is one of the reasons why he was, you know, put on a—it is short of being on the 

terrorist list, which is why I know that you are concerned about, 

but it was designated in such a way because they are not—they are 

not complying, and they are not cooperating on issues having to do 

with terrorism. So it is a yes. 

Mr. MACK. So, yes, he is supporting terrorists? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Although if I might—if I might add a point, 

that we see a declining support for the FARC specifically in the 

last few months, particularly since President Santos in Colombia 

has reached out to Venezuela. 

Let me say that, you know, I am not sure that that is going to 

work out. You know, I am skeptical about that. But there has been 

a definite reduction in support for the FARC. 

Mr. MACK. Which is a terrorist organization. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. It is a terrorist organization, yes. 

Mr. MACK. Okay. Isn’t it a fact that Chavez supports other rogue 

regimes by selling gasoline to Iran and engaging with Syria and 

Libya? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Yes. I mentioned to you that we brought this 

to their attention to see whether, in fact, they are violating our 

own legislation in that regard. 

Mr. MACK. But the evidence is there. He is supporting, he is selling gasoline to Iran? 

45

Mr. VALENZUELA. He is violating the international sanctions, it 

appears. 

Mr. MACK. And isn’t it a fact that Hugo Chavez disavows freedom, undermining the press and discrediting political opposition 

figures in his country? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. We have expressed our concerns over the way 

he has gone after the press and the way he has harassed opposition 

figures. And as I said recently publicly, we were concerned about 

the way in which the National Assembly delegated executive authority to the President, contravening, I think, the sovereignty of 

the new National Assembly that was elected later. 

Mr. MACK. So it is also a fact, then, that Chavez manipulates 

legislative and judicial institutions in Venezuela, giving himself decree powers, threatening judges? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Exactly. And that is of concern. 

Mr. MACK. And when you say ‘‘concern,’’ you are not saying concern like concerned whether or not it is happening. It is happening——

Mr. VALENZUELA. It is happening. Yeah, it is happening. When 

I say about concern, I mean we are concerned about it. Yeah. 

Mr. MACK. It brings me to two things. Well, we would agree that 

in the case of the OAS, that Venezuela is considered to be a member in good standing? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. It is a member in good standing, yes. 

Mr. MACK. So why do we continue to fund the OAS? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, I think we will need to work with other 

countries to more effectively, Congressman, raise within the OAS 

and other for a situations where there may be a violation of democratic institutions and democratic rights. 

Mr. MACK. But if we know all of these things are facts about 

Hugo Chavez, why do we continue to support an organization that 

is in violation of its own charter? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I think it is in our interest, Congressman, to 

continue to work with the OAS, to try to make sure that the OAS, 

in fact, meets the obligations that it needs to do. For us to simply 

walk away from the OAS thinking that because they are not doing 

this would be to abdicate our own responsibilities and leadership. 

Mr. MACK. But wouldn’t it show more leadership that if we 

showed our friends like Panama and Colombia that we support 

them and that we are going to move the Free Trade Agreements 

than it is to continue to fund an organization that is in violation 

of its own charter? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I don’t think they are mutually exclusive, Congressman, with all due respect. I think that we need to work to 

support Colombia free trade, Panama free trade, and at the same 

time to strengthen our Organization of American States, to make 

it a more effective institution. 

Mr. MACK. Just so you know, I am planning on introducing legislation to withhold funds from the OAS until at such time the OAS 

can ensure that it actually is fighting for freedom and democracy 

in Latin America instead of supporting states like Venezuela and 

Hugo Chavez, who we agree supports terrorists, supports rogue regimes, disavows freedoms, manipulates legislative and judicial inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:27 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\021511\64549 HFA PsN: SHIRL
46

stitutions, and has torn apart the domestic fiber of Venezuela. At 

the same time, I think it is——

Mr. VALENZUELA. Could I interrupt you? 

Mr. MACK. Let me just real quick. You are going to also see that 

I plan on continuing to push that the State Department put Venezuela, put Hugo Chavez on the State Sponsor of Terrorism list. 

And this gets to the crux of the entire hearing today. The question 

is, do we have a foreign policy? And it appears that our foreign policy, instead of standing up for America’s interests and what is good 

for America and our allies, we seem to continue to engage in organizations and with countries that are in direct conflict to what it 

is that America’s interests are. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Let me respond by first underscoring the fact 

that despite some frustration over the inability of the OAS to move 

forward to strengthen the democratic charter—remember, this is 

an organization of member states, so there has to be some kind of 

consensus to do this. This is something that is not just done out 

of the Secretariat of the OAS. 

Mr. MACK. Doesn’t it have to be a unanimous vote? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. It depends on what for. But, no.

It doesn’t have to be a unanimous vote if you want to raise concerns about that. 

But let me make a point that the Inter-American Human Rights 

Commission, which is part of the OAS, has a strong history of defense of democratic values, and they have come out with some very 

clear statements that are critical of Venezuela recently, and very 

bold statements. And they have done so by also criticizing press 

freedoms in Venezuela. And the Secretary General of the OAS also 

recently made some clear comments about his concerns over the 

delegation of authority that we talked about earlier. So the picture 

is not quite as black and white as you suggest, in my view. 

Mr. MACK. Well, we have a difference of opinion because I think 

it is pretty crystal clear. 

The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Just continuing on the issue of the treatment of American citizens and how the U.S. Government responds to that treatment by 

the Cuban dictatorship, are you familiar with the case relating to 

the 1996 rescue, shoot-down of a Cuban spy who had infiltrated the 

Brothers to the Rescue Organization and, right before those four 

Americans were murdered, had returned to Cuba? Are you familiar 

with that case? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I am not familiar with the case. 

