afghanistan, so many more veterans now suffering the loss of limbs and so forth and rehabilitating here, getting to big events of the accommodation we have here in this country, let in effect until the protections and at the nation's sure. while you're able-bodied counterparts can imagine jobs overseas, only the ada extends only across the continental u.s. and in the global marketplace that's not fair to the veterans warfare to person with a disability generally. ..

>> it is clear that the u.n. will likely maintain a political presence. they have a critical human rights mop to having role -- monitoring role, and we're seeing right now the centrality of supporting the afghan-led voting process. those are all things that don't cease to be necessary in the wake of any u.s. drawdown or even eventually, you know, when all troops are, all american troops are out of afghanistan. because president karzai has not signed the bsa, the president has not made his decisions about what the u.s. troop presence is going to look like after this year, and i think the u.n. is waiting to understand that better. we've seen just with the monstrous taliban attacks that have occurred in the last few weeks mission to all those that preceded those attacks just how

precarious the security is, particularly for civilians who are trying to aid the afghan p population. and so that is a challenge. thank you. >> chairman, welcome. and let me ask you, we talk about the fact that we spent a lot of money on theup, and over the years there's been an awful lot of efforts in congress to bring about reforms to the u.n. and one of the kind of glaring dysfunctions of the u.n. is the u.n. security council. because that's supposed to bring peace and security on an international basis. but it doesn't seem to always work that way. if you look at syria, the efforts to end the conflict there, i think there have been at least three times where china and russia have vetoed efforts to do that. so you wonder how it can meet

its goal when its permanent membership are divided. so i would ask you two questions. one, do you think that to a certain extent the security council has lost a little bit of its credibility, maybe lost a little bit of its he visit massey? and if so, is there anything the u.s. can do to help it regain that? because the second part of that question is if you look at the other side, it seems just about every veto that we've put forward in the last 25 years has been vetoing some condemnation of israel. and israel doesn't get treated very well. i know you've been working hard to see that israel gets fair treatment across the board in the u.n. so take those two things and talk about that, a, what kind of reforms might be brought either through the u.n. security council or even in a broader sense and, b, how you feel like you're doing in trying to make sure that israel gets treated

more fairly in the u.n.? thank you. >> thank you, congressman, and thank you generously for leaving me three minutes to answer your questions. let me say about the security council that you have put your finger on it. when the permanent members, particularly russia most recently backed by china, decides not to fulfill its responsibilities under the u.n. charter, to enforce international peace and security because they are a veto holder, that leaves the council vulnerable. and there's no question that the council's legitimacy has suffered greatly not to be responding to the humanitarian catastrophe in syria and the profound threat to international peace and security when you have millions of people spilling over into neighboring countries, many of which are fragile like that in iraq and lebanon. and when you now see, also,

foreign, treatmentists take root, you see a regime brutalizing its people using barrel bombs, chemical weapons, scuds. the fact that russia can use its veto in circumstances like this really reflect a vulnerability, as you say, in the council structure. and we've had to work in other ways working through the arab league, working true the human rights council which, as you know, is very problematic on issues related to israel but has created an inquiry that has produced really important reports for syria that will be used to hold accountable the perpetrators of these hour rusk crimes to task. on chemical weapons and recently on humanitarian issues, we did manage to get two resolutions finally through the security council, and on chemical weapons

we have seen, as you know, just 50% of the weapons removed. the deadline for the overall removal operation is not until june 30th, but the syrians are missing a number of milestones along the way, so we're very concerned about the pace of removal and elimination. there i would say russia has worked more constructively clearly because it sees its interests as imperilled first because of the threat of force that hung over syria back in august and september, but also because of their concern that chemical weapons will fall into the hands of terrorists, so forth. so we can still see that russia a la carte can choose to see its interests engaged in ways that coincide with ours on syria. but by and large, on the humanitarian situation though we did get a resolution recently, there's not nearly the same energy put into enforcing that resolution, and we're seeing very disappointing results on the ground which, again, i can speak to later. what i would say, though, is that in complementing or at the

very same time we're seeing this, as you put it, disfunction on syria and obstructionism might be a better word on the part of russia, we are also seeing the security council go about its business and do important work. of we just in the midst of the ukraine crisis passed a resolution granting the international community the authority to interdict stolen oil that ends up on the high seas from libya. and u.s. special forces did a heroic job retrieving some of that oil, but this is a phenomenon that could persist, and russia went along with that. we're renewing mandates and enhancing mandates for u.n. peacekeepers in congo and expanding the higgs in south sudan -- the mission in south sudan. so the council is still doing very important work for u.s. national interests but, of course, the vulnerability is there because of russian obstructionism. >> thank you, madam chair. ambassador, it's good to see you.

i'll try to ask my questions in a compressed way, also, so you can have most of the time to answer then. i want to focus more on the palestinians' pursuit of statehood or recognition by u.n. agencyies, and -- agencies, and understanding that our policy is that we withdraw from those agencies and cease funding when a unilateral action is taken like that. how can we, if you could walk us through your thoughts on how, perhaps, a unilateral approach to that concern -- which is, obviously, a very significant concern -- may not be the best strategic approach for us. you know, instead of maybe a focus in an a la carte way, to use your term, like with the icc or the iaea.

if we were going to try to leverage our participating in a way that -- participation in a way that is more microtargetted approach to respond to wildly inappropriate actions like the palestinians. the other issue is on israel's treatment in general of the human rights council and our ability to revage our -- leverage our membership in the human rights council, what are we doing to get the human rights council -- how are we using our membership to get the human rights council to stop almost exclusively focusing on their obsession with israel and actually focus on very significant, serious human rights abuses in syria and iran and venezuela and cuba just to name a few? then just a couple of others. on humanitarian assistance, you know, it's been the entire, for

the entire existence of the united nations that we've essentially shuleddered the burden of financing, you know, much of what it does. how do we encourage cost sharing from, you know, wealthier countries that actually have the ability to ten up, and how can we use u.n. security council 2139 to encourage other donors to do that, particularly rich gulf nation, for example, that have the resources but choose not to use them? and then lastly, if you could just cover the issue of u.n. reform. because i know the united states' position is that reform and economy accountability, beingty and excellence are all essential. so what are we working on this that regard. >> thank you, congresswoman. i mean, on the palestinian question i just would underscore that we will oppose attempts at upgrades in status anywhere.

we are in very close touch now, we have a monthly meeting with the israelis where we look out at the sea of international organizations and u.n. entities including treaty bodies and treaties and so forth and coordinate with them and also try to understand whether they are prior tuesdaying in particular ways sort of along the lines of what you're is suggesting. the icc is, of course, something that we have been absolutely adamant about. of secretary kerry has made it very, very clear to the palestinians as has the president. i mean, this is something that really poses a profound threat to israel. it is not something, it's not a unilateral action that will be anything other than devastating to the peace process which is, again, where all of our efforts

should be placed right now. we, you know, before the peace negotiations talk started between the two apparentlies restarted with secretary kerry's and the president's leadership, we were fighting on every front front, i mean, for sure. contesting unilateral efforts on every front, and that is what we would do in any event, i mean, because we don't think this is a productive approach, we don't think there are shortcuts. and we know that these, that this can be an effort to delegitimate israel at the same time it's an effort to upgrade palestine's status. i think my point on the waiver and the funding issue is that the american people and the united states are so much better off when the united states is in good standing within these organizations defending our interests, fighting for our friends and not surrendering playing field to those that

would like nothing more than for the united states not to be in these organizations. so we're not punishing the palestinians if we cut off funding to these agencies, we're punishing u.s. interests. and that is why, again, we need to deter precise hi the moves -- precisely the moves that are with the spirit behind the legislation to deter palestinian action, that is what we do all the time and will continue to do. but we cannot surrender the vast range of u.s. interests in the process. very briefly, on the humanitarian assistance and cost sharing, maybe i'll just touch on that since it hasn't come up before. the kuwaitis have hosted the last two donors' conferences, and we think this is progress and an example of the kind of leadership, and they've really shown tremendous leadership on the humanitarian situation. we seek to mobilize resources from the countries that you've alluded to, and you have seen emerging economies, you know,

like brazil and others, you know, make contributions in a i new way in light of, again, the scale of the catastrophe. but we still think there's a lot of room for others to be doing their fair share. and particularly those wealthy countries in the region, a region that stands to be very destabilized, again, by the effects of this crisis. let's leave it there. >> thank you, madam chair. and, ambassador, thank you so much for joining us today, and there's so many topics to cover and so little time, and we appreciate the work of all of our diplomats and leaders around the world. thank you for your leadership. certainly with, we've talked about syria, north korea, russia continuing to be, i think, perhaps on a lot of our minds is the nuclear threat from iran. i know you've spoken about that morning in several of the questions. i have some specific questions i'd like to get your thoughts on

as we, as a congress, look at what our future foreign policy should be. as we come back to the iranian nuclear desires, i know we're in a a diplomatic mode now. should those efforts fail, is military action still on the table if iran does not abandon its nuclear program, and how are we articulating that today? would that military action require u.n. security approval to move forward? would you seek -- and i know we're dealing in hypotheticals, and you need to or articulate this well not to damage any current efforts. i respect and appreciate the way you're going to have to try to articulate your answer here. but would you seek u.n. security approval, and would you be, would the country be willing to move unilaterally without that approval? and did the united states' war and action in iraq require u.n. security approval? do we believe that that did in retrospect?

