Oversight Hearing – Department of Justice

The Subcommittee on National Security, Department of State, and related programs will come to order. Secretary Rubio, I am so pleased to welcome you back to the NSRP subcommittee for today's hearing on the fiscal year twenty twenty seven budget request for the Department of State and related programs. mr. secretary because of your extremely busy schedule that's an understatement which i would argue has led to an extraordinary record of success for the american for uh for american foreign policy uh we were unable to get your testimony uh on the budget request prior to the mark up of our fiscal year twenty twenty seven bill uh we hope the bill will soon be considered by the full house and then as you know negotiated with the senate before becoming law so there is still plenty to discuss today in our fy twenty seven proposals uh as well as how the department is implementing fy twenty six funding provided earlier this year now despite uh being late uh in the budget season i believe this hearing is well timed as uh you may have heard i just returned uh from leading a codel to south america i was reminded once again how much leadership matters president trump and your leadership implemented by our embassies abroad has really fundamentally changed the course of our foreign policy and history. And it couldn't have come at a more important time. Following four years of the previous administration's efforts to consistently reward our enemies and frustrate our allies. Likewise, we see the positive impacts of the leadership of key partners in our hemisphere such as President Peña in Paraguay and President Millay in Argentina who are standing firmly with United States and our shared values despite tremendous pressure and in doing so advancing the national security and economic prosperity of our country as well as theirs but while the anti-American anti-freedom forces in our hemisphere are are really being defeated at the ballot box they're not giving up on the contrary they are aggressively trying to sow chaos including through violence all you have to do is look at what they are doing right now in bolivia the region also is confronting external malign influences most notably the pr c who are not happy about what you and president trump are accomplishing in partnership with pro-american allies They're ratcheting up the pressure and will continue to fight back in what is now really contested space that America has ignored way, way too long. The Trump administration is transforming the world in bold and durable ways. And as chairman of this subcommittee, I intend, I intend to provide the resources you need to ensure we can double down on our wins and and continue to support freedom and security throughout the hemisphere and beyond. However, we don't need to increase top-line funding to do this. In fact, our FYI bill, FY twenty-seven bill reduces spending by two point seven billion dollars from the enacted level. That is in addition to the twelve billion in responsible, responsible cuts to funding that this committee has delivered since twenty twenty three because the greatest long-term threat to our country's stability and security is our debt. So with less funding this bill does more. I wanna repeat that, this bill does more for our national security. We provide an increase for embassy security to keep US personnel safe. We increase foreign military financing and international narcotics control and law enforcement to ensure our partners and allies around the world have the best equipment and training to advanced to advance our shared security. I would note that your budget request in two of these areas embassy security and counter-narc- nar- counter-narcotics and law enforcement is greatly improved from fy um from the fy twenty-six request by seeking levels that more accurately reflect the needs that we see today especially to carry out president's national security strategy the the president's national security strategy In the coming years, I look forward to examining more comprehensive budget requests that will support the ambitious and critical foreign policy goals of this historic president. Now, however, I think we both agree that it's just not, it's not only just how much you spend, it's how the funding is actually spent. As you know well, Mr. Secretary, an America First policy requires careful strategic consideration of how to spend american tax dollars abroad to that end our bill maintains the requirement for you mister secretary to consider prior to providing funds the voting practice of other countries at the united nations it also requires an assessment of cooperation on other issues of importance to the united states such as migration issues opposing foreign adversaries, and burden sharing, among other. These are all areas of focus where I believe the department has achieved notable success. And I look forward to discussing them further with you, Mister Secretary. To support a policy of peace through strength, the Committee recommendation for fiscal year twenty twenty seven once again supports allies and partners of the United States while countering adversaries, and those those countries and non-state actors that support our adversaries. Our bill includes steadfast support for our great ally Israel by providing three point three billion dollars in foreign military financing, consistent with the US-Israel Memorandum of Understanding, and it maintains critical support for Egypt and Jordan. With respect to confronting adversaries, the United States has been in near- in nearly continuous conflict with the Islamic Republic of Iran since its founding in nineteen seventy nine. For almost five decades, Iranians have endured repression, violence and torture at the hands of the evil Iranian regime, a regime that exports terrorism and brutally suppresses dissent at home and attacks the United States and our allies. Mr. Secretary, last week, Mr. Secretary, on Mike O'Neill, we visited the site of of the the amia bombing in buenos aires where in nineteen ninety four iran's just terrorist proxy has well attacked a jewish center in argentina killing eighty five eighty five people and injuring over three hundred and in nineteen ninety two has bombed the israeli embassy in argentina killing twenty nine people and injuring more than two hundred these are just two examples of how iran and has well uh have been exporting deadly terrorism around the world for decades. We have a responsibility to do everything we can to stop these terrorist regimes before they claim more victims. Now in my view the coordinated military action by the United States and Israel against Iran's military capabilities as well as its nuclear program will help ensure the security of the United States and our and our allies and partners for years to come. So I'm sure members will have questions for you about these operations, including the status of efforts to help secure freedom of navigation in the in the Straits of Hermes and the status of our embassy operations in the region. The committee also continues its long-standing focus on countering the the challenge to United States national security posed by the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party. This includes funding above the request for our Indo-Pacific strategy, including through fully funding the countering PRC influence fund. This bill strongly supports allies and partners in the region, including Taiwan and the Philippines and Pacific island countries. As I mentioned at the beginning, I am particularly proud of the fact that the United States has reprioritized the Western hemisphere. and put and put the Americas first, which has been a major foreign policy priority throughout our history. As with the President's bold action in Venezuela to remove the indicted criminal uh uh Criminal Nicolás Maduro, the United States is now decisively tackling security challenges closer to home, like putting anti-American regimes like Communist Cuba on notice. Threats to our national security should and will not be tolerated. The bill continues strong support for democracy programs for the people of Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua and calls on European partners seeking support for Ukraine to stand for freedom and democracy in the Western hemisphere as well, especially in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. One of the State Department's facilities in Argentina that we visited last week, the place displays a plaque that reads the following, it says the following, quote, " Democracy is still the hope of the world." This is a sentiment that I think we should always remember. More broadly, the committee infallibly supports your efforts, your efforts to strengthen United States' economic ties with countries in our hemisphere. This includes uh combating the influence of the PRC, securing access to critical minerals, supporting the nearshoring of vulnerable supply chains and identifying commercial opportunities such as in countries transitioning away from authoritarian or communist political systems all of these areas of emphasis align with administration administration priorities and i look forward to working with you mister secretary on this implementation on the implementation mister secretary we have endeavored in the committee to provide you with the resources the resources and the flexibility that you need to implement to implement the President's America First foreign policy. We appreciate your team working with us to implement committee directives from fiscal year twenty-six uh and I want you to know that we work very closely with you on your priorities as we advance this measure this bill uh through the legislative process. Now, Before I conclude, let me thank you for your service and your family, uh, Mr. Secretary, and also reiterate how much we appreciate the service of the men and women of the Department of State. Let me now turn, uh, to the Ranking Member, by the way, another great Floridian, uh, for her opening remarks, um,

Thank you.

Ranking Member Frankel.

Thank you and and welcome. Mr. Secretary, you know, it really is something that the that the three of us all served in the Florida legislature together, a long time ago.

Wow.

And um I I I also wanna say I wanna just uh thank my chair who we we worked very hard to on bipartisanship because uh uh uh one thing I do really believe is when we're talking about facing the world and the challenges that we ha have to be, try to be on the same page. Now we do have some differences of opinion. which i will talk about today and uh i also wanna say uh secretary i saw you this morning your testimony this is a this is a very rigorous day for you and we see you all over the world and um i thank you for your service, i may not agree with everything you say or do but i have a lot of respect for the time and commitment that you put into your job um on the budget i'm not gonna talk that much about the budget i really uh the comments i have are really gonna be on uh uh what's going on in the state department from our point of view uh democrat's point of view we we do have a couple of missing members i want people to know because it's primary day in some of the states in this country and so they're out actually uh in their reelection uh it's not that they didn't wanna see you um i just wanna say on this budget last year we actually we worked out i think uh i didn't like the top lines we i think we could have had more money but the fact is we did come up with a bipartisan agreement this year uh our budget passed here only on republican uh support for us things we're missing like our paying our dues to the un family planning for the women of the world uh human rights we think we have to do a better job on that And I hope as w- as our budget goes through, we can uh get together on those points. But at the core of this hearing is about whether America leads or retreats, whether we prevent crises or wait for them to become catastrophes, and whether we preserve the diplomatic development and humanitarian tools that has makes and will make America safer, stronger, and more prosperous. uh when you mrs. tech when you started your tenure at the state department i was honored to attend your welcome i will tell you that i thought you were you were there with me right or i

hmm

was there with you we were together with a lot of other people uh

we're together yeah

and i wanted to say that your your remarks were inspiring uh and i left very very hopeful uh about your commitment to democracy and american leadership and then what happened doge came in with elon musk other i won't i'm not gonna go through the litany of names came in uh would uh what i think was an insidious sledgehammer because we have we have witnessed the devastating consequences of the devastate devastation and dismantling of usaid the terminating of critical health and development programs and forcing thousands of experienced public servants out of government and the consequences are not hypothetical People are living in some of the world's most vulnerable countries, places facing uh poverty, conflict, hunger and weak health systems that have long relied on American partnership and leadership. Places like Sudan, Haiti, Ethiopia are losing access to health care. Families are going hungry, humanitarian crisis are deepening, and American's influence is shrinking as our adversaries are expanding theirs. a k a of course china in just one year mr. secretary these cuts have contributed to more than seven hundred and fifty thousand deaths worldwide roughly eighty eight lives every hour malaria is surging hiv treatment programs have been disrupted health centers have been closed we hear reports from countries like Haiti the democratic uh Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, and Jui, where cuts to family planning have forced more than fourteen hundred clinics to shut their doors, leaving an estimated nine million women without care and contributing to increases in hemorrhage, infection, unsafe abortion and preventable death. These are the mothers of the children, the spouses, uh, that we expect to be taking care uh families experts experts warned us we're on track for millions more preventable deaths by twenty thirty and meanwhile a dangerous ebola outbreak in the democratic republic of the congo was spreading rapidly making harder to contain by the emissions administration's decision to cut funding to the world health organization which is resulted in their staff cuts and now this is a good one Or a bad one. At the direction of the vaccine conspiracy theorists, also known as Robert F. Kennedy, Junior, the secretary of Health and Human Services, uh this administration is continuing to withhold funds from GAVI, the vaccine alliance. And this is an organization which has helped save more than twenty million lives since two thousand, immunized more than one billion children, strengthened health systems in some of the world's and help prevent the outbreaks of the deadly diseases such as measles, polio, pneumonia, retrovirus and yellow fever. Stopping them from becoming global threats. And now,

Yes.

and now the administration has dramatically expanded the global gag rule, which was uh in many ways a a a a a a killer to women. But now to uh conditioning vast swaths of non-military assistance on ideological requirements, unrelated to the mission of foreign aid. And this will disproportionately affect the LGBT community, uh uh uh and we should not let ideology get in the way of protecting human rights.

Mm.

