at 7:00 eastern wednesday morning on c-span, c-span now or c-span.org. ♪ >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government funded by these companies and more including sparklight. >> the greatest town on earth is the place you call home. is our home and we are facing the greatest challenge. that is why sparklight is working to keep you connected, doing our part so it is easier to do yours. >> sparklight support c-span is a public service along with these television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> while testifying, secretary of state antony blinken was interrupted by protesters who had to be moved from the hearing. if you're before the foreign relations committee to discuss

u.s. diplomacy and foreign diplomacy challenges. he was asked about the israel hamas war, the death of iran's president and competition from china from both sides of the aisle. this is two hours 40 minutes. te oil, and denying the request to provide dollars to stabilize the british pound, soon, there was a cease-fire.

>> more criminal. more criminal. >> the senate foreign relations committee will come to order.

secretary blinken, welcome. we very much appreciate your being with us today, back in the committee room that you are very familiar with. we thank you for your extra ordinary effort on behalf of the united states. we know that you have been doing a lot of traveling. a lot of talking, promoting american diplomacy based on our values, and we thank you for all of your service. we look forward to this hearing every year. as we go over particularly the fy25 budget. i often speak of the importance of adhering to our values and our foreign policy. that is because i believe are values are the core of our american power and key to achieving of our -- our foreign policy goals. this country was built on a unique basins on in the words of our declaration of independence, that all men are created equal, that they are

endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. we have sought to live up to these ideals at home and abroad. i think there would be bipartisan agreement that we don't always ask -- succeed, but her aspirations better, knowing where our northstar is matters but we often find common ground on how values and principles can help us make hard decisions. some view the world as survival of the fittest. they say rules are for suckers. we asked the question, what are we getting from this, or worse, what do i get from this? this approach not only sees foreign policy is transactional. it also says nations only get what they want by military force or corrupt dealings, but to not adhere to the market values and foreign policy decisions is making a major

strategic mystic. to be true to our founding principles, we need to support those people trying to defend human rights, those rights endowed to us by our creator. sticking to our values leads to policies that encourage people to stand up to corruption. that champion the rule of law and fair play. that supports democracies, that save lives, policies that advance america's national security interests. these issues should inform the way the united states engages with other countries in the world. that is why the leahy law advocated by our former colleague from vermont are important to securing cooperation in our foreign policies. it is why i am proud that congress has enacted and the executive branch has implemented the human rights act. the department has at times opposed values driven human rights proposals when they surface in congress. we recognize there is competition between the executive branch and the

legislative branch. i think we all agree that we are stronger when we were together, and when we can coordinate our activities and work in unity, it is a lot better for our nation. and i think your training here as the director of this committee has served you well, as i applaud your efforts to try to coordinate as strong as we can, the actions of the legislative and executive branch in the best interest of our nation. secretary blinken, right now, we face many serious world crises. some of these conflicts are in the headlines. the war in ukraine, the hamas attack on israel, the humanitarian situation in gaza. otherwise only get passing met -- mentioned like burma or sudan. whether they attract widespread attention or not, these crises are important. from reducing the spread of malicious information to reducing the threat of nuclear war, from modernizing automatic -- diplomatic work or

harnessing the power of ai. from fighting prudent in ukraine to fighting the effects of climate change, the work we have done every day as never been more impotent. this committee understands the need for healthy, thriving american diplomatic presence around the world. i want to think the senator for working with me on this authorization bill. this will be our fourth authorization bill in four years after a long hiatus. i'm glad that we had the opportunity to discuss that during last week's hearing with secretary burma. we need to incentivize it. this bill really underscores the importance we put on supporting the work of our state department. secretary blinken, i want to thank you personally for all you have done and the hard work you have done to promote the strength of our diplomacy. in the state department and its mission around the world.

i know that you have traveled many miles and with many world leaders, especially in the context of hooten's work in ukraine and the wake of hamas's attack in israel. i would like to hear how your demonstration plans to confront the challenges we face today. because despite everything that has happened, the best efforts of our colleagues on the appropriations committee, our foreign aid budgets have been drinking. what effect do you think this has had on your ability to advance american priorities, defend interests, and projected market values? what kind of trade-offs have you had to make at the statements because of the drinking budget? that is the purpose of the hearing, to discuss the presidents fy25 budget and i look forward to that discussion. with that, let me recognize our distinguished ranking member, senator risch. >> it appears we are at the start of a new global era . it is marked by fraying economic

relationships. this is time for u.s. leadership and resolve. the presidents annual budget, which is what we are talking about here today shows his priorities, and there are a couple of areas in the budget request where we agree. but the request lacks seriousness, and shows inability to make tough choices. first, the budgets biggest focus is on climate change. that focus doesn't help ukraine or israel, or help our allies compete against china. by rejecting low carbon energy options like natural gas and pushing a green only approach, the admission is doing more to help china. it should focus on china's focus on ports, digital technologies, and other critical sectors rather than advancing ideological products. this budget does contain a poison pill, which i suspect you already know, secretary blinken in the form of a quote green climate fund which proposes to transfer u.s.

taxpayer money to china through the u.n. about $1 billion. the budgets so-called outcompete china initiatives might enjoy my support if the department actually worked with this committee, but the request of the programs to be mandatory spending is inappropriate. mandatory programs are not subject to congressional oversight. that is why these requests have filled in the last three years. in fact, i would argue, the department has perfected the art of hiding information from congress, which you and i talked about yesterday, to some degree. on israel, ukraine, and china, and congo, it is impossible to get honest and clear information from the department. instead, the president prioritizes funds for nontransparent initiatives, like climate and for structure.

it is steered not by the department but by the white house, which is accountable to no one. the admissions policy is fatally flawed. average income dish accommodation have filled. the lack of any serious strategy has come home to roost. iran has doubled on its support for terrorists and flooded russia with drones and missiles. the red seat remains contested and dangerous, and the u.s. navy has spent $1 billion on missiles to defend vessels. aaron's unprecedented attack on israel shows around -- the doubts to this behavior. the ship act, and legislation targeting uranian drones are all wrong -- law. will the admission and force them? recent history suggests they want.

they are imposing costs on israel. we must stop blaming israel and let israel remove hamas from gaza. that is the only way forward. in europe, instability is growing. congress is asking for the ukraine strategy, which i suspect will never be delivered. if you are serious, funds for ukraine would be in the base budget. instead, you urge to continue support through long-term policy with short-term emergency packages. it isn't appropriate. in haiti, i remain concerned about the logistics, feasibility, and cost of the proposed multinational security support mission. prioritizing international interventions over a long pb of time in haiti have been dismal failures, leaving the haitian people worse off than before. it is an open-ended mission. it is a country plagued by

violence and political instability without some kind of assurances that things are going to be different this time. in africa, we have had coups in several countries in the last three years. our people continue to get kicked out of countries there. we are seeing a devastating clash in sudan. even then, the appointment is for 180 days and support for the officer means insufficient. our partners have highlighted the lack of u.s. engagement in meetings with sudan. during our first conversation, after your confirmation, we discussed the need for coordination and assistance from throughout the united states to get ahead of the next pandemic. i introduced legislation that you and the white house supported for which i am appreciative. despite that, this budget

undermines effective coronation of u.s. global health security. i also did not and will never agree to negotiations with the world health assembly that would trade await u.s. intellectual property rights and give a deeply flawed world health organization enhanced authority and resources. these are challenging times for the united states, and the world. but our policies across the board are not helping us. we need to do better. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you, senator risch. appreciate your comments. our witness today is antony blinken, the 71st u.s. secretary of state. he was nominated by president biden and confirmed by the united states senate and has been our secretary of state since january 27th, 2021. over three decades, three presidential admissions, mr. blinken has shaped u.s. foreign policy to ensure it protects u.s. interest and delivers

results for the american people. he served as deputy of state for president obama. in that role, mr. blinken chaired the interagency deputy committee, the main form for hammering out the admissions foreign policy. in the first term of the obama admission, mr. blinken was national security advisor to then vice president joe biden. perhaps the most impressive part of his back on, by far, is the fact that he served six years at the democratic staff director to the united states foreign relations committee. then senator biden was chair of that committee from 2001 to 2003, and again from 2007 to 2009. 2007 was my first year in the united states senate, and i was appointed to this committee, which then, staff director blinken was externally helpful

to this freshman member of the united states senate and i'm forever grateful for his help during the transition years. secretary blinken, your statement will be made part of our record without objection. you may proceed as you wish, and we look forward to a robust discussion. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much. ranking member risch. members of the committee. i always appreciate the opportunity to be back here. thank you for the opportunity to testify today. more importantly, thank you for the partnership that i think you have been able to manifest together. to advance american leadership in the world. that is so central for delivering on the priorities that matter to the people we represent. the need for u.s. global leadership, and for cooperation with allies and partners -- it has never been greater. the people's republic of china. >> he was six years old. you will be remembered as the

butcher of --. >> the person -- willie officer please remove the person making these comments? if anyone is speaking, please be removed.

>> he is a war criminal. >> mr. secretary, you may continue. >> the peoples republic of china is pursuing economic preeminence, challenging our vision for a free, open, secure, and prosperous international order. russia is committing aggression, not only against ukraine, but against the principals at the heart of the

united nations charter bird sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence, that are the building blocks for global peace and security. in the middle east, we are sinning with israel to that what happened on october 7th never happens again, as we do every thing we can to bring in and -- an end to the human suffering in gaza. including in sudan and haiti, where millions have been displaced and many killed, and to address global issues that no country can solve alone, including food and insecurity, a changing climate, transnational corruption, the sentinel crisis, but, with the support of congress, we can come and we are approaching these challenges from a position of strength. because of the actions we have taken come the united states is stronger economically, diplomatically, and militarily, then we were three years ago. we made historic investments at

home, in our own competitiveness, innovation, infrastructure. we have renewed our alliances but we built anyone spread we have secured unprecedented alignment with key partners in europe, asia, and beyond. we have delivered essential american aid to ukraine, and we have rallied the international community to share the burden with us. for every dollar we have sent in economic and development assistance, others collectively have invested three more. many doubted whether bipartisan support for ukraine and other priorities could interpret last month, congress demonstrated to the world that we will not pull back. we passed the supplemental funding bill by in of roaming margin. it doesn't come at the expense of strength at home. far from it. most of the supplemental is being spent here in the united states. building up our defense industrial base, creating and supporting thousands of american jobs. we need to keep up with the

spirit that includes the budget we need to meet the challenges of our time. the presidents fy25 -- >> this is sick. this is deranged. you are a war criminal. shame on you. >> you may continue. >> thank you. >> they do this in two key ways. first, it funds the essential missions of our department. the budget will ensure the united states continues to be the partner of choice. that country's turn to when they need to solve big problems. in an era of renewed great power of comp addition, we must