and then second topic, the administration has called for, certainly, a reset with relations with russia in past years. what can we do to successfully deter vladimir putin going forward? what does the new reset look like? what are your thoughts just generally moving forward, and how do we reset those relations again? because, clearly, that didn't work as successfully as probably anybody liked. and then you were in the white house and witnessed the struggle in our country over the murder of ambassador be in benghazi, that continues to be a very big topic in this country and certainly before congress regarding what the united states did to prevent that attack, statements following the attack from our then-ambassador on what may have led to the attack. so i guess just seeing that firsthand in the position you're in, and now you're the new united states ambassador to the united states -- to the u.n., what have we learned and, specifically, what are we doing differently with security and how would we treat something like the this differently in the future?

>> okay. >> thank you. >> thank you so much, congressman. let me -- it will, as you anticipated, it will not shock you that i'm not going to engage in hypotheticals, so i think it's more appropriate simply to describe generally the president's position which is that even today he has taken no option off the table as it relates to iran. consistently he has made clear on any issue that if america's vital national interests are at stake, he's going to act to protect the american people and our vital national security interests. be and what that means is that, you know, in the event that the security council does not accommodate our, his need to lead and perform his duties as the commander in chief, he is still going to pursue what he deems the right policy on behalf

of the american people. in terms of the retrospective question you asked, again, i don't think it's appropriate for me here in my current role to be going back over decisions that were made. what we're focused on at the u.n. but across the administration is trying to shore up the security situation in a country that, unfortunately, in recent months has really taken a turn for the worse in terms of the penetration of terror is, the seizure, as you know, by terrorists of iraqi towns, towns that very brave americans expended, you know, made great sacrifices to try to secure for the iraqi people. so we are focused, the u.n. special representative there is working hand in glove with our

embassy to try to diffuse that crisis, to try to insure that the coming elections go off without causing or provoking or being accompanied by more violence. that is our emphasis on iraq. on putin i would just say that the steps that have been taken even just since the so-called referendum in crimea and the so-called an for example sayings which we reject and which the united nations has rejected now in an overwhelming way, the steps that we have taken have already had an effect. you're seeing investor confidence plummet, you're seeing the ruble depreciate, you're seeing investors recognize that if there's not a climate of rule of law in russia -- and, clearly, taking over part of someone else's country doesn't exactly reflect a respect for the rule of law whether domestic or international -- that that is a very perilous market environment.

and so, again, we do believe that this economic and political isolation that president putin has chosen for himself is going to have an effect, and we are in addition to that, of course, supporting, tanks to the house -- thanks to the house vote and the senate vote on this issue, robust financial assistance for ukraine so that, you know, x number of years from now we see a prosperous ukraine that is thriving, that isn't forced to choose between east and west and where the people see the benefits of the kind of economic integration available to those countries that lay by the international rules -- that play by the international rules. >> thank you, madam chair. welcome, ambassador. at the outset, i want to just express my support for that flexible funding mechanism for u.n. peacekeeping missions. regrettably, given how unstable the world is right now, it's not a question of where we'll need

to -- whether we'll need to support such operations, only where. and i would much rather make that kind of investment than either to have american boot on the ground or suffer the effects of a total state failure and collapse and all the related risks that we ultimately face as a result of those failed states. i wanted to just direct my question to syria. syrian civil war has claimed the lives of at least 150,000 people. one-third of whom are civilians. the syrian observatory for human rights announced yesterday millions more have been forced to flee their homings to neighboring -- homes to neighbor ing jordan, lebanon, turkey and even iraq, and millions more have become internally displaced, their fates hanging on the ebb and flow of battle. while all of syria's people have suffered from fighting, it is minority populations and especially syrian christians who are most at risk. as you know, ambassador, these are some of the oldest christian communities in the world. about a week ago the up to of

ka -- the town of kassab was attacked and emptied in a bloody assault. many of the residents are descendants are victims of the armenian genocide, and there's a particular poignancy. can you tell us what efforts the u.n. and its agencies working if and around syria -- in and around syria are making to safeguard syrian minority communities? many of them are resistant to seeking refuge in ngo facilities out of fear for their safety and ,, thus, more likely to be internally displaced persons. minority issues generally on the agenda in new york with reference to syria? and finally, is there any diplomatic movement at all in resolving the syrian conflict, or is assad so confident of his military advantage now that any hope of a diplomat you can resolution -- diplomatic resolution is, essentially,

gone? >> thank you, congressman. first, on the peacekeeping response mechanism, thank you for raising it, and met me just say a -- let me just say a word on that knowing that not all may think it's the best idea right from the beginning. this mechanism comes about because what we have gone through in the last few budget cycles where real world exigencies like that in mali are now potentially in the central african republic after we've submitted our budget. the bad guys in the world are not responsive to our budget cycles, and we are trying to prevent the rise of extremism, protect civilians, you know, meet humanitarian needs. this is not something where the money would be spent on anything other than the kinds of emergencies that this committee, subcommittee and the larger committee have expressed and proven their support for over the years.

and one of the things that i was, that we would be very eager to discuss with you is how could we create some kind of consul todaytive process where you felt at the heart of the decision making around the use of such a mechanism. but we are finding ourselves, our decisions base. >> shrunk in new york when a crisis arises because of the prior year's cycle. if you look at refugee funding and so forth, they've found a way -- because refugee flows also are unpredictable -- to 'em belled, i gather, within refugee programming a little wit of flexibility, again, allowing for the kind of consultation that could allow real world emergencies and real world peacekeeping missions, exigencies to secure funding in a nimble way. on kassab with, it is an issue

of huge concern and the broader fate of minorities and all the syrian people is of pressing concern. in terms of what the u.n. is doing about that particular, the takeover of that particular town, the security council has met recently, i believe it was just -- i've lost track of time in my preparation for this hearing, but i think it was late last week on friday where we discussed the humanitarian situation in syria generally, and most of the council members raised the issue, calling on the u.n. to do more to try to meet the needs of these people. this was in a closed consultation on the humanitarian situation in syria in compliance with the humanitarian resolution. i would note that, unfortunately, the extremist group that has taken, that appears to have taken hold of that town is not one that the united states or the united nations has a huge amount of leverage over. and so our emphasis now is on supporting the moderate op

opposition in syria that is taking on those extremist groups and making sure that the u.n. has the funding it needs and the resources of all kinds that it needs to accommodate refugee flow along or idp in the case of the armenian, syrian-armenian community and, as you say, an internally displaced flow. so it's resources, it's strengthening the moderate opposition which is taking on the very group that has taken over that town, making sure that none of the neighbors are giving support to terrorist groups or extremist groups which would aid their efforts in seizures like that and going on a funding drive internationally because only a very small percentage of the u.n. funding appeal for syria generally has been filled at this point. >> thank you, madam chair. good morning. following up on mr. schiff's question with respect to syria that the u.n. security council's

demanded that the government of syria and opposition groups allow humanitarian aid to be deliveredded. the secretary general's report last week made it clear that the syrian government is violating the security council resolution i believe adopted in february. the administration is also on record that the syrian regime is in violation of the security council's demands, and many of my constituents -- i think i mentioned to you i have the largest syrian community of any member of congress in the country -- support helping the syrian people, and this subcommittee provided a significant amount of funding and increase for humanitarian aid to help meet those particular needs. what will the united states and the u.n. do to insure that aid can get to the syrian people? that's my principal question to you right now. >> well, the first thing we sought to do was to get russia on board with a humanitarian

resolution that included in it a list of very specific demands which capture at least some, again, of spirit of your question. a demand to lift named we seeminged areas -- besieged areas, a demand to allow cross-border access, potentially reaching up to three or four million people who have not been reached or who are in so-called hard-to-reach areas, demanding the end of the use of barrel womans, etc. and -- bombs, etc. , and alto the russians and chi these had vetoed three resolutions only things roughly related to the humanitarian fate of the syrian seem, in february they finally came on board and supported a strong resolution. that was a resolution, also, that threatened further steps in the event of noncompliance, and now because of the upon the compliance you allude to -- noncompliance you allude to, i mean, really just a drop in the bucket compared to the set of demands i've just laid out, we are consulting with our partners

