>> i think that is very important. thank you, mr. chairman. two the chair thanks the gentleman and we now recognize the gentleman from virginia, mr. griffith. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i ask you more about this.

>> so ordered. >> send those to you and we thank you for the testimony that you have given. including my members who have submitted questions for the record. they should cement their questions by friday, january 24. >> the chair thanks everyone for in their attention. and without further ado, this meeting is adjourned. >> chris christie apologized for

what happened on the george washington bridge. here's what he said at his news conference. >> good morning. i come out here to this office what i have been many times before and i come out here today to apologize to the people of new jersey. and i apologize to the people of fort lee and i apologize to the members of the state legislature . and i am embarrassed and humiliated by the conduct of some of the people on my team. there is no doubt in my mind that the conduct that they exhibited is completely unacceptable and shows a lack of respect for the appropriate role of government and for the people that we are trusted to serve.

and there are two pieces of what i want to talk about today. the first is bad i believe that all of the people who were affected by this deserve this apology. and that is why i am giving it to you. i also need to apologize to them for my failure as the governor of this state to understand the true nature of this problem sooner than i did. and i understand now the true nature of the problem and i have taken the following actions as a result. this morning i terminated the employment of the offending individual and i terminated her employment because she liked me. i was done with my workout

yesterday morning and i got a call from mike mutations director at about 850 or 8:55 a.m. comment informing me of the story that just broken on the website and that is the first time i knew about this and the first time that i had seen any of the documents that were revealed yesterday. so before i came out and spoke to all of you, i wanted to do the best i could to try to get to the bottom of this so that when it came out, i could answer questions as best as i can and take appropriate action if action was necessary. no doubt from reading those e-mails yesterday, action was necessary and i wanted to make sure that i spoke to those people who advised me to make sure if there is any other information that we are aware of that i had it before we needed and we will continue this process. i couldn't get it all done yesterday. as i said, if there is more

information for me to cover i will act accordingly instead of releasing it in the wrong way. and i will take action for any other issues as well. and also will react to any other information coming from anyplace else. >> watched governor chris christie's news conference at c-span.org. thousands of people have been displaced in south sudan because of fighting rebel forces and the government. we will give an update next on c-span2. next unemployment benefits. >> on the next "washington journal", we will focus on chris christie's apology for several days of bridge lane closures last year apparently orchestrated by a member of his staff. we will talk about the state legislatures are basically

halted traffic on one of the disease bridges between new jersey and new york and we will be joined by georgetown university law professor paul butler to talk about how ordinary citizens in iraq have a justice system as tourists or witnesses or criminal suspects. the "washington journal" is live everyday at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> nancy reagan was the first sitting first lady to address the united nations and the first to address the nation in a joint appearance with the president. >> my young friends out there, life can be great, but not when you can't see it. so open your eyes to life to see it in the vivid colors that god gave us and a precious gift to his children, to enjoy life to the fullest and to make it count. when it comes to drugs and alcohol, just say no. >> first lady nancy reagan on

the original series first lady's influence and image monday night on c-span and c-span3. also on c-span radio and c-span.org. >> new cadre of south sudan was created in 2011 leven after more than 20 years of civil war. next, a senate panel will give an update on violence in that country after rebel forces restarted peace talks. officials will testify at a senate foreign relations committee hearing. >> reason for this being the first hearing of the committee of the new year is the hope that our attention can send a message to all parties that a cease-fire, a continuing cease-fire and a political solution and reconciliation is

critical for the u.s. and long-term assistance. and in doing so hopefully we can save lives. we have many questions about the direction in which this nation is headed and the greater implications of the conflict. i hope that our panelists will provide us with deeper insight into the situation on the ground, which i might add in a different context underscores the importance of congress moving quickly on embassy security with our embassy in cuba operating at reduced capacity as a result of the violence. the united states government and members of this committee were hopeful when we strongly supported south sudan and their independence in 2011. after decades of war with the sudanese government, the people voted in favor of self-determination and a chance this society. and they were united towards that goal. now that ideal is in jeopardy in over a thousand people have been

killed and more than 194,000 have been displaced and humanitarian conditions will diminish. i think that we can all agree that it is absolutely necessary to avoid a downward spiral, all armed elements will cease hostilities immediately with continuation of violence that will only jeopardize future u.s. engagement in u.s. assistance. having said that there is some sign for hope and some optimism and i commend the governmental authority for the development for successfully arranging negotiations in this way. and i commend the president and former vice president for talking about this. at the end of the day there is only one option and let me reiterate secretary carries remarks. but we have made efforts to seek

an inclusive political solution. today's panelists are here to help us better understand the road to that political solution and the implications of the crisis and we hope to gain insight into the nature of the rebellion. how much does he have as far as control over rebel forces and i would hope that our panels can provide answers and the underlying political grievances that must be addressed and one of the most immediate humanitarian needs and what can the united states do to play a role towards the long and short-term reconciliation, and what should that reconciliation look like. with that i would like to turn to the senator for his opening statement. >> thank you both for being here with us today. we thank you very much for that. and as we know, it's an understatement to say that we are at a critical juncture today

and our ambassador there has beefed up security and 30 months ago i guess there were real expectations about the future of south sudan and we are seeing the difference between a rebel movement and a government and i think that we understand it was a movement that united the country and things are dissipating and unfortunately due to the lack of good leadership it could dissipate among the secretary and lines and make the conflict even more ethical to overcome. so our team is obviously benefiting from this and we are seeing is the de facto backstop and people expect us to be that backstop and while uganda and others are playing important roles in south sudan is very

important to china, this is a place were obviously people expect us to make a difference. and so in addition to the conflict that we have better that is ongoing that is causing murders and the kinds of things that we hate to see taking place, we recognize that the framework there is going to take incredible effort over a longer period of time. so i look forward to hearing demonstrations point of view today and i know that they share the sense of urgency it with a conflict ending in us moving on. and i do look forward to hearing your comments as to where we are as a nation where we should go from here relative to south sudan. so i thank you for being here and i thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. let me introduce our panelists with us tonight.