present the stress possible offer, one relevant to the country's needs, and that advances our security and economic interest. that is why we are requesting $2 million for a new fund, to build high quality, sustainable infrastructure around the world. crucially, investments like these create jobs for americans, they expand markets for our businesses. we are requesting resources for the world bank. with $1 billion in u.s. funding, we can unlock a number $36 billion in development capacity to direct the priorities of emerging economies. that is an enormous return on investment. the budget includes $1.7 billion for international organizations, encoding the united nations, aipac, american settlement pack, to help shape them in ways that reflect our interests and our values. we are asking for $500 billion to get more people around the world access to secure internet and digital technologies. doing so will support our economy through the export of our technology products, and

will help ensure that we and our fellow democracies remain the leaders and standard setters in key technologies like artificial intelligence. our budget also includes funding to address global issues that affect the lives, the leavy -- livelihood of those around the world. it funds our response to migration, global food insecurity, public health, climate, and energy security. we are asking congress to fund the educational and cultural exchanges. these are one of the best, most cost-effective tools we have for advancing our values and our interests around the world. they support students, researchers, young professionals from our communities who study and work abroad. we also need to invest in the foundations of our strength abroad, our diplomatic work. that is the second pillar of our budget. our budget makes a strong investment in expanding overseas presence, the eastern caribbean. it will also continue our modernization of our diplomacy, organizing the department in new ways to meet these new

challenges, working to attract and retain the best talent needed to take them on, investing in our people, in washington, and overseas, with training, with technology, promoting more agility, more innovation, and are prices. it represented a 5% cut from the year before. that challenges our efforts to deliver results in congress that the american people to see. i urge you to support this budget which helps us address the most pressing records of the coming and lays the foundation for strong leadership in the years ahead. in conclusion, i would like to thank this committee for your recent confirmations of ambassadors and other senior officials. any undue delays in such confirmations undermine our national security and weaken our ability to deliver for the american people. i'm grateful for the partnership of this committee and for your time. i look forward to answering any questions. thank you. >> thank you, mr. secretary. i regret the interruptions during your testimony. i believe it was the new york times editorial page that pointed out it takes as much

urge to listen as to speak out. i think you're going to hear, during the course of our discussion here today that we will have different views. and i think it is critically important that we all have an opportunity to hear those views, and i regret the disruptions that took place. we will not tolerate disruption in this committee, as i have made it very clear. we will now have a round -- are we doing seven? seven minutes on questioning. i ask that you respect the seven minutes so each member can get a chance to question before we run out of opportunity and time. let me start with the budget restrictions that you have. he was just here. i know he will be back. he does his best to get you the most robust budget he can. we believe that the funds you make available for diplomacy are great investments, our soft power is critically important. the list goes on and on. you have to make tough decisions. i appreciate your help in the fact that we were able to

enact, combating the global corruption act that you helped make sure we got to the finish line. it does put additional responsibilities on your mission around the world to have the capacity to identify areas of corruption that need attention. tell me how this budget will be adequate to implement that policy and how you intend to implement that policy. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. we are determined to implement it and support it with the necessary resources. i think this committee sees corruption as being one of the most poisonous things that undermines democracies or countries that are attempting to become democracies around the world. it saps people's faith in their governments and institutions. it takes resources away from the actual development of the

country. to line the pockets of people who are engaged in corruption. and around the world, we have seen time and again that as people come out to protest, often, the investigating -- and stating factor is corruption. we need to help identify it, to root it out and to help countries develop the institutions and processes necessary to guard against corruption in their institutions. it is a critical aspect of demoting and strengthening democracy. we are encouraged to implement what is given to us through the authorities in the act. i think the budget reflects the dedication of resources to do that. but of course, everything we are doing, given the budget environment we are in, comes with trade-offs and decisions we have to make to balance the

responsibilities we have, the needs we have, with the resources that are made available. i don't want to see it come at the expense of the effort to engage in this vital work. >> so let me talk about one of your requests for funds for haiti. 800 miles away. an area that is certainly not stable today. we had the president of kenya here this week. it is an appropriate week for us to get more information about it. you requested funds for the u.s. to support that mission. tell us how important those funds are, and what is the expectation? there have been concerns raised as to whether this is an investment that can lead to a positive result. please help us understand that. >> haiti has been an economic presence. >> is your mic on?

>> haiti is on the precipice of becoming a failed state right now. we have discussed this on a number of occasions. in years past, there have been numerous interventions in haiti. some have had some near-term effect stabilizing things. but it is certainly true that we haven't seen a long-term stabilizing effect that has allowed the country to genuinely move forward. i understand some of the skepticism that exists about another mission in haiti, but i think what we have going for us is this. first, a general revulsion of the people at the direction the country is taking, has taken. gangs dominating part-au- prince. democratic trajectory that's been disrupted by failing to have a government that has a clear mandate. and all of that has had the effect of interrupting

development assistance, other forms of assistance that other people so desperately need. there's an opportunity now to do a few things. first, we have managed to move to a better trajectory politically to get back to a clearly mandated democratic government. we have a transitional presidential council has been established. all of its members are in haiti working. they have a mandate to name an interim prime minister, interim president and electoral counsel. all of which will be in place to try to establish a clear pathway to elections. to get haiti back on its feet democratically. second the power of the gangs needs to be ended once and for all. the haitian national police who are outmanned and outgunned need to be given the resources and support they need to regain control. in thes will few weeks they've taken back control of the airport and other critical

infrastructure. we anticipate american carriers will be flying again in the days ahead. absent a clear support structure, for some period of time, it's going to be very hard for the police to fully establish that control. so the united nations has mandated and other countries have stepped up to fulfill the functions of a multinational security support mission for haiti. the purpose of which is to bolster the police. the purpose of which is to engage in operational anestra tick support for the police, to reestablish security, to create confidence in the conditions for elections. mostly police and kenya in particular has stepped up to provide these forces with a number of other countries. >> mr. secretary, i'll give you a chance to expand on that probably later. i want to focus my last minute on the give you a chance to give us the status of the

middle east what's happening in regards to the conversations with israel and hamas in order to get the opportunity for the release of the hostages and a pathway towards a way forward for both the palestinians and israelis without the terrorists. the icc ruling yesterday, i'd like to get your view on it. i see it as a step in the wrong direction that it's going to make it more challenging. there's always been an understanding the icc is there to deal with countries that don't have an independent judiciary. israel has been independent judiciary. they did not give the israelis an opportunity. we thought there was that opportunity going to take place this week. in regards to the hostages and pause in the hostilities. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we see the effort to get a

cease fire in the release of hostages as the best, most effective way forward both in getting hostages home, in creating an environment in which the people of gaza can get more of the assistance they so desperately need and a platform for which to build a more enduring solution that provides genuine security for israel. there's been an extensive effort made in recent months to get that agreement. i think we've come very close on a couple of occasions. qatar, egypt, others participated.

to do that. but that decision as you said on so many levels is totally wrong headed. we'll be happy to work with congress, with this committee on an appropriate response. >> senator risch. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me start there. sometimes we don't agree on stuff but i've got to tell you on the icc you got it exactly right. your characterization of it being shameful is stunning. the trump people did an executive order to do sanctions on certain members of the icc who were investigating us for things that happened in

afghanistan. president biden's administration came in and dissolved that executive order as you know. you probably know about this, but there's a number of us up here working on a legislative approach to this that includes not only the afghanistan question but also includes the question of the icc sticking its nose in business of countries that have an independent, legitimate, democratic judicial system. obviously they violated that yesterday. did k you support this? obviously the devil is in the details obviously and the legislation, but do you think you can support a legislative approach to this? >> um, senator risch, in short we want to -- let's look at it. we want to work with you on a bipartisan basis to find an appropriate response. a i'm committed to doing that. as you say, the devil's in the details. let's see what you got and we

can take it from there. from our perspective going back and lifting sanctions that were previously implemented the intent, the purpose was to find the best way to protect our service members who served in afghanistan and we belief that we did that. but given the events of yesterday i think question have to look at the appropriate steps to take to deal with, again, what is a profoundly wrong headed decision. >> thank you. as i said, your coinage of that as a shameful equivalence is a good starting point for all of us. it really, really deserves our attention. we'll spend time on that and i hope we can work together on that. let's shift to china for a minute. obviously the biggest problem we have. in april you said china was the primary contributor to russia's military complex and the u.s.

has strong evidence china is providing drone and missile technology, satellite imagery, machine tools and other items that aid moscow's defense build up. are you still of that frame of mind? >> yes. >> in that regard, what plans do you have for this? help me out here. where are we headed with this? i think you got it right, what do we do about it? >> so two things. first, just to be very clear what we're talking about. we have not seen china provide actual weapons to russia for use in ukraine. north korea's doing that. iran is doing that. china is not. what we are seeing is china provide overwhelming support to russia's defense industrial base. 70% of the machined tools that russia's importing are coming from china. 90% of the microelectronics that russia is importing, coming from china. a lot of that goes to building up the defense industrial base. we've seen as a result russia

churning out tacos, artillery, ammunition at a record pace. first of all, identified this and called this out. called this out direct will i with china when i was there a few weeks ago with president xi, as well as with the foreign minister. we've called it out publicly. weave brought the information to allies and partners. it's very clear that particularly for the europeans who tee in russia's aggression against ukraine a larger threat to their own security because if it doesn't stop at ukraine, it is very much likely to continue elsewhere in europe. you can't have china on the one hand professing to seek better relations while on the other hand fueling the greatest security threat to europe since the end of the cold war. in my conversations with european leaders as we shared this information with them it's clear that that's exactly the way they see it and i am confident they're engaging china on that basis.

what we need to continue to do. we've sanctioned more than 100 chinese entities that were engaged in providing dual use products, other things that are in sanctions lists. we will continue to do that. working to coordinate our efforts with european partners who are even more agreed by this practice because it's a more direct threat to them. >> when you're sitting across the table from the chinese what do they say, mind your business? what's their position on this? >> their position is they're engaged in perfectly normal legal trade. >> that brings me to something else that we know they're lusting over in a perfectly legal manner and that is they want to be involved in the peace process for ukraine. we all know why. they're going to descend like locusts in a plague on ukraine and ukraine is going to need a

tremendous amount of rebuilding. they want to participate in that. your thoughts on that. >> well if that's their intent i don't think they're doing themselves any favor. i don't think that will be looked kindly upon by ukrainians when the day comes when there is peace and a strong sovereign ukraine is fully engaged. their concerns about a chinese involvement in rebuilding ukraine. >> i have to say it's not something that's come up in discusses. i'm pretty got one on board the

belgians who have most of the assets really have come up with innovative ways to do this. >> i applaud you for what you did with that for the leadership on that. it's made a big difference. two things. just today the european union has gone ahead and approved the use of the interest, profits from the sovereign assets that are in europe fur ukraine. that's a step but it's an important step. >> i don't disagree with that. when i met with them they talked about the difference between the principal and interest. i'm not a banker. it becomes part of the principle. i don't know if they use the principle or the interest. they can use the interest for a

long time. it's there forever. fine. whatever the solution i'm all in. >> so the eu has done that. to your point, senator. there are other possibilities we're driving toward including looking at ways to collateraltize the principal and use that for a basis to create more resources for ukraine up front. >> my time's up. thank you. >> senator murphy. >> mr. secretary, thank you for being here. thank you for your continued willingness to be in an open dialogue with the senate. senate foreign relations committee on these important matters. press reports suggest that the united states and saudi arabia are close to finalizing the bilateral elements of a regional security deal. the saudis themselves called the existing draft semi final. so i wanted to ask you a couple