about what further steps we can take recognizing that russia's history on this issue does not leave us wildly optimistic. they would be enthusiastic for another security council product but still needing to follow through on the commitments we have made. what the u.n. on the ground is doing is seeking to leverage this resolution in tactical ways. and what they can report is here or there having this resolution has allowed them to get through one cross-border checkpoint that they weren't able to get through before, you know? a lot of bureaucratic fixes, more visas, a committee set up by the government, but it's nowhere near sufficient to deal with the needs of the people on the ground. and in addition to regime obstructionism which is by far the primary culprit here in terms of noncompliance with the resolution, the fact of the terrorist and extremist groups in syria has not made this task easier for the u.n. >> and also i just wanted to ask too since you mentioned the

russians, ukraine. anything that can be done at the u.n. outside the security council at this point because the russians, obviously, will veto anything we would attempt to do to be helpful? what can be done at the u.n. to help provide some assistance to the people of ukraine right now? again, outside the security council? >> that is exactly the approach we take when we see that the security council is blocked. we look for alternative u.n. venues within broader u.n. family. and i think there are two that we have made use of so far, and we need to look at other mechanisms. the first is we had a very strong, surprisingly suspenseful vote on ukraine's status and on the legitimacy and legality of the referendum last week. i say it was suspenseful because roughly analogous vet on georgia that had to -- vote on georgia

that had occurred back in 2008 passed by a count of 14 yes votes -- i think i have the numbers roughly right -- 12 no votes and 105 abstentions. whereas this vote we got broad cross-regional support. a hundred people voted saying this referendum will not be respected and only the venezuela, i sudan, syria, dprks voted, et, voted with russia. so it was a very, very strong vote. and it has legal consequences because now legally the u.n. finding, as it were, is that that referendum was illegitimate. the other place i think we can make a big difference through the u.n. is in monitoring. and the secretary general has now sent a team of 25, 30 monitors to ukraine principally deploying in eastern ukraine in places we're concerned about the russian buildup. that is alongside a monitoring team doing election monitoring and human rights monitoring as

well. >> my time has expired. can i submit a question for the record? >> you certainly can. if we all stick to five minutes, we can do another round. >> as we are wrapping up this hearing, given the turmoil in the world, given the public's questions about what's happening in syria, what good is the u.n., what is happening in iran, i could go on and on, and we've mentioned so many of the trouble spots. i thought i'd give you an opportunity in summing up how does u.s. involvement in multilateral institutions such as unicef, unfpa help in solving global challenges? what benefit is there to the united states in participating through these institutions? why is participation in the u.n. in our national security

interests, and how is your office continuing to work toward updating and increasing the efficiency and transparency of u.n. operations and management practices in how does the u.s. oversee the operations of the united nations and other specialized agencies? how are results measured and evaluated? >> thank you. >> so make your case for why we should continue to support the united nations. >> okay. well, let me start by noting that we go to work every day recognizing that this is not a perfect body. it is a body filled with 193 governments, and we all know that governments are challenging creatures and that not all of us, you know, every day, cute in just -- execute in just the way

we would seek to execute. more than half the u.n. member states are, again, nondemocratic, it gives you some insight into scale of the challenge sometime. but there are vast regions of the world, and it feels like ever more, sadly, where civilians are being targeted, where women are being subjected to horrific sexual violence, where children are are being recruited as child soldiers, where terrorists and extremist groups are seeking to spread their bile, shall we say, and recruit others to their cause. and is we, the united states, do not want to be in the all of those places. and yet the american people have made clear their longstanding generosity, their humanitarian impulses, their solidarity with the victims of sexual and gender-based -- [inaudible] with child soldiers, with the

victims of a tsunami or any kind of humanitarian catastrophe. america always stands up and steps up first, and often it's the american people doing so through private charities right alongside the contributions today make through this subcommittee and the committee in the congress. so we don't want to be deploying our troops around the world to be dealing with every crisis of the nature that i've described. while we pay a good, hell think share of -- healthy share of the u.n. budget this terms of humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping, the regular budget of the u.n., it's the other countries of the world that pay three-quarters of the budget by and large, particularly when it comes, again, to the u.n. regular budget and peacekeeping, it's other countries that pay 71%. and it is in our interest to pool the resources of the world to deal with these crises. i give you just a few examples. i think the peacekeeping mission

in mali where terrorists and extremist elements had virtually taken over that country, and with the u.n.'s help led by the french, the africans, the united states pushing to roll back those extremists, mali now has a chance. and that's a chance not only for the people of mali which i think we would, of course, support, but it's also a chance to wipe out a threat t that at some later stage could come home to roost for us. somalia, a place that was almost, you know, a poster child for state failure now has an actual chance. they're building a government. the african union has provided troops, we have helped support that, again, thanks to this committee's flexibility. and al-shabaab is on the run, and the people of somalia have the chance to live in dignity. some security it's not, again, a perfect security situation. it's going to take a very long

time for the state to be fully recovered there, but that is another example again where we don't want to be sending u.s. forces to somalia, and we want other countries to be doing their share. we've spoken a lot about iran today. the sanctions that we have gotten through the u.n. security council are a force multiplier. you can see through the iranian sanctions regime and, again, we will wait and see what happens in these negotiations. nobody is trusting that we're going to be able to get where we need to get, but the reason that we are in the position that we are in is because of how biting that multilateral sanctions regime is and that every country in the international community is bound to those sakss. that's the force -- sanctions. that's the force of doing things through the united nations. >> [inaudible] >> thank you, madam chair. ambassador, in our last round of questioning i had a third question that we didn't get to, so i thought i'd just give us a chance to answer it. hopefully, it won't take the full time. the question was onless szobs learned from benghazi, and i know there's a lot of oversight

committees and investigations going on, but for our purposes today and where we're looking at putting dollars forward and where we finance operations, i guess, given your position in the white house during the benghazi crisis, i guess i wanted your thoughts on what we, what we could have done differently, what we've learned from it and how as a nation we can move forward to insure that that never happens again. >> thank you, congressman. i guess what i can speak to probably best or at least most knowledgeably is what i can see in the government in terms of the precautions that we now take and how we're operating. and, again, there are other individuals in the government who would be more expert at precisely what accommodations that we have made and what resources we're deploying where. but, you know, i, you know, have at least some visibility into the extent to which every

mission is being scrutinized to make sure that our diplomats who are out there serving the american people in the case of chris stevens, one of my real heroes in the government just by the way he chose to operate. i mean, he was always at one with the people, always reaching out, you know, in the internet cafés and trying to be out there really hearing from the libyans how they saw their future. and it's tragic that in the wake, it's tragic that we no longer have chris, one of the great human beings and great diplomats that this country's ever seen, and it's tragic that an attack like that, unfortunately, has us needing to -- particularly in dangerous places like libya -- curtail that kind of interaction. and we had already in the wake of 9/11 beefed up our embassy security, of course, all around the world, and that had big resource consequences.

which you're well aware of. and now we've dope, you -- we've done, of course, another overlay on that in order to answer, to make sure that the president and the congress and the american people are satisfied that our diplomats who are risking or their lives every day just as our soldiers are in some of these very dangerous environments have the protection they need and that they know that when resources are needed, that we can.com up and work with you -- we can come up and work with you and make those resources available. you know, i know we have a budget ceiling that we are all operating under with the budget control act. it is, you know, we are trying to do a lot internationally with less because the costs of beefing up those missions and enhancing that security is, of course, substantial. so as we, you know, rightly, again, act responsibly fiscally and set limits on our spending,

you know, i do want to note even though our peacekeeping budget request here is increased for the reasons that i've described, we are finding cuts across the department and in usaid in a way that we can both accommodate real world emergencies along the lines that i've described, but also the need to make sure that our diplomats are safe. >> [inaudible] >> thank you. ambassador, if you wouldn't mind, i know there were a couple of -- i'm sorry? >> [inaudible] >> oh -- >> we actually didn't use all of our time. it's a miracle in this committee. if i might just to follow up with a question. you're looking prospectively. can you look retrospectively a little bit for me? looking back, what could we have done differently to save ambassador stevens' life? >> again, i was not involved in that. i think i don't have the familiarity to offer you a productive response.