At the same time, an understaffed and weakened State Department is expected to absorb the full uh, scope of America's diplomatic development and humanitarian responsibilities, while operating under restrictive, politically driven directives that often bypass congressional intent. And boy, uh, y- has that been happening. We were promised that the State Department's reorganization would empower regional bureaus and strengthen American leadership. We do not see that happening. We were told that congressional directed programs would continue. Instead priorities that Congress have has funded and mandated, including food security, clean water, education, and women's empowerment have been sidelined with little transparency and no clear implementation. And the reality is simple, uh too few people are being asked to do too much without the expertise needed to succeed. More than one hundred ambassador positions remained vacant, including many in Africa, a continent that will be home to one quarter of the world's population by twenty fifty. And meanwhile, many of our most experienced events, de- developmental professionals, grant offers, technical experts, they've been pushed out, uh leaving an already overwhelmed State Department staff to fill the gap, uh because it seems to us that the American appears more focused on short-term transaction than long-term stability. And uh we we are now seeing, and this is shocking, uh we are seeing life-saving assistance treated as leverage only offering countries if if they who to agree to unrelated demands involving trade, deportations and critical minerals to get the resources they need for their population to thrive. That's not partnership, I call it coercion. And uh, you know around the world the humanitarian crisis continues. The war with Iran has now entered its thirteenth week. The straight Hamoos, I'm not telling you anything you don't know, remains largely closed, disrupting energy markets and the movement of fertilizer, not just oil, fertilizer, food and humanitarian supplies. And these consequences are not only uh felt abroad but also of course here at home especially to our farmers uh so in communities where America assistance was once promoted uh stability where we promoted stability and opportunity new new research is already showing an increased instability and a conflict following the abrupt dismantling of usad programs with no substitute At the United Nations,

Yes.

the United States is increasingly absent from

Yes.

critical discussions on human rights, democracy and women's empowerment. And even uh even as we expect the international community to support our priorities uh while we fail to meet our own commitments. Uh that getting back to our our twenty twenty seven budget, we need to pay our dues. The result is clear. our alliances have weakened, our credibility has suffered, and American standing in the world has diminished. We need a State Department and an international affairs budget that reasserts American leadership, honors our commitments, supports those in need, and advance a foreign policy that makes our nation safer, stronger, and more prosperous, because we we know this, when you know people say, " Well what's what is in it to us?" Well you know what? When people abroad, when they when they are educated when the children are educated when they're not hungry when they're healthy there's less opportunity for disruption and chaos and wanting to join terrorist organizations uh i i can tell you this and i've said this before i'm not really bragging ok but this is how i my my son was a was a united states marine he's he's back home thank goodness but he served in iraq and afghanistan he would be the first want to tell you and i'll be the first one to tell you that most americans would rather prevent war than send their sons and daughters to fight them and that's why soft power matters that's why what we're doing in this budget matters that's why what uh mister rubio what you're doing at the state department should matter uh diplomacy prevents conflicts before they erupt diplomacy not bombs and bullets diplomacy, a global health program stop outbreaks before they reach our shores, development reduces the desperation that fuels extremism, and strong aligns ensure that we do not face threats alone. That's how America leads. That's how America stays safe. And unfortunately, it seems to me, it's my opinion and some others, the administration has abandoned that proven strategy and uh Mrs. Secretary really uh and I say this in good spirit because I in the end I hope we can come together on our budget uh and I hope uh you'll share share today with this committee how the United States intends to meet today's global challenges without sacrificing the diplomatic development and humanitarian tools that have long advanced our interests and will look forward to your testimony and to uh the questions of of my colleagues and with that mister chair i yield back

uh thank you the ranking member by the way having a member of the us military is in your family is a very good reason to brag

alright

absolutely so uh will now uh yield to the ranking member of the appropriations committee

ok

mister lora for her opening statements you're recognized ma'am

thank you very much mister chairman and thank you ranking member frankel um for the recognition And I wanna just say uh welcome, Mister Secretary, uh and look forward to your testimony and and questions. Uh, there is an old saying, often attributed to Benjamin Franklin, that by failing to prepare, one is preparing for failure. That is a fitting description for this administration's foreign policy. To start, the Trump administration has hollowed out much of the American diplomatic corps. There are one hundred ninety-five ambassadorships in the United States Foreign Service. As of May nineteenth, one hundred nine of those positions were vacant. We do not have ambassadors to either Ukraine or Russia, and the President has been unable to mediate an end to the war there, despite his campaign promise to do so within the first twenty-four hours of his term. Conflict in the Middle East continues to escalate, with cease-fires all but abandoned. Prime Minister Netanyahu has announced he intends to deploy Israeli forces to occupy seventy percent of the Gaza Strip, while continuing strikes in Lebanon. Settler violence in the West Bank is becoming more aggressive by the day, and the president appears to have completely given up on peace talks to end the war he started with Iran, resuming military strikes over the weekend. The rationale for the war shifts whenever the president speaks. At first, it was to topple the regime and free the Iranian people. Then, it was to cripple their military capacity. Then it was to preempt a response to an attack that Israel was poised to carry out. Then it was to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before President Trump started the war. The most recent justification is to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, a goal they are now pursuing diplomatically after failing militarily. The Iranian regime is still in place. The Iranian people are not free. the Iranian military remains strong enough to control the Strait of Hormuz, I often wonder whether not anyone suggested that that was something that might Iran might do in this context. The Defense Department estimates that we have spent some thirty billion dollars on this war although the true cost is likely much much higher. And what we do what do we have to show for it? We find ourselves in the absurd position of having begun a war to pursue a goal that the Obama administration had already achieved more than ten years ago but that the Trump administration reversed. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or the JCPOA, was painstakingly negotiated over the course of twenty months by diplomatic experts, in close coordination with our partners and our allies. It prevented Iran from enhancing uranium to the grade necessary to produce a nuclear weapon. It allowed for independent inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, an organization to which we currently do not have an ambassador, by the way, to verify Iranian compliance, which they did. By contrast, the current talks are happening in a much more tense environment, with pressure coming uh uh pressure that's coming from conflict, ongoing conflict, and US leveraging tactics. There is no clearly defined plan for how a new agreement would be verified or enforced. And it is unclear what international partners would be involved in supporting or helping to implement it. But President Trump tore up the JCPOA less than three years after it was signed, and Iran promptly began enriching uranium to weapons grade. After claiming that Iran's nuclear program had been " obliterated" less than a year ago, the president is now realizing that you cannot destroy Iran's nuclear program by bombing it. You can only delay it. And the only way to secure a nuclear-free Iran is to negotiate a deal. But after failing to do this, The president threw up his hands in the air saying, and this is a quote, "I don't care if negotiations are abandoned." So here we all are, forced to suffer the consequences of the president's indifference. Americans are paying higher prices for gas, for groceries, and everyday necessities. But by his own admission, the president does not care if the war drags on, and he does not think about its impact on the American people at all. After taking office, the Trump administration withdrew from the World Health Organization and dismantled the US Agency for International Development. Thousands of programs were canceled and thousands of programmatic experts were laid off. Subsequently, health clinics were shuttered, These surveillance systems were greatly weakened, all while our global health efforts were withheld and exploited as leverage to extract concessions from partner nations who depend on them, holding them hostage for the health necessities that they needed in turn until they might have agreed to a trade agreement. Now we are faced with a significant infectious disease outbreak. In Central Asia, In Central Africa, a species of Ebola for which there is no authorized vaccine or treatment, is rapidly expanding and is expected to take months to address. It is primarily concentrated in the Democratic Republican Republic of Congo, where we do not have an ambassador. Ebola does not wait for bureaucratic reorganizations. It spreads when surveillance systems are weakened, health workers are laid off, clinics lack protective equipment, and communities lose their trusted partners who help detect and contain outbreaks before they become public health emergencies. Thanks to years of investment through the Department of Health and Human Services, we have a number of facilities in the United States that are equipped to safely treat patients with Ebola, as well as other infectious diseases. In the two thousand fourteen Ebola crisis, we established these facilities. We made a hundred and sixty million dollar investment. But this administration is blocking those specialized facilities from receiving Americans who are infected. We have asked numerous US government employees and partners to put themselves in harm's way. to help us keep safe. And how does the Trump administration repay them? By slamming the door in their face. The United States spent years building the relationships, supply chains, laboratories, and community health networks that help stop deadly diseases at their source. The Trump administration tore apart that capacity and now wants to pretend the consequences were unforeseeable. They were not. They prepared for failure and now it is here. Congress and the American people deserve answers. Secretary Rubio, thank you for taking the time to appear before this committee today. We look forward to hearing your testimony and getting some answers to our questions. I thank you and I yield back.

I thank the ranking member. Secretary Rubio, your full written statement will be placed in the record. as you know please feel free to summarize your testimony and again thank you for being here you are not recognized sir

thank you thanks for having me here today um i think i'm gonna skip the long opening you have it in writing i'll just do a couple of brief points rather spend the time on your questions it'll probably be a better use of our time just suffice it to say what i told you a year ago and getting back to that point now couple of things the the in terms of us foreign policy

stop supporting israel

stop doing bad things

stop supporting israel israel committed a genocide in palestine it's still ongoing and now they're committing another genocide in lebanon and what are you doing you're serving israel stop serving israel stop serving israel

alright the the core of our am i is that i can continue now alright

Mr. secretary

so the the core of our foreign policy must always be the national interest to the united states that is basically defining what that national interest is and then operationalizing in such a way that our foreign policy reflects it. This is across the board in the work of diplomacy, in the place in which we, and that requires prioritization by the way, it requires us to prioritize some parts of the world over other parts of the world, some issues over other issues, that's just the reality of limited resources and every country in the world has limited resources, including the United States despite our vast resources. The second is in terms of how we procure aid and in how we provide aid, we are still the world's largest aid provider, and I mean by far, like there isn't a close second. but we don't want aid to solely be judged by how much you spend we want it to be judged by what its results are and i think we can talk about it today but there are couple of points that i would raise that i think are very promising the first is we've now entered in the global health strategy over thirty-two health compacts with countries around the world and these health compacts basically are the countries that are signing them love it not just because they're getting the resources but because we're investing in their domestic resources in essence we are trying to lay the groundwork in many of these countries where one day they will no longer need foreign aid because they will be able to sustain it we're helping build the internal infrastructure other than uh uh ex uh um as opposed to relying on extensive ngos and things of this nature in the long term we want them to build their own domestic capacity we'll help them and they're very happy because it also gives them sovereignty over the way some of their aid is being dispersed in those countries likewise with humanitarian assistance one of the great success stories of the last year is we are able in a time of disaster to faster than we were responding under previous administrations and organizations and with much more effectively jamaica is a great example they had a hurricane in the caribbean jamaica was heavily impacted we were able to respond very quickly and very effectively the same has been the case in a couple of typhoons and we're doing it now with ebola we were able to program upwards of over two hundred million dollars very quickly in responding to it down to the point of being able to even through diplomatic means establish a facility in kenya for any americans that are infected it as an observation post for americans if someone's infected with ebola they will be transferred to a facility that could care for them if they're not infected after the observation period they'll be able to return to the united states or wherever it is they're travelling to but we've also provided assistance to the individual or partners that we have at the un and in other places in providing aid immediately so i would say that today foreign aid has become more nimble more responsive it's operating faster because of some of the flexibility that you've given us to respond but also more creative and that's particularly true in the global health strategy we can talk more in depth later on about some of the the the the arrangements that we've made uh with international organizations as an example the the global fund and our ability to meet our commitments to them we've worked very closely with them they're very very happy with the way we've outlined our contributions to the global fund i think there's a statement today from the un and ocha on the work that we've done with them and the ability to provide them the funds and resources necessary to carry out their mission so i would just say that i feel like while it is still ongoing and there's only always a process i feel like we have made dramatic improvements in the way american foreign assistance is delivered across the world but we're able to do it now not just in a targeted way but in a more effective way in which it's not simply being judged by how much money you're spending it's being judged by what result are you getting from it and uh there'll be more to talk about in the field of pepfar and otherwise if you wanna ask about those i'll find a way to work it in but i don't wanna take any more time i wanna get to your question so thanks for having me