we have the assistant secretary of state of african affairs and we appreciate her work as well as now in being here today. as well as the full statements will be included in the record without objection and we ask you to keep your statements around five minutes or so so we can talk about the dialogue. with that, madame secretary, we will call upon your first. >> who thank you, chairman and ranking member. members of the son of one relations committee. thank you for the opportunity to are thank you for the opportunity thank you for the opportunity will allow thank you for the opportunity to are you sure you today. i know this is a little more is one in which you and other members of congress are deeply concerned and that you deeply care about the situation in sudan. i regret that our special envoy

is unavailable to testify before you today and we have him working to get the peace process under way. mr. chairman and ranking member bob corker, three years ago today, and it is very important that was three years ago today on january 9 of 20 11, the people of south sudan voted for independence from the republic of sudan. and after decades of war they were peacefully and joyfully voting for separation and for a new future. then senator john kerry was there to witness this moment and the united states played a critical role in giving the world's youngest nation back on the map. tragically the world's youngest country and one of the most fragile democracies is in danger of shattering. the united nations has reported that more than a thousand people have died and over 240,000 have

fled their homes including refugees in neighboring countries. political rivalries have taken on atrocities that are being committed and men and women and children are being caught in the crossfire. this is not the future for which the people of sudan voted three years ago. the crisis began less than a month ago with the political struggle that escalated into broader violence. however the fighting began and a few things became crystal clear. first, neither the united states and the international community are part of the overthrow of a democratically elected government in hostilities must stop. it must end and those responsible for perpetrating human rights abuses must be held

accountable. third, this crisis will not be solved on the battlefield. and we have made that point over and over again. although fighting started less than one month ago it is much deeper and roots and the resolution can only come through with a broader reconciliation. finally, all parties must submit immediate humanitarian access to those in need to the tens of thousands of men and women and children who are the real victims. and the united states has engaged in an all-out diplomatic effort to bring an end to the fighting was engagement by secretary john kerry and susan rice and other high-ranking officials as well as with the heads of state and foreign ministers and around the world. we have talked about opening a

broader dialogue in this calls for a political detainee now being held in cuba. in the immediate security system situation remains critical for the thousands of displaced civilians in the u.n. compound. this must be addressed. and as the crisis begins to unfold, we propose the security council should unanimously adopted resolution doubling theirs. and in turn we are actively encouraging member states to provide additional units to the u.n. mission, including through the transfer from other missions in the region. as my colleague will discuss, we have committed an additional $50 million in humanitarian assistance. the president's special envoy to

sudan and south sudan could not be here today to testify because he is in ethiopia and he has been in the region since december 22 and he has been working around-the-clock and he has met repeatedly with these officials that he has had the first official visit and you sat down with religious leaders and those to help find a solution. this is an all-out effort on our part and given our special history we are working closely with neighbors through the east africa intergovernmental authority on development spearhead these efforts. a special summit was held just 12 days after the conflict began. the ethiopian minister and kenyan general were on the side

of those leading this effort. the neighbors are also providing a psion to the new refugees. they offer the best hope for south sudan and the region. an agreement to end hostilities, we have agreed to provide time for a dialogue to begin and it is the root of this crisis. both sides must recognize that there can be no oteri solution. we have made clear to the rebels that we will not recognize the violent overthrow of a democratically elected government and we have made clear to the government that they must open the political space to allow for greater inclusion. the united states strongly believes that the political prisoners currently being held must be released. each day that the conflict continues come the risk of an all-out civil war grows with ethnic tensions and more

civilians are forced to flee. the humanitarian situation grows more dire and those that remain on the sidelines are pulled into the conflict. let me say that i am concerned that the crisis has the potential to escalate further. while we do not know the scale of atrocities that have been submitted, it is clear evidence that there are targeted killings taking place in civilians and women and children have become victims of violence replicated by both the government and the rebel forces alike and each violent act registers in a cycle of violence and destruction that the south sudanese have voted to end in 2011. humanitarian access is dialogue and the release of prisons, the

united states has sworn up possibility of pressures against individuals on both sides who interfere with peace and reconciliation and those who are responsible for committing serious human rights abuses. let me thank you again for giving us the opportunity to speak before you today and let me thank you for your commitment to the people of sudan and also your support for our efforts in the region and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. >> chairman menendez, ranking member bob corker, members of the senate foreign relations committee. thank you so much for holding this hearing today and inviting me to testify. and thank you for our ongoing support around the world which continues to save millions of lives. the u.s. government, including many of you have seen strong support with a comprehensive

peace agreement and we are deeply alarmed by the horrific violence that threatens this hard-won struggle. especially today as we talk about the anniversary of independence in which 99% of the people have talked about. the outbreak on december 15 has since skyrocketed to heavy fighting across seven of the 10 states and the fighting is the result of deeply rooted grievances in a fragile new state that has institutions that are not yet able to deliver justice or services to its people and coupled with unresolved power struggles, we are now seeing a renewed and vicious cycle of killing. this new fighting creates urgent new sets of humanitarian needs and it also complicates our

ability to meet the extensive needs that already existed across south sudan. and they are one of the poorest nations on her. an estimated 4.4 million people were already in need of humanitarian assistance and this is the result of two decades of civil war plus the influx of over 2000 refugees into south sudan since 2011. so the lack of roads and the pervasive under development that already meets south sudan one of the logistically smooth difficult environments for their competence or work today and there are seasonal rains that routinely cut up access to regions for months at a time. so i challenge today is twofold with response to the immediate hostility driven needs as well

as continuing our long-standing work that assists nearly half the population already in need. the united states remains deeply committed to the people of sudan and today there are a few more words on what is a rapidly changing situation in our humanitarian response. the violence has claimed the lives of more than a thousand people and as of today 270,000 people have been driven from their homes. 60,000 have been forced to seek protection in the peacekeeping nations which are located in major towns around the country. in almost 39,000 have sought refuge in ethiopia and kenya which are straining this at key border crossings. it is a strategic gateway that

is caught in a desperate tug-of-war and it has bore the brunt and we are hearing graphic reports of this along the road. more than 84,000 people have fled to make a treacherous journey across the white nile river to seek shelter in neighboring counties with water and food and medical assistance and parents are making difficult choices of whether to separate from their children so that they can pay out of a dangerous area. the new fighting is accelerating development and just yesterday we heard new reports of several thousand displaced people, including a newly discovered 30,000 displaced amount of people and people continue to flee the shifting winds of

control and ongoing violence. so our humanitarian response has made it complicated by the chaotic position and the nile river is typically a conduit that has been off-limits for week because many have been commandeered for hostile purposes. we currently have an ample stockpile of key supplies that have previously been positioned around the country and it is the security conditions it is impeding us in disrupting the supply chain. there is a disaster assistance as well as a response management team shortly after the violence began and since then we have been working closely with the u.n. and humanitarian partners to support the urgent new program as well as planning for the upcoming rainy season. the good news is that in the middle of the crisis there is a deep humanitarian expertise and on january 3 we announced an

additional 50 million that is in addition to our ongoing humanitarian commitment of 318 million or 2013 and 2014 and this includes humanitarian response operations. and most importantly logistical capacities. we have enabled the u.n. to reach food and supplies and we just received confirmation that they reached this as well and previously we were not able to reach. and today the relief agencies have reached about 167,000 people in the bases in the new settlements with urgent relief and we need full access for

humanitarian assistance throughout south sudan and that is of the most urgent and utmost important. humanitarian workers are currently working at great personal risk and they must have safe passage to reach those in need. we need to ensure not only that we reach those whose lives who have just been offended by no violence but also to begin to resupply in advance of a greater crisis through the country. humanitarian access is part of the ongoing negotiation for peace and the south sudanese have the ability to ease the suffering of their people. we are in a commitment with sudan in the united states and we thank you for your ongoing attention to this new crisis. thank you. >> let me start off with you. and what evidence is there to