questions about the status of these talks to the extent that you can tell us. the first is this. it seems as if the administration has really put their foot on the accelerator to try to get the u.s.-saudi elements of this agreement wrapped up. this would be in the context of an agreement that included israel. and critically would include real commitments for a palestinian state. unfortunately and regrettably right now there's not seem to be the willingness or the room inside the israeli politic to make those commitments. so my first question is why the rush to get a deal done with saudi arabia when we don't even know the shape of the commitments that israel may ever be willing to make. and two, why dot we have

confidence that saudi arabia would ever live up to the commitments that it is making? in the national security world, a mutual defense or a security treaty is a sacred trust. this is a country that four years ago chopped to pieces an american resident journalist. this is a country that two years ago turned its back on us when we asked them to side with us at opec plus and instead chose russia. and so i'd ask you to answer those two questions. why the rush given that we don't really understand the potential for the full agreement to come into effect. and what gives you confidence that saudi arabia will live up to any of the commitments it's making? >> thank you, senator. a few things here. first, yes, we have sought to move forward in negotiating the bilateral u.s.-saudi aspects of

a normalization agreement between saudi arabia and israel. but even if we were to conclude those agreements, and i believe we can conclude them relatively quickly given all the work that's be done. they could not go forward and the overall package could not go forward absent other things that have to happen for normalization to proceed. in particularly, the saudis have been clear that would require calm in gaza and it would require a credible pathway to a palestinian state. and it may well be that in this moment israel is not able or willing to proceed down that pathway. to the exticket that the agreements are finalized in principle, between the united states and saudi arabia, that in effect calls the question. and israel will have to decide whether it wants to proceed and take advantage of the opportunity to achieve something that it has sought

from its founding which is normal relations with the countries in its region. and we see the possibilities for the future in that agreement. we saw them starkly, powerfully on april 13th and haveth 14th. direct attack by iran in israel and countries come together. to defend it very successfully. there's an opportunity for israel to become integrated in the region. to get the security, fundamental security to have the relationships that it sought going back to its founding. in order for that to go forward there has to be a credible pathway to a palestinian state. i think one advantage of completing the work at least in principle with the saudis is the question becomes one that's no longer theoretical or hypothetical but one that needs

to be answered. we'll see what the answer is. look, these agreements like any agreements whether it's with saudi arabia or anyone else, you count on the other party to live up to the agreement and if they don't there are consequences. including the agreements being in effect. i think it's profoundly in saudi arabia's interests to fulfill the commitments they would make in the context of these agreements. by the way, none of this will go forward before congress has its say. >> let me just express worry at the phrase credible pathway to a palestinian state. a credible pathway to a palestinian state is very different than a palestinian state. we've had numerous credible pathways to palestinian states that neither side has made real upon. this is a unique and perhaps final opportunity to actually cement a palestinian state

which many of us believe is the necessary predicate to peace in the region and the long term survival of the jewish state in the middle east. wanted to touch one other subject. senate is going to vote on a bipartisan border security measure negotiated with republicans that would dedicate $20 billion to border security, including substantial unprecedented new resources to stop fentanyl from coming in to the country. this amount you've requested stands on top of the commitments that you secured at the recent summit in san francisco from the chinese to do some really important dramatic things to stop the movement of precursor into mexico and the united states.

just in the remaining 30 seconds to a minute the importance of achievement at the summit and how that dove tails with the request you're making. you've made substantial progress, but this money seems to be critical. >> i commend the efforts being made here to dedicate these resources to what is arguably the number one challenge we face in terms of public health and in terms of the security of the american people. number one killer age 18 to 49, not heart attacks, not car accidents, not guns, fentanyl. synthetic opioid. this is a number one priority. it requires a lot of work at home. it also requires a lot of work around the world given the global nature of the threat. with regard to china, president biden achieved important agreements with president xi when they met at the end of last year outside of san francisco. and china moved ahead in

publishing new regulations in cracking down on some of the companies engaged in producing and then thereforing the precursors that go into making fentanyl, as well as to establishing a working group with us so we could track this. when i was just there a few weeks ago i made the case while this was a good start and important, more needs to happen in order for it to be truly effective in reducing the flows coming to mexico. the precursors and synthesized into fentanyl and coming into the united states. including very public enforcements of the law with prosecutions and convictions. including scheduling, some precursors that china has agreed to schedule but has not yet done. to make their use more restrictive. and also going at the financial networks where we've seen connections betweenment some chinese entities and criminal cartels in our own hemisphere. working from their end to sever

those. we'll be watching to see whether that happens. it's a start. a lot more needs to happen. >> senator romney. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, it's good to see you. appreciate the extraordinary commitment that you have made over the last years to continue to foster american interests around the world. i'm sure we don't agree on all the topics but your devotion to american interests is note worthy and something that i applaud. you know i'm going to want to talk about china. china is a disappointment for those of us who followed the second world war and the collapse of the soviet union. we were hoping china would align with us and see more modernization and liberalization and democracy. unfortunately it's take an different turn. its ambition is to lead the world, dominate the world militarily, economically, geopolitically. i just on a piece of paper while we were here i just wrote

down some of the tactics that i see that they're employing in their grand strategy. in no particular order. monopolizing key industries with tiktok, institutes to promote their policies. inserting themselves through cyber systems and our critical infrastructure. buying ports around the world so they can foster their naval commitments or naval ambition. putting in place graduate students in our universities particularly in s.t.e.m. subjects to steal technology. thousand scholars program to do the same. inserting themselves into leadership positions and international organizations. purchasing farmland around our military installations. selling drones. chinese drones to our police forces. spy cranes in the sea port we heard about more recently.

monopolizing key raw materials. stealing technology from our companies. spreading dissension in the u.s. and through the west. it's an extraordinary list and goes on and on and on. that is why the former chairman and i of this committee proposed and actually got signed into law a commitment to put together a group of people republican, democratic, inside government, outside government to develop a comprehensive strategy to deal with china's ambition. part of this legislation said that by last july the administration would be required to submit to congress in a classified form and with an unclassified summary the results of this strategic development. now i'm -- i've been offered the chance to review in camera what has been prepare. i've tried to schedule that and that has not been responded to

by the department. but does the state department intend to submit to the law as signed by the president to actually put in place and to submit to congress the strategy in a classified form? senator, i agree with the short litany of items that you listed in terms of what china's doing to try to pursue its military, economic, diplomatic premannans or dominance in the world. across the board. we have worked in new and effective ways to deal with that to push back against that. before coming to your question, two fundamental things have changed in our approach to china that allows us to approach from a position of strength. one, what's happened at home. the investments we've made in ourselves. with the leadership of congress, particularly when it comes to infrastructure.

when it comes to the chips and science act. when it comes to the inflation reduction act. in each of these ways we put ourselves in a position to make sure that we are leading when it comes to the industries of the future and what i see around the world is people taking note of those investments and wanting to partner with us. we have a i lined in ways we have not before with key partners in europe and asia and beyond in the approach to china. you see that now in convergence of the approach. both individually and collectively. whether it's investment screening mechanisms, whether it's controls on outbound investment to make sure it's not going to help industries in china that could come back and hurt us. export controls that we're doing in a much more coordinated way. working across the board to deal with some of the economic nonmarket practices that china

engages in that unfairly penalize not only our workers and companies but workers and companies around the world. i can go on down the list. but we see that convergence in powerful ways. now on the strategy and advisory board. first, we applaud everything of you done and your leadership on this for many years. we announced the public strategy back in spring of '22 and you were gracious in being there when i put that out. but yes, this is with the white house made available the classified strategy foreign camera review. i'm going to make sure if there's some problem in scheduling that that that happens. i'll also go back to them about what more we can do. i know we provided classified briefings to members and to staff on the approach that's in the strategy. but let me come back to you on making sure that you can see and other members can see the

full strategy in a classified setting. >> the law that was passed called not just for a classified setting, which is certainly appropriate, but also to submit to congress in a public setting what the summary of those strategic moves would be. as i went through that long list of chinese steps, those are the kinds of things i'm looking for. to say look, our strategy is invest and align and compete sounds great, that may be an objective, but the tactical steps of what we're going to do country by country, industry by industry, port by port, spy ware by spy ware, et cetera, that's the kind of detail that really creates a comprehensive strategy that can be effective. i guess i'm concerned that as we go potentially from it one administration to the next whether that's in one year or in five years that we have a

strategy that lasts. following the second world war george canaan and others came together to develop a strategy that was successful in confronting the soviet union. we're looking to do the same thing here, but we haven't seen anything of that nature yet. and in the law required that that be submitted to congress in a public setting but also in a classified setting. i would ask that you honor that commitment made in law and provide that information both to congress and to those of us that would want to attend a classified setting. >> thank you. and i'll come back to you on that. >> thank you. >> senator merkley. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. secretary. i applaud your and the president's efforts to secure a cease fire and to secure the release of hostages. president biden has also recognized, however, that the

campaign carried out by the netanyahu government in gaza has included what presidents called indiscriminate bombing resulted in a massive summer of civilian casualty. the nsm 20 report concluded given israel's reliance on u.s. defense articles it's reasonable to assess that israel has used u.s. provided weapons and instances inconsistent with international humanitarian law. given this assessment why did the state department conclude that israel's assurances that it was not using weapons in a manner inconsistent with international law are in fact credible and reliable. >> thank you, senator. we've said two things from day one since october 7th. one that israel not only has the right, it has the obligation to defend itself and try to mac sure october 7th never happens again. the united states is committed to doing everything we can to sport it in those efforts.

we've also said the way israel does it matters. particularly with regard to civilian protection in gaza and the provision of humanitarian assistance to gazans who need it. we've been working every single day since then not only to provide israel with what it needs but to do our best to help see that palestinians get what they need in gaza. we see the horrific suffering of children, women and men who have been caught in a cross fire hamas is making for eight months now. when it comes to the nsm and the use of our weapons, here's what the report said. it said exactly as you quoted. given the totality of the damage that's been done, and given the fact that we are major provider of weapons to israel, it is reasonable to assess that in some instances israel has acted in ways that are not consistent with

international humanitarian law. indeed we are investigating a number of instances, some of which are alluded to in the report. others that are not. to make those determinations. israel itself ising investigating hundreds of incidents to make its own determinations. indeed there are criminal investigations underway in israel in this area. it's very difficult to make final determinations in the midst of a war when we do no the have access on the ground and when you have a almost total unique battlefield where an enemy, a terrorist organization, hamas is hiding behind and underneath civilians in apartment building, in mosques, in schools and firing at the israeli forces. so we're determined to make every appropriate determination. we're determined there be no double standard.

we have processes at the state department, including our conventional arms transfer policy. >> thank you for jr. explanation. i know that it's so complicated you could go on for a while. i think you've pointed out the challenge and the fact assessments are on going. on may 7th president biden announced his decision to pause a shipment of thebombs. quote, if israel goes into rafah i'm not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with rafah, to deal with the cities. you reinforced this point.