oh thank you mr. secretary um and for the members i'll call on members based on seniority uh of those present when the hearing was called to order and as always going uh alternating between each side uh each member will have five minutes for questions and responses i anticipate they will have enough time uh for two rounds uh so let me begin mr. secretary secretary if a country uh is a us designated state sponsor of terrorism and and ordered a terror force to shoot down unarmed US civilian aircraft in international waters and kidnapped and held hostage a US humanitarian aid worker and harbored terrorists and fugitives from US justice and closely is allied uh allies with another state sponsor of terrorism, which is Iran and provided intelligence and security support to the narco-trafficking anti-American Maduro regime in Venezuela. and was found smuggling hundreds of tons of weapons material to north korea and repeatedly welcomes russian spy and warships and encourages thousands of their nationals to deploy to russia uh to fight on russia's side in ukraine and is currently giving china access to spy spy facilities with signal intelligence capabilities and furthermore orchestrates an extensive espionage network against the united states and has over three hundred military drones within reach of us territory including us military installations and nuclear facilities would you consider a country like that as a threat to the national security interests of the united states

yeah and i think you're describing cuba and that's absolutely the case but i think you one more point i would make is all of these violent marxist left wing you know radical terrorist groups that operate in many countries have destabilized colombia for example for years and others all found their seed money from cuba as well they sponsored these groups all around the region and part of the region is still playing the price for the for the rise of those groups uh particularly you know the the the the FARC elements that have now spun off and and are actually uh carrying out violence as we speak in colombia

yeah and and i hear that from heads of state throughout latin america uh the impact that that regime is continues to have the threat to their security to democracy's and to our national security let me shift again also in western hemisphere um on venezuela um you know we know what happened this this fugitive of us law is now uh in a in in here in us custody uh and and that we thank uh the secretary uh you and the secretary war and in particular the president for his leadership on that you've laid out what i believe is a clear three phase plan for venezuela stability first and then recovery and then a transition where are we in on that process in that process and are we still on track

yeah first i think it's important to remind i think tomorrow will mark the five month i know it feels like it was five years ago three years ago seven years ago five months ago that's how long we've been in to this process so let me say venezuela is not today where we hope it will be for the people of venezuela say but it is on a trajectory that i think is a very positive one if it continues and it has to continue as you said our first uh priority was stabilization we did not wanna see mass migration we did not wanna see a civil war we did not wanna see societal breakdown and that required working to the extent possible and wise with existing institutions not to preserve them or to perpetuate them but to insure that we didn't have systemic breakdown the second is recovery which is the phase i would argue we are primarily in right now and that is the ability to to recover their economic vibrancy to allow small businesses to develop and the like and part of that is ensuring that the wealth of that country which is primarily through mineral uh resources that are and and energy resources are going to help the people of venezuela directly and that's what you see through the treasury blocked account is that the money that they're generating from these oil sales is that is being driven to pay for things like salaries and to buy medical equipment and and things that are beneficial to the people not being pilfered and used as side hustles to help you know cronies obviously more work remains to be done. Ultimately, and and other things that need to happen, ultimately the answer in Venezuela is a free and fair democratic election, because it's not just the right thing, it also is necessary in order for them to be able to attract the kind of investment that they want. In order for it to be a long-term and investable place that can attract the kind of capital and interest and normalize the way their economy works, they will need to have a government that is legitimately in place through elections. But you have to create the conditions for that. Those conditions include free and open media we've seen independent journalism operating again in venezuela that's been a positive you need to give space and time for political parties to organize and prepare them position themselves to participate in those elections you need a new electoral council uh because they are the ones that are gonna be counting the votes and ensuring that the vote is legitimate all that work is ongoing there are multiple areas of cooperation with the interim authority some of which are not publicly discussed in the proper setting we could that have been very positive and uh and i also think talking about diplomacy we now have an embassy open there with with with americans on the ground every single day interacting with the business community with american in businesses that are interested in coming in with members of the interim government and also members of the opposition so i think we're making good progress we're not where we need to be but we're only five months in and i think it's important to remember that because this will take some time we're dealing with sixteen eighteen years of uh of a system and you uh take reversing that responsibly take some time but we're moving in that direction i think in a good pace

thank you mr. secretary the ranking member most frankly you're recognized

first just very quickly you know iran's proxies have have been the cause of so much human suffering not just in israel but around the world of course hamas was responsible for attack on israel we see hezbollah shooting rockets into israel but other parts of the world question is are billions of dollars are any funding gonna go back to iran so that they can resume to fund their proxies as a result of the deal that you are uh talking about

well first of all the deal that we're talking about or the deal that you've seen reported in the media is a dynamic situation because the first thing the first the sort of what needs to happen at the front-end is they want us to lift our blockade so they can get their ships to market that isn't gonna happen unless they open the straits so that's the first thing the second thing that has to happen related to the first is they have to agree to enter into negotiations that are on very specific topics which they have not been willing to do in the past number one they have to agree to negotiate on the issue of no enrichment number two is they have to be willing to agree to dispose of the

ok i'm i don't mean to interrupt but

uh no but it's gonna get to your point i promise you the second thing is that that they have to agree on the issue of the the highly enriched uranium

ok please ok

now what you're asking about is what about sanctions relief for frozen funds and assets so let's begin by saying that this regime as you've rightfully pointed out even despite sanctions even despite all the pressure have found a way to funnel money and resources to these proxy groups what's being discussed is what do they get in exchange what nuclear sanctions that have been on them do they get in exchange for compliance for the if they comply with the reasons why those sanctions were put in in the first place all of that will be condition based meaning no there's not gonna be some sort of advanced signing bonus or good faith front front line

i i really my question is is is the administration contemplating returning

yeah

fund money to iran so that they can continue to fund these proxies all that are that are hurting millions of people

yeah well if the money is going to fund the proxies then it won't be returned to them obviously i think the question you're really asking is what concessions are you willing to make in the negotiation there are specific sanctions. Some of them are congressional, some of them are UN, and some of them are from the executive branch. But there are specific sanctions that are in place related directly to their nuclear program.

Alright, well let me let me just not

So that's why they were put in place in the first place.

Listen, let me, taking back my time, I I would just say this, I would urge this administration not to give money to Iran to continue the the work of their proxies. But let me move right on because uh I wanna I wanna talk to you about what's actually happening at at the State Department. Uh, USAID uh was dismantled, they did so much of the development work, humanitarian work around around this world. Um The uh we you told us that the regional bureaus and embassies uh were gonna do the work. Uh we we have sent directives from congress uh to to the State Department and uh for example millions for education for agricultural capacity for water and sanitation how would these our directives getting to uh these regional bureaus and to the diplomats and when you only when you have a hundred missing hundreds plus missing diplomats who's getting our directives and what are they doing with them

well first of all we don't uh i think hundred something missing we were saying is the unfilled ambassadorial posts but ev- everyone every mission of the united states is is staffed if they don't have a senate confirmed ambassador and we'd prefer to have senate confirmed ambassadors now as you know there's a process for doing that some of it's you know we've uh i think we've only gotten like a hundred something nominees in state department through the senate um and and some that i think we need to pick up the pace in terms of appointing people to some of these posts and believe me i want that to happen but i don't nominate them so we have to work with the white house to get those names out there now on your fundamental question is what is the role the embassies and regionals bureau play and i think the answer to that question is can be found again i wanna harken back to these global health mou's for thirty two countries which is a conglomerate of different aid programs that are involved in helping with with health and and it could include water projects we these are often negotiated directly out of the embassy with personnel that are on the ground that are laying the groundwork to do it the other things the embassies do is they help us identify the areas that would have the highest impact at the best efficient cost in these individual countries

but uh sorry to interrupt you but what what i'm worried about what a lot of us worry about is is the lack of expertise the expertise so the your people in the in the various countries even know what to do what has happened to that so there were thousands of people fired i mean how do we know that in each of these countries you have someone there who knows how to fix a water system or

yeah so well first of all i think that we would ideally do in every one of these case is that we will be partnering with the local government with with the with the domestic government with our host nation to ensure that we're relying on building their capacity to do this work and our job and depends on the country and that's the unique part of the way you approach this you could do a a bucket and you can say this is money for x and it has to work exactly the same all over the world or you could do it the way we're doing which is understanding that a health mou with one country maybe look very different than what a health mou looks like in another country and then we would have to hire or add depending on the contract eh whether it's an international partner or others if necessary the expertise for implementation but the the key to the front-end of it is identifying what those unique opportunities are because i can tell you going through the thirty-two mou's they are all different

and i'm i'm um mr. secretary i can tell you this

it

that because of whatever the lag time the the lack of expertise right now there are there are literally thousands and thousands of people dying i'm gonna i know there's some of you

i know i don't by the way i just don't agree with that number but

i just ok mister, just one question.

We'll have and we'll have another round.

OK.

We'll have another round.

I got I got one one more thing, this is very important, alright.

Alright.

We have heard

She is a Floridian, I'm gonna have to give her that.

I understand, you think so.

Wait, wait, wait. No, we have heard first of all, this country right now has a has a immigration policy which is an an abomination. We're taking innocent people who have committed no crimes off the street and we are sending them to countries some of them that they have no connection to and we are hearing that the state department is out there making deals with foreign countries and saying you if you want to get the mel development funds uh healthcare or humanitarian funds you must take amount of deportees

and mister secretary you gonna have to enter that relatively quickly cause we're way past time

yeah i don't know where you've heard that from we have certainly negotiated third country agreements with multiple countries around the world but none of them are under threat in some cases for example they have said well we'll do this for you as a as a but we will do but we have some cost associated with assuming this responsibility and we provided them funds to deal with that but i can't recall of a single instance i don't know where you who's reporting this to you where we're basically threatening a country that we're gonna never deal with them again if if they don't help us but obviously we are friendly and helpful but this is the way diplomacy should work honestly let's be frank we are going to reward those that are good to the united states we're not gonna be as friendly to places that are not furthering our national interest for a long time this has been going on we there are countries around the world we were spending millions and millions of dollars and they vote with us against us ninety nine percent of the time at the un and all the commercial contracts are with china but yet we're funding their entire healthcare system Look, I think that's a legitimate thing to say, hold on a second, does this make sense?

Alright, let's let's move on and we've we've given the ranking member because she is the ranking member, and she's uh my friend and partner, way over time and thank you Mister Secretary for uh indulgence. Uh speaking of now the Vice Chairman of the subcommittee is uh recognized. Mister Edwards.