suggest this is underlined. and what evidence suggests that the events that triggered this crisis? >> senator, thank you for that question. i think that we have looked back at the situation that has been ongoing in south sudan for almost a year and there were internal and there were internal dynamics that started with that started with bashar al-assad being voted out of his vice presidential position. and what we have heard through many sources was that there was

a fight that occurred that led to the ongoing conflict and we have not seen any evidence that this was record attempt, but it certainly was the result of a huge political risk between himself and the president. >> how do you view this decision to take part in an armed rebellion against us? >> this? >> it is an armed rebellion against the government and it started as a result and we think they should resolve this through political talk and negotiations and what happened was we understand that he then left and

the armed conflict resulted after that. >> early advocates of expanding the peace process and we are focused on the urgency of the moment and the attempt to create this. and it seems to inquire what is fundamentally extending the peace process. otherwise there is a quick and dirty resolution of this between the powers that exist with long-term stability that we seek. are we advocates of expanding this peace process and creating a more inclusive broad range of

participants? >> absolutely, sir. we do not believe that this is going to end with the cessation of hostility and it must follow the end of the conflict and it is a very organized political dialogue that will lay out the grievances of the various parties so that those grievances can be taken into account and plans can be made for the next election. we do think it is absolutely important that the 11 detainees who are being held will be released so that they can participate in a political dialogue and bring to the table the issues that they house but they did not and are not part of what the conflict, but they do have political grievances. and it is important that they be addressed. >> are we collecting evidence of atrocities?

>> absolutely who are not only are we vigorously collecting us, we are sending a clear message that we will find ways to punish those who commit atrocities? >> jest, sir. we have sent that message to all sides. and in my remarks today, they have heard from the ambassador and they are hearing it from others in the region. and it has also been looked at to establishing a commission of inquiry and others in the region as well. and we are trying to bolster the u.n. human rights monitoring capabilities so that we can collect the information that we need. and so part of our efforts to get the u.n. forces built up was to get enough troops so that

they could provide protection for the population. part of the camps, it is incredibly important. what, if anything, are we doing to assist in this effort to protect these people who are women and children? >> we went immediately to the security council and supported the efforts for them to increase this by 5500. we have been working around-the-clock on the phone with leaders in the region as well as outside of the region to contribute to those numbers. we have a commitment to redeploy

some of the troops as well as provide new contingents to bolster this. >> what do you assess the ability to be at this point? >> it's challenging. >> yes, it is challenging. but quantified as for me the challenges. >> they do not have enough troops on the ground to do that is and this is why we want to help them build up those numbers. >> administrator, let me ask you two questions. one is looking at the nature of this crisis. how long do you think about of that will take you and what are you doing to work with others to join in and assist. you mentioned what about these reports with those firing upon children being used in this regard?

>> we have employed all of our flexibilities to redirect portions to meet these new needs. the program has been able to redirect this and we have had something called a rapid response time that is built to be able to respond to the many different crises that have erupted in south sudan. so for right now we have a good ability to help us deal with the existing crisis and we have also worked closely with our other donor allies and there is a new action plan that the u.n. has put out that has gotten significant resource from the uk and from norway and a few others that have been supporters of south sudan. that way we have a solid partnership with those and

others who are stepping forward with resources as well. and the reports that we have received was that it was potentially an error of communication and there have not been further incidents of getting into this. the big problem is where we were not getting permission from the south sudanese government and that was changed as of yesterday when we got reports of this and i hope that that will be a regular occurrence that will enable us to get supplies. >> what else do you hear? >> we are hearing reports and we don't have confirmation of how many as of yet. that is one of the many issues of concern in this rising

violence. and the talks are taking place this week we have the right people at the table? from the opposing sides? >> well, the government has sent a strong delegation and we were very pleased with that and bashar al-assad has requested that the 11 detainees be part of his delegation and he has a delegation on the ground and this is not there as of yet. so i do think it is a good team there and the other side does not have the full delegation at once. >> okay, are you sensing that

without that full delegation and yet having participants from both sides, are you saying that these talks will yield any breakthroughs? >> not at the moment. and we have an agreement as i understand from the ambassador for hostility. but this side is insisting that the 11 detainees be released before they sign off on anything and we are working as well as here in washington to release these detainees in these two negotiators and they met with the president and they also met with the detainees. >> is there any chance that that is going to occur? >> we are hopeful and we heard

right around christmas but the president is going to release eight of them total and that did not happen and we are still pressing him and the secretary spoke to him several times on this and we are hopeful that he will get the message that he is getting from around the world. because he is getting phone calls both from within the region as well as outside the region to impress upon him how important it is for him to release the detainees. and we are not part of the fighting party.

>> so what would be a part of releasing them and why would he resist? >> that is a question i cannot answer. but he has accused the prisoners are being part of this and that there are legal procedures that they have to go through before they can make the decision to release him. >> is to understand how this is playing out, we have a special envoy and we have ups and downs and then we also have ambassador in south sudan who is actually in charge of the u.s. policy relative to this conflict in trying to resolve a. >> in washington we are in charge of the policy and we have the responsibility of implementing that policy and terms of the negotiation.

but the ambassador on the ground is a major individual for the government because she is there 24/7. and she comes in and out and is currently leading our efforts to push forward the negotiation. the ambassador has continued to have meetings with the government to release the detainees and she has had several meetings with the detainees and her position of being there is an important role. >> seizing the arrangement that we have relatives to this, we have arranged for this leadership and it is working away trade? >> guess, is is working well, sir. >> and we have obviously

invested billions of dollars as a country and a lot of time in south sudan has a lot of interest in what is happening there now especially after the bigger expectations that everyone had read and so has it at all question our efforts and feeling like we can end up in a place, and what is this last couple months, as well as the effect on state department? >> i think that i can say that we are disappointed with the way things are going. we are committed to ensuring that sudan does not fail and to staying with the process to get

us to the peace negotiation table and committed to it having a future. they are disappointed and have been failed by their leaders and we feel that we have to stand with the people to take this to a conclusion that will be the country back on the right track. >> turman menendez was talking about u.n. forces. many of us have been there and i've seen a mandate and it has been frustrating. we have the right mandate on the ground right now? >> we think that they do. but we have had to look at the mandate and given the current situation on the ground, we need to make sure that we beef up the mandate particularly on the peacekeeping side. and certainly in terms of their

numbers and capacities they are not at a place to handle the current situation and it is our hope that we can build that up rather quickly. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator. >> mr. chairman, thank you for conducting this hearing and let me thank the witnesses. we are under extremely challenging circumstances and i thank you very much. i strongly support the framework that you have laid out. we need to protect the population against continued violence and the u.n. peacekeeping force needs to be critically evaluated to make sure that there are adequate resources to implement and we hope that some form of this, the humanitarian issues are

incredibly difficult with the community and we are not able to operate this violence. it raises significant challenges as to whether the resources will get to the people who really need it, particularly when there are ethnic clashes as to whether we can distribute the relief that is desperately needed. that presents challenges, which we expect united states to play a major role in trying to sort out. and you are correct that three years ago the united states and the international community was touring on a new nation. the last two and a half years we have not spent enough time dealing with the institutions of good governance that can deal with the challenges of the country. and i hope that we will understand that it is not just

acknowledging this but working to make sure they have the institutions necessary to protect all of the citizens from the challenges of ethnic diversity. >> i would like to talk about one point that the chairman mentioned. your response was what i expected it to be. and in a written statement you said -- he said he want to hold responsible and accountable and i have heard this before. we've been through rwanda and bosnia and syria and now south sudan. it seems to me as we start negotiating and we say that we are getting documentation we are going to make sure that this becomes an afterthought rather than a primary thought.