we are already seeing significant action in rafah about a million people have fled the city and is the president going to stand by his red line? >> first the president stands behind the proposition that we will always make sure that israel has what it needs to defend itself. no one has done more not only throughout his career but over the last eights or so months to make sure that's the case. that will continue. at the same time, when it comes to rafah we've been very clear in conversations with israeli leadership over the past months about our deep concerns about a major military operation in rafah and the impact that would have on civilians in gaza. we insisted if anything is do to go forward we see a credible plan to get civilians out of harms way. to make sure they're provided for when they're out of harms

way. you mentioned we've seen a very large exodus of people from rafah but they are now in places where they don't have the support that they need and that we believe is critical to provide. we also remain concerned about any major military operation and the impact it would have on the remaining population given the dense urban environment in rafah and what we've seen in other places. the president's plan clear about this with israel. in public as well as in conversations with others about the fact we will not -- >> thank you. that's helpful to understand. i wanted to turn to the issue of providing aid in this situation of the challenge of food and water and medical supplies and so forth. the nsm 20 report noted that action and inaction by israel

contributed to lack sustained needed assistance at scale and that the level reaching palestinian civilians remains insufficient. insufficient is a polite way given that we now have what cindy mccain has described as full blown famine in the north. we're aware of the highly stressed conditions in the south as well. as a result of the restrictions that israel has had in place, we have been urging them, you all have been urging them to open more gates to have a more systematic inspection process so far more trucks per day can get in to make sure that once the trucks are through the gate that they can actually get to the warehouses without being attacked or so forth. you've also supported air deliveries by ourselves and other nations. you've also built a dock, all these things in response to the

restriction of aid. thus i was somewhat puzzled that the report concludes we do not assess that israeli government is prohibiting or otherwise restricting the transport and delivery of u.s. humanitarian assistance. because it seems like all those actions were taking the urging of israel to do more and all the other air delivery and docks and so forth are all in response to the restrictions preventing sufficient aid to get in and creating famine conditions effecting a couple million people. >> if you could respond briefly. >> yes. first, senator, there is no doubt that the people of gaza, children, women, men are experiencing an acute humanitarian crisis. food, water, medicine, shelter, all of these things are in severe short supply.

we've been working every single day as well to try to make sure that they could get what they need. we have impressed upon israel time and again the imperative of bringing a determined focus to this not making it an afterthought in the conduct of the war against hamas but a priority. they've taken steps over these many months to open access points. going back to october. to have aid go in. but it has not been sufficient by far to meet the need. we saw much more significant progress over the last month or six weeks particularly in the wake of phone call between president biden and prime minister netanyahu. we saw a land route from jordan being activated. that's improved, but now we've

seen unfortunately the reverse because of the actions in and around rafah, we see the critical transit points in the south. rafah gate itself until recently being stopped or disrupted. so that the situation in the south now risks being even more egregious. the restrictions that have been in place in some cases it's because of concerns about dual use items and making sure that israel could see and verify what was going in given the history of dual use. in some instances it's because of the war conditions that make it incredibly difficult. but there are also things israel can, should and must do to further facilitate the distribution of aid, including much more effective deconfliction with those providing it. convoys bringing the aid in can go about their work safely and securely.

that remains insufficient. >> senator paul. >> secretary blinken. on your recent trip to china news reports said you reserved your strongest language for china in its dealings with russia. castigating beijing for allowing the war to continue in ukraine. the report went on to describe the exchange as such a blatant dressing down in the chinese capital. do you think publicly scolding china will make it more or less likely that they continue selling dual use parts to russia? >> senator, we've tried it both ways. we've had these conversations with china for some time in private hoping to see a change. we haven't seen that. and it's important. >> i would argue that we have only tried it one way. we've got stick and almost the majority of people who work for you everybody wants to use the stick. nobody's really considering that there is a carrot. so really for the last let's say five years or more your administration and the previous administration not a lot

different really that you put impediments to trade. you add sanctions then you scold them. there is a school of philosophy or school of diplomacy that believes public scolding particularly in another country can have the opposite effects. that you've given up on this, nothing's working so why don't we just read them the riot act. that's what it looked like. yellen was also there recently and she's described and told the chinese government how it should run its economy, what sectors of its economy they should or should not subsidize and told them as well who they can conduct business with and threatened to impose sanctions. you know, more or less likely to actually get them to do it. i think it's a misunderstanding of diplomacy in general to think that you going and scolding the chinese, yellen going and scolding the chinese that somehow they're going to like go oh my goodness, we've been wrong and because they've yelled at us and treated us like school children we're in and out now going to change. i would think the opposite

might be true. there might be a certain amount of child psychology to visit criticizing people and like a rebellious teenager they might end up doing more. in addition to threat of sanctions, in addition to the scolding, we now have the administration talking about more terrorists. so in june 2019 then presidential candidate joe biden tweeted trump doesn't get the basics, he thinks his a riffs are being paid for by china. the american people are paying his tariffs. remarkably accurate and true at that time. now he's become jumping on the trump train. but the thing about tariffs, regardless of who pays them. american consumers will pay for these. tariffs are not good for the economic well being of all americans in general. but the question would become when you add tariffs, you threaten sanctions, you scold them, add tariffs. more or less likely they'll do what you want. i think less likely. everything we're doing,

everything the previous administration did as well as this administration is heading towards less trade, disengagement from china, part of diplomacy might be offering well i tell you what, what if you quit selling the dual use parts to russia, maybe we can consider removing some sanctions on trade and actually trade more with you. so the threat of sanctions, the threat of tariffs have effects if you're willing to remove them. history of sanctions is more, more, more and then you're not doing enough and people on the right here will say you have to do more we'll pass legislative sanctions. nobody talks about removing them. that's the only way you get behavior to change. i really think it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what's going on. the final point i would like to make and i'll let you respond to this is ukrainians still claim that victory includes the reclamation of all of its territory. many nato allies are beginning to question this. czech president who once served

as the chairman of nato's military committee stated he believes it's naive to think that ukraine will be able to regain the occupied territories from russia. commander and general of the ukrainian army until he was fired by zelenskyy had the same sort of comments. i think it's not an unreasonable thing to believe that this war may well end in this stalemate with people in place. some say similar to the way korea was. nobody likes it. nobody agrees the russians should be there but they're there and they have a bigger army and more might than their neighbor. if president pavel is correct, the ukraine war aims are naive, one of the few negotiating items ukraine possesses is a promise to remain a neutral country. not aligned militarily, yet you have repeatedly ruled out ukraine remaining outside of nato. if you take this off the table you're taking off one of the things that actually is a negotiating item. my question to you is are there any circumstances under which

neutrality of ukraine would be a negotiating item? >> thank you, senator. let me try to respond to both questions. first, if you want to look at hectaring and a ranging look at the website of the chinese foreign min city on a daily basis in terms of what they say about us. i'm not going to apologize to anyone for standing up for american workers and american companies. here's what we're dealing with. and by the way, of course, you're right. we always try and as a diplomat i always try to engage our partners or adversaries diplomatically to see if we can get the result. if it we don't, then we have to use every means at our disposal, including calling them out. let me address the yes. on this what we've seen and what we're seeing now.

and to do that in a way that undercuts and indeed could gut -- >> my question to you is is there an offer you would undue things? >> of course. of course. >> you want to argue tariffs are good and sanctions are good, the offer would have to be to say to the government quietly or otherwise that we would be willing to go in the opposite direction. >> of course. >> there's no public -- i hear no public discussion not from congress and not from anyone in the administration -- >> senator, the -- >> we would undo this if this. >> on their own terms it's clear if the conduct we object to and that risks terrible damage to our workers, to our communities, to our companies, if they change that conduct, of course. >> did you specifically discuss not having tariffs or undoing sanctions in exchange for the chinese to quit selling dual use parts to russia? >> in the context, sure if their companies don't engage in that practice. >> i didn't hear any public

statements to that. did you make private statements to president xi that you would undo trade sanctions? >> by definition if they don't engage in the conduct that we object to we're not going to be using those tariffs or using those sanctions. >> this doesn't sound to me like this is the kind of diplomacy that's occurring. all you see is the stick, all you see is more sanctions and if i ask you to tell me what has china done to change its behavior to change their behavior for the better, i would say you can't come up with anything china's doing. everything seems to be the wrong direction. everything's the wrong direction. the sanctions really are not having a value unless you want to negotiate removing sanctions to get better behavior. >> senator van hollen. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome, mr. secretary.

i want to start by applauding you and the president for your overall approach to foreign policy and national security. the president was right to travel to israel in the immediate aftermath of the horrific hamas terror attacks of october 7th to express our solidarity in word and in deed. but like you, i have been very concerned with the way the netanyahu government has conducted the war in gaza. we understand the despicable tactics of hamas. we also understand there's a responsibility to make sure that a just war is fought justly. and i've been especially concerned about the restrictions placed on the delivery of humanitarian assistance to two million palestinians who have nothing to do with hamas.

as you and secretary austin pointed out, it undermines our strategic objectives and those it have israel. it also means on top of everything else americans have spent over $300 million to build a temporary pier in gaza to try to prevent more people from starving. that's the right thing to do, but we had to do it because we couldn't get the netanyahu government to get more food and aid through the many land crossings and get it delivered to people safely without over 200 aid workers getting killed including those killed in the attack on the world central kitchen. that's why virtually every international aid organization that has operated worldwide for decades say they've never experienced a worse man made humanitarian disaster than that in gaza. that's why the president said at one point no excuses. yet in the recent national

security memorandum 20 report the administration could not bring itself to conclude what is painfully obvious to anybody paying attention that for long periods of time the netanyahu government has failed to comply with the international norms that require it to facilitate and not arbitrarily restrict or deny the delivery of humanitarian assistance to people in desperate need. mr. secretary, that hurts our credibility around the world and it sets a dangerously low bar for what's acceptable going forward. i listened to your exchange with senator merkley. this issue does not require additional investigation. we've seen this play out in real time. while you concluded in a snapshot that israel had improved and was doing better, the report required a backwards

look. and the administration decided to duck that. you and i have known each other for a long time. i have tremendous respect for you but i thought that was important to say. i know you and the president are trying 24/7 to bring an end to this conflict. i know you're working 24/7 to bring back all the hostages and make sure there are no more october 7th. as the president and you and others have pointed out in order to achieve a durable end to the conflict we need to build a future that has security and dignity and hope for israelis and palestinians. that is why the president has tried to create some light at the end of this very dark tunnel by calling for recognition of israel by saudi arabia and others, paired with a clear timeline for the establishment of a viable palestinian state. listened to your discussion

with senator murphy. i've lost count of exactly how many times you've traveled to israel and the region. my staff tells me it's about seven; is that right? you, the national security advisor, secretary of defense, two aircraft carrier deployments, billions of dollars in military assistance, hundreds of millions to build a pier. our work, our very important work to intercept the iranian missiles launched at israel. would you agree that it's in our national security interest to have a plan in place to achieve a two state solution within a clearly defined period of time paired with normalization of relations with countries like saudi arabia? >> yes, i would. >> and i want to raise this because, you know, for a long time u.s. policy has been in favor of two state solution.