Thank you Mister Chairman, uh Mister Secretary thank you so much for being with us. I recall when you were with us about a year ago, you talked about the new focus of United States State Department. I I want you to know that uh I was privileged to participate last week in the CODEL led by the esteemed Chairman Diaz-Balart to uh South America and had the opportunity to witness how effective and how targeted our foreign assistance is being used to, in your words, to further the interest of America. It w- it was so incredibly obvious, uh, through the empowerment of the ambassadors that I was able to meet there, through the sense of, uh, respect that those ambassadors carried, along with the, uh, the, uh, the, not only the empowerment that they had but the sense of respect that they had from the people in those countries, almost to the same level as their very own heads of state. And it was so heartening to see your words put into action in in in those countries. It's truly working. We saw evidence that narco-terrorism is being eliminated. We're saving lives here in America because of that. It was obvious that the influence of china is being diminished and that uh the united states is being so much more recognized as uh not only a military and economic strength but as that soft power that i continue to hear members here on this panel speak of and so uh i i just commend you and the administration for the work that you're doing i got to witness it firsthand and i appreciate the chairman uh lead leading such a distinguished codel to uh to to let us see and learn those things one of the things that you spoke about a year ago was recognizing america's humanitarian responsibility in countries like this and i've had a number of uh organizations the ngos that are charged with administering uh humanitarian assistance uh talk to me about concerns with the predictability of the uh funding that this committee has appropriated and uh i i think you can probably agree it's necessary for them to be able to predict when that funding will come available so that they can plan human uh resources so they can uh, plan on supply lines and, and that sort of thing. What advice can you give this, this, this committee and those folks that are charged to implement the humanitarian needs on how we can work better with the State Department on that predictability?

Well, first of all, it's, unless I know the specific programs are kind of, it's a little bit harder to opine in general on what you've outlined. Other than to say that i think what they'll find certainly over time is that their ability to get answers will be much quicker now we still have an obligation and a due diligence requirement in any contract we award any grant any monies we obligate we have to make sure the money is being spent on what it's supposed to be spent on we have to make sure that it's being dispersed at an appropriate rate and that we're getting and that we're getting result for it so i think what they'll find over time is that the system that is managing this for them now will be a lot less byzantine a lot less bureaucratic they may not always get the answer they want on some of these but they will get their answer faster our ability to deploy and to partner with an NGO in case of a humanitarian crisis is an example right now with ebola I mean that is something that is required as to ramp up opportunities to keep it you know constrained and ultimately to help deal with it and it we we have partnered with Samaritans first we have partnered with some others uh who and some international organizations as well and our ability to deploy and quickly provide the funding for that more on uh uh uh uh more of a a a sort of a an acute event as opposed to a chronic one is is is better than it used to be we are responding much faster than it was in the traditional system and the more legacy projects i think what they'll find over time is once this becomes systemized you they'll become more familiar with our systems and they'll be and they'll they'll find that that um that that uh that certainty that they need in terms of planning and so forth but i would just say we'll continue to communicate with your offices on specific

thank you and i look forward to uh to working with your department in order to do that

great thank you uh thank you

thank you just just a note that on this side we've been on time but i'm not complaining um the ranking member of the full committee it's a privilege to recognize you

Thanks for not complaining, Mr. Chair.

Not yet.

Uh, Mr. Secretary, nearly sixty percent of Americans disapprove of President Trump's illegal war of choice with Iran. The war has led to skyrocketing fuel costs for Americans, needless deaths of American service members, while failing to achieve any of the stated aims of the war. In the meantime, it seems that the Trump administration seems to have forgotten all about the crisis in Gaza. Nearly eight months after it was signed, the administration's twenty-point plan peace plan stands largely unafilled. I have it right here. It looks like there are uh uh uh uh four and five have been accomplished, and and the rest have not been accomplished here. Most Palestinians in Gaza are sheltering in overcrowded uh uh tents, pests and rodents spreading disease, health services remain limited, Israeli military strikes have escalated, despite the cease-fire, pushing the total death toll to nearly seventy-three thousand. A li late last week, Prime Minister Netanyahu ordered the IDF to seep to seize seventy percent of Gaza in complete violation of the cease-fire agreement. So, Secretary, the State Department must take the lead for the US implementing the President's twenty-point plan. What is the status of implementation? what progress should we expect to see in the next few weeks what is your response to prime minister netanyahu s directive

you don't on gaza

yes

yes ok so well because you started out talking about iran so let me just

well

first let me just say i i disagree with

i said in the meantime the trump administration seems to have forgotten about the crisis in gaza

no no one's forgotten about it i think luckily there's not active combat operations happening of the kind that we saw a few months ago but it's still a challenge that we're gonna work through i just wanted to correct the record for a second you said we have not achieved our stated aim and i know you went through it in your opening statement

no uh uh if you don't mind i have a limited time for questioning mister secretary my question

i know but you gave a long introduction and then they're not gonna answer some of these things they just need to sit there and

my no well i wanted to get to gaza i want to get to the twenty point plan which is what my question is is about implementing the twenty point plan what is the status of implementation

but you gave a speech first

what progress do we see in the next few weeks what is your response to prime minister netanyahu s directive

ok i got it so on this on let me first start with the status we are now at a phase where we should be having or want to have an international stabilization force that goes in and provides the security this requires the demilitarization of hamas which right now they have not been willing to meet the conditions necessary by the way it's not just the united states that's complaining about it many of our partners in the region are pressuring hamas to enter the demilitarization phase

so there will be but will be no progress with the twenty point plan unless there is a demilitarized hamas

well there are other elements to the twenty point plan that are ongoing as an example the plan for reconstruction and economic development and the donors that are coming forward to fund it that continues to move forward and develop it's just you can't implement it no one's gonna invest money in hamas in in in gaza until hamas is demilitarized because they know there's

no eh

gonna be another war if they're not

these twenty point these twenty points were to be moving i i would think and and moving along with various uh uh phases of implementation as we go along here in terms of uh also humanitarian aid um uh uh it it it is all laid out but as i said there are only two that have been uh apparently implemented that is with seventy two hours

no

of uh the hostages will will be released so uh nathan yahu's directive idf seize seventy percent of gaza just just your view cause i need to move on

yeah our view of it is i i haven't i i think those comments he made last week in an appearance that he did somewhere we have a plan it doesn't call for that and at the end of the day we understand that what we want and i think what the israelis would ultimately want is a gaza that is governed by a non-hommosity

so you have no opinion on on the idf seizing seventy percent

and the people well he is he made that statement but that's not part of this plan this plan doesn't call for that what this plan calls for and it's what we're committed to carrying out

of of of Gaza well but you

is that the people of gaza are governed by

but there has been no implementation of the plan

well that the people of gaza are governed by a technocratic palestinian government a palestinian

yeah

let me just please mister secretary

no but you're asking me questions you're not letting me answer

we go round and round eh yes you are answering them no you're not answering them because you don't have answers um

but you don't let me finish

uh uh let me let me just say this and first of all you talked earlier in your comments about humanitarian assistance and how quickly it's going up quite frankly um that hasn't really happened uh in gaza uh commercial not just commercial uh uh uh humanitarian aid going in let me just talk about the humanitarian assistance it is not a false statement

that's false that's a false statement i have to correct you on that it's not we spend hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid in gaza already and that includes through the world food program and other organizations

you know i have talked to sydney mccain at world food about the situation the humanitarian crisis in gaza

so have i i talk to her all the time in fact i tell her a month ago and she would disagree with you

and the food and hunger and it's not there it's not there Let me just continue on. Humanitarian situation in Ghana's Gaza worsens. At the same time, the Israeli government has ramped up its pursuit of a de facto annexation of the West Bank. Oslo Accords have been torn up. Demolition orders for Palestinian villages are on the rise. Incidents of settler violence have surged with no accountability, and the construction of settlements and outposts continues at a rapid speed. From May twelfth to May eighteenth, Palestinians faced more than fifty attacks by settlers across the West Bank, including arson attacks that damaged a mosque, homes, farmland and vehicles. The UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has documented an average of six such attacks per day. The Israeli government has begun proceedings to demolish the Palestinian community of Khan al-Amar, just east of Jerusalem, as part of its goal of constructing settlements along the Eone corridor, which would bisect the West Bank, foreclose the possibility of a continuous Palestinian state. Secretary, do you believe that the situation in the West Bank is one that leads to greater cooperation between Israelis and Palestinians or will create conditions for a two-state solution and promote Israel's. Two-state solution in my view will promote Israel's long-term security.

As the President has stated clearly and repeatedly, he is not in favor of these changes or these changes in the status in the West Bank, that it potentially complicates our ability to work out the deal in Gaza as well.

OK, thank you.

And the President's been consistent, he has said this multiple times, and we've shared that with our Israeli counterparts as well.

Mm-hmm.

Thank you.

And what are we doing to deal with settler violence?

we will do that on the if that's alright we'll do that on the second round cause we're way over and the best back fine thank you very much mr. chairman thank you no thank you thank you remember um thank you mr. molinar who is also the uh the the chairman of the select uh committee on the ccp is recognized

thank you mr. chairman uh secretary rubio thanks for being with us today and uh thank you for uh the important work you're doing around the world and for the sacrifice you and your family are making in order to do that uh we appreciate it uh Also, I just wanna say uh my apologies for the young gentleman from the CCP funded Code Pink uh who interrupted your opening statement. Um, I wanna go right into some questions about the CCP. Um, I wonder if you could characterize China's support for Iran, uh, military or otherwise.

Okay, well that's an, it's a important question. i think let me start with this point i don't think the the chinese have publicly said and repeatedly said and told us in our visit as well they are not in favor of what iran is doing in the straits they they they are opposed to that as is virtually every country in the world some obviously more open than others um but but they have stated that point i would say that china has not provided any assistance to iran in any way impeded our operations or ability to operate um they clearly have had previous relationship and you can see that in some of the military equipment that they have, certainly of Chinese origin and likewise. But we have seen no signs in the short term that they, that in during this situation, that anything they've been providing them has in any way changed the dynamic in the battlefield and I think they've been quite cautious about engaging themselves in it. That said, we would like to see their help at the United Nations. We have a resolution right now, it has the highest number of co-sponsors of any resolution ever proposed before the Security Council. that would you know create authorities to deal with the with the what's happening in the straits and um unfortunately the chinese continue to threaten a veto of it so if in fact they are against the closure of the straits they should be endorsing this or at a minimum abstaining and not using a veto of it the russians are another matter of course they're vehemently opposed to that resolution for a variety of different reasons but um um i would say that as time goes on the chinese economy will begin to be negatively by what the iranians are doing for two reasons the first is because though the concept of a tolling system sounds intriguing the reality of it is very hard to implement and in fact you saw a chinese destined vessel attacked and hit two weeks ago by the iranians and the second is because if you as for a export driven economy like china to have countries around the world's ability to purchase diminish as more of that goes towards fuel that will begin to have an impact on their exports as well so i think china in the short to long term should has should have a and we've made this point to the chinese have a vested interest as well in ensuring that iran stop its activity

thank you uh there was a media report recently that iran may have used a chinese missile uh to shoot down a us fighter jet are you familiar with that report

that report i can't comment on the specific technology that they use suffice it to say they look they do own chinese systems they own some russian systems and they've developed some native systems especially in the drone technology um and um but i don't know specifically about i mean i'd have to refer you to the department of war i would i would hate to comment on something and give you a misleading answer

thank you uh during the recent china summit i was thankful president trump raised the issue of china's prisoners of conscience and president indicated that xi shenping is seriously considering uh the release of pastor ezra jinn and i know this is something you care deeply about have there been any tangible follow-ups or indications regarding this case or others like jimmy lye since the summit

well first of all jimmy lye the president has raised it twice he raised it once when we met in south korea um late last year october whenever that was raised it again during this visit uh uh pastor jinn is obviously a more recent case and it was also raised in the meeting And I don't wanna do anything to jeopardize his status or what's working other than to say that, you know, I'm cautiously optimistic that we could potentially find a positive resolution to his case. Um, and that - that - those talks and that communication is ongoing. But sometimes with these things they work better when they just happen. And so I don't wanna say anything publicly that could undermine or harm that effort in any way, but be clear that we have raised that, and it is a priority for us.