i think that one of the problems that we have as many of those do not believe the international community will hold them accountable for their crimes against humanity. unless we make this a real priority and we talk about it and we have to get the parties talking and we don't want to bring up issues that might be divisive, we are never going to get attention or accountability for those that commit crimes in the way that we need. so i think we have too many of these ethnic cleansing problems around the world. and the response for those who perpetrated it is weak at best. and so what can you tell this committee, which has always been the leader on these issues, to make sure that those who

committed atrocities will be held accountable by the international community. >> thank you for that question. my answer, i'm not sure that will satisfy you because it will not satisfy me. it is hard. but having worked in africa for many years, we have some examples and if we look at the fact that charles taylor was held accountable in serving the rest of his life in prison, that is the example that i want to follow for us in sudan as we look at how to be successful in holding people accountable. and i cannot say that this is something that we will be able to accomplish easily. but i can say that it is something that we are committed to making every effort to accomplish. >> let me just point out that if the united states is not making

this a priority issue, it will not be a priority issue. and it is up to us. so you are responsible for putting together the agenda on the international meeting. and i do appreciate the fact that we are documented in providing the legal information that was necessary in order to be able to present it to the appropriate tribunals and the information. but it seems to me that your public statement has every opportunity to talk about how we will not tolerate those that perpetrated the atrocities and not being held accountable we

will be the next country. >> it is incredibly important and it's such an important thing with this commission.

and the u.s. military aircraft is part of this and hopefully the details will be injured or not. including those who fired on our aircraft and entered our personnel. >> thank you for that question. we have watched the security situation on the ground almost

on an hourly basis and we have a 24 hour task force. we are down to minimal levels right now and it is the ambassador being supported in the rest of them are security people including those from the east africa response unit. to provide that support. so we are looking at the security situation with the concern of the ambassador and the rest of the team in mind. i know that we are looking into that with africom. and that is something we are in the process of investigating.

and we don't want to abandon these people. but at any moment where we determine that the situation is not secure for our ambassador to remain, we are prepared to get them out of there. >> my second question has to do with this follow-up to the question that senator corker asked us. especially with the folks that may or may not be part of this.

so how concerned are we about that? there have been reports about the community-based groups so how big of a problem by these armed civilian groups that are out there we are not on the commanding control of any of the leaders there. >> so is it -- it's a real problem? >> yes. and the question has to go through our national interest and anytime we deal with this,

and especially with the testimony that you just heard but the comments as well. i think those things are in interest to the united states. and ironically the leaders are desperate to get this thing figured out. and so this put a strain on sudan's economy and it was actually quite interesting in regards to that. so talking about the threat this poses to sudan and others and the loss of oil revenues as they are undermined and also the flow of refugees that are pouring back into sudan and what is the possibility of this to create

real problems and ultimately the entire region becoming unstable and we know what that leads to so please describe about that threat. >> the situation really spirals into problems for all neighbors. i think that particularly the fact that we saw this and he clearly is concerned about the impact that there have been discussions about it in providing military support and

if they do not plan to do that, they're going to provide experts and we can talk about that in many different ways. and the government has indicated that we will have real concerns about the impact in south sudan. we have seen the flow across the border. >> with the loss of oil revenue,

we create some pressures and so what -- if you could just describe briefly, the ramifications in these camps and other installations that are crossing over into other countries. and from the political standpoint, we have this into neighboring countries. and on the south sudan neighbors, having been neighbors on sudan during the conflict of more than 30 years, they know

the impact that refugees will have on the society and the economy. >> i would just add that it is a region that has had this for several decades and we have some who are dealing with their own spiraling crisis as well and 200,000 people have come here from the two areas as well. and those people are not doubling and as people continue to move across these borders is always greater danger. .. pearled. there's always greater danger once the families are displaced and once they're moving into countries with fewer resources and some are already fragile because of pressures of dealing with so many displaced

populations. let me thank you as the ranking member, you have done some tremendous work over the last year. at this time they're recognizing. i would like to thank the witnesses for sharing their insights today. 2011 i led a resolution welcoming the independence of south sudan, and urging that its leaders address some of of the long standing challenges in order to put them on a path towards long-term stability. and just three years down from the date of the referendum, as you mentioned. secretary, deeply dispinted by the senseless violence, by the rapidly expanding political challenge in south sudan.

a thorough engagement. ambassador booth is showing and for our ability to step up to the plate quickly. and start, if you would for me, secretary, with just a quick summery as to why south sudan matters to the united states. why this crisis matters to people of the united states. >> thank you for that question. for 30 years the united states has been supporting the people of south sudan. for south sudan became an entity. supporting the right to exist. the right to freedom of religion. and their fight against the government of sudan. we birthed this nation. and there are americans from all walks of life.

me e-mail is up since this started on december 15th from americans concerned about what is happening in sudan. i've not gotten a single e-mail from someone saying don't spend your time working on this. and so we do hear as a nation about this country. we also have a significant population of sudanese americans who have thrived in our country. but who have an abiding interest in sudan. it goes without saying that we care. we have an interest. but we also have an interest in maintaining piece in the area and making sure there's no space that extreme it groups can take advantage of. i think if we leave it, it could become a problem. and then it becomes a bigger

problem for us. >> i agree with you that we have both values priors. a new fragile democracy. we want to see it launched and healthy and successful. does the united states stay the course? do we remain engaged in a leadership role as we fight for democracy? and as the ongoing negotiations are moving the forward, there is a serious fire immediately. i hope there will be a broader focus. including corruption chrks is one of the main challenges. what role might the united states be asked to play monitoring the cease fire. what additional resources might we bring to the table or be called upon to bring to the

table to make sure they're successful. and what additional resources, if i might ask, in both the administrative networks do we need to be deploying in order to be effective in our humanitarian relief efforts. >> again, thank you for that question. i'll turn to my colleague. we've been viewed by both sides as an honest broker. we been accused of supporting each of the other sides. and so i think we probably got it right. and we're looking at how we can support the efforts to ensure that there is peace, and each side honors commitments to a cease fire. we're looking at what sources we may have available to support the effort. >> on the humanitarian side, as

i mentioned earlier we've added $50 million in addition to what was already $318 million portfolio. if this conflict persists, if the needs continue to be this urgent, we will start running into tough choices given the rising cry cease that we have with syria, the typhoon that we just responded to. so thanks to the very important support of congress, we were able to do what we needed to do last year. as we look ahead, there will be again tough decisions and the need for the support of all of you in order for us to maintain bloebl humanitarian leadership. >> this is a great example of how it makes it possible for you to indeed effectively and rapidly respond.