formally announced during george w. bush's administration. over two decades. despite the fact we say those words, we have never addressed our policy to use our influence to make it happen. you would agree that the continued expansion of illegal settlements and outposts makes it harder? >> i would. >> yet if you look at prime minister netanyahu's extremist government, since they came in to power and while the war in gaza has been raging we've witnessed the largest land seizures in the west bank in decades. in fact, during your visit in march, finance minister who also has a west bank portfolio under the minister of defense announced the single largest west bank land grab. and the question is what are we going to do if it conflicts with our national security

interest to try to achieve a two state solution? i applaud the actions taken with respect to individual extremist settlers but they are just part of a movement largely empowered by this current government -- i don't know if you had a chance to read the new york times magazine this weekend. israel's extremist take over by two veteran journalists. i urge you to look at it. so my question is, if we agree about our national security interests, what are we going to do to make sure that we achieve the goal not only of normalization. i heard the conversation. but that as you said has to be paired with a palestinian state and timeline. what's the time to get there within a timeline that is meaningful? >> well, thank you, senator. look, i agree with the assessment.

it's not only in our national security interest which is my responsibility. it's also in our judgment, in israel's profound interest. because there really is a choice and it's very hard to see it in the midst of this conflict. certainly in the wake of october 7th. but the choice that's clear is a choice between a path that leads to israel normalizing its relations with virtual all of its neighbors to have countries that actually its back to when it comes to security and the primary threat it faces. destruction, death and insecurity. but to move down that first

path, it requires not only the willingness of the countries in question to normalize relations, but it also requires that there be finally a resolution to the palestinian question. the realization of a state. that is clearly what these countries need to see and want to see in order for this to happen. and that's one of the things we've been working on. the bottom line is this. you have five million palestinians between the west bank and gaza. you have about seven million israeli jews. neither is going anywhere. there has to be an accommodation and there has to be an accommodation that respects and fulfills the rights of everyone concerned. has to be done in a way that has the necessary guarantees for israel's security. >> senator rickett. >> that's the only path forward. >> thank you, mr. secretary. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. secretary for

being here today. last sunday the british foreign secretary lord david cameron was asked if the uk would follow president biden's lead on withholding weapons to israel. he responded that when he last came under pressure to announce an arms embargo, quote, a few days later there was a massive iranian attack on israel so i don't think it would have been a wise path. he continued, if i announce today might help me get through this television interview, but actually it would strengthen hamas, it would weaken israel and i think it probably make as hostage deal less likely. hamas hasn't released a hostage since the end of november and this administration starting in december has been ratcheting up the pressure against israel. now according to mediators dealing with hamas, hamas gaza chief believes he's won the war. whether or not he survives it.

he's indicated to mediators that time is on his side and the longer he waits the more international pressure builds on israel an the more damage is done to the relationship between the united states and israel. secretary blinken, please explain why a bunch of 20 somethings on liberal college campuses are right and the administration thinks they're right by pursuing this policy and lord cameron who is the foreign minister of one of our closest allies is wrong when he says blocking weapons to israel would strengthen hamas' hand. >> thank you, senator. let me be clear about two things. first, no one has, no one will do more to defend israel man president biden. he was there days after october 7th. we deployed significant assets to the region to make sure we could deter any further aggression and a widening of the war against israel. when iran unleashed an attack on israel the first attack from iran on to israel. for the first time the united states actively participated in

israel's defense. we brought together a coalition of countries to do the same thing and what could have been a devastating attack by iran was thwarted. in terms of what we provided to israel. no one has done more than joe biden going back to when he was vice president, including getting the mou that led to a ten year agreement to provide israel with the assistance it needs to defend itself. we have one weapons system we have been holding back, pending discussions with israel. about how and where it would be used because of the concerns we've expressed over many months about the possibility of a full on military assault on rafah, a dense urban environment where using something like a 2000-pound bomb could have terrible consequences for the civilians. this is something that needed to be discussed. it's deeply unfortunate that that discussion leaked to the press when it was a private discussion between us and israel. it did, and when the president was asked about it we responded

forthrightly. but there's no final decision and it remains subject to discussion. when it comes to making sure israel has everything it needs to defend itself, no one has, no one will do more than president biden. >> so you agree that you're strengthening hamas' hand by having this leak get out? >> no, leaks are an unfortunate part of the business that we're all engaged in. it's really regrettable, but it happens. but it's also something that's not a leak is the fact we've been both public and private about the fact we have deep concerns about a major military operation in rafah. by the way, we've been working closely with the israelis on other ways to achieve what we agree needs to be the result. >> how is putting to achieve wh needs to show result. >> how is it helping when this concept against what you described yourself is a terrorist organization and an enemy. >> not a question of putting pressure on. it's a question of when you're

a close friend and they are going down a path you think may be counter to its interest and potentially our own as well, then of course, we have conversations with them. that's what we're suppose to do. that's the nature of the relationship. we have a better way of dealing with the ongoing problem that hamas represents in gaza, rafah specifically. >> what kind of pressure are you putting on hamas? >> when is the last time you called for hamas' surrender? >> virtually every day. >> virtually every day. i have said, senator, the single quickest way to end this is for hamas to surrender, give up their weapons, to release the hostages. i have said that from day one, and i continue to say it. i agree with you. that's one of the things that's regrettable is not by us, but just across the board, the extent of which hamas has disappeared from the conversation as if they have nothing to do with anything. i think you're 100% right. they could end this tomorrow by

yes, giving up, surrendering. i wish more countries around the world were doing that. >> i agree with you 100%. this all ends tomorrow. and then the civilians would be able to get that aid and there wouldn't be any war. they are using it as human shields as you told yourself about how they are hiding in hospitals and schools to fight the israelis. they're the problem here, the one that started this and they committed the atrocities. they have to be rooted out and destroyed. we need to have israel be successful. what do you think of those similar words when he said he already won by this delay? >> first of all i haven't seen those words. second, i would take with more than a grain of salt anything he says about anything. the fact of the matter is, he is under, and hamas is under

unrelenting pressure. when you're an analyst, it is not entirely clear what will effectively move you. if he believes there's victory in death, that's a different thing. we can't, you know, we can't necessarily deal with that in the same terms. >> here is the deal. we need to make sure israel is successful. this is why you don't start them. israel has to be successful. during world war ii, we had to go into the urban areas to root out the nazis. they must root them out. hamas said we will continue to commit these atrocities and continue to attack israel. they cannot be allowed to survive. that's why we need to continue to support israel. that's my concern here. when you start putting conditions on our allies on how

they have to win these conflicts, such as what you're doing in ukraine with saying you can't go after that stuff and when you start doing that, our allies around the world will wonder if the commitments will be ironclad in the future. and that it will lead to a more dangerous world as we need to continue to support israel. please make sure you're doing that and stop strengthening their hand by having them signal that we are showing the weakness. thank you. >> thank you. and it is secretary blinken. thanks for your superb service and for being here today. i have three quick items to get back on the dimension. first, i believe congress should lift their hold on the support to the security force in haiti and i worry it is

really complicating our small ability to push this in that right direction. if congress does not release that hold on those funds to fund this security force, what will happen? >> well, if we don't have those funds available, then it will be very hard to move the security force. look again, i understand and respect those who expressed concerns about the success given the history. but i think we have an achievable mission to put them in that position to reassert effective control. >> and it was hard work for you guys to get them to leave this and it is likely. >> they certainly won't. >> and who would take up the mantle if the u.s. does not provide support? >> that is exactly right where they will be in washington for a state visit. it will be good if they could

fully deliver. i know some people have concerns about the united states being the policeman of the world. here's the situation where a number of the other countries have stepped up, but they need support. >> absolutely. and the state department requested medical providers to snap together to provide services, coming to the airport when they came in the summer of 2021 where they largely came in with those sites in virginia and we now have more in any other state where we are proud of it and they are doing great work and i met them as they worked with us and now they are training to be shipbuilders. but those that responded, they have not been paid and it is about $630,000, where we have been asking over and over again that they be paid.

they haven't gotten a response back. will you work with me to make sure these folks who will jump to an attention when asked are treated fairly, so if you ask, they may do it again? >> happy to work with you on this and we have further information that we could share with you. but the initial line is we had our procurement executive investigate this. we learned that the company in question acted apparently on its own and they beat out that good motivation. without the agreement with the department of state or with the cherokee nation in this case. >> i want to follow up because of the ones i'm talking about are folks that are asking. >> and i'm happy to follow up. >> this is really for the senator and me. it has presence if virginia and tennessee and other u.s. states where they own a port in mexico. they have tried to appropriate that twice with police and

military invasions of the property. i would rather not get into that now, but i would love your commitment to work with me to make clear that appropriating the private company would be very bad for this important relationship with mexico. >> and that is subject to that arbitration right now, but we certainly made that point to the governor of mexico and including the president that yes, they are not a good way to attract investment. >> on israel, guys. i think my colleague has dug into this, but i want to focus on what i call the pillar too, which is a certification that they are cooperating with u.s. support of humanitarian efforts. i think that making a determination about whether israel is or is not using these weapons is more complex. on the humanitarian side, look,

world central kitchen, aid workers killed. they're attacking the convoys on the west bank, setting the trucks on fire. the u.s. having to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build that pier and be deployed to do it. all of that to me says none of that would be happening if israel was fully cooperating. it took too long to open it up. it took way too long to open more. and i think my editorial opinion, you've answered questions about this. certifying on that record, the humanitarian efforts of israel to help gazans who are non- combatant is sufficient. i think that's grading on the curve. and if that is sufficient, then anything is sufficient. i don't think it's in the time zone of sufficient. and i agree that it is more

than what was started as it would be a complete siege. and he was able to get an agreement to finally open up the crossing. but i think calling this state of affairs with u.s. humanitarian effort. i just think that will demean the credibility. i think you should say you're not getting a passing bill on this and lay out more what needs to be done. the widow of the former committee will talk about what's resulting. i don't see how they would say that's enough. they're saying let israel with their help knock them down on the drones and the missiles. i'm all for that. the punishment, the killing of the aid workers from the idea

of doing very little to stop it. how can that be sufficient? >> well, we have as you know, senator, from day one in working on this every single day, including going back to october and getting the crossings open, then later in december, two months later? >> yes. it's in march or april and the jordanian root, etc. at the time of the report, by the way, it's an effective and helpful vehicle in terms of concentrating minds, focusing them on this. the question was from the time we would receive those, the time the report was issued, did we judge them to be credible

and reliable? and we saw it during that period to expand. they took steps, but they were still related as you read that report as i know you did carefully where they will lay that out very clearly. >> i'll call in the senator because he's next. on the record, i think it will fall below the hurdle that i don't think that it will warrant a passing grade. thank you for being with us this morning. and on our support of our allies. that's one of the challenges that i will see around the world that it seems like the world is on fire because of the weakness of the biden administration that you would

