mind. so how does this play into the of long duration mission? we will set off another three your journey if you have the break you could be your own human body the environmental control system so to start that fundamental challenge to get to mars and that research is being done right now and we're seeing successful results. we recycle urine into drinking water and water into oxygen with an amazing regenerative system and we are working on reliability with that quest. >> i hope that covers enough

of your question is. [laughter] >> thank you for having this broadcast today as my constituents i appreciate what you are doing time also proud of our country but up here it is not universal support which i think is a mistake. what would you tell my colleagues and why we should go three times the amount of money we are supporting right now or four times. i don't care. [laughter] >> i've would be happy with twice but that is the good question. it goes back to what do we provide the taxpayer? we do provide research and development we get new products and new ideas which always helps the country in

the future 10 or 15 years down the road that creates that is better for the economy in to make the country stronger to help those whole human race. >> my question comes from the bay area have three young aspiring astronauts. but the first question is the easy one for the commander what is your favorite food in space and also for commander swanson did think one day we will encounter light from another planet? >> i am a food lover but there is one particular food

that they know when they opened the desert fox all chocolate pudding cake goes directly to my locker i cannot get enough. i tried it on earth i did not like it that much better up here i am in love wes. -- i am in love? >> yes. for the follow-up as he points out there are so many sources and planets and possibilities i figure it will happen sometime. >> thank you, mr. chairman. how the. in your experience so far what has surprised you the nez held up quite well on the space station and what have you found it that we

will have to do future re-engineering? >> i would lead off with this is my first space flight i have known the space station for many years into our 5,000 the day of operations was struck me when i arrived i expected to see an aging system coming i expected it to be maybe it does look messy bet every wire has a purpose but is it an amazing shape banbury bell cared for. the engineering that went in that operating 5,000 days and that looks like a brand new machine. very impressive from that aspect. some things that are quite not as reliable you to see

how quickly technology on earth develops. introduce the ethernet cables running along the outside because we do not have that technology but we just flew up tablets and there is a device that one year ago we hardly knew now i can barely live without so building on these technologies is a surprise to see that evolution that is something with future designs i don't know how you account for that is something we have to look at >> this is the last question. >> the students of waterbury connecticut want to know that they can do to become astronauts in the future. >> study hard. you have to do well in school also find something you are passionate about it

in life whether science or technology or engineering but find an area you are passionate about and do it well and enjoying it that will show when you become an astronaut. that is what they're looking for. >> unfortunately we are out of time and so are the astronauts dinkey both for spending 20 minutes with us today we appreciate the answers and we look forward to supporting you in the future. [applause] >> thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] >> please go down the hall for the iss hardware did

thank you for being here today. this was a special event. [inaudible conversations]>> i be internet without government intervention so it is going into the future this is all done under the private sector.

>> to why would they expose their products or their grant -- the brand to tens of thousands of people? sec took the first move they will bow finally at the end of the year but we believe they will follow suit. >> a bill that tries to address concerns over must carry kerry drools over reid transmission consent to give people able to negotiate with the broadcast and the providers those that try a touche deliberate so to be on a level playing field with those types of negotiations.

>> my perspective is

congress needs this to talk about as said a law-enforcement economic issue is about to us. america as a country and something we need to do. republicans say wait a minute. you only enforce the laws that he wants to. my perspective is congress has a job to do. they ought to be doing their job. [cheers and applause] they ought to pass the bill and both branches ought to be working together. i know how hard this is president bush tried if we could not get it done with the republican congress but that is why we elect people to tackle the difficult issues we have as a country. they should be accountable. >> but your position is so interesting because obviously people inside the

party who are just resisting especially the top crowd that says you are rewarding people who have done illegal things. you are in a position of an intraparty civil war over the issue. how does that plan out? >> in the end of my side will win. [laughter] or is the end of the party. that is the way i see it to. >> raleigh? bennett this is something that has to be solved. hispanics are a growing political force if they feel the republican party does not have anything for them they will vote democrats and republicans will lose control so it is an important issue

>> i believe in the open and free internet without government intervention to look at it as we go into the future. this is all done on the private sector. >> why would they not want to expose their product duces of thousands of people? so the sec took the first move they will close at the end of that year simic of bill that tries to address concerns over reid transmission consent to give people a level when it comes to negotiate with the providers in the people to

try to deliver that media to the consumer. so when it comes to those issues. screeria -- nigeria. -

featuring archival government and educational films from the '30's through the '70s. c-span 3 created by the cable tv industry provided by your local cable provider. ves we do expect this to start in just a moment. live coverage on c-span3.