my next question has to do with the regional actor and global actor. what sort of messages are we sending to him about the role that we welcome or we hope that uganda might play in what you make of as motives and what are the challenges with uganda. and my last question is, what role does china play? the chinese have been quite active in the region and stability rather than picking sides. >> uganda initially went into -- went into south sudan to support needed infrastructure. so they provided troops to secure the airport. and to secure the road to nimily

to ensure that their citizens were able to come out safely. we do know and this has come up as an issue of the talks that the ugandans have indicated, and they said it publicly, that they support the government of south kiir. that they have an interest in the region, and they want to ensure that a democratically elected government is not overthrown by violence. it has caused an issue. it got announced very early on after the summit? that they would support stability in the region, and would be prepared to do so militarily.

so this is something that we're watching very closely. their actions do not lead to greater conflict they have rongly sup will don't provide a stabilizing force in cuba. they will continue to provide a stabilizing force in juba. >> on china? >> on china there's a chinese special envoy who is in adis. he's been working very closely with ambassador booth. they have the interest. >> thank you very much. thank you.

i appreciate working with on this issue. he had many of the same questions that i wanted to ask. with regard to uganda, they moved in quickly with troops to secure exit of their citizens and whatever else. they did it as a neighbor. the government of south sudan, they were asked to come in. >> the peace keeper troops in there, what countries make up those forces right now. we have recently just bangladeshis. we have some kenyans.

>> thank you, with regard to the oil revenue. there are some reports that i see say that production is down 20%. others saying that it stops completely. what do we know at this point? >> the latest information i have is that many of the oil wells have been stopped. i don't know what the percentage is. there is some oil left in the pipeline. most of the pumping has ceased. >> the only option that the pipelines go through sudan, or over land by truck on coast, that's not much of an option. it never was. and no other industry in the country to speak of really. i think the largest industry outside the oil industry is a

brewery. so not much to fall back on. this is one of the first examples i have seen where the u.s. has actually taken the prohibition that congress has placed on aid to countries that undergo a coup or new governments by virtue of a coup. if this is a coup and succeeds, this will be a cut-off of aid. are we using that as leverage now against the opposition forces? >> we said to the opposition that we will not support their efforts to violently overthrow the government. that would include aid programs. i have to be careful.

we're not talking about the programs of the people that support sudan. right now all of our support to the government of south sudan, all of that support is not being implemented because we can't implement it. so we're not doing any programs right now. i would suspect at a point if this violence continues that we would suspend that supportment. >> those programs, if they were to be implemented now, what percentage of them are in the humanitarian area? that would not be affected by our restrictions. and is it a real threat to nose in opposition for the vice president's forces or whatever that aid will be cut off? >> you know, i don't think it's a threat that works. if either of these sides cared about their people, they wouldn't be fighting.

and we have told them they stand a chance of losing all support from the u.s. government. >> to make a sharp distinction between the humanitarian funds that are in need from the development activities, some of which went directly to support government capacity building and standing up of the new institutions. they're put in separate categories. >> some of the development categories to improve the lives of the people, is that a fuzz zi area? or is there a clear distinction as to what is humanitarian and what is not? >>. >> there's always a distinction that directly assists people, such as health facilities or health programs or the community based reconciliation programs that we've conducted.

that's the consideration that would come into play should we need to. >> can you give me some idea? we're saying're going to cut off aid. if this succeeds, for example. if this coup does succeed, how much of our aid will still flow? can you give me a percentage? i know there's some fuzz ziness. that's why i'm wondering what will go to a u.s. if a new government comes in? >> let us get back to you with that information. i think it will take additional consideration. but we will be happy to get back to you on that. there's an inability to conduct the programs in any case just because of the confusion and the violence that's under way. it's the humanitarian programs that we're continuing to push out and able to ensure that aid is getting to people.

>> with regard to china, this is the first time china has issued a statement with regard to security concerns there. china tends to, when they invest, they invest in human capitol as well and have personnel there. is their concern the safety of workers there? have there been casualties among those who are in the country? foreign workers? >> i have not heard that there have been any casualties that the chinese have suffered. but many of them are working in the areas of oil production, and all of those people have been evacuated out. and so for that reason the oil wells are not operating. >> is china doing anymore than making a statement? that's the first time they've gone that far. but have nay done anything else? >> they are actively involved in

the peace process in the addis. i understand they've been holding meetings with various parties there. and they certainly have been working very closely with the ambassador. >> well, thank you both. that's a tough duty and i know you are working hard. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. i'm sorry i missed your testimony. you may have talked more about th this. can you talk about to what extent we're cooperating the u.n. and others on the ground and how that's working and whether there are ways to improve that or how concerned are you about what's happening there?

>> we're working very closely with the u.n. and with our key allies, including those who have been long strong partners on south sudan. the u.a. the eu of canada. we are in almost daily contact in nairobi and through our headquarters conversations. the u.n. country team is leading the charge in terms of coordinating the overall assistance, and seeing when the opportunities arise to get aid into the compounds. the ngo community is very courageously still operating many of their programs. there are ngos doing protection patrols inside the compounds, for example. so there's active close coordination. as i said earlier, one of the bright spots in the middle of a

lot of bad news is there's a history of the action in south sudan. born of necessity, but it gives us the capacity to respond. as one can in tough situations. >> obviously some of the stories that have come out have been in the atrocities this women and particular challenges facing women. women and children. can you talk about whether there are specific efforts around humanitarian assistance to address the concerns. >> again, against the backdrop of a lot of security constraints and impeded access to the degree that humanitarian workers are able to reach the populations. within the displaced

communities. some of the real effort has been to get medical supplies, food and water to these spontaneous settlements of displaced people. so the humanitarian and protection needs are hand in hand. and one of the most important things that we can do is improve the security situation overall, which my colleagues talk about in terms of increasing mistruths, and most of all, having improved access in peace negotiations. >> there was a report on the news this morning, criticizing our efforts in south sudan as being, as our having not been tough enough. i don't remember the exact phrasing. but that was the gist of what it was saying. some of the new leaders. and not expecting enough of them.

and whether there are other things that we can do to help put pressure on those leaders to encourage them to resolve the situation? >> thank you. i think we have to keep the pressure on. but even before this started, our ambassador had made numerous statements concerning her concerns about the situation. she has been in regular contact with the government as the political situations started to unravel, almost a year ago. she was making those statements. he indicated to me that in congressional testimony in june. and also we have continued to express the concerns, both to

bashar as well as to kiir. >> and you talked about uganda and the role they're playing. there are situations for good or bad that we should be concerned about. >> i think we should thank the ethiopian government and the kenyan government who have been actively involved in the negotiations, working to bring both parties to the peace table. the presidents visited south sudan, visited juba, and impressed upon the president the importance of sending a delegation. i know they are speaking on a regular basis with and pushing

the government to release the detainees. they have been working closely with us to look at ways that we can support the efforts. and so i think the efforts have been extraordinarily positive. we have also talked to many countries in the region concerning additional troops for the u.n. and all of them are looking at ways that they might either move troops from one -- another peace keeping force to provide support to the u.n. in south sudan. and pretty much we're asking them to run from one crisis to contribute to another. >> thank you, thank you mr. chairman. >> senator cain has been patiently waiting for his opportunity. >> if you patiently wait, your colleagues ask all your questions. that's not a bad thing. you get to hear the answers to

the questions you want to ask. just a few things. to what extent is the motive? is it more of a collateral consequence? >> i think it's probably both. i know fighting in the north, the rebel forces clearly want to maintain or gain control of all resources, and the government is fighting tooth and nail to retain those resources. and certainly any government that wants to take over power will be looking at the oil resources as resources they would want to have contributed to the efforts. and we've made very, very clear, that if there is a violent takeover, those oil resources will be sanctioned.