Thank you. Um, as you know in Michigan we're proud to have a large Chaldean community, many of whom are still having deep family and religious ties to Iraq, Iraq's Christian communities, uh, particularly Chaldean Christians have faced years of displaced displacement, economic hardship, security threats in the Nineveh plain and surrounding areas. How is the administration supporting religious minorities, including Iraq's Chaldean community?

Well, as you know, they're just recently forming a new government with a new prime minister. and uh and so i think the fundamental challenge in iraq has been and continues to be what level of influence do the iranian back shia militias have inside the country over the government and in fact we we face that that situation very uh dramatically during epic fury when in fact there were launches occurring against our facilities both in uh in baghdad and in erbil so it would be raised within the context of our relationship with the we wanna give them a chance to be successful but we also wanna give them a chance to be responsive to the issues that we've raised including the issues just outlined about you know unfortunately a much smaller christian community than it was there twenty five thirty forty years ago but still nonetheless facing very difficult circumstances obviously we also wanna see a government that's less under the domain or control um of of these iranian backed militias who still remain very powerful in the country so those have been the leading features but we're going to give this new party prime minister a chance we're willing to do things that are helpful to him but obviously we have things that we're concerned about primarily the iranian shia militias and the influence they have and the danger they pose to the region and to the country but related to that is the issue you raise and that is these minority communities inside of iraq uh who have faced oppression now for the better part of you know twenty years and uh and and have seen their numbers in areas diminish as they more and more people have left the region but it is a priority and we do raise it because we think it's important for a sort of a diverse nation like Iraq for every segment of society to have not just representation but to feel safe and respected inside the country. It is a feature of our talks with them.

Thank you. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Miss Meng. You're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary, uh, for being here. As the daughter of immigrants, I'm so proud to represent Queens, New York, uh, the world's borough, and a strong community of immigrants and refugees, including a large Afghan community. even though we promised them safety in exchange for risking their lives for our country thousands of our vetted afghan allies remain stranded abroad including relatives of some of my constituents last month this administration reportedly decided to close camp as salia and force eleven hundred afghans there to choose between going to the democratic republic of the congo where they have no ties and which is facing an ebola crisis and afghanistan which would be a death sentence uh what is the plan to help our vetted afghan allies who were promised safety in the us

yeah well the plan is and we're working on this very actively and is to have more than just those two alternatives and obviously the afghan alternative is not one that's realistic for most of them and and um and so we work we're engaging every single day and we think we have a number of other countries that are willing to now the the question is not what the country is willing to assume the question is how many we have about a thousand something people there and we have to move them and so i don't think there's one country that's gonna take all one thousand but it has to be countries that a are willing to assume some of this responsibility and numbers that are manageable to them but also places that give more options to these individuals that they would be more comfortable going to so we are very actively engaging this is you know we have a lot of capital hill engagement on this issue from both sides of the aisle it's a priority for a lot of people and uh we don't wanna see a situation where any of them are being forced back into afghanistan because that's just clearly not an option for some of them uh the the case of uh relatives of of of american citizens uh i think is a is a separate case in the sense that they have ties to the united states and so that process the processing is still ongoing in terms of the applications the background checks and the vetting and so forth um we're obviously operating right now under a directive that prohibits the entry of afghans into the united states uh but um that could change at some point and that that we would be able to facilitate some of those but but that that that issue right now is we are just trying to find more countries that will step forward in being able to assume in some cases it might be two hundred in some cases they might be able to take a hundred and fifty three hundred but give them some options other than just those two that you just outlined

can you rule out third country options especially dr c you mentioned earlier that the state department won't deport people to to conflict zones can you rule that out going forward

you mean rule out the DRC

yes

well ultimately these people would have to they would have to agree that they're gonna go to DRC as well because that's what we wanna do is give them seven or eight options rather than one or two um and i imagine if we can find more options for them and there are some countries look i think the problem is is not that i'm trying to i mean we could probably talk to your staff about it um a lot of these countries are in nascent talks with us about their willingness to assume some of these people but they don't want me announcing it at a hearing because then they have you know newspaper and media going crazy in their country about what does this all mean but i can tell you that we are i know of at least five other countries that we have spoken to that seem at least open to the idea of assuming some number of these refugees we'd like to get these people more than just five options maybe five or six or seven

are they conflict zones can we rule out deporting people to conflict zones

well i don't remember all five or six of them but i don't think that any of them would be conflict zones is my recollection

um thank you uh at the same time we are stranding our afghan allies we are rolling out the red carpet for white africaners from south africa even though we've completely stopped resettlement of other vetted refugees the president recently approved seventeen thousand five hundred spots for africaners and none for any other refugee from anywhere else in the world can i ask what your standards and justification for issuing only refugee slots for them

well first of all the united states over the last four years before the president returned to office assumed upwards of fifteen to twenty million people had entered our country through a variety of methods so our immigration policies must always ultimately be geared by by the national interest of the united states and in an era where we're already dealing with fifteen to twenty million people that have country in a mass migration event in such a short period of time adding to that number in the short term would make no sense in our view from the national interest hence the freeze on refugee admission the case you point to is a very specific one probably a time limited one and that is we have gauged that there is real interest from a unique subset of people in in south africa who would be interested to coming in the united states and who we assess have a high likelihood of rapid assimilation and success in our society and hence this program was created now that's not a program that's gonna exist in perpetuity it's a program that's designed to the fact that we are seeing the demand we are seeing applications from south africa people willing to enter the united states and we think this is a group of potential refugees

so our afghan

that can very quickly

allies are refugees they have been vetted eleven hundred versus this new seventeen thousand

but it's more than just vetting we're also trying to determine again this is the immigration policy of the united states like everything we do has to be geared by the national interest and it is in our national interest if we are allowing people in our country be people that can quickly assimilate into society and be successful and not become public charges

why can't they assimilate into society i've been to their centers in my district in queen

but a background check is not the same as a simulation well i

they have assimilated and contribute and pay taxes

yeah but we've already assumed a lot of afghan refugees as you said you have them in your district we've already assumed a large number in the past the point is that the the general policy has been to limit the entry of refugees from all over the world and then to create the special track because of a unique circumstance in the short term of a high demand from a number of immigrants that we have determined if they pass the vetting and the checking will very quickly assimilate and contribute to our society that's what our by the way

right

that's what our immigration policy should always be about is what's good for the country

i think it's important for america to keep our promise as well in the interest of national security

well

better our our word to our global allies to people who we made a promise to uh we eleven hundred versus seventeen thousand eleven hundred vetted uh allies uh who already helped this country i think they should be given consideration and not sent to conflict zones

and i think this you know i don't know if secretary you wanna

thank you i do agree

and uh you've already answered do you wanna say anything else cause i will

no i mean we talked about the point in the decision that was made

yeah uh mr. alfred you're recognized sir

Well, thank you, Chair. Thank you, Ranking Member and the Ranker for our full committee. Um, I do want to recognize you, Mister Chairman, for the great work that you've done to help rein in the spending while still protecting America's national security interests around the world. Last year, Chairman Diaz-Villars delivered a sixteen percent reduction from fiscal year twenty-five in active levels nearly nine point three billion dollars in savings without compromising support of our closest allies, weakening our posture on the world stage. This fiscal year, the committee built on that success with an additional six percent reduction, cutting another two point six nine billion dollars while still maintaining robust funding for Israel, Taiwan, Jordan, Egypt and critical Indo-Pacific security programs. These reductions, Mister Secretary, are only possible because of you and your leadership, which has forced partner nations to shoulder more of the burden and make sure that American taxpayers are no longer footing the bill for countries that refuse to meet their obligations and that really aren't on our side to begin with. And so I salute you. Sir, there is a lot of noise in this world. There's noise out in the hallway. There's noise that we've seen on the back row here. And what I'm about to say is not going to make the news because the, I used to be in the news business, so I know what makes the news. It's it's the clips of the loud people, the Code Pinko people, that want to disrupt and yell hateful hateful things to you, sir. But I want you to know that the vast majority of Americans have a lot of respect for you, have a lot of appreciation for what you're doing. You are a stalwart, a resolute rudder in a sea of chaos. And I just want you to know that we appreciate that. Thank you for the job that you're doing. And I, I do wanna talk about Cuba. Chairman Diaz-Balart brought this up. Um. is is Cuba a threat and how big of a threat is Cuba to the United States of America

well i think the fundamental threat is that they are a um first of all thanks for your nice comments i would they should give you more time too uh

yeah

uh i would say that Cuba is two two things about Cuba number one is it's a failed state i mean it really is i mean the model that they have economic will never work and and and it will never work because the country is no longer even controlled by the government there i mean the people are under the control of the government but the country is under the control of a private i say private a military controlled conglomerate that controls about seventy percent of the g. d. p. of the country none sitting on eighteen billion dollars in assets none of that money transfers over to the treasury or to the or to be helpful to the cuban people anyway meanwhile they have power plants that have been failing because of years and years and years of chronic uh mismanagement and lack of investment so on the one hand you have a country that doesn't have money to buy fuel and on the other hand they have you have a country that uh that is sitting on a military conglomerate that has eighteen billion dollars in assets and none of it transfers over to the cuban people lot of people don't realize it and they're accountable to no one they are the ones in ultimate control of the country so what you have now is a failing system uh frankly i think in the since two thousand one is it fifteen percent of the population of cuba has left some to the united states many to spain or other different countries around the world uh they they've lost a lot of human capital as well so it's on the verge of being a failed state because of their mismanagement and incompetence and the last straw was they lost free oil Maduro used to give them free oil that's really the biggest change since January is they no longer are getting free oil and we're not in a world where people are in the business of just giving away oil for free all the time so they're really struggling with that as well now the second thing i would argue is they are also a base of operation the Chinese the Russians operate intelligence collection facilities targeted at the southeastern United States from the island of Cuba that's well documented open source has reported on that repeatedly they are a country that has long links to all of these transnational many of these transnational ideologically motivated groups in in the western hemisphere if you travel extensively in the western hemisphere you will find that behind every disruptive element in their society designed to for example overthrow or pressure a pro-american government there is a cuban element involved including in fact many of these countries have expelled either the ambassador and or multiple personnel from the cuban um embassies because of their intelligence and and counter uh un-subversive activities inside of their country. And then they have a long history of supporting actual violent groups throughout the region. Uh, so all of these things pose a threat to United States because a failed state that's friendly to our adversaries ninety miles from our shores, that's a threat.

So what are we gonna do about it?