i think probably there are others who'd be better positioned to respond to that. >> thank you, ambassador. i think you didn't get to finish your response to i think i asked you four questions -- >> the human rights council i know i didn't answer, right. >> and also the u.n., u.n. reform. >> u.n. reform. yes. and, in fact, congresswoman lowy asked a similar question. >> and the other thing i just wanted to get in is to underscore what mr. diaz-balart mentioned on venezuela and also to praise you because you have personally engaged as well as the secretary has and president obama has acknowledged the very serious oppression that is going on in venezuela. but if you can more specifically discuss how we can balance the united states' role and not feed into the obvious attempt to

distract and blame his problems on the united states. >> okay. let me start, if i can, by addressing the human rights council question. i know -- don't remember exactly how you worded the question, but it was -- >> [inaudible] basically, how can we get the human rights council, through our membership, to focus less on israel and more on -- >> that was, exactly. that was the line i wanted to pick up on because what i would say is since we joined the council, since the president made that decision to return to try to reform the council from within and make the council more functional for human rights around the world, we have had a great deal of success getting the council to focus more on real world human rights abuses where we have had hess success is -- less success is getting it

to focus less on israel. and so there are fewer countries, i believe, i'd have to look at the statistics each year, but there are, you know, fewer specific country resolutions on israel from one year to rest, but it is still a standing agenda item. and the notion that israel is a standing agenda item on the human rights council and dprk, which has some of the worst atrocities on planet earth, syria, where you have a government using chemical weapons, barrel bombs and scuds against its people is not a standing agenda, it's obscene. so our challenge there is the numbers. so what we do is we use our platform to call out what is happening and to stand up for israel and to object. i indicated in my opening remarks that we also have, i think, a really important step for israel which is membership now in a regional grouping which

should not be something that we have to celebrate, but because they had had excluded in geneva for so long, this is something that has come to meet a great deal to israel and a great deal to us. and so that is happening right alongside the challenges that we face on israel within the human rights council, and we will continue to chip away, including getting israelis into leadership posts across the u.n. system which we're doing more and more. but on the functional side of the human rights council, this is the place where the first-ever acknowledgment of lgbt persons were entitled to human rights was passed two years ago. ..

>> i'm sorr >> i'm sorry lex cuba and venezuela are more challenging within human rights council because of the way the waiting for the membership and what we've done there. i mentioned this earlier, we seek to use the platform we have. we are america. people listen to us. we can show solidarity with people are suffering inside these countries. we sought to build regional but not creating formal u.n. human rights resolutions which we haven't, you know, for whatever reason haven't been able to build the kind of support we would like on that, but we can still show that in all regions of the world people are willing to condemn the human rights

abuses and the crackdowns that our existing. i would note in cuba that there have been more roundups i think in the first quarter of this year and in a very long time. so one cannot be too complacent at all on that situation. on u.n. reforms, if i may, i see a flashing red light. it hasn't become a solid red light just yet. just simply to say that there has been a huge amount of duplication in the u.n. we have a department of field support strategy that is some $250 million in cuts on peacekeeping. i mentioned earlier that per peacekeeper costs have gone down by 60% over the last five years, thanks in part to leadership of congresswoman granger and the push we've made on audits. you now have unicef, u.n. women, a bunch of other u.n. agencies were posting their odds online. the secretary doing so as well and try to make that permanent. i think it's a turning point in human culture which has been

very opaque. with great al-qaeda on waste, fraud, and abuse. and we have frozen, the regular budget growth has been growing, growing, growing. we basically, you know, frozen the budget growth, put in place a spending freeze, or -- and we're looking at staff compensation which is where 70% of the regular budget costs are a crude, and they've got to do a comprehensive review on competition. just in the last budget cycle we secured the cutting at 221 posts, which again in the human culture where everybody is once key posts or you know who and you know who, a pretty substantial achievement. >> thank you. the question is going to sit for the record i might as a%. it may not be able to stay for the answer. i the commitment i must make. the united states has long led the fight against the arab league boycott of israel and aggressively combated the

delegitimization of israel through various international forms like the u.n. the latter part of the strategy is known as bds, boycott divestment and sanctions, considered drugs at a new line of attack against israel. delegitimizing israel's actions the use of international systems, ms. use of international law, and now it's feared integration of an international codes of conduct that have the potential to really harm israel economically and politically. these remain. we effectively defeated the arab league boycott as a tool of delegitimization by establishing legal protocols and advising corporations about penalties in store for those of who abide by. while the challenge of the boycott divestment sanctions, the bds, the underlying principle remains the same. we cannot allow others to divert international systems to attack israel and we cannot allow international codes of conduct

to be turned into new weapons to come in the delimitation arsenal purchased a question, do you share my concerns? and if so what steps is the u.s. taking to ensure that the international systems which we are part and large contribute you are not taking or supporting actions to deliver to single out and delegitimize israel? the last question is, how are we engage with international bodies as they seek to establish new code of conduct that if left unchecked could be used against one of our closest and dearest allies. >> let me try to take advantage of your presence here for the next minute to say that we oppose and reject divestment and boycott's. i think secretary kerry has been very clear on this. i've certainly been clear on this. in the u.n. system the form that that has taken so far is more along the lines of what we discussed so far, the exclusion

of israel from various groupings. i just had the chance to discuss this western european and others group which, back in 2000, we were able, the united states was able in new york to get israel membership in in new york. we were always denied. israel was always denied in geneva taking advantage of the peace process, and years of lobbying and months of intense lobbying on this issue, israel was finally admitted. similarly in new york, and human rights caucus for like-minded countries that basically vote the same and sentencing on human rights issues. israel's voting coincidence with the countries were part of that group is very, very high, even higher than that of the united states. and yet for years it was excluded from the crew. we just secured membership for israel in that group. israeli officials have a very hard time becoming senior u.n. officials, but in recent years

we've gotten an israeli official elected vice president of the general assembly. the u.n. human rights council has just named an israeli an independent expert on older persons. we've gotten them on two executive committees for the discrimination against women. i mentioned these in some details because this is what legitimization looks like. this is what has happened alongside our efforts to oppose like it, divestment and unilateral statehood beds. >> thank you, madam chair. question come want to follow up because i take my clock ran out in the first round. is there any kind of diplomatic avenue, are we still open syria, or given abbas' current military advantage, has the geneva process in any other completely evaporated? and second, a lot of barriers are coming down at home in terms

of the lgbt community, there seem to be a rash of new anti-lgbt laws in africa. we seeing action in russia. but increasingly in places like eastern europe you were saying this on the legislative calendar in the parliamenparliamen ts in eastern europe, and the baltic states. what are we doing at the u.n. to try to get out ahead of this, to be proactive on this? and do you see this as part of a lisa's first eastern europe goes, putin's effort to create a new ideological war with the west and make this one of the components? >> thank you, congressman. on syria, the diplomatic process is not in a good place. that's evident for everyone. i can share personally that the meetings that we had when locked are making me, the media was in you, the challenge we're facing

is that the mediator has put forth a path forward which would have the parties, both of them then showed up for the second round of geneva finally after much preparatopreparato ry work on our part with the opposition. but bringing his conviction is that in order for these talks to go forward, one cannot exhaust the topic of terrorism when it comes to conclusion on the topic of terrorism without parallel deal with the issue of the transitional governing body, which is the cornerstone of the geneva communiqué. an extreme position, often position to this point is we will not talk about the transitional governing body and tail we have dealt with terrorism which, you know, is itself a show of bad faith, the way that they are approaching the stocks. so we are working aggressively behind the scenes,

notwithstanding ukraine and all of the other business that we are doing at present, to try to get those influence over the syrian regime to change their position. right now it is the syrians who were preventing the reconvening of another round of geneva talks. in parallel, address book all of that to the earlier but in a different context, the kessab context, it's important the moderate opposition be strengthened and we are looking at additional steps that we might take in order to enhance their efforts on the ground because something quite significant has happened over the last few months which is that they have taken on terrorist and extremist groups which, you know, so far probably is one factor behind some of the abbas regimes recent tactical military gains, infighting within the opposition but certainly in the u.s. interest for that moderate opposition who are willing to commit to protect the rights of minorities, and

who seem to have a vision for syria that is multi-confessional. it is in our interest for those elements to be strengthened. right now the regime is not, you know, does not, it does not feel that it needs to come to the negotiating table. and so that's support for the opposition will be important along the pressure those are backing the regime to bring the regime to the table. on the lgbt issue, i would agree it is complete with way you characterize it, just at the time where lgbt persons in this country are seeing a rate of progress, particularly when it comes to gay marriage and inclusion and acceptance, that isn't the important and, of course, needs to continue and

even speed up for the sake of the dignity of all people living in this country, but at the very time we had some good news stories in this country, the trend internationally is going in the opposite direction. there are laws criminalizing homosexuality in 80 countries at present. so the country that you mentioned or alluded to in sub-saharan africa and in the baltics, these are, this is a new chapter, shall we say, in what is been a chronic effort to criminalize sexual orientation. the death penalty is applied in seven countries on the basis of sexual orientation. two years ago, president obama issued a the first of a presidential directive on lgbt writes as international human rights. secretary clinton gave an incredibly powerful epic speech in geneva in human rights

council where many countries were very startled to see the united states out there leading in this way and insisting that lgbt persons were entitled to the same rights as everyone else around the world, and are a central part of what it means to promote human rights. as part of the presidential directive, we look at assistance. we look at asylum claims on the basis of persecution, and now any of these countries people of course have a well found restitutionary gourmands going door-to-door with a list of lgbt persons in laces like nigeria. russia was the first recent country to put these laws on the books, and, unfortunately, in the old days we used to talk about the importance of exporting best practices in development and security sector reform and all that, now we see countries like russia exported worst practices and other countries taking the worst aspects of the ball and putting them on their books.

but president obama began has been very outspoken on this and we'll continue to contest this and make a subject of our bilateral diplomacy and do what we can with india's along the lines i described earlier to make sure that other countries are standing with us, particularly from other regions and not just, you know, from europe and north america. >> thank you. [inaudible] >> thank you very much. members mason any additional questions for the record.