>> and pick up on questions the senator was asking about the delivery of humanitarian aid. some of your written testimony. tell us about that. i want to make sure i understand. it sounds like the challenges with the delivery of humanitarian aid right now are mostly security challenges. there's not other kinds of challenges that are making it hard to deliver the humanitarian aid that we want delivered. do i understand your testimony correctly on that? >> i would say security plus logistical. >> can you talk about is that? i think you testified about the security side. that would be helpful. >> so the nile is a virtual highway for moving supplies around. and all the barges have been commandeered and are unavailable to move supplies. there are very few roads. we have to work against the rainy season.

typically on an annual basis. those are shut off during the rainy season. there's a lot of logistical supplies. we have funded additional flights so the u.n. can fly to the spaces where we have a concentration of displaced people. they're otherwise not very easily reached. so it's expensive. it doesn't let us move as much as quickly. so it's security compounded by logistics. >> when does the rainy season start? >> it will start in may. we have until may to position for the following year, or we will face increased hunger around the country in addition to the consequences of this violence. >> i would love it if you would

type the committee informed about steps we should be taking or working with the administration to support the humanitarian aid. thank you. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, senator, very much. ambassador, there have been points of atrocities by all sides of the conflict in south sudan with mass graves discovered in reports of newer civilians being murdered or belonging toe the wrong ethnic group. i was especially daddened by a report that members of the south sudanese army had targeted newer civilians on the basis of their ethnicity. given the fact that hundreds of millions of dollars of assistance that the united states has provided to south sudanese forces since 2005.

this creates disturbing questions. the united states has suspended security assistance and training in december. under what circumstances will the security be allowed to resume? will there be consideration now paid to the fact that we need assurances? that our resistance in training will not be used to commit human rights violations. >> thank you for that question. we have been really saddened by the events that have turned this fight into a battle that is ethnic in nature. and particularly that is happening inside of the military. we have asked the u.n. about the information on mass graves. they've not been able to confirm

those. . we hope to get them out in the field so we can collect that evidence and be prepared to deal with the evidence in terms of holding people accountable. but without seeing the evidence of the mass graves, we do know that there have been extraordinary killings, both in the north and up and around juba. and this is something that has you all worried. >> this raises serious questions an how we will imp plemt programs that provide training with the sudanese military after the actions have been made public. >> so here's my question to you. in january of 2012, president obama added south sudan to the list of countries eligible to buy weapons for the united states during fiscal year 2012 the state department reported

that it had authorized commercial sales of $9 million worth of u.s. made military equipment to south sudan. including military electronics and missed related technology. more than $3 million of equipment was shipped. in contrast, the european union maintained an arms embargo. will the state department suspend or limit the sales to south sudan, given the risk of u.s. weapons being used to commit atrocities? >> at the moment, we're not implementing any of those programs. let me get back to you with a full answer to that. my inclination is to say that that will likely be the case. but i prefer to get back to you with more details. >> the administration in general is in the process of loosening

the regulations that government exports. most could be done without a license or legal requirement that the state department review the sales to make sure they will not fuel armed conflict or harm human rights. the press has reported at one point the administration was seriously considering loosening patrols on guns and ammunition, since they were not critical to maintaining a military foreign intelligence advantage of the united states. can you give us your opinion, madame ambassador, whether or not we do need a careful review of armed exports in general to assess the potential for them to be used to commit human rights violation that is critical to protecting civilians, not only in south sudan, but in other countries in the world. >> i can speak on south sudan. i will certainly take your

question back. my view is in south sudan we are suspending the implementation of the programs and we'll be looking closely at any support we provide them in the future. >> for my part, i think the union is closer to where we should be on these issues. i think the united states has to step back. because the long term implication of anything that we do can be profound. if we start selling nuclear power plants to countries that have long-term instability issues, or we sell arms to countries that we know have much higher probability than not of being turned around and used for purposes other than those which were originally intended. then we have the responsibility to reevaluate whether or not it makes any sense going forward. and finally the overwhelmi inii

majority depend on rain. temperature has increased. rain has decreased in the last several decades with negative consequences for agriculture and food and security. we know that that then creates a threat multiplier inside the countries like sudan. can you talk about that in your opinion, as to what we can do as a country to help to reduce the long-term impact of climate chang change. >> it's specifically in areas that have chronic poverty overlayed with the continuous shocks of droughts and floods and the changes that you're identifying. we've made progress in kenya and ethiopia and somalia.

and we are moving the forward in south sudan. we are seeing the disruption of all of that. that's the case when you have conflict that roles back conflict and gains. hopefully we can resume that and enable greater management of risk and greater adaptation to these changes so we get ahead of the kind of natural disaster cycles. >> you get into a very bad negative feedback loop where it's a very very thing that caused the problem. the smaller and smaller natural resources and that makes it more difficult to solve the problem, the original cause of the problem. >> that's absolutely right. understanding how to manage the conflict is critical for the programs. we've done a lot of the work in the community level throughout south sudan. we are not getting widespread reports of violence among

communities. so far it's armed actors, and we would love to brief you on the resilience programs. >> the only problem we know, the absence of resources related to climate change further exacerbate the ethnic con flicks. they're fighting over less and less, which makes it easier to list the ethnic brethren and again, i would urge that human rights be a factor that is much higher in priority. i think it's time for us to have that re-evaluation. >> let me thank you. you bring some very critical issues. some of the questions that have been raised about who in our continuation of assistances, why this committee voted 16-1 in a bipartisan basis to create a language to deal with the

circumstances. my hope as this bill moves the forward that the appropriations committee will look at the language, and if not, they will have an opportunity to consider the language on the the floor. the state department cannot be in a position of picking and choosing by having a standard that's universal for national security. i think that's incredibly important. >> thank you again for your testimony. i'm just listening to a lot of questions here. and in the opening question you mentioned that bashar did not undertake a coup, in your opinion. that forces went to his home. he left and then this began. then on the continued basis, talking about no aid if there was a coup at any time or a volatile, a violent take over. i hope, and i've seen juganda i

reporting thousands of troops may help the regime. i hope all the players and ourselves are are putting enough pressure on kiir to solve this. as i listen to the questions and answering, it feels like most of the pressure is on the other side. and i just hope the pressure is being applied in a very balanced way. and you don't have to respond to that. but just in listening to the answers, i'm not sure that would come out in this testimony. >> we'll move onto the second panel. you're excused. and with thanks to the next panel, i will introduce for their patience and the input that they'll have before the committee now, ambassador who served from 2011 to 2013 and previously served as the u.s. senior adviser, a human rights

activist and cofounder of the enough project to end genocide and crimes against humanity and kate, who has served as the assistant administrator for africa and mission director. let me -- evidently you all know each other very well. handshakes and kisses are being shared. so let me again thank you for your patience, but your testimony is incredibly important. we ask you to summarize your statements in five minutes so we can have the dialogue with you. your full statements will be included in the record without objection. ambassador lineman, i'll start with you. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman and all the members of the committee here, this is a tragic situation.here. this is a tragic situation, and it's important --