Well, the first thing we're trying to do about it is find a better way forward for the people of Cuba. We've made, by the way, we've made offers to them in this regard. We have offered to distribute a hundred million dollars of humanitarian aid through the catholic church and other non-governmental organizations first they denied we made the offer so then we went public with it um then they said they would accept it but since then have not been willing to follow up on how that distribution would work we're fine with it as long as it goes to the cuban people because if you distribute it through them here's what happens the products wind up on the shelves of the dollar stores controlled by the conglomerate that i just outlined we know that for a fact you see the same products but we've delivered humanitarian aid in cuba through this mechanism three million dollars after the hurricane that went directly to the cuban people in many cases we wish we had six million destined but only three million has been distributed unfortunately because they've impeded some of it and all of it marked with a gift from the people of the united states so they know where it's coming from that we we're offering to do that we've made offers on a bunch of other things as well uh so far they've they've but ultimately i remind everybody that us policy towards cuba is governed by law it's statutory there's statutory requirements for us to change our policies towards Cuba, embedded in the law in Helms-Burton that passed in nineteen ninety six. So um, that governs, that that's the official policy of the United States, it's embedded in statute. So we have to stick to within those parameters as well.

Thank you, I've gone over a yield back.

Thank you, sir.

Mister Soskimani, your recognizer.

Thank you, German. Thank you, Secretary Rubio, for being here with us. Um, thank you for taking time and answering all the questions. I wanna take a moment and start with recognizing the western passport center in my district they um they're doing an incredible job i i consistently call my office does for uh passport issues there and they i the volume that they handle is incredible and their customer service is as high as it as as it could be i i visited it in twenty twenty four and just just to thank them and i wanna just highlight them for you just cause they're they're doing such a great job so Wanna start out with that light lighter note, I think. Uh, let's go into a a heavier topic topic here. Uh, I wanna give you also and the President tremendous credit for your work to combat dangerous drug cartels and other transnational criminal networks. Combating international crime is essential to making America safer, stronger and more prosperous. I wanna ask you about another damaging uh form of international crime, which is human trafficking. This issue hits close to home for my constituents in Arizona. the Department of Justice has identified Phoenix as one of the top human trafficking jurisdictions in the country and as one of four states bordering Mexico, Arizona is a major transit point for traffickers. The National Human Trafficking Hotline has identified over twenty-three hundred cases in Arizona alone, with more than five thousand victims identified in those cases. Troublingly, the average age of youth trafficked in Arizona is thirteen years old, four years younger than the national average. there's a strong bipartisan support for the department uh for the state department programs to combat trafficking in persons internationally so given all this what what are the department's regional and or uh country specific priorities for programs to combat trafficking in persons and how are you ensuring that these programs are successfully implemented in support of the national security interest of the US

yeah thank you for and obviously when we talk about human trafficking you're you're talking about the international element to it from our perspective,

yeah

there's obviously a domestic issue as well that that but that's separate from our involvement um a couple of points these migratory routes that existed with mass migration events are the same routes that are used by human trafficking so clearly when we had a border crisis we had people pouring over the border we had organizations that were that were involved in trafficking of drugs contraband and also people we know that and that was a big component to all of this i believe last year the number maybe it um off by a million or two but it's about a hundred million dollars we spent a year ago um on human trafficking programs and it depends on the country, every country is different, in some cases some countries are transit zones, they're not sources of human trafficking but they are a a transit zone where human traffickers bring people through and so oftentimes the assistance is assistance to local authorities in helping to partner with us, identify or if they're already advanced enough in that field simply sharing intelligence and information as we gather it and pick it up. In other cases the assistance depending on the country is helping prevent human trafficking in essence working in partnering with the local with the host government for programs that help identify potential victims of human trafficking and prevent them from being trafficked before it happens that's the second um and so it really is country specific and one of the reasons why it's so critical that these programs not be put in a box and say here's human trafficking globally that it's a great example of how this program needs to these expenditures and our focus on this needs to be specific to the location because what the human trafficking issue looks like in one country might be different than another country one country may just be the airport that they're flying people through and we know it another country may be the source of children that are being literally purchased or bought up or grabbed off the streets and being trafficked for labor purposes or worse and so that's why in every one of our embassies we have people that are in charge or um also uh supposed to be helping us to implement that program so through the regional bureau so that it becomes specific to the individual country and whatever role they play in the human trafficking, whether it's transit zone or source.

Thank you. Um, I know we have a second round, but I'll ask one more. Uh, I know the administration is actively engaged in discussions with Israel about the future of the US-Israel relationship including opportunities to further expand and deepen our strategic partnership. With the current memorandum of understanding on security assistance set to expire in two years this feels like a real moment to think boldly about how our cooperation can evolve to meet the shared interest and security needs for both of our nations. With that in mind, what's your current state of talks with Israel on on the new MOU and the the broader future of the relationship and uh who in the department is leading those conversations?

Well, the conversations have been both with the Department of State and the Department of War. And actually, and I think he has said this publicly now, uh what Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israelis have told us is they would like to set up a scenario where they wean off US assistance the way they did with foreign aid, about a decade and a half ago. so in essence they'd like to go from the number they're getting now to slowly less every year until the number hits zero so those are the conversations we're having with them it's at a pretty high level at the stage although i know we're engaging their ambassador has been dealing with the counselor in chief of staff in our office on this proposal they've made that proposal to us on a number of occasions over the last year i think the prime minister spoke publicly about it about a few weeks ago so it's no longer a surprise but i think one of the things israel is talking about is basically winding up over the next ten years in a place where they are getting no i mean they may be buying things from the us but they are not getting any sort of assistance to the mou obviously we'll talk it through with them and and see where we wind up that's not finalized

thank you

jim i go back

thank you uh mr. uh so again thank you mr. secretary we do have time for a second round but i am gonna hold people to five minutes on the second round uh we've we've been pretty flexible and uh uh but we're gonna we're gonna now limit it to five five minutes and i will start that five minutes and try to hold myself mr. secretary to five minutes as an example to the rest i mentioned uh in my opening remarks and you heard before that uh i just returned from a from a trip to south america we saw some really positive things but we also saw some sobering things regarding communist china they've spent decades embedding themselves across across the region frankly in ports power infrastructure communication networks everywhere uh and more recently beijing has been aggressively moving to lock up america's critical mineral supply uh the chains and so again i think for decades we've united states has looked the other way uh or worse uh you however have begun to turn turn this around i saw that first hand i mean i actually saw that you've aggressively refocused state department resources and attention uh on countering china's encroachment in our region in argentina your team signed a critical minerals framework with president male's government in february in peru i saw evidence of us pushback at multiple ports we saw that i saw that but this subcommittee wants to support these efforts which bring me to paraguay uh because frankly it's the counter example the whole region needs to be looking at it needs to be emulating now so while neighbors have flipped to beijing paraguay has chosen united states over communist china it's held firm with taiwan for nearly seventy years and posted the strongest economic growth in south america um you've met with president pena and you've been directing uh state department attention towards partners who stand with us you've talked about this in this hearing it's working it's really working but i think we can and should do we can and and should do more what do you need uh to make sure that this hemisphere continues to see and sees sees clearly actually that choosing america over china actually pays off for their people and for the entire region

yes

yeah i think the first thing you know as long as i was served in the senate for sixteen years everybody said we need to focus more on the western hemisphere just like people say you need to eat more broccoli and more vegetables but no one ever wants to actually do it so i'm proud of at least over the last year and a half you've seen a more sustained focused on the hemisphere and uh and it's borne fruit in a couple of ways here here's the challenge the the in the region not only twenty years of negligence in this regard but what chinese efforts in the region have done is two-fold the first is they it's resource extraction so they try to establish for themselves um access to critical minerals mining of any sort and give themselves this long-term contracts gain this long-term contracts and uh that allow them to extract resources as they do on in africa and other parts of the world as well the second is they come in with infrastructure investments key infrastructure like telecommunications ports these are areas we've seen heavy investment in on their part and when i say investment i i understand oftentimes these come with financing mechanisms that can cause these countries to fall into a debt trap the third thing they do frankly is is uh they come in and they promise to build you an amphitheater or a bridge they may not do a good job at it but now you owe them money for it and then they expect your vote at the united nations and in international forms as leverage and the challenge in all of this is that oftentimes a country will come to us and say we wanna build x or we wanna expand y but the only people showing up are chinese companies there are no us companies showing up there are no american alternatives showing up or western alternatives showing up and so part of the challenge that we have is to identify and connect those us alternatives and i'm not us western you know allied alternatives to what the chinese are offering and and to make a compelling argument and this is the important work of our embassies that they've been focused on um and and they'll continue to do so i think continued support for those efforts is important we have a fund that provides us a little bit of flexibility that we've asked for in our budget request that will allow us to very quickly act if the opportunity presents itself and it's not just state department money it would allow us to to leverage the resources of uh the development finance corporation in some cases depending on how uh the deal works out but we most definitely want to see alternatives to what the options have been available to these countries in the past have been in many cases solely chinese companies or chinese related companies

yeah and we and we heard that everywhere now look it's gonna surprise everybody i've got forty six seconds but i'm gonna stop now

oh god

give it to me i know no i'm not gonna give it to anybody else at the request but i am gonna recognize the ranking member

thank you mr. secretary again for for for being here i wanna i wanna talk to you about uh two i'll give you two unhappy questions i'm unhappy about this uh it's about congressional directives and laws that are being ignored. Number one, the women of the world. Women, when they have access to education, capital, jobs, and ability to fully participate in our economy, they lift families out of poverty, they grow markets, they strengthen communities, they create more stable societies. When they have a seat at the table in governments and peace negotiations, peace agreements actually last longer and nations are more secure and prosperous. We passed two laws, you were the sponsors. think of one of them women in peace security act of twenty seventeen the women's entrepreneurship and economic empowerment act of twenty eighteen and we have not been able to find anything that's been done in the state department responsible for having these programs carried out and then we get this notice i am like i can't even believe it from your office the administration does not have a dedicated strategy to increase engagement by women and girls in democracy, human rights and governance and programs. This is not acceptable. And it's not only is it not acceptable, it's just wrong. I'm telling you, if you want to have this country, our country, to be safer, more prosperous, more healthy, you have to uplive the women and the girls of this world. I am pledging to work with you to do that, and I hope you will. I I wanna go on to Another point, which is GAVI. We provided the State Department six hundred million dollars for GAVI. That is the uh vaccine alliance that delivers life-saving vaccines and protect children from deadly diseases like measles malaria pen uh polio, so forth. Its wor- its work has reaches nearly half the women's children and has saved over uh twenty million deaths since since the beginning. And now your state department has not distributed this or not allowing gavi to distribute this because you're waiting for a response from a vaccine conspiracy theorist i almost put terrorist yeah he's a health terror uh robert f kennedy this is so wrong i just ask you i think we ask you about the support to commit to getting these funds out can you do that

i mean first of all i don't think it's fair to call secretary kennedy a terrorist i mean um he has strong views on health issues and you may not agree with them but i i think by a large he's also made a positive contribution to this administration in a variety of fields

wow

uh whether you agree with it or not that's i and i i agree with eric

ok well anyway listen you know what we uh we don't have to wait so long

but but let me talk about govian specific as you understand that obviously that's been largely a state department prerogative in the past at the direction of the president we've allowed secretary we've worked with secretary kennedy on his input to get reforms from gove he wants reforms from the organization and we've been supportive in pushing those reforms definitely and what i told the committee in the senate a moment ago is we've now reached the stage not anything negative towards secretary kennedy where we've now reached the stage where the state department will become more engaged in making sure we can reach an outcome because we have to get to an outcome here that allows us to preserve

uh ok but just to reserve my time i i heard what you said i just

our evidence but we do want the reforms that he supports

alright well i don't know what i can't even imagine this man knows what he's talking about but the fact is we need to get this these vaccines out then i just wanna uh i i just i i do wanna just say this that we're still waiting uh for a report to congress on the women peace and security act i hope you can get that to us um you told us that the the regional bureaus have dedicated staff on women tell us who to call cause we haven't been able to get make any headway on that and i just wanna end with this um two things i wanted to say first of all this crazy this ice ice is an abomination and what they're doing and the immigration uh policy in this country is an embarrassment it is inhumane but it is crazy that you wanna let people in from south africa cause they can assimilate while you throwing out hundreds of thousands of people who have already assimilated and that are important parts of our economy and family life secondly i just wanna end with this i hope that this administration will have the patience in reaching a diplomatic agreement to keep iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon but a trade-off should not be giving them the ability to fund proxy terrorists. And with that, I thank you again for being here. And I yield back.

Thank you. Uh, uh, and you did. Mister Edwards. Thank you again, Secretary Rubio. We appreciate, uh, that you've had an intense day up here on Capitol Hill and that, uh,

More intense here than the Senate, I'll tell you that.

Uh And that, uh, you've you've been here to share your thoughts, your philosophies, and you've been so transparent with, uh, this sub committee even where there are obviously some places that we don't agree. Uh, but I I again can't tell you how much I appreciate the focus of the administration abroad.

Mm.

Uh, with that I've just got one question, fair fairly short, uh, the the US Foundation for National Natural Security and Counterterrorism was passed into law as the US Foundation for International conservation at the end of twenty twenty four and as you know this foundation was created with the understanding that mismanaged impoverished and the protected areas across the globe can become safe havens for transnational organized crime drug cartels and terrorist networks all core principles that would fit under the america first agenda however funds for the foundation now under the purview of the state department have not been uh launched and the funding is frozen. And because the foundation's two to one, private, public match, there's about six hundred million dollars that could be stabilizing East Africa and the Sahel uh region cracking down on illegal Chinese fishing, stopping cartel driven deforestation in the Amazon with protected area enforcement. is this foundation something that you're committed to and if so what would need to happen for that to become activated and for the funding to be released

well you may correct me if i'm wrong i i think the foundation depends on some appointments that need to happen to the there's a there's a governing structure to it that has both presidential and congressional appointments i think those have not happened yet and i know that's probably taken longer than you as a supporter than you would want it to see happen and others um we can't really activate this stood up and right now it just hasn't been the the the governing structure of it is not in place for a variety of reasons i would imagine part of it is the change in administration with so much going on we just haven't gotten to the point where we've gotten i don't believe we have the congressional appointments either on that uh i may be wrong about that but i don't believe so as well so let me get back to you on where we stand on these appointments because having that governing structure in place is what's necessary in order for it to be deployed i can tell you i've heard a lot about it it has strong supporters in both the house and senate in both parties if i'm not mistaken i think senator graham was involved in this effort in the senate along with senator coons and in i i'm not sure who the sponsors were on this side so we've had numerous inquiries but we we've gotta get those appointments before we can activate it

alright thank you we'll follow up as well i yield

thank you um ranking member delora

thank you mr. chairman um mr. secretary we're currently in the midst of a significant outbreak of a of a type of ebola that has no authorized treatment or vaccine. The outbreak is occurring in a region of the world that really is highly insecure and in the wake of the administration's withdrawal from the World Health Organization, the dismantling of USAID, and the State Department's restructuring of global health engagements, impacting the centers for disease control and prevention. It is now my understanding that the State Department is now rushing millions of dollars for the response. Uh, I would have preferred for funding to be spent on preparedness and detection, uh, just as you c- as you outlined in your global health strategy, but here we are, uh, with a growing, uh, case, uh, uh, case counts and, uh, people dying. In two thousand fourteen in an op-ed, you wrote that it was " inexcusable" that no senior official had been designated to lead the US Ebola response under President Obama. And today, there is no single designated lead. And the senior National Security Council position responsible for coordinating infectious disease and biosecurity is vacant. Mister Secretary, who is in charge of the Ebola response? And how is that different from what you called inexcusable in two thousand fourteen

yeah

a well it's different in a couple of ways first of all our response has actually been faster than the response in twenty fourteen both in the ability to flow funds to our partners in the region and in standing up all kinds of facilities let me answer the second question first and then get back to the first we are at this time it's an interagency process in which multiple agencies are involved in this response the us state department is taking a lead in some aspects of it but even department of war is involved in the sense of flowing for example the standing up of this clinic this uh this uh observation post in kenya that will allow us to observe uh exposed americans or suspected exposures for twenty one days if they are infected those americans will be transported to a treatment facility somewhere in europe or maybe stateside if after twenty one days they're not infected they continue home we're standing up that facility but we float i believe well over two hundred million dollars to partners in this response this is not a scramble this is something that broke out in a rural area of a war-torn country and was under-reported for over a month not because of anything other than the fact that it was in a rural area in a war-torn country that was highly unstable on on your first point about who is in charge who is in charge one of the things that's being discussed in the interagency is whether we need to stand up a specific individuals for this specific case mmm and that's been proposed there are couple of people being considered i don't wanna use the term ebola czar but someone with the qualifications ok to sort of serve full time in the coordination of the interagency in the interim ok ok well the interagency has a daily meeting on this and we at the state department have a task force twenty four seven on it as well

well mmm mmm but it would be in keeping with what you talked about in two thousand fourteen to have a single person in charge it it's always better to have a point person i think you would agree that is the thing to charge mmm

well ultimately you're trying to coordinate multiple agencies

working with the agencies because it's it has to be interagency but there is a

yeah

is is is one person uh who is coordinating them and the information flows through so apparently you are thinking about doing that i think it would be sooner uh than than than later and i would just uh say that i i i i think in in the wake of withdrawing from world health and dismantling of usid i think it has put us in a a a a position of uh of really trying to play catch up when this when because we should have learned uh from two thousand fourteen let me uh just um uh uh last year you testified that quote " no children are dying on my watch" end quote. Due to the termination of USAID, it has been estimated that the total number of additional child deaths is more than five hundred thousand. While we'll never know the exact number of deaths, I believe that there have been additional child deaths from diarrhea, from malnutrition, from pneumonia, from malaria and HIV. i would hope that we would really not accept the consequences of the termination of these programs because it is unacceptable to see that kind of death and destruction but that we will have learned that we need this some of these programs and the apparatus to be in place that help us to prevent uh these illnesses and be able to respond rapidly so that we can be in the position of the united states of of preventing death particularly amongst the children of the world with that mister chairman i yield back

thank you i remember and i was just

well i just say this number keeps getting thrown around i dispute that this just this numbers are nowhere near reality that's not reality that's not a reality that half a million people

well i would be happy to try to document it but mister chairman my time

have since and seven hundred thousand people have well how about my time do i get time to respond or i just have to listen

well yes i think i think it's fair for him to to for the secretary just uh for a quick respond

no uh mr. chairman

the question was asked and we've been going a little bit over

fine and and then if that's the case i can go back and take a look at all the areas in which this is documented what the losses are because i have that information

no no we're just you're the ranking member thank you you're the ranking member you can always submit that to the record if if you'd well desire and we can get it accepted

well i just wanna respond to that point because

alright

we can just give a quick response and then we'll move on

yeah the quick response is this no country in the world spares

mister chairman a hundred twenty six thousand children died from diarrhea

well if you will if you will uh

well

if if you remember if i can ask where i can remember

hundred and fifty five thousand from malnutrition

i can ask where i can remember to suspend please

mmm

well but

we've we've

we gave the gentleman a time

well it was

it

you

to challenge documented information

if i can ask

no but how is diarrhea supposed to

if i wait wait wait hold on hold on hold on order

it's a duty of the united states

because the programs that deal with that have been dismantled

order the ranking number the ranking number

i hear you mr. chairman and i wanna be responsive i yielded

thank you thank you thank you

i ended at my five minutes

alright we will we will we will continue i think i think you you you you uh you got your questions the secretary

i ended with my five minutes

i think answered now we will go to mr. Molinar

thank you mr. chairman uh mr. secretary you can add on to whatever you'd like to say further but i also wanna ask if you can uh we've learned a lot over the past few years about critical minerals about reliable supply chains you've been doing a lot in this area with pack silica uh quad critical minerals initials framework um after you maybe respond i would love to learn a little bit more about that

well i mean i made my point my point is we spend more money than anybody else on foreign aid by far not even close and we're gonna spend it smarter than we ever have before as well i mean part of this health compacts thirty two countries around the world have signed compacts with us that will allow us not just to deal with the acute cases that are occurring but actually strengthen the health programs of these countries so that they become self-sustaining over time some will get there in five years some may take ten but all these countries love these MOUs because we're building their domestic capabilities to address these challenges i've always said the best foreign aid program is the aid program that ends because the country doesn't need it anymore south korea is a great example this was a country that was an aid recipient today they are an aid donor we'd love to see that replicated and these countries that are signing the mous love it because they've gone from an era of dependency to an era of self-sustainment that were helping and partnering with them directly with their healthcare systems we are we are not going we're not just standing up ngos that come in from abroad and go into the country and tell them this is what you need to be doing we are empowering the national health agencies of our partner nations so they can deal with this Now, on the issue of critical minerals, look it's it's an issue of global consensus now. Forget about which country it is. It is not healthy for the global economy and frankly it is dangerous for national security and the security of the world to depend on any single country for ninety percent of anything that's critical to your industrial base, your defense base, your technology base. And so I think there is, we we hosted the PAC-SIILICA which you mentioned, is a great conglomerate of countries that have signed on cooperating on protecting particularly the supply chains related to artificial intelligence and development in that field as well as hopefully standards that go associated with it in the field of critical minerals we had a ministerial i don't remember but march or april this year earlier this year we had three dozen or more countries attend the critical minerals ministerial and every country you go into today and at every embassy around the world critical minerals are a key component of our diplomacy not just the access to the raw materials but the ability to process those materials into a usable product that are that are that are critical and and obviously we are doing that overlaid with the mapping of our vulnerabilities and i don't just say our vulnerabilities these are the vulnerabilities of japan the vulnerabilities of south korea the vulnerability of the majority of europe and frankly of the world we simply have a hyper concentration of of of the whether it's critical minerals or you could add pharmaceuticals to that concentrated in the hands of one country and it leaves us dangerously dependent and cannot continue and and dangerously dependent because you can be cut off in a crisis you can be cut off in a contingency in which they use it against you for leverage so it's an all hands on deck approach and i would say almost anywhere you travel in the world you will find if you interact with our embassy the critical minerals and critical mineral agreements and critical mineral cooperation has become central and core focus of our economic diplomacy around the world

wanted to just follow up uh on a little bit of a separate issue but it's something that i know you think about um when you think about Haiti and all they've been through what more can the administration do what more can congress do what ways does the international community need to step up

well on Haiti we have this gang suppression force which replaced the MSS that was standing there um it'll come uh it it it it'll come at a fraction of the to the us about a hundred something million versus eight or nine hundred million because other countries have stepped up and donated to it the force is actually over recruited the number of the number of commitments we have for the force is larger than the number of slots we needed available and the core of it is this these gangs won't just sit back i'm sorry these groups won't just sit back and watch gangs operate this international security force that will be there will be on the ground to take and hold territory from the gangs so that the government can gain in strength hopefully be able to have an election but also take back their economic vibrancy this is an effort that was endorsed at the united nations it took a lot of work at the united nations to get it approved so that's what's opened the door for all these countries to join it it's gonna be a challenge Haiti is a very big challenge but this is the best plan we've had in a long time to address it it has the support of the international community not just rhetorical support but monetary support and troop contributions and police contributions and uh we hope it's successful it has to be successful because there is

thank you mr. chairman i go back

thank you very much miss mink you're recognized

thank you mr. chairman uh mr. secretary this administration has claimed to prioritize curbing waste fraud and abuse but in this department you've overseen the destruction of over eight million dollars worth of birth control bought by us taxpayers even though many organizations have already offered to buy and to distribute them these are the same birth control methods used by millions of women and girls here in the us if distributed they could have prevented an estimated one hundred and ten thousand unsafe abortions and the death of over seven hundred moms your apartment your department is attacking them earlier this year sixty six of my colleagues and i sent you a letter in january asking about the status of these supplies but we never got an answer um secretary rubio what is the status of these birth control supplies

we're operating under executive directive not to participate in these programs internationally the united states is not gonna fund this internationally it's as simple as that i mean that that's what's happening

but how these products already exist eh eh how much have taxpayers spent to keep them in warehouses instead of distributing them

well i don't know what it costs to store them in the warehouses per se i think some of them as you pointed out have been has been have been disposed of we're not gonna use them the the government of united states is not gonna be involved in distributing contraceptive and all these other things around the world and that's a directive we're operating under from the executive order and that's not where we're gonna prioritize our funding

ok these these supplies are not damaged expired or destroyed um do you have any issues with them being distributed

we're gonna follow the directives that are in place i have an issue in us being involved in that that is not what foreign aid in the united states is supposed to be paying for to be honest it's not foreign aid in the united states should be to advance the national interest of our country and that's what we're gonna focus our resources on and i know there will be disagreement you people are you know making noise in the background here but here is the bottom line that

what's the bottom line

well look at the end of the day that is the policy of this administration and we're gonna execute on that policy our foreign aid is gonna be about advancing the national interest of the united states

we're we're

and we don't view that this is in the national interest of the united states though we don't know what what core national interest of the us do these programs advance for us

we're we're not just making noises we're concerned about preventable deaths and lifesaving measures for for women for girls for um

i understand but this at an again the united states there are lot of worthy causes and worthy endeavors around the world the united states government is not a charitable organization

but not women and girls around the world

no of course women and girls i mean every

if if i could ask in in march the new york times reported that that ken jackson a senior state department health official at the time

uh

in march

yes

wrote a memo wrote a memo to OMB director vote on these supplies, including the option to distribute them. To your knowledge, did mister vote receive this memo and did he have anything to do with these decisions?

uh i don't remember that article that you're pointing to or the memo in specific, that you're talking about.

Do you know if mister vote had anything to do with the decisions about these supplies?

well we always as you guys know the role that OMB plays, they issue directives on spending to the agencies, um that that's the role they've always played that includes in the formulation of the budget we've presented to you i i can't speak specifically about whether he saw that memo or whether someone in his office addressed it

so i mean mister secretary you were here in congress before you know that for over six decades in a bipartisan way the us has supported these international family planning programs they have saved the lives of tens of thousands of women and girls for pennies on the dollar last year despite congress directing funding for international family programs on a bipartisan basis you told me quote there is no plan to spend that money we're not going to be in that business globally we're not going to do it just earlier this year congress again funded these programs um i i wanna know what is the plan and under what authority are you refusing to spend taxpayer dollars directed by congress

well again i i don't we're we're working through directives for this year we'll be in consultation with

thank you uh ms. Shelford

thank you

Your Recognizer.

Well, thank you once again, Chair. Thank you, Secretary. The uh first World Cup match in the United States of America I think is in nine days. Team Argentina arrived in Kansas City yesterday. Uh, they're, we're hosting them. Uh, a lot of tourists, or millions of tourists are coming to the United States of America. Uh, can you talk about what your department has done to get ready for this massive influx of visitors and make sure that cities like Kansas City receive a return on their investment? for these events

well as you know we set up an expedited process for visas for people that own the fifa card in essence the fifa you have to prove that you have a ticket you purchase the ticket you still go through the vetting you still go through all that process but uh you have to prove that you've bought a ticket to a game not just that you're coming to attend so that's for the fans perspective and so far from what we you know we're interacting now on a daily basis with fifa and the world cup people we feel really good about the processing there are couple of places that might be more challenging but by and large um if you own a fifa a ticket and and you've registered through that program you will receive expedited processing to make sure you can attend matches in the united states obviously it's also being hosted by canada and mexico so that provides some level of complexity because some of the matches might begin in mexico and wind up finishing in the us but um nonetheless we feel pretty good about where we stand on that in the case of the athletes and the teams themselves um yeah obviously that that's been handled separately they don't they're applying differently they're still going through the same vetting by and large but um for the most part we have not had any reports of any teams having a struggle to get here except for um i will i will highlight this um the the iranian team has chosen to stay in mexico as opposed to the united states

hmm

um in the beginning of the and we have no problem with the athletes as we stated earlier or their support staff but what we're not gonna allow is for them to embed in their delegation a bunch

Wanna end our final moments talking about global media, real hot topic last year, um. Can you update us on the new broadcasting plans with recent changes to the government's global media investments? How are we reaching people in the communist authoritarian nations? and how have widespread internet allergies for example in iran affected free media from entering into these contested spaces

yeah so while i believe that that program is under the jurisdiction of your committee we don't entirely that's an ancillary function to the us state department nonetheless we have great interest in how it works out uh because it does have an impact on our diplomacy on our foreign policy as you highlighted appropriately there was actually an internet outage it's shutdown uh the internet was completely shutdown in iran until very recently it was restarted uh so even vpns wouldn't have worked because you had no access literally to the pipes they've restarted some limited access to the internet because it was devastating their commercial sector um but it's been problematic it's been damaging no doubt about it and and and shows you how critical and important it is and and why authoritarian regimes are so fearful of it as you know uh recently there was a court order that basically uh stopped all of the reforms that have been put in place by the previous administrator So, we've had to go back to the drawing board and begin from scratch, uh, on rebuilding that that global program as a result of that court order. All the decisions that were made by the previous director, uh, were also eliminated. Um, again, we don't control it, but we are involved in giving input and guidance because it does have a direct impact on our ability to conduct diplomacy and on conditions within these countries.

Got a minute thirty left. I want to ask one last question. I'm gonna pivot back to Gaza just a bit, because there's been some allegations made that maybe we aren't living up to our commitment to this twenty point plan. Is the case, sir, not that uh H- having to do with Hamas. Hamas was left in place by the previous administration, who tied Bibineh and Yahoo's hands, refused to let him finish off Hamas, and now we're still having to deal with these uh uh terrorists who keep popping up and and uh threatening the people of Gaza who want to get on with their normal life.

i mean at the core is that the the issue with gaza is that our hope is not just for a peace deal our our hope is for a a complete rebuilding of it in a way that's positive that gives people economic opportunity and some level of governance for themselves without having to be run by a terrorist organization and so the key to that is investment in attracting and there are there's plenty of interest as i said both donor countries in the region companies that wanna be involved in the redevelopment and good people in charge of sort of envisioning what that would look like the fundamental challenge at the end of the day will always be that you can get all the pledges you want for assistance in rebuilding you can get all the interest you want from those who wanna go in and be a part of it no one is gonna invest there as long as hamas is militarized because as long as hamas is militarized they know that there's going to be a war in the future there just is if hamas remains in place so the goal now is to demilitarize hamas that is that is the impediment that's holding up the the rest of it is still ongoing all the planning all all the the meetings all of the But but the impediment to actually effectuating many of these other points is that Hamas still refuses to demilitarize. And it's not just us that are frustrated by it. Many of the partner countries in the region that helped put this deal together are frustrated and pressuring Hamas to comply with that requirement as well.

Thank you, Shirai. You're back.

Before I recognize uh Mister Soskemani, I just remind the gentlemen that uh two of those players on the, well at least two, maybe more, but two that I'm aware of right now, top my head, uh who are playing for the Argentina national team, play weekly in miami and through miami so anyways thought i'd mention that mr. suskebani you're recognized

thank you um secretary i everyone here on the panel has welcomed you and um thank you for being here i'm not sure that our welcoming nature is totally reflected on the sixty degree ac setting in this room uh it's freezing at least for in arizona or floridian maybe in the hot seat it's not but over here it's felt pretty cold uh but i i do wish to end with a more on the warm side of things um when and it's been said already by by the chairman and some of my colleagues here on the critical mineral side of things uh the the backbone of our defense system this is more a statement than a question cause i know you've answered it already but i wanna agree with you on this energy infrastructure and emerging technologies right now china dominates the global supply chain for for many of them and you addressed that uh this is a serious national security uh vulnerability and specifically we have a we play a major role in solution uh my state produces nearly seventy percent of the us copper and has significant untapped critical mineral deposits that could meaningfully reduce our dependence on foreign supply chains uh yet permitting challenges and the lack of diplomatic coordination continues to slow the process so i i i wanted to mention that uh if you have any further comments on that please go ahead but uh i just have one question on nigeria and then you can cover both if you want and then That that'll be the end of of my time. Uh, I wanna acknowledge the administration's counterterrorism successes along with Nigerian partners against Boga Haram. Uh, these are meaningful steps forward. Defending people of faith from persecution remains a top priority for this subcommittee which is why our FY twenty-seven bill uh conditions assistance to Nigeria, one of the deadliest places in the world, to be a Christian today. Uh, this committee also submitted recommendations to the White House on violence against Christians in Nigeria and we hope those inform the path ahead with that in mind how does the department intend to move forward on this issue particularly on the atrocities prevention of religious freedom protections

thank you for that actually it's an interesting uh not that we were unaware of it but it was congressional attention to this matter that first brought it to the forefront even though we've been monitoring and are watching it for a while it's members of congress that really accelerated public attention on the plight of Christians in Nigeria um one of the first things we did immediately is engage with niger nigerian authorities because in many cases what was happening there was not a lack of willingness on their part it was a lack of capability in essence they were confronting groups that in many cases had better weapons uh more sophisticated weaponry in some cases they were facing a real domestic challenge and they too jointly identified these terrorist groups which are the ones that are conducting these massacres as a threat to their security we were able to enter into very cooperative arrangements with them in fact uh i've met with their national security advisor on a number of occasions i know our department of war and uh folks are working with them quite closely and have been able to conduct two you know significant joint operations targeting these groups one on december twenty fifth one as recently as two weeks ago that eliminated the number two in the global uh isis uh uh affiliates in terms of the um and a very successful operation that in addition to eliminating these individuals captured a substantial amount of intelligence and uh of items of intelligence value that will inform not just further operations there but operations in other countries or or threats emanating from other countries as well uh since then we have conducted a couple of other joint operations much smaller scale so i think we were at a stage now where the cooperation between united states and nigeria in going after these groups is pretty substantial and i think a good success story and it's the work of both diplomacy from the state department but frankly also you know good liaison work with the department of war

thank you thank you for that mr. chairman i go back

thank you mr. siskamani um as reminder members as you all know may submit additional questions for the record mr. secretary look let me you have multiple hats secretary of state national security advisor let me just thank you for your outstanding service to this great country of ours and also thank you for your time today you've been very generous with your time this concludes today's hearing the subcommittee on national security department of state and related programs stands adjourned oh