[inaudible] [inaudible conversations] >> here we are now live on capitol hill. the household and secure the subcommittee just about to get underway with the hearing on passport fraud. this issue being examined after two iranians bordered that missing malaysian airlines plane with stolen passports. you see the chairwoman, candace wheeler, the republican from michigan. ranking member sheila jackson lee from texas. live coverage now on c-span2. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> the committee on homeland security, subcommittee on border and maritime security will come to order. the subcommittee is meeting today to examine the issue of passport security. we're certainly pleased to be joined by mr. alan bersin who has been with this committee in the past and resort appreciate his attendance her here today. his thesis is negative or international affairs at the department of homeland security. mr. john wagner, excuse me, it's also been before the subcommittee for. we pressure his attendance today. is the deputy assistant director of the u.s. customs and border protection and brenda sprague to as the deputy assistant secretary for passport services at the department of state, and mr. shawn bray was the director

of interpol washington. united states national central bureau. i will more formally introduce them in just a moment. but let me recognize myself for an opening statement here this morning. and first of all of course let me start by saying all of us must and prayers are with the families of those killed and wounded at fort hood, a terrible, terrible incident that them in in my ranking member's state of texas. and certainly as we begin the very to school -- difficult task of what went wrong with be mindful to support the men and women who wear the uniform not only been overseas but certainly when they get, when they return home as well. this morning we're going to be talking about travel document security which is the cornerstone of the united states' effort to secure our homeland, it's integral to pushing our borders out, the building of terrorists and others who seek to do is harm hinges in large part on the building into trouble.

if you make are for terrorists to cross our borders without being detected, future acts of terrorism hopefully can be prevented. and i want to begin a committing the department of homeland security of the department of state for the great progress made as we have strengthened the so-called out a ring of border security. today we conduct more vigorous vetting, early in the process. we stationed dhs personnel and high-risk countries to prevent persons of concern from boarding a plane are getting a visa and where using biometrics to detect visa fraud. and in the past three years is subcommittee has actually held six areas hearings on visa and document security because we sorely understand the importance of the 9/11 commission's recommendations, and one of the conclusions actually as they said that for terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons. vulnerabilities in our documents security can be exploited by those who would do us harm so we must have robust measures in

place to deter and to ultimately detect those traveling on false documents. to that end we would certainly dismayed to from press reports that two of the passengers on the malaysian flight 370 bordered the aircraft using stolen passports, and while of course as been reported we don't have any reason to believe that these individuals were involved in an act of terrorism, it sort highlights the vulnerability in the aviation systems abroad. our thoughts and prayers go out to the families who are still waiting to learn what has happened to their loved ones and which would hope and pray that that plane will soon be found. in the united states for the work of the department of homeland security, we've made the necessary changes to keep the flying public secure, and the building of passengers to board a flight bound for the united states with known, lost or stolen passport is very, very low. in the years after 2001 the international committee through interpol created a lost and stolen travel document database

that is -- send information to a central repository and check against that database to make sure no one could enter a country or board a plane with a known, lost or stolen passport. unfortunately, only three countries in the world routinely check flight manifest against that database. the united states of course, the united kingdom and the united arab emirates. so there is no question that more countries should follow our lead, otherwise international travelers, including americans who travel internationally, are at risk. according to interpol, in 2013 travelers bordered international flights more than a billion times without having to passport numbers checked against the database. tools are in place to determine if the passport has been reported missing, and we should use every avenue at our disposal to encourage countries to do the right thing, including offering technical assistance where appropriate. in addition to not consistently

checking the lost or stolen passport database most countries are not consistently sharing lost and stolen passport information with the interpol database. the overwhelming majority of the 40 million records in the lost and stolen database comes from visa waiver program countries. in large part because it is condition for visa free travel to the united states. however those countries do not routinely check their flight manifest against the database. and as a result i will be exploring and introducing legislation and legislative solutions to encourage countries within the visa waiver program to do so. because without time reporting of lost or stolen travel documents become straight difficult for cbp through the advanced targeting system to determine if someone is lying on a false document before they present themselves to a customs officer at an airport. if a terrorist is intent to hijack an airplane, it might be duly. and even though the united

states has a robust screening in vetting process for travelers, it doesn't mean our work in this area is done. i understand cbp just recently began to check passengers on outbound flights against the lost and stolen database. we certainly are interested in hanging from our witnesses today why that wasn't done before. finally, i want to get an update on the work that the department of homeland security and cbp and the state department, and interpol, done since 9/11 to prevent those with lost, stolen and fraudulent passports from getting on a plane bound for the united states. while americans should be confident that teach-ins is doing good work vetting all of the appropriate databases, we can and should work with our international partners to strengthen aviation security for americans who travel abroad. this subcommittee stands ready to assist in any way that we can. and the chair would not recognize my ranking member, on the subcommittee, a gently from texas, ms. jackson lee for her opening statement.

>> thank you very much, madam chair. good morning to the witnesses. thank you so very much for your presence here today, and thank you again, madam chair, for reminding us as i intended to do of the tragedy that occurred in my home state, my neighbors at fort hood, texas, and to again offer to those men and women who have been brave enough to put on the nation's uniform to fight in faraway places, our deepest concern and sympathy, certainty for the families have lost their loved ones who, as i indicated, are willing to serve in the united states military, and certainly those who were injured. this is the second time that this tragedy occurred at fort hood, and second time that we've had to embrace those who, as i said, are our neighbors. i mourned with them in 2009 and will continue to do so now. i hope this committee will have an opportunity to address the

question of protecting even as this is a military issue, protecting our men and women while they're on domestic soil, and view it as a cause for zero tolerance for these kinds of incidents on the nation's domestic military bases. again, my sympathy do not only the men and women at fort hood and the leadership, but also to the people of the state of texas. this is another tragedy that we are facing, trying to find solutions, and i would make mention that even as this has gone into many, many days, that we still express our concern for the families of the passengers of malaysia airlines flight 370. i hope that it will not be their final and as there's been no determination as to what occurred to that particular flight. but today i am appreciative that we are holding this hearing as i spoke to the chairwoman in the

immediacy of the hours of determining that there were passengers on that flight that have fraudulent passports. survey there have been continuing investigations and whether not we have concluded that there was no connection, we do know that passengers traveled with fraudulent passport. and as well but american citizens were on that flight. while many questions remain unanswered regarding the tragic disappearance of flight 370, we do not know as i indicated what connection those two passengers may have had. to its demise, if any. to iranian nationals were allowed to come using italian and an australian passport -- posturing passports had been injured in interpol stoler a lost passport database. reports suggest that these individuals were not criminals or terrorists but rather a asylum-seekers hoping to reach your. nevertheless, the fact that at least in certain countries travelers can readily board aircraft using passports that do

not belong to them is a cause for concern. if a couple of asylum-seekers can do it, so can terrorists or criminals. and after 9/11 and even in other countries before that, we know that we live in a different territory with different actors and different reasons for their actions. in fact, they are known examples of terrorist comment on fraudulent documents. according to interpol, master money the 1993 world trade center bombing in new york committed his crimes after traveling internationally on a stolen passport. also the so-called white widow of a london july 2005 suicide bomber is wanted in kenya and currently at large with aliases linked to a fraudulent passport and a passport reported stolen. evidence that this is a problem. it is my understanding that the u.s. is ahead of most of the rest of the when it comes to

preventing individual talent a loss, stone or fraudulent doctors. department of homeland security systematically checks all travelers documents against appropriate lost and stolen database. these checks yield results. for example, in fiscal year 2013 u. fiscal year 2013 u.s. customs and border protection, cbp, reviewed 17,710 possible hits against lost and stolen databases resulted in 496 individuals being denied from boarding planes to the u.s. already in fiscal year 2014, cbp has reviewed 10,806 possible hits resulting in 159 individuals in denied boarding but i also want to thank homeland security and the various agencies relevant to the issue of our border security for the extended perimeters and improved security that we've had post-9/11. we are clearly, as i've often said, in a better place than we