>> one moment. >> i'm sorry. >> if we could ask those who are leaving to do so quietly and exit the -- so we can hear these witnesses. ambassador? >> i was asked to talk about the context and origins of this crisis, but let me make, if i can, two comments about some of the issues raised earlier. i think the importance of strengthening the u.n. peace keeping operation, as was discussed here, it's absolutely vital that the people who have sought protection under the u.n. be protected, and that structure there needs a great deal of help. it will take more than the u.n. resolution, a lot of work, and i hope the u.s. can provide logistic and other support to get the troops there. the mandate is there, but it needs to be activated. there has to be a much more aggressive role in protecting

civilians, and eventually monitoring the cease fire. so i appreciate the attention that's been given to that. the second thing is i want to point out that the work of the special envoy don booth and the work of ambassador susan page in juba. they are on the ground working this issue all the time. but their presence there in both places sends the message that the u.s. isn't walking away from this crisis. the support to juba is very, very important and i'm glad it was emphasized in the testimony. i want to talk about the run-up to this crisis to illustrate the weaknesses of the institutions, the political and the military institutions in south sudan, because it's important that as we look ahead to how these

issues are revolved, it's not simply a reconciliation between two men or even return to the status quo, because the underlying issues, the underlying weaknesses are going to take something much more and it's going to take a much more active role by the international community in solving these problems than we had before. let me just describe two trends, two developments that led to this crcrisis. one, going back a year and a half or more is the uneasiness or worry within the ruling party about the way the country was being governed. there was not attention to the party by president kiir, not even to the president. it was more on the basis of a st. paul group of advisers. and even more disturbing, relying more and more on intelligence and security people to harass opponents. journalists assassinated.

others being pushed out of the country. became a major concern in our relations with south sudan. so there was a real concern about that governance. and then the second challenge came from mushar, challenging he was going to challenge for the presidency. he is a very international figure. he split in the '90s, fought against it. there was a major massacre. these things haven't been forgotten. so the party was faced with a dilemma. if you don't give him a path to the presidency, there could be a crisis and a split. if you do give him a path to the presidency, other people will be very upset. instead of having a party capable of doing it, president kiir went the other direction. he froze and eventually dissolved all the party mechanism. he treated the elements from both of these crises as just

direct challenges to him and as and as inciting unrest. not because these people now mostly in detention were support ing mushar's presidency. but the way these issues were not being addressed. instead, by december, president kiir dissolved many of the policy institutions and it was very clear there was no resolution taking place. then we had all the unraveling. i emphasize this because when we look ahead, it's not enough to say well, we just reconcile. there needs to be a process that gets at the basic structures of governance in south sudan. enough protection for democracy and human rights. for how parties are supposed to

operate, etc. the constitutional process in south sudan has not moved forward. and that gives us a vehicle for dealing with a lot of participation from civil society, the churches, etc. in a new constitution for south sudan, there would be proceed the next elections and maybe bring new leadership to the country. there should be an advisory committee from the u.n., the u.s., africa union, etc. the same goes for the economy. there is an oil driven economy. there has to be a much more dynamic relationship between the international community and south sudan over the management of the economy and how people can be helped.

otherwise going back to the old institutions will not be sufficient. we have invested the united states heavily in this process. between sudan and south sudan, since 2005, the united states has spent i estimate around $12 billion in peace keeping, in darfur, in humanitarian activities and the birthing of south sudan. we can't turn back on this. it's going to take a lot of time and effort. if we recognize the fundamental weaknesses in these institutions, we and our partners can start to address this. thank you very much. >> thank you. mr. pendergast? >> thank you, mr. chairman and ranking member corker. this has been crucial to

development of u.s. policy to sudan for years, now even decades. i think having this hearing sends a really important signal to the people of south sudan that we care and we're watching very closely, so i thank you for that. i want to move right to the solutions on page 4 of my testimony. i want to propose four ways that the administration and congress supporting the broader peace process that many of you have talked about. first way that the u.s. can help, i think, is to help expand this peace process, beyond just a deal between the guys with the biggest guns. this goes into the heart of what you're sending in your initial questions. the u.s. can play a major role in helping to ensure that the current process that's unfolding doesn't repeat the mistakes of past mediation efforts in sudan and south sudan. i've tried to document some of them in the written testimony earlier. this will require i think a team of diplomats that can be

accompanying our current special envoy. let me just say that sudan -- itself, not south sudan, sudan itself has no peace process to speak of. darfur with the mountains, blue nile, eastern sudan, all these places, particularly the first three, there are huge conflicts with thousands and thousands of deaths over the course of the last year alone, and hundreds of thousands of displaced people over the course of the last year alone. nothing is happening on that front. so we need a team, a cell i think of people to work with our special enjoy, to be able to help deepen these processes. particularly in the south, i want to associate myself very strongly with what ambassador lyman said. there are a number of layers. but then you have to bring in others. you have to get involved with the governance reforms that has to be part of this process. there are reasons why the war

erupted so quickly, whether it was a coup or not, and spread to all the different regions of the country. well, there's a lot of problems, so they're not being addressed through the regular channels, so they need to be reformed. the intercommunal reconciliation efforts have sort of petered out and need to be revived. the constitutional process that princeton talked about. and support for army reform and ddr. we can talk more about that if you want the q&a because i think it's really important. so i think their work gets backed, of course, by susan rice and secretary kerry and president obama himself, ambassador powell. they've all been making contributions in a good way, just like in past administrations we've seen that from secretary powell and others and secretary rice in the cpa negotiation. and that needs to continue. congress can be helped from ensuring that these resources are available from the diplomatic efforts, for building the kind of team to be able to

undertake protracted negotiation. that's what it's going to require for the peace to have a chance in south sudan and in sudan. second way the u.s. can help is i think to reinvent the troika. it involved the three countries, the u.s., britain, and norway. it went back to the late '90s. played a crucial role in the mediation process leading up to the 2005 comprehensive peace agreement. i think the troika can play an even more important role in the new peace efforts in south sudan and in the ongoing effort to try to build a peace process in sudan. and so, if they added another member, and that is china, bringing china into the tent in a more formal way would increase the emphasis on the parties. we need the leverage. and engaging even india would also be potentially productive. so i think a high level white house effort should be undertaken with beijing to find