think about the fact that they would stare across the straight or the kremlin will set their sights further west. they will come out of the shadows and they start attacking our strongest ally in the middle east, israel. you would think about the fact that in the terrorism, it will seem to be spreading faster than ever before. to me, it just seems very clear. without question the weakness will embolden the adversaries. it seems like there is a lot of daylight and the more decisions that are made from the administration to withhold the shipments of the weapons. the more challenges that we would have and frankly if they are concerned about saving the innocent lives, seems like they

could have the provision technology that has been held up the weapons that i would like to hear your thoughts, the relationship with israel and the best interest that we would hold back, that is necessary to turn these bombs into clearly better weapons, and it will reduce the casualties >> and it won't surprise you that i agree with your overall judgment. >> you're right. we brought countries around the world together to stand up for maintaining the peace and stability across the straight,

to make sure no small measure because of our own engagement. when you show weakness anywhere, it will affect strength everywhere. and when you have a botched challenge and they say that a small incursion might be acceptable. the list of areas not to cyber attack. i think it will embolden the adversaries. from my perspective, most will respect the strength and that is all they respect. >> and they respect strength and wisdom and that we're demonstrating both where they made major investments for

themselves and particularly in the competition with china in different ways and that was preventing them from erasing them from that map and to stand up and push back. it's what you mentioned as well and maybe before you were in the room. when they engaged in that attack on israel, the first time they directly attacked israel for the very first time, the united states, they actively participated with their military in the defense of israel that it never happened before. we would rally other countries to their defense and what could have been a devastating attack where that is clearly out throughout the region and around the world. >> and a part of the challenge that i see there is no doubt that it was available for the response. it was a strong one. a part of that is because of

the accords, normalizing the relationships in the middle east is actually impactful. however, a part of it on october 7, the first thoughts that came out before they deleted it was to tell israel to pause. it's a challenge. the second thing is you don't have to have a coalition defending israel if there are no attacks from iran. the fact of the matter is the more we strengthen and embolden them by illuminating any of the hurdles, the hurdles that are being the sanctions, allowing their oil to flow easier to provide $10 billion. the august decision that will provide $6 billion. the fact of the matter is the 35% of the iranian economy is driven by the sale of energy. so the fact is when we open

that up, we are actually strengthening the adversaries, not making them weaker. >> not a single sanction has been listed on iran. >> and the post sanctions, the individuals. but we haven't listed a single thing. the increase of the revenue, which is used 90% of it to attack our allies. >> and in the case of the $6 billion that you referenced, they have not accessed any of that. to find a secure way. you're an intelligent guy. the fact of the matter is you put a credit and that you should expect them to be used that they would decide to do

so. so do you think not having the iaea board of governors sensor was a good thing or not? >> it depends on what we're trying to achieve and that best way to achieve it. that we have lost access to what we have and that it is to make sure they have that access

they need. anyone who thinks that having the nuclear iran is going to make them more peace filled for us to have that conversation and how bad it was, sure, to have a

conversation. that the greatest strength that you have shown us is in building our alliances, the quad and a renewed partnership. really in stabilizing the pacific through alliances and in that response, coming to their defense and imposing the sanctions is remarkable. against the missiles and the drones fired by iran, they would not have joined us in that defense of israel, but for biden's leadership. i'm simply going to assert that

and if it will weaken us to have no ambassador confirmed by the senate. is it important that we confirm nominees to serve as ambassadors? >> thank you, senator. it does hurt us and it is imperative to get them confirmed and here is why and in a global competition. when we don't have an ambassador in place and the chinese will have a fully credited in place. they get to see them on that issue and that it might put them in that advantage. >> and it is a key priority

where i had to go to see the impact of the quarter that i will get a chance to see them and how important is it and to give them an opportunity to have that higher quality for key infrastructure? >> and we do that by using the tools of government to be able to leverage private sector investment and that we were never going to outcompete them on anything else and that it is not how we do things where it is in a coordinated way, so together, we could have a greater impact and to have a

better offer, and we will do it in a way that will be erased to the top. and worker rights, making sure countries don't get loaded down with debt. and that is a part of the effort that we would bring to that there is no question. >> and that they are having a very positive meeting with the secretary of commerce who will come out of the private sector and this is another reminder that we need to show up and we need to have robust and innovative financing tools. kenya has really suffered through massive floods, record drought, and locusts.

and one of the things i'm concerned about is food security and how they would engage in more than anything will suffer. and something like 800 million people will go to bed tonight that will use the tools to risk insurance and the first loss guarantees to help catalyze the programs that many of us on those systems. >> and obviously i need to look at the approach that is a very good one that it is having that transformational impact.

we're the lead provider to people around the world where that world food program and the work they do on that basis, but when i hear to feed themselves and others. so in doing that bringing them together in that way could make a big difference, that it will be one of the most important things, and that we added to it and that is one thing we understood. if you have nutritious and resilience seats to resist the ravages of the climate change and extreme weather, etc. and we have them, then we know what they are, we know how to

make them. you have the abilities that we now do to actually monitor the quality of soil anywhere, to remediate where it is necessary and that it is the foundation for sustainable productive facility. it's a part of our budget to make sure starting in africa and it is appropriately resourced. continue to fund innovation and sustain the work of our diplomats and the development professionals around the world. >> thank you. >> mourning the death of the iranian president. as secretary, you would share that sentiment? >> we would express the official condolences that we have done when adversaries would not have lost the leaders and it will change nothing about the fact that he was

engaged in misconduct including repressing his own people for many years as a judge and that it is not a way on our policy, but it's something that we have done many times in that past, going back many decades. and as a normal course of business, we do. >> it shouldn't be a normal course of business that it is shocking this administration would mourn the death of the butcher of tehran. i don't. he's responsible for death, rape, torture. sworn enemy of the free world. it's a terrible mistake. i want to move on to the other issue in terms of the evacuation efforts and retreats that are happening in the world. since the deadly withdraw in august, they have urgently evacuated americans in several industries across the globe. i haven't heard about it again in wyoming just this past weekend. whether it is in burma, haiti, there seems to be a growing

retreat. the united states has been forced to draw down and evacuate numerous diplomatic posts. it used to be rare to evacuate our industries. but it's becoming a more common sight. 2023, u.s. troops and three helicopters air lifted 70 american employees from sudan. 2024 were air lifted over 30 stranded americans and that they have become the administration of evacuations. during your leadership, how many have we had to close or evacuate? >> senator, we are operating, living in a very dangerous world. we have americans all over the world and embassies all over the world. that it is important we would be represented and they are able to afford. it's been the case many times in the past whether it was in yemen in 2015 and libya and

syria in 2012 and again in 2011 and lebanon in 2006. i could go down the list and sometimes you run into crisis where they will have to shut down for some period of times where this country is not often engaged in the evacuation of americans, but we would see it as our responsibility when they are in harm's way to try to do that and what you have cited, that's what you did. and you have some kind of a situation that runs the risk of putting harm either our own embassy employees or the americans who may be there and we will make sure that is job number one, protecting our people. >> and do you see an underlining factor for this terrible trend? >> each of these are distinct. what i do see is a country over

the last few years have renewed the alliances, revitalized the alliances, created new ones. so whether it is with those core allies in europe, asia, beyond, we don't have to face these situations alone. i see the leadership that brought these together in ways that were not the case in recent history, which is a great strength for us to deal with the challenging world. >> and following the withdrawal that left behind weapons, ammunition, equipment that would arm the taliban. now we've announced the withdraw from the state department efforts to reestablish the relations and engage in diplomacy there have failed and they are demanding that we would leave drawing the thousand troops for two air bases that we conducted admissions for decades. media reports already indicate that russian troops have already been deployed to these air bases.

and where they are located. do you know how many they have spent on building these bases and training the military there? >> we've seen it in that coup that took place. we sought to find a mutually acceptable way to keep our forces there to pursue the counterterrorism mission that they were engaged in. we couldn't reach such an agreement with that current government. and so we are pursuant to the conversations with them. and if they are not wanted there, then they will not be there as we made other arrangements in other places to conduct the necessary missions to ensure our community. >> do you not see a risk though? that they are ending up in the hands of the russians and now they will see the group

providing military training and support. and in addition to where you mentioned, how are we creating that food hold? >> and of course, i would refer to the pentagon on the specifics of that. and second, i think that unless you have a comprehensive approach that would work to try to shore them up, democratically. and the military piece is necessary, but it's insufficient. and we have thanks to the work of congress in countries adjacent, the global side that will give us the ten year plans to help countries get on their feet in a sustainable way. that'll create partnerships that will allow us to sustain the military presence, and you have fragile countries. yes, there are a series of non-

democratic coups in the country and that is a fact of life. i believe we could bring much more to the table than the russians can, for example. when they experience what they bring to the table in terms of their resources, the brutalization of their people actually more violence and more extremism and more terrorism, they will tend to change their minds and have a different perspective on this. it is unfortunate that they need to find out that hard way and their security and success. >> i would add once they find out the hard way that it will be difficult for them to extract themselves from the russians and come back to us. >> senator booker? >> thank you very much. thank you very much for being with us today. i appreciate your commentary, everything from the situation in gaza to the situation in haiti. i want to pick up where the senator did on issues regarding

africa. you know, i've been traveling across the continent. the thing that always affects me is the enormity of the potential. i know we're dealing with the crisis of today. the truth of the matter is by 2050 as you know one out of every four human beings on the planet will be on the continent. one out of every working age human will be on the african continent. it is a continent with vast resources, vast human potential, and in many ways, the investments we would make today will help deal with a lot of the challenges when it comes to democracy. unfortunately the global competition with countries like china and russia that do not share the world orders or their rules clearly. and i was appreciating what you were saying to the senator about what it is and how we're trying to deal with the

democratic threats. obviously the backsliding, and in molly and all in the region, they have to be very concerned. seeing the challenges that are now in the north of those countries, including nigeria, it is very sobering to me when it comes to the challenges of democracy. i was very affirmed by your fiscal year 2025 budget request that includes $411 million for democracy rights and governance programs in africa. it's a sizable increase from the $284 million allocated in fiscal year 2023. could you just talk a little bit to how the administration is adjusting regional assistance programs and priorities in response to the democratic backslide that i have discussed with the others? >> thank you very much. look, exactly what you said senator as i know you have been deeply engaged on. we see the extraordinary positive potential in africa.