were. thank them again for the service at what we've been able to benefit from. since flight 370 incident, not just arriving passengers but also those departing this country. while overdue, this step should post our remaining -- should close the remaining loophole applied to or from this country. hope to hear from our dhs witnesses debate about why the party passengers had not really been included in their checks and whether any analysis have been done such going to determine whether passengers have been departing the u.s. on documents that do not belong to them. i also hope that we will be able to embrace and declared the airline industry as we move forward on a number of ways to ensure the safety and security of the traveling public. hope to here from all over what this is about how we can encourage our international partners to follow the lead of you as an handful of other countries that regularly check travel documents against intervals database. it is my understanding that

traveling on loss, still are otherwise fraudulent travel documents has already come place in certain parts of the world. doing so is made possible because fewer than 20 of interpol's 190 countries systematically check passports against s. ltd. although the flight 37 incident has focused attention on the vulnerability was already known to interpol. in fact, speak at the seventh annual world summit in february just before flight 370 incident, interpol secretary-general noble lamented that only a handful of countries are systematically using sltd to screen travelers. when that technology and device is available, leaving our global security apparatus vulnerable, exploitation by criminals and terrorists. the world is getting smaller. traveled from all over the world to all over the world, this is simply unacceptable. helped her from her witnesses

debate about how we can encourage other countries, particularly those would work closely with on aviation security matters to begin regular screening passengers or doctors against interpol's the database. it is in that then i will be looking to draft legislation dealing with the enforcement aspect of this particular aspect of aviation travel. the security of the traveling public including u.s. citizens traveling between foreign countries can well be at stake as well as those traveling from foreign countries to the united states as well as americans leaving our soil and traveling elsewhere around the world. again i think chairwoman miller for holding today's hearing, and the witnesses for joining us. at this time i ask unanimous consent to allow mr. swallow, a member of the full committee, to sit and question the witnesses at today's hearing. >> without objection. >> i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman.

other members of the committee are reminded that helping statement might be submitted for the record. we are pleased today to have as an agent for very distinguished witnesses joining us today spent allow me to indicate that i am called to be part of a quorum in a market and i'll be away for just a moment. i think the chairwoman for her courtesy. >> certainly. a busy morning here on the hill and we will be having votes a little after 10 so we will move a long. mr. alan bersin is the assistant secretary for national affairs and chief diplomatic officer for the department of homeland security. previously mr. bersin service commission for u.s. customs and border protection. mr. john wagner is acting deputy assistant commissioner for the office of field operations in u.s. border protection. mr. wagner from serve as executive director and passenger programs was responsible for all travelers admissibility related policies and programs.

ms. brenda sprague served as deputy assistant secretary of state for passport services in the bureau of consular affairs, a position she held since july of 2008. and in this capacity this break oversees a network of 28 agencies and centers that are responsible for the exception -- adjudication and issuance of u.s. task force. mr. chabot is the director of interpol washington, the nsa's national central bureau, a position he has held since 2012. as director the xml for the attorney general as the official u.s. represents to interpol. mr. bray has been focused on improving partnerships between the other 189 interpol member countries and the u.s. a federal, state and local tribal law enforcement counterparts. careful statements about what is will appear in the record and the turn of recognizes mr. bersin for his statement. >> thank you, madam chair, ranking member of the, i appreciate this opportunity on this subject.

the international criminal police organization or interpol is the world's largest transnational police association with 190 member countries today. each member country as a national central bureau to conduct interval activities and could make its services within its national territory. on the service is interpol provides to the law enforcement entities of every member country is access to its sltd, stolen and lost travel document database. this database contains over 49 records provided by nearly 170 of the organization's members. on march 9, interpol confirmed that two of the passports used by passengers that boarded malaysia and fought through some have been recorded and installed a lost travel documents a base. as noted by the ranking member, interpol secretary-general ronald noble noted to the surprise of many that very few

countries systematically query the sltd database for the purpose of verifying whether a passport has been reported as lost and stolen. even more troubling is the miniscule rate at which countries outside of europe, canada and the united states visa waiver countries our country bidding information to the database. madam chair, as you noted since 9/11, the united states government and the american people have addressed the security vulnerabilities exposed so tragically on that day. in the 12 years since any thoroughly bipartisan fashion in which this committee has play significant role, we have together constructed a multilayer, fully automated, in agency approach to homeland security. as additional vulnerabilities have been revealed, and are revealed, we examine and respond to them properly in concert with the concert. -- congress. eveas we do so to in the contexf lost and stolen passports.

when an individual seeking admission to the united states presents a foreign passport, whether he or she seeks admission by land, by commercial air or by sea, that passport to screen against the sltd database prior to admission. in fact, many cases on multiple occasions. doubt as mr. wagner will explain we screen outbound passports in a way. most countries in the interpol committee do not screen travelers against the database as thoroughly as we did in the united states. meaning not at all. the alarming number of countries that report very few and in some cases no lost or stolen passport data to the sltd database. as a condition for participation as the chair noted, these a waiver countries are required to do so. the united states, canada and europe as those of the other the deputy partners according have provided a vast majority of the 49 records in the slt database.

some of the most populous countries in the world note of it including china, india and indonesia have contributed few if any records to the database. despite the remarkable department of the database, 49 records added in the past 12 years, the lack of data provided by many interpol member countries remains significant. i have had the honor of serving on the interpol executive committee, and as vice president of the americas since novembe november 2012, and i've been urging the organization to prioritize the sltd program and other border security efforts as core functions of interpol. to be sure, madam chair, congressmen, there are real and current challenges to this vision. despite the fact that dhs and the united states national central bureau have worked to incorporate recommendations for data reporting and response

times into interpol's standard operating procedures, many countries have not been able to connect their agencies and interpol does not require them to do so. the task ahead is encouraging our partners to more fully utilize the sltd database and to engage in these kinds of border screening and security efforts. this can only add to this that from a standpoint of american security. i look forward to exploring with you how we may best approach this latest challenge. it will not be the last, madam chair, and congressmen, but i take from our past experience that we can forge and resolve this matter in a satisfactorily cost-effective way. thank you for this opportunity again, and i look forward to responding to your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. bersin. mr. wagner. >> chairman miller, ranking member lee and testing which members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to appear today and to discuss our

u.s. passports are good for appreciate the opportunity to join my colleague conspicuously important issue supports the core mission of cbp. today i would like to discuss the sources of information of able to see bp, how we query this information as well as operational responses in a different travelers are desperate to deliver cbp officers to access real-time and reliable information on all travis seeking admission to the estateestates is critical for antiterrorism and anti-fraud efforts. however, secure modern document may be today, cbp must ensure that a traveler isn't fraudulent presenting another individuals valid passport or other travel documents with the dog is stolen or intentionally provided to enter the united states. cbp uses interpol stolen a lost travel document database, and department of state called through lost and stolen passport and support systems in the air land and sea environments to verify the validity and status

of travel documents. cbp also uses the sltd data on a citizen of a visa waiver program country applies for travel authorization through the electronic system for traveler authorization also known as esta. cbs tonight over 98,000 s. does since 2008 for lost and stolen records. and all travel environment air, land, and sea, cbp officers were troubled it was against tax which is our primary database that includes access to many enforcement systems including lost and stolen test -- and edit it in the air and see if i'm cbp as extra advantage of receiving airline travel information prior to departure from the foreign location to this enables cbp to address potential risk factors and admissible issues prior to boarding the aircraft. cbp will coordinate our national targeting center and our assets overseas in immigration advisory program or in preclearance oma

cornet directly with the airline to prevent boarding in cases where the esta has been denied for the traveler does not have a replacement document to the one reported lost or stolen. cbp has recommended over 650 no board recommendations to carriers in the last 18 months. in all environments cbp chordates with interpol when matches are returned from the sltd. many of the cases are actually travelers with no malice i think it. there simply travelers headed for a lost document, but later founded and are trying out to use it for travel. in ms. casey bp will verify the person's identity and if the passport is a u.s. passport we will allow the traveler to proceed but will seize the passport and returned to the department of state. in other cases the travel will have a valid replacement document for the lost and stolen one and cbp will verify that they are the to bear and about the traveler to proceed. this often occurs in the air environment when the traveler hasn't updated their airline profile with an airline and the

old passport data has been transmitted to us. if the travelers found to be present a lost or stolen passport as an impostor or is altered and tempered with a passport in any form, cbp will take appropriate law enforcement action against that traveler. in the last 18 months see pscs over 300 lost and stolen documents using attempt to enter the united states fraudulently. to enhance passport security operations, cbp has developed a carrier liaison program which provides training to airlines and security companies and identifying improperly documented passengers destined to the united states. cop keating provides airline personal hands-on instruction fraudulent document identification or passenger assessment, posture identification and traveler document verification. to date the clp has trained 33,600 airline security personnel. winters encountered a lost or stolen document, clp training instructs teachers to contact