common ground on what our two countries can support together in south sudan and a lot of work has already been done. i don't want to say anything negative about that. but a very high level specific effort to try to figure out how the u.s. and china can work together. i think they can do that in the context of what can be a revived troika. i think for its part, the congress can help by engaging directly with some officials from china. in exploring the ways that the u.s. and china can work together for peace in the sudans. third way the u.s. can help is to collect evidence of atrocities and to sanction the perpetrators. this goes to the heart of what senator cardin was talking about earlier. and i think we all know what that means, but there are two ways you can do it. you can collect the evidence and use that evidence immediately to impose targeted sanctions against individuals who are found to be perpetrating, suspected of perpetrating mass

atroci atrocities. and you can turn over the bodies and work for the creation of bodies or the existing bodies like the icc. but the creation of bodies like a mixed court in south sudan that can work to begin to end the cycle of impunity and begin to prosecute those that are committing these kinds of atrocities, as i think everyone in this committee and panel thinks, if we don't start to deal with those kinds of questions, it just leads to a deepening of a cycle of violence and impunity that we've seen, not only in south sudan, but as was mentioned already in a number of other places in africa and around the world. for its part, i think congress could ask for regular briefings from the administration. formal briefings on the evidence of atrocities and how specifically the u.s. is responding on these two areas. targeted sanctions and prosecutions. what are we doing? the fourth way the u.s. can help is to help negotiate humanitarian access. i think the u.s. has been admirable, going all the way back to when kate was running things. admirable in the way we have

responded to the humanitarian crisis. we have a long history of negotiated access agreements in south sudan that we can build on. i think we don't want to wait a long time before we get those negotiated access agreements to get to people, particularly there are people all over south sudan, but i want to highlight one group of people that are extremely at risk, and those are those refugees from sudan, from the nuba mountains who are in south sudan and have no resources to call upon. and their home area is in sudan are the subject of intensive bombings in south sudan in the mountains today. so to be able to negotiate the access up to those areas and ensure that the parties uphold those agreements is terribly important. in conclusion, track record of this commerce is moving clearly with regard to south sudan. i know i speak for my fellow

panelists and so many others in expressing our deep appreciation for your continuing advocacy on behalf of the people of sudan and south sudan. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify in front of you today. to improve the lives of the people of south sudan has been undone. as others have indicated today, the violence could devolve further. i would like to offer a few observations on the current crisis and then make several recommendations. let me be clear from the outset, upon south sudan's independence in 2011, the united states pledged its commitment to continue to stand by its people. we should remain resolute in this commitment, not flinching in the face of recent

developments. the united states's unique influence and a deep reservoir of good will in south sudan that gives it an indispensable role in overcoming the current crisis. my first observation is that this crisis was neither inevitable nor ethnically motivated. it is a political crisis, precipitated by the failure of president kiir and machar to settle their political violences without resort to violence. they can stop it. the first priority is inducing them to do so. secondly, institutional development takes decades. political transitions are inherently messy. it's not a surprise that there is a crisis in government. it is important to recognize that south sudan was not afforded self-determination based on its capacity for self-rule. south sudan must develop its political institutions indigenously and from the ground up. it is unreasonable to expect these institutions to develop

and take root in two and a half years. sadly, the government's record since independence is one of deliberate undermining and erosion of t erosion. this is the root of the current crisis and the fundamental issue that must be addressed if and when the fighting ends. thirdly, the united states's deep relationships with the protagonist and unparalleled degree of influence and the speedometer to use that influence to broker a return to nonviolent political competition. this is not a time for incremental approaches. the united states must continue to deploy the full weight of its diplomatic capabilities on the parties directly and multi-laterally, including through the u.n. security council. the united states should move to invoke the president's authority to institution travel bans and asset freezes on senior leadership on both sides as well as prepare to extend those sanctions multi-laterally through a resolution in the u.n.

security council if the following actions are not imminently forthcoming. one, a secession of fighting without further stalling or delay. the united states must foreclose a military option for either side, including by discouraging regional actors such as uganda and sudan from directly or indirectly participating in the conflict. two, a release of the 11 political detainees arrested following the outbreak of fighting in juba. they have been targeted on the basis of their public dissent with president kiir and their participation is vital to reaching a political arrangement. three, the impartial delivery of urgently needed humanitarian aid, including providing humanitarian actors full unimpeded access to all those in need, not just in the protected enclaves of spaces and most especially to civilians caught in active conflict zones. four, full cooperation with human rights monitoring, including with a formal u.n.

inquisition. neither kiir courageous leadership is required to rise above personal ambitions and animosities to achieve a cease-fire. escaping cycles of violence is hard but it can be done. if an interim political settlement is reached, the south sudanese leadership will need to dedicate itself to three critical tasks to demonstrate accountability to its people. building coalitions to support key institutional reforms in citizens' security, justice, and jobs, expanding space for independent voices so a national dialogue is possible, and tangibly demonstrating the state's responsiveness to its citizens, particularly by drafting and adopting a permanent constitution, fostering national and local reconciliation and conducting fair and peaceful elections. prioritizing road networks and radio communications is a must to achieve any of these tasks.

the united states is the largest bilateral donor to south sudan and it should remain so. significant areas of the country, in fact, are peaceful. in government, community, and church leaders in these areas are to be commended and supported in their efforts to stem the conflict spread, including through the continuation of development partnerships. an abrupt stop to development assistance will only worsen the national crisis, not alleviate it. u.s. aid has been providing development assistance to south sudan continuously since 1998. eventually through the newly independent government. the games from these programs should not be jettisoned hastily or unnecessarily. doing so will only make the task of stabilization reconstruction that much harder if and when a political settlement is reached, further harming the people of south sudan. let me conclude on a practical note. the u.s. government's ability to respond effectively to this crisis, whether through diplomacy, humanitarian

assistance or development will be significantly handicapped without the presence of americans with deep knowledge of relationships with south sudan. i understand all too well the tradeoffs between security and impact. it is imperative that u.s. government staff be allowed to return to south sudan as quickly as possible. thank you again for this opportunity and i look forward to your questions. >> well, thank you all for your testimony. some very important insights there. let me ask you, ambassador lyman, you refer to machar and other spln leaders and their grievances. was there popular support for those views, the views that they were espousing on the south sudanese? >> i doubt it. those were kind of inside what we would call here inside the beltway kind of arguments over authorities in power, etc.

but one area that was getting quite a bit of popular attention was the harassment of human rights workers, of journalists, etc. that was raising a great deal of concern inside south sudan. the challenge from machar did, of course, reverberate through because of the history. and i think people recognize that that challenge was going to be a major one to be managed by the government. >> now, the composition of the government delegation is interesting to me, particularly since nile was once part of a faction that opposed garang and kiir's vision for south sudan. what might the composition of the delegation mean in terms of larger regional dynamics?