[inaudible conversations] welcome to the afternoon subcommittee hearing i think for serving as today's ranking member and are distinguished witnesses for being here this afternoon. has taken six months for our schedules to wine so we hope this a productive hearing and in march the subcommittee held a hearing to examine united nations report in north korea.

and mib a prostitute's totalitarian regime the was a shocking wake-up call from the international community to take action it has been over five months away are just waiting for significant action one of the greatest security threats to the peace and stability of asia with the exact same security challenges is also one of the great policy failures and marks the 20th anniversary since the united states and north korea's time to freeze the operation in construction of nuclear reactors suspected to be a covert nuclear weapons program. this from the vantage point as the entire time dealing gang continue to develop the

uranium enrichment capabilities in the effort to continue negotiations we took a multilateral approach with the six party talks in begin concession after concession this method of negotiation also failed and has been stalled since 2008. where are we today? north korea is testing three nuclear devices since 2006 the most recent in 2013 declaring itself a nuclear-armed state. threatening rhetoric from a young gang leader has escalated since he took the throne in december 2001 lunching nearly 100 missiles artillery and rockets in the web of illicit activities dealing with terrorist organizations around the world has expanded alternately north korea proliferation and support to grow -- groups continues unfettered without limitation.

most of the tension in today is where russia supports the infiltration of rebel troops into eastern ukraine and the middle east operatives tried to wipe israel off the map it should come as no surprise it was reported hamas militants are looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars to north korea for missiles and communications. this relationship was first made public 2009 when 35 tons of surface-to-surface rockets and rocket-propelled grenades were destined for iran that was then smuggled to hezbollah and hamas in gaza. u.s. federal judge ruled period in concert with iran and syria to provide materials and assistance fired rockets during the

offensive in 2006. but again nothing is done to obstruct the sales or the ships over the oceans with weapons in the cargo bay. over the years north korea has branded itself as a one-stop shop for a technology the alternate facilitating bad guy for whatever the anti-american friends want as long as it gets the materials it needs to maintain the power of the regime in in fact, help to build the facility destroyed by israel in 2007 north korea last nuclear test where they were reported the presence underlined the harsh reality north korea's weapons capabilities are advanced and possibly more so than i ran with that tremendous failure of efforts made by every administration since the

early 1990's progress the effort continues to mount the great threat the number three opposes the obama administration official position is a north korea is not known to sponsor any terrorist acts since the bombing of the korean airlines flight in 1997 even more staggering secretary kerry noted korea was quieter than previous years in the u.s. is moving forward to denuclearize north korea. according to our records the past violence has been the most historically active in terms of testing missiles including u.n. restricted technology adams think that behavior can be called quiet they do nothing with the strategic patients policy waiting to be siege negotiations and kim jong

noone has no interest in nuclear station. the top trading partner and source of revenue in china also dealing with little progress but we're still sitting by waiting for beijing's patience to wear thin. with the start of restarting the six party talks is futile really wasting time as beyond getting augments the material stockpile with capabilities. the administration refuses to have more targeted sanctions with russia or zimbabwe aarhus sudan or belarus it believes doing so would unnecessarily hinder to conduct foreign policy. it will not list the world's most prolific money launderer to as the country apart wray money-laundering concerns and the current

policy does nothing to help the people. i remain disappointed so little has been done to hold the kim regime responsible for the terrific human rights abuses detailed in the commission for inquiry. north korea is the grave threat to our allies in asia we cannot wait for them to decide if they want to negotiate. non-nuclear number three is the elusive goal if the administration maintains the current strategic trajectory