Mr. RIVERA. So you are not familiar with the case of the spy who 

had infiltrated this organization and also married an American citizen named Ana Margarita Martinez? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I am not familiar with that case. 

Mr. RIVERA. Well, I know Ana Margarita Martinez was a U.S. 

citizen who a Cuban spy married who was part of the Brothers to 

the Rescue shoot-down plot, who also received a judgment by a 

U.S. court against the Cuban Government for that action against 

her, and recently has tried to collect on that judgment and has 

been blocked by this administration collecting on that judgment. 

47

Why is the U.S. Government trying to block a U.S. citizen from collecting a judgment against a foreign government? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Well, I will have to look into that since I don’t 

know this particular case. 

Mr. RIVERA. If I send you some written questions, would you indulge me and respond to those questions? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I will respond to your questions. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you very much. 

Going back to one of your previous comments regarding the impact of convertible currency going to the regime, you describe it as 

minimal compared to what the administration is trying to achieve. 

We have seen estimates of billions of dollars, U.S. dollars, going to 

Cuba in terms of travel, particularly travel; business between the 

United States and Cuba; money that funds the military, military 

enterprises; money that funds the instruments of repression in 

Cuba, as you would recognize, I am sure. There are no labor rights 

or no collective bargaining rights in Cuba. There is no private sector. There is no entrepreneurial class. There is no economic activity 

that could be considered within normal circumstances, by normal 

standards, by any other country in the world. 

Based on that and the purposes of that money, do you stand by 

the statement that that money going to the regime really has a 

minimal impact? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I agree with your analysis that it is a totalitarian state, that the state controls everything, that the people 

don’t have independent economic lives. And that is precisely why 

the policy needs—we need to find a policy that is effective in reaching out to the Cuban people, because the Cuban people are desirous 

and want to be able to engage with people elsewhere. 

Mr. RIVERA. Let me follow up with that. The problem is I have 

got 2 minutes left on my time, and I really want to follow up on 

that statement. 

For decades now, people have been traveling to Cuba, families 

have been traveling to Cuba. We have been trading with Cuba. We 

are one of Cuba’s largest trading partners since 2000, when the restrictions were lifted on trading with medical and agricultural 

products in particular. The entire world trades with Cuba. The entire world travels to Cuba. You just said to me that that type of 

policy, that type of engagement, promotes democracy. What democracy has been promoted in the decades and decades that that policy 

has been pursued with respect to Cuba? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I think that the kind of engagement you might 

be referring to is people going on tourist vacations and just simply 

using that opportunity. What this policy does, it does not——

Mr. RIVERA. There is no tourism in going to Cuba from the 

United States. I am talking about the policy of the United States 

engaging Cuba, families traveling, trade with Cuba, cultural, academic exchanges that have been there for decades. What reforms 

have resulted? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. I think that those efforts have been minimal 

and that this is a substantial way to—it takes time to work, Congressman. I think it takes a while for that to work. 

Mr. RIVERA. Okay. I appreciate that remark very much, particularly having read some of your books in graduate school. When I 

48

meet privately with you, I am going to remind you of that remark 

of how much it takes for engagement to work. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Let me sign one of them for you. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you very much. 

With regard to the Colombia FTA and the unresolved issues, that 

is also something that I would ask if you could try to get us members more specifics on that, and particularly because I think there 

are many members that are working on that issue, and they 

shouldn’t be wasting their time, if they are. 

If there is someone who knows—you said you didn’t have the 

specific metrics, and you said you couldn’t say exactly what those 

unresolved issues are. I am wondering if there is someone else who 

has the specific metrics or can say exactly what the issues are, because I am one of the freshmen out of many that has been assigned 

a task of whipping other freshmen, discussing this issue, with the 

prospect of bringing that Free Trade Agreement to fruition. Is 

there someone else that can give us that information? 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Let us continue to talk about it, because I really would like to be able to be responsive to you on this. 

Mr. RIVERA. We will do that, and that was my next question. If 

you and I could get together perhaps privately, I would love to 

meet with you. I think it could be the beginning of a beautiful 

friendship, as Humphrey Bogart said. 

Just one more moment, with your indulgence, Mr. Chairman. 

When I was in graduate school, I really did read several of your 

books. My professor, who I believe you know, Dr. Eduardo——

Mr. VALENZUELA. I know him very well. 

Mr. RIVERA. You know him very well. He spoke always very 

highly of you. And there are many elements in your writings that 

I would love to engage in a colloquy with you, particularly as they 

are relevant to U.S.-Cuba relations. 

Mr. VALENZUELA. Excellent. Thanks very much. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

I thank the gentleman from Florida. 

I also thank you, Mr. Valenzuela. We appreciate your time and 

your patience and your determination to stay and answer questions. And I look forward to continuing the dialogue. As you can see 

on both sides of the aisle, there are a lot of concerns about if and 

what our foreign policy is in Latin America. And I think we laid 

out a lot of questions to you, and hopefully we can expect that you 

would get back to the committee on a lot of those answers. 

And if I could just leave you with this, that I think you have a 

United States Congress who is begging for you, State Department 

and the President to send the Free Trade Agreements to the Congress so we can pass them, show our support not only for American 

workers, but also for our friends in last America. 

And with that, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:29 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(49)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

50


64549n.eps
51


64549m.eps
52


64549m-2.eps
53


64549b_1.eps
54


64549b_2.eps
55

[NOTE: Responses to the above questions were not received prior to printing.]

Æ


64549c.eps