the regional carrier liaison groups that are 20 for seven operations maintained at airports in new york, miami and honolulu. the rcl just respond in real-time to carry increased concern to plenty of the total document presented. after a determinadetermina tion a loss of some travel docket has been made, they will make the recommendation to board the passenger or denied boarding. so in concert with a part of cbp strive to ensure that travelers who present a risk are abruptly interviewed or vetted before boarding a flight bound for the united states in any document his address before traveling to give. cbs place opposite the strategic airports overseas to work with carriers and host nation authorities and has built strong liaisons with airline represents improve our ability to address threats as early as possible and effectively expand our security efforts beyond the physical port abuse but these efforts seek to keep our transportation sector safe and prevent threats from ever reaching the united states. these efforts also enhanced efficiency and create savings for the us government and the

private sector by preventing inadmissible travelers from traveling to the united states. and for the opportunity to testify today and i'm happy to answer your questions. >> think you very much, mr. wagner. the chair recognizes mr. sprague for her testimony. >> chairman miller, distinguish most of the committee to thank you for the opportunity to testify today about the many things the department of state does to promote the security of u.s. passport and to deter passport for appreciate your focus on this important topic. we at the department of state believe to prevent passport fraud we need to focus on five areas. a sophisticated document with technic advanced security features, a robust and vigorous education system, real-time sharing of data, a proactive anti-fraud program, and outraged u.s. citizens to educate them -- i'm sorry. to educate them about the important form of identification.

because of the access of passport provides, we spend years creating products with high-tech security features in photo biometric and secure limiting micro-printed, color shifting ink enhanced electronics that render these documents virtually impossible to counterfeit. but it's the sophistication of u.s. passport increases, so did efforts of those attempting to commit passport fraud. today's passport fraud most often involves fraudulent birth certificates, fake identities and the look-alike photos. passport adjudicative spend hours annually in mandated trained to make certain that they have the skills to identify there is types of fraud. we also integrate several real-time fron front-end databae checks into our education system. but this is not enough. as recent events have shown, even a well-designed, well educated passport still if on ability in the wrong hands. domestically we counter this by reporting lost, stolen and

revoked passports detected, the system and custom border protection used to screen arriving passengers at u.s. ports of entry. in turn cbp transcends us u.s. passport its season at u.s. borders so that we can identify patterns and determine whether the better submits a fraudulent passport application internationally we lead the way in reporting lost, stolen and revoked passport data to the interpol lost and stolen travel document. we provide interpol with real-time data including the passport number and date of issue so it is accessible to member law enforcement authorities worldwide. we also require all countries in our visa waiver program to report lost and stolen data to interpol if they wish to maintain vwp status. the departments of state and homeland security use the sltd to that visa applicants inbound flights and doesn't manifest and people crossing mentors at all u.s. ports of entry.

if you this is about international law and border enforcement agencies, the sltd effectively prevents impostors and is lost or stolen passports they bought or obtained fraudulently for travel. though i would our documents and systems are strong, there is never time to rest on our laurels. the u.s. passport is one of those sought after documents in the world. not only is it an international can't document it is also a legal form of identification and might be used to determine eligibility or endowment benefits, to apply for driver's license, to confirm employment eligibility, to qualify for a mortgage or to open a bank account. this means we must continually assess the passport security features and design for potential vulnerabilities and incorporate new measures as technology advances. through our website, travel top state.gov after committee outreach by our 29 passport agencies, we remind you citizens

of the importance of safeguarding their passport and provide guidance for reporting to us if the documentation is lost or stolen. we continually review our methods to improve our passport issuance system and fraud detection capabilities. and look for new ways to partner with other agencies to educate the public and strengthen existing procedures. we welcome opportunities to expand the efforts with federal, state, local and international agencies to protect our citizens and promote safe, secure and legal travel throughout the world. thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much, mr. sprague. mr. sprague. thatcher never get jesus mr. bray for his testimony. >> thank you, chairman miller, ranking member jackson lee and distinguished members of the subcommittee. it is an honor to be today to provide you with an overview of interpol stole the lost travel document database or sltd. dashing stl p.

before this i'd like to echo the previous statement of the pen regarding the tragedies there's a malaysia airlines flight 370. our thoughts and prayers remain with the families and loved ones of the flight passenger and crew. this incident servicers to underscore the need for coordination and collaboration across international borders great a safer, more secure world for us all. as you're aware the international criminal police organization commonly known as interpol is the largest police organization in the world. membership is comprised of the national police the first from 190 member companies. all of which participate in the organization on a voluntary basis to interpol exist to ensure and promote the widest possible you to assistance between these police authorities. in order to achieve this high level of cooperation each interpol never should country is required to establish and maintain a national central bureau. interval washington is that national central bureau for the united states. a component of the department of justice were unique in that we

are also omitted by the department of homeland security. enough for six year of operation interpol washington is or but a multisector workforce consisting of a full-time staff from the department of justice and an additional senior personnel represent more than 30 years law enforcement agencies. simply stated our mission is to visit the international police cooperation, communication and investigations through interpol on behalf of the united states. we support and heavily utilize interpol's database and resources, it's global, secure global complete situation in the i-20 47 and what to publish this nation. it is the it would force him that connects the uc berkeley with interpol which with resources but also correctly with our 189 other member country partners. the use of its databases are governed by interpol tools in the processing of data. it is these rules allow interpol washington to extend the service and data including sltd to u.s. law enforcement. in accordance with our internal information sharing session interpol washington is next and

the ability to query sltd to all authorities to existing u.s. law enforcement data systems. the sltd itself is essentially a search of a positive stolen and lost passport, visa and attended document information designed to prevent illicit international travel and false impersonation by criminals and terrorists. a query against the database to which there' there is a naturalt in the return of only information about the suspect document itself but will not include personally identifiable information about the document holder. although stronger encouraged by interpol, participation in sltd is voluntary and does very country by country the u.s. has embraced as a pd in its efforts as the critical point of its persecuting and transportation strategy. in the united states the bureau of consular affairs at the department of state as a designated target and source for the stove and lost passport data that is popular into the stove and last travel database. the u.s. making over 39th of

the more than 49 records contained in the sltd. u.s. participation in sltd is managed at interpol washington by our operations and command center. working on a 24 by seven basis recorded the entry of that data into the u.s. passport data into the sltd, and also verify and result in matches against the database by either for or domestic authorities. in 2013, u.s. law enforcement border security and council authorities already sop in more than 238 million times. accounted for proximate 30% of all query activity worldwide. these queries result in more than 25,000 matches against the database, the of 100 of which were resolved administratively. small number of these hits, however, represent a series potential concern and were referred to appropriate law enforcement authorities for further investigation. as you can see, interpol washington is aggressively pursued the use of sltd to enhance and support on national security investigation.

we will also continue to explore additional applications for sobt to further assist our law enforcement can be to ensure the safety of the american people. chairman miller, ranking member jackson lee, and distinguished of the subcommittee i appreciate the opportunity to testify about our role and support program and i've be pleased at any questions you have at this time. >> thank you very much, nestled appreciate all of the witnesses your it's been very, very informative. i think they're interesting issue and something that i think the united states congress needs to be looking at a bit more. because really the purpose of this hearing, first of all, we have a great story to tell, as has been mentioned here this money. the united states has a great story to tell about how significantly we have ratcheted up our security, our document security, et cetera, for our american citizens, particularly flying domestically here since