not just the challenges of the moment. for us, when we have something that will happen on that continent when we would see the fastest growing population, the fastest growing economy as you know. we want to make sure we are supporting that positive ocean and particularly making sure that young people with growing populations have positive outlets and positive opportunities. but you're right. we will also see this democratic backsliding particularly here and that is where we have had these recent coups. we need to reflect this, committed to it longer term stability, human development and making the development on economic empowerment and the governance in these countries where we are working to do that in the countries that have been on the receiving end of the coups with some limits that we will need to abide by when they come to the assistance, but we're trying to make sure when

it comes to what is vital that we're providing it. and then on the democracy more broadly that we came from the third summit with korea hosted. that it is a positive thing for what we could do when they would try to shore up the institutions, which sat there. >> we were encouraged by that and they were corrupt. and they would focus on elections. it will seem that they are being such a significant investment in their efforts, as well as other things that will make for the vibrant democracy and i'm grateful for that. and obviously as you could imagine, we would talk about sudan, that it was the enormity of what i saw when i was in the sudan border and nothing that i have ever seen before and the

border, even the camps at the border in mexico right now. that's the kind of budget that they would need over the authority of any programs and those funds to support their work. >> and the short answer is i believe we are, doing an extraordinary job getting out of the gates fast and moving to do what we can to tackle this crisis. and that it is something that has not gotten the visibility that it deserves given the amount of suffering. they've got 8.5 million displaced people and 18 million people in desperate need of food aid. of course, you have the violence and the atrocities that are being committed by

both sides against innocent civilians. and so it is fully authorized and by the way, they will report directly to me and they will work in close collaboration for africa. two, they would work to press for an end to the war and to make sure they have the humanitarian assistance to stop the violence, to try to get a return to the democrat transition to get a unified civilian approach to this where the best vehicle to try to move through that is the jet process. >> getting all the players. and getting them around the same table. >> exactly. i want to jump in on the final minute. thank you for your comments on the icc recent actions where you would call it wrong headed and i would agree on the comments on it and it seems to violate the common sense that

you could undermine the resolution of this when you have them on being put in sort of equipping them, but more importantly, we know they are doing everything that they can to isolate israel to put them on the same footing and the issues and the challenges that we have right now and with trying to bring this resolution that it seems stunning to me and how are they working with israeli counterparts to implement that for the civilians? and even if or when that is reached without really a mechanism that it will continue and we need that in one of the biggest concerns, any carrying american should have right now is the scale of the crisis

going on in gaza. this is not counter to dealing with hamas and it is urgent right now. and the lack of food and so there has to be a more coordinated effort. and it will be other counterparts to make sure that cease-fire or not that we have the mechanism. >> and we ask that you give a brief response and that coordinated effort to work to do just that with a senior envoy. and it's deeply experienced in these matters, working them every single day to do three things to make sure that they are getting in and the appropriate crossings will land. and second, to make sure once

it gets in, it's effectively distributed to the places in the people who need them. third, having deflections, so the humanitarians that need to move things around aren't as dangerous as they have seen. and prodepress is made having this coordinate at the sort of 10,000 foot level. but where we continue to have problems is at the tactical or unit level that is mill units this that have not adequately gotten the instructions to have a con joy going through. so we're working intensely to get clear protected corridors, clear times with people moving the humanitarian assistance to the people who need it among other things. as well as bet real-time communications between those providing the assistance and those on the ground engaged in

combat. >> senator young? >> mr. secretary, it's great to have you before the committee. i recognize that there are many pressing concerns that will require your attention and your time. and these days. at the same time i believe we have the resources to pursue our national interest globally including in burma and that is what i would like to ask you about. it's been concerning to read and hear reports of the bureaucratic delays. to junta in burma and they will authorize that and be required by congress in the burma act. secretary blinken, you have broad authority and sufficient funds by my reckoning to distribute non-lethal aid to armed groups and to the burmese societies. items like drones and the communication equipment, for example, that can save countless innocent lives. why has this aid not been fully

allocated and dispersed? >> senator, i welcome sort of coming back to you on that in detail because i'm not aware of particular delays. certainly our intent and my intent is to make sure we're taking advantage of the act and taking advantage in a way that will allow us to robustly support both the democratic opposition and the ethnic groups, to bring them together in a unified program. to provide them the assistance that they will need and the support they need even as we're putting pressure through the reseem and sanction. if there are specific things, then i welcome them on that. >> well, i'm grateful for that and i'll take you up on that myself and my team and we will stay in touch with the committee. but one concern that i have is the department perhaps made a legal determination and because some non-lethal assistance could conceivably be considered dual use, it couldn't be provided. and so i would want to know if that were indeed the case, how

we would square that with the enormous military assistance that russia and china have been giving the junta? why don't i move on to some ai discussions that have made news recently. last week u.s. officials including states acting special envoys for critical and emerging technology met with chinese officials to discuss international or artificial intelligence. where do you see their goals for the ai governance differing from our own? how are we seeing them from our diplomacy? >> so when it comes to china and ai. first as you may have noted, we got the first resolution through the u.n. general assembly with the wide support including even china on questions of ai governance and in particular, the importance of trying to use ai to advance

the goals to meet the needs of people around the world. in that certain basic principles about how they should be used that will reflect our views and to the extent of getting other countries signed on to those principles. that is a good thing where we have gotten strong support on how to think about the use of ai and the autonomous weapons. those are very important guidelines that hopefully they will be including china and more specifically, we thought it was important and in respect to the profound differences to be, particularly when it comes to safety and security because we know the extent of which

this could be used for benefit. this is a good way of getting a better understanding of how china is looking at this and sharing a way that we would see it and in the past, when it came, for example, for arms control during the cold war and maybe their other avenues for getting misuse. and this is just a broad conversation about how we would see ai and its development. >> and move on with an additional question or two. i think it is fine to talk and engage in these sorts of broad discussions and we may indeed come to terms on something that we didn't expect it to come to and it is important to see how

we could harmonize and that will where we would try to move out and hopefully build out from there. >> yes. >> and relate blue south korea hosted the safety summit. what role do you see them playing in their debate? >> i think they could help us with the understanding when it comes to safety that could prove invaluable. the more we can develop a consensus around what these norms, standards, and rules should be. or like-minded countries are in the driver's seat. the more effective we're going to be in making sure they're used for good and we minimize that use for bad.

>> and those trying to work and get clarity within our own government and on this topic. what is the role that you see them taking and with commerce following the international network of ai safety institutes? >> we are working in close coordination on this and as you know and i appreciate the support that we have established for the first time, the bureau in the department for cyber policies, and for emerging technology with that department to make sure we have the necessary expertise to play the necessary diplomatic role around the world in trying to rely on other countries and the way forward on ai. but of course, they will have an absolute vital role to play in and particularly when it comes to engaging the private

sector, and we're fully partnered on that. >> and i anticipate a lot of future conversation and focus from this committee as it relates to the harmonization and ensuring that the standards that prevail around the world are standards that will embed our values and privacy and transparency and the human rights and so forth. so thank you for your work in the early stages of what might be characterized as a resolution in ai technology. >> and just one quick thing that i want to applaud your leadership in this area and the work that you have done that you would show on the science act has given us a much stronger hand to play around the world as the united states will make sure we continue to have the leading technology, the leading industries, and

thus the stronger position to actually shape those norms, rules, understanding. that a lot of that will go to chips and science. >> thank you. we all thank you for their leadership and he has educated us all. >> and before i start, i want to acknowledge that they need to provide badly needed care and who will remain hostages of hamas and the tens of thousands of lives that palestinians and the list is long and overwhelming. it was lost to the latest conflict in the middle east. my staff and i have relied heavily on the close support in collaboration. i expect we will need to continue to work closely together to provide assistance and ensure oversight and accountability of the situation. i want to express my situation for all the department staff for working around the clock

with me and my team. my first question has to do with this. it goes think discussing something for last year. strong relations with our partners. i applaud the elevation of the relationship to the partnership last year and as i said in the opening of the new center in december, china will continue to increase their engagement and gain in popularity and that there is so much more that we could do and that includes showing up. high level participation in those meetings is no longer a nice option. but it's a must do and i'm hearing about that summit as i'm sure you are as well. are we doing enough to support them? and through them, the host government in carrying out success for the meetings?

in the upcoming add ministerial summit? >> thank you very much. i fully agree with you and i believe the answers to both questions are yes and yes and we are determined to build on what has been a deeply strengthened partnership between the united states and including the president hosting a special summit here in washington. my own engagement going forward is a support that will allow them in the chair to do what we can to help it succeed and also yes, be present. >> thank you. and i want to touch on the internal reforms that you led every year to the public that will depend on the institutions. i want to commend them strengthening the state department itself. important progress has been made, but when it comes to the physical accessibility at the facility, it is my experience that there is still a lot of work to do.

the lack of basic accommodations like the ramps and working buttons to open heavy security doors are still serious obstacles to the full participation of persons with disabilities, whether they are employees who need accommodations for themselves or for family members who would join them abroad, or our counterparts and guests. so in last year's state authorization, i included the report on accessibility as overseas diplomatic missions and an estimate of the cost of making our facilities usable. that report will be delivering next month. what they have learned from the fact the employees will receive is the accommodations they need when they need them through the streamline and common sense process. >> in short senator, i'm committed to that, we're committed to that. i want to come back to the timing of the report to make sure it's on time. if it's not, why not. so i'll come back to you on

that. we have a request for an additional $11.5 million in the budget for bolstering accessibility. in the department and in our facilities. it is something that i will take very seriously. of course, there is physical accessibility, which is critical. we are also doubling down on efforts with the technology to make sure we have the right technology as we made real progress on that. >> thank you. secretary and staffing continues to be challenging. including what you have done to address the employment for foreign service employees. last year, late last year i helped introduce a readiness act to help federal employees who are relocated to join their spouse on an official assignment. it would require federal government agencies to make the maximum effort to maintain them by simply allowing telework or transfer or as a last resort a period of leave without pay

status. would you say that current policies in states support the flexibility, so a civil servant isn't needlessly faced with the choice of either stay with their family on an overseas deployment when the spouse is being sent to represent our nation overseas or keep the job and continue their public service career? >> we're very much working in that direction. i think we've made prodepress against more to do. we also have the family service act that we were working to implement to create greater flexibility. for family members, we have more and more people who are now serving as eligible family members and greater flexibility for people to make sure they can continue their employment as a spouse or partner when they're overseas. and i think that's part of an ongoing effort to improve those opportunities and to support families because we know if we want to not only attract, but

retain the best people in the department, we have to make sure they're supporting the need for their families or they will do something else. >> thank you. can you speak to the importance of paying competitive rates to locals or nationals that work at embassies? i have heard this on many of our embassies that i have traveled. it's not limited to any particular region. i mean i've heard it in europe, i've heard it in asia, where it is often very hard to maintain quality local staff because they can't be paid at a rate that is competitive. even though they want to stay with us and they are very loyal, can you speak to the challenges if your budget? >> yes, that's correct. it's important to start with this. literally the heart of our enterprise, the state department, are locally employed staff. about two-thirds of the state department employees are locally engaged staff.

our embassies can't function without them. not only do they fill vital functions in the embassies, they are also the most extraordinary connectivity between our countries, in which we are engaged. in so many countries, the local staff is at the brunt of inflation, and trying to keep pace with that in countries around the world that are not doing as well as the united states has been challenging. it's in many regions. it's not in any one place. we've taken steps to address this. first for a number of people to try to deal with the impact of that and then just coming out of covid, which is so devastating for so many. one time increases in their compensation. second, we've looked at the way we've assessed competition. we have tried to bring in more criteria, so we better take the account in a living country.