9/11. it really is a remarkable achievement by our nation i think. and so i think, i want to make sure that our united states systems do recognize and take a high degree can't have high degree of confidence and comfort level in the fact of what is happening with our various government agencies when our citizens are traveling domestically here. but as we are very aware now, and i think the american citizens are much more aware, because of the tragic of the malaysian flight 370, that if you are an american citizen and you are traveling internationally, particularly from one international country to another, they don't have the same type of security with their data documentation that we do. and suppose we know that, but yet we need to look at what types of things we could do perhaps to incentivize others to

improve a bit, particularly when they see in the malaysian flight 370 there were american citizens traveling on that aircraft. and so since that has happened, the world continues to search for that flight, we decided to have this hearing this morning really to look into this issue a bit and explore what kinds of options we might have. and certainly one that comes to mind immediately and has been mentioned here of course extensively, and there's a testament today in our opening comments, both myself and the ranking member, i mean, we have 38 countries, a list of 38 countries that do, these are our friends. these are our allies, these nations that are under the visa free travel, the vwp program. and this is a program that the united states started back in the '80s really as a way to expedite travel from our allied countries into the united states

and for tourism, for commerce, et cetera. and since 9/11 we have had great success with them. certainly checking, or giving us information, if there is a lost or stolen passport. so that is all good. however, it is interesting and it really comes like i think because of the malaysian flight that these same countries are not really checking as they could for the potential stolen or lost passport under database when people are getting on their flights. and so again these are other nations, and i think the united states obviously they are our friends, allies consider but we do this particular program with them, and i'm just wondering, i mentioned in my opening

statement, it's my intention we are looking at introducing legislation that would require them as a participant in this program to really not only just regulate submit information on lost and stolen passports, but really for these countries also to routinely check the database for passengers who are boarding these flights. and i mean, you look at the list of the countries here. as i say, these are our friends and allies, closest allies in the world. look at france and germany and greece, ireland, italy, et cetera. this information is available, and in some ways it would seem to me that many of these countries don't need to incentivize by the united states. perhaps they will start doing it on their own at what has come to light with malaysia's flight. i guess i would throw the question out, maybe start with mr. bersin. what is your thought about actually legislation about something like that and what you think would be the reaction of

our allied countries for something like that? would they consider it an intrusion? what would you you about the on something like that? >> madam chair, so of course you recognize that pending the submission of legislation this is, which the department would have a formal review process, this is in good faith response to your -- >> at i appreciate that. there has not been legislation introduced by as i said it is my intent to do so. >> is looking at. >> is looking at the what and which visa waiver countries operate now, we do require them to pipe of the database so that every time someone comes -- populate -- on the way to the united states we have been queried the database, maintained by interpol operate as ms. sprague indicated and find lost and stolen documents, and the number is great because of the requirement. also when you get on a foreign airline and they come, someone

is coming on a foreign airline from those countries, we get the same benefit because the advanced passenger information requirement of games to any flight from any country, whether visa waiver or else coming to the united states. the question you raised which is whether as a condition of protecting into visa waiver program they ought to be compelled to scream against the database with regard to all flights, regardless of whether the coming towards us are going elsewhere, poses an interesting policy question. it does address the issue that we see highlighted by malaysian airline or flight 370 and the two iranians using the lost or stolen passport issued in italy and austria. is a legitimate issue. i believe though that we are going to have to assess whether of all the things that we would require that do not have a

direct impact on us, whether that would be one of them, i think it's an open question. .. ct do that. some of them do it in a varying degrees and then the ability to run that data against the different databases that are there for that government to

access becomes a technology and resource issue for a lot of the governments to do. in the cases where we've had our closest partners develop these types of systems we've also brokered some arrangements to help them targeted information and help them review it and exchange information and located personnel on the ground to work with their authorities to help them adjudicate a lot of the manifests. we have officers in camelot and mexico. it's an extension of the advisory program. but we can work with travelers moving towards the government to identify travelers in the countries to help them identify that. we've had some success with stolen documents entering pamelor in mexico to do that so people continue to push certain countries to expand on those really on those capabilities.

>> following up with mr. wagner because it was in your testimony or one of you that testified at the cbp was going to be just starting a screening for lost in the store when passports and i know you've been doing that on the in-bomb flights. can you tell us what we are doing and why we are doing that and how it advantages us from the security risk standpoint? >> we get 100% of the passengers departing the united states manifests. historically we have screened them for some of our top threats that we face the terrorist screening, no-fly hit with some of the targeting and analysis. we've recently added to the lost and stolen database to the manifests and screaming. we are looking now i want to see 60 to 80 hits a day total.

we are looking to program the systems to be able to see if we can administratively reconcile so we are not chasing down administrative actions. the old database person is interred. as we've seen on the inbound the majority are reconciled in the administrative manner cause they have a replacement document and they lost and found the document so we see ways we can help them pinpoint the ones that are with qualified intent and depart the u.s. on the stove and document. and we are working to see if they can build and prohibiting printing the boarding pass when

they get the hits to reconcile the information and respond. it is properly credentialed the person leverages a lot of that as well. even though we are talking about peace and passports activity i think interpol is an interesting organization and you mentioned all of the members countries. for instance if you had germany got on an aircraft flying into the united states would they be sharing that information with us? not just other threats.

so i understand how the information sharing works in the organization. >> it can be received from germany and other countries. we routinely receive information regarding traveling sex offenders from a generally registered offenders in many countries that have a registry for that but for the countries that may be notifying us. we communicate that information immediately to the determination can bthatdetermination can be me disability in the united states but that's one story. there is information regarding criminals, terrorists that are chain-smoking on a daily basis. at the command center is 24 by seven, 365 s 365 so they procesd over 30,000 messages to and from

the law enforcement community. this is the work we do every day into vs ltd has been a component of the work we do to enhance u.s. security. as we spoke about it is a department of justice concern. there are no officers there. it is law enforcement and tools to help us overcome linguistic and sometimes cheap traffic barriers with other foreign countries. as you said it's been a success story we will be able to build upon in the future. >> as indicated that we can receive information on the criminal records and in fact it is the vehicle that they can

communicate and there are sex offender registered but that information was not come unless there is a specific case or law enforcement inquiry. unless that sex offender or murderer unless that record is in the fbi database we had no routine insight into what is in the data records of other countries. that's the issue. if there is a specific case or inquiry they would receive that information but the point is it's not a routine data exchange because we don't have routine access to german criminal records anymor any more than the routine access unless there is a case towards the criminal

records. >> of the subcommittee and the full committee is interested in pursuing legislation in regards to biometrics etc. and that is the only sure fire wa surefire f verifying somebody's identity in this case we are only talking about foreign travelers into the united states. they are an important tool for something like that perhaps from the department. do we have a comment on that? >> i would never pretend to be an expert but as you know they provide ten fingerprints and of course those can be verified at the entry so the most reliable biometric accepted his fingerprints and they are already collected.

>> one of the requirement requit congress imposed is that we enter into something called the preventing and combating serious crime agreements. there's also a national security agreement that's required that would facilitate the exchange of information and we do have with the 38 countries in agreement and in fact with some countries that are not members we have those agreements. but we are at the very dawn of creating the exchange and one of them is biometric we can inquiry each other's fingerprint databases and if ther there's ad light alert to call the police

authority to say what is that about. >> certainly the information is power. such a critical component of the security that we appreciate that and the chair recognizes the ranking member. >> let me thank the chairwoman and the witnesses again. in my opening statement i mentioned it to individuals and i'm going to mention them again because in the present circumstances of the malaysian flight 370, the investigation initially has not pointed to the individuals having criminal intent to bring the plane down. what is attributed to these individuals in false passports

is a benign but important issue of a desperation added that the bike drop and 50 and sympathy. i don't want that determination to cloud how serious this hearing is and how crucial that we have a construct that will let the world know this is a very serious issue and the witnesses already know that in actuality he was convicted of masterminding not just a traveling soldier standing by the wayside about masterminding the world trade center bombing and many have made note of the fact that it's something that didn't wake america up.

it was so unusual we didn't attribute it to the beginning change in the psyche of those that want to do america harm but he was traveling internationally on a stolen passport and of the widothewidow that is now wantedn kenya is linked to fraudulent passport. we must leave here with the idea that solutions are possible and i would like to put on the record that interpol has taken note travelers have boarded flights more than 1 billion times without having their passports checked against the lost travel documents. that is very much a wake-up call so i would ask you what

impediments with respect to technology privacy concerns that are blocking or keeping countries and what is your view of how the u.s. might be able to be hopeful to these countries? you are correct with the observation on the 1 billion -- >> that is a large number. >> very large. you indicate some of the difficulties the countries have. these include not only resource free strains in terms of lacking the money and priority of a budget decision. it also involves the lack of technological know-how to set up the kind of sophisticated information technology systems that are required to create this kind of automated checking. it also involves as you indicated the invisible requirements or constraints of

privacy and the lack of coordination between immigration authorities and police authorities of the provincial levels in foreign countries. all of those together within institutional, create an institutional capacity to operate the kind of automated vending systems that we have. having said that, we have to have a strategy with regard to those countries that are critical to our security to ensure at the very least they populate the stolen and lost travel document database. the important requirement for us in the near term is that we have the data to be able to see who may be traveling to the united states. the second requirement is to figure out again based on flow of passengers what strategic capacity building efforts we

ought to engage in to help countries build up the kind of technological and capital requirements to build up the systems and while we do that, to some extent we don't, for example, at the department of homeland security have capacity buildinbuilding fund and fundine sector funding in which to do that. so when we go out to do that they grant from the state department or the defense department we have to do that so-called aldehyde which we regularly do. >> that you have no budget line items that would allow you to dip into the funds and be engaged in that kind of capacity building? >> that's correct. >> when the secretary went to visit with countries dealing with tsa responsibilities in