it is an equation to someone in that situated job, so that is now coming into effect. we have worked to budget in including in this budget and a guaranteed 2% increase every year, so people can see they will have sustained support. and of course, there are other one-time measures that we're looking at to help people. but the bottom line is we have to do this, we need to do this if we're going to sustain our mission, and the budget reflects that. >> thank you, thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, you have presided over the worst form policy disaster of modern times. when joe biden became president, he inherited peace and prosperity in the world. we now have two simultaneous wars waging. the worst war in europe since world war ii and the worst war in the middle east in 50 years. both, i believe, were caused by

this administration's consistent weakness. indeed, your form policy is precisely backwards from what a rational american foreign policy should be. to our friends and allies, this administration has consistently undermined, weekend, and attacked them. to our enemies this administration has shown constant appeasement, and indeed, has flown billions of dollars to the enemies of america want to kill us. you were asked about president raisi, sending condolences for his death. is the world better today now that raisi is dead? >> given the horrible acts he engaged in both as a judge and as president, yes, the iranian

people are probably better off. >> you didn't say that in your statement, did you? >> i believe we did. >> today the united nations is flying their flag at half staff to mourn the death. would you agree it is utterly disgraceful for the united nations to be mourning the death of the butcher of tehran? >> we're certainly not mourning his death. >> would you agree it is disgraceful for the u.n. to? >> we certainly would not do that. >> what they have done is blown the flag at half staff. is that disgraceful? >> we would not do that. >> i would note that that is the absence of american leadership. let's shift. the washington post on may 11 wrote an article. i will read the opening paragraph. the biden administration working your urgently to scale off a full-scale invasion is offering israel valuable

assistance in an effort to persuade it holdback including sensitive intelligence to help the israeli military pinpoint location of hamas leader to find hidden titles. according to four people familiar. is that paragraph accurate? >> exactly the opposite. first of all, no one has done more to defend israel the joe biden. let me finish. he was there right after. >> i'm not asking for a campaign speech. i have limited time. is the paragraph accurate? >> no. to the contrary. we are providing everything we possibly can to israel to help them find -- >> so the sources that briefed the post and other multiple media outlets were lying? >> absolutely. >> does the administration, did the administration offered to provide the locations of senior hamas leaders to israel if they did not invade rafah? >> again, totally misleading and wrong. here is what we said and what we are doing. we have said that there is a

better way to deal with the challenge -- >> i am not interested in a speech. >> you don't want my answer. >> it is a yes or no. >> no. if we had the location, of course, we would provide them. >> so you are saying the post got it totally wrong, it is utterly false, and anyone who said to the contrary was lying and perjuring themselves. >> that statement is incorrect. we will continue to do everything we can, if we can do it, develop the information and share the information. i wish we had it. >> does the administration have intelligence on the locations of hamas officials you have not shared with israel? >> nope. >> does the administration have the location of tunnels you have not shared? >> no. >> your position is the story is a complete lie. >> as you read it to me, senator. it is not accurate. >> we are not interested in playing word games. i've asked you directly. you are saying there's not a single hamas leader you know about, you are the administration has offered,

will tell you where they are. >> that is correct. >> what have you offered? >> nothing except they plan to deal more effectively with rafah . >> your testimony under oath is that you have offered them nothing not to invade rafah. i find that very hard to believe. i want to understand your testimony. >> i will be very clear. we have been engaged in a long conversation with them about the most effective way to deal with the problem. >> they're quite aware you disagree with their plan to kill the hamas terrorists. you and the president have vocally said -- to be clear, your state department on the morning of october 7 sent out a tweet telling israel not to engage in military retaliation. i called you out, and you deleted that. the next day you personally sent a tweet saying you had spoken with the turkish foreign minister and israel should not retaliate. from the very beginning, the biden administration has

consistently at every stage told israel -- by the way, when i called you're too out, you deleted it again. at every stage, you have been telling israel do not kill the terrorists. that has been from day one. >> i was in israel five days after october 7 and have been there seven times since. no one, starting with president biden, has done more to make sure they have what they need to defend themselves . >> with all due respect -- >> that is ludicrous. >> why have you cut off weapons to israel? >> we have not. as you well know, starting many years ago, president biden was at the heart of the mou that led to israel having a tenure guaranteed supply of assistance , which is very important. >> when you became secretary of state, how much oil was iran selling a day? >> i will have to come back to on any numbers. >> you don't know. doesn't surprise me. it was about 300,000 but how

much oil is iran selling today? >> we have applied sanctions. [ overlapping speakers ] you can tell me. >> don't filibuster. i am not. >> how much oil other selling today? >> you tell me. >> apparently don't know. it was 300,000. today they're selling about 2 million barrels a day. let me ask you -- >> given the sanctions and export controls and other controls we have put on, the cost of doing that, the evasion they have to engage in -- >> they have made $80 billion. [ overlapping speakers ] i am not interested in speeches. let me ask you this. how many ghost fleet ships did iran have in november 2020? >> we have sanctioned more than -- >> that's not the question. how many do they have. >> the total number? i will come back to you with that. >> the number was about 70. how many to they have today? >> we have blocked about 50. >> let's see how effective your. how many today? >> you tell me. >> they have about over 400. look, this administration desperately wants a new iran

deal. you have been showering cash on iran from day one. understand, the $6 billion through were asked about is the tip of the iceberg. by refusing to enforce oil sanctions, we have seen iran oil sales go from 300,000 barrels a day when you got it office to over 2 million today. that is $80 billion, 90% of hamas funding comes from iran. in a very real sense, this administration, you and president biden, funded the october 7 attacks by flowing $100 billion to homicidal, genocidal regime that funded those attacks. >> that statement is profoundly wrong. >> why? i'm not even going to humor it. it is a disgraceful statement. >> why? >> we have gone at iran repeatedly with more than 600 sanctions applied against -- >> why are they selling 2 million billion dollars a day? -- 2 million barrels a day?

you to that [ overlapping speakers ]. >> we continue every single day to go athens. >> you are not addressing the facts. why are they selling 2 million barrels a day. >> they determined to do that, we are determined to drop them off -- cut them off. we also have their nuclear program in a box. >> you are filibustering. >> you get the last word. >> you funded our enemies and undermine our friends. the world is much, much more dangerous as a result. americans are at greater jeopardy because of it. >> in fact, we brought more countries together. you stronger allies, stronger partnerships, stronger engagement for countries around the world to deal with a very dangerous world. we were alone, we aren't anymore. america's leading those efforts. >> remember the abraham accords? >> i do.

>> let me break you apart for a second, if i might. secretary blinken, thank you very much with your patience with our committee. i want to complete this hearing where i started. thank you to you for restoring america's global leadership. what you have done to strengthen the transatlantic partnership is incredible. i saw that firsthand at the munich security conference as our allies recognized the importance of the biden administration, and are secretary of state, and restoring confidence that america's word meant something, whereas it was unclear four years prior to that. that was indispensable in our campaign to help ukraine defend its sovereignty. that transatlantic partnership that was restored by the biden administration was absolutely essential. the leadership globally goes

well beyond just the transatlantic partnership. i was pleased to represent the united states at cop 28. i saw what happened when i was in germany when president trump withdrew america's participation in the climate summit. america's leadership made a huge difference in a very positive commitment to deal with the threat against our globe with the climate. i applaud the biden administration and the state department for the work it did in making that conference so successful. let me talk a moment about iran. the threat from iran is real, but the way the biden administration and you have answered that after the attack

on october 7, showing america's strengthen the region to prevent an escalation of the conflict i think we all thought was going to happen any day, that was extraordinary leadership. as you pointed out in this hearing, and i want to underscore, your challenges to contain iran was made so much more difficult by the withdrawal from the nuclear agreement where we lost the eyes on the ground to see what was going on in iran. all that made the challenges so much more severe. but i think you are right, on the right path for israel. it recognizes that, yes, there is no future for israel or the palestinians with hamas, and we have facilitated working with israel to make sure that

threat is eliminated, but the security for israel will not be solved on the battlefield . the only way there will be lasting peace in the middle east is if there is a genuine path forward for the palestinians and israelis to live side-by-side in peace, recognizing each other up a security. that means moving forward with normalization so we can get the normalization of the countries in the region and by the way, you showed in april that the security against iranian threat can be much more effective with the partnerships in the region working with israel than just the military response to iranian terrorists supported actions. i just really want to go on record to thank you for your extraordinary service to our country, and to applaud the biden administration for restoring america's leadership. it is certainly worked in our national security interests and has made a valuable

contribution to so many countries that need america's support in order to defend against attacks to their own democratic institutions. your service has made a huge difference in that regard. >> mr. chairman, first of all, i'm grateful for those words, but as might be said right back at you. i'm not sure if i will have the opportunity to appear before this committee for this congress, but i just want to say that your chairmanship of the committee, your leadership of the committee, but even beyond that, your leadership in congress and as a senator, has been both exemplary and exceptional. exemplary in making sure that our values, to the best of our ability, remain at the heart of our form policy and engagement around the world. but also in helping to provide some of the most critical tools we have to actually ensure that can happen. i deeply appreciate the

collaboration we have had as you have been chairman and i have been in this role. you are an immense credit to this institution and the country we both love. i thank you. >> i started my career in the senate being helped by you. we will continue to work together until my last year in the united states senate. thank you very much. the record of the committee will remain open until the close of business on thursday for questions that may be submitted. we ask that you try to get those responses back as quickly as possible. with that, the hearing will be adjourned. [captioning performed by the

national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] >> c-span's "washington journal," discuss the latest issues in government, politics from washington and across the country. wednesday morning, democratic strategist, simon rosenberg,

talks about president biden's reelection effort in campaign 2024. then the foundation for defense of democracy discusses the next steps for iran after the death of the iranian president. c-span's "washington journal," join the conversation live wednesday morning on c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. >> wednesday on c-span, the house is back at 10:00.m eastern followed by legislative busisst noon. members will tak up legislation that establishes a regulatory framework for determining when the securities and exchange commission has jurisdiction over cryptocurrency assets. on c-span two, the senate considers judicial and execute nominations for u.s. district courts in ariza d california, and undersecrety of the air force.

on cpathree the house homeland security committee holds a hearing to examine h artificial intelligence can be used for national security purposes. that is followed by secretary of state antony blinken testifying before the house foreign affairs committee. you can watch live coverage on the free c-span now video app, or online at c-span.org. >> the c-span bookshelf podcast feed makes it easy to listen to c-span's podcast that feature nonfiction books in one place. discover new authors and ideas. we are making it convenient to listen to multiple episodes with critically acclaimed authors discussing history, biography, current events and culture. a signature program, listen to c-span's bookshelf podcast feed today. you can find it in all of our podcasts on the free c-span now

mobile video app or wherever you get your podcasts, and on our website, c-span.org/podcasts. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> are you thinking this is just a community center? >> comcast is partnering with community centers to create wi-fi for students from low income families to be ready for anything. comcast supports c-span as a public service alo with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. vice president kamala harris deliver the keynote address at the 2024 service employees international unio convention in philadelphia. she received a mixed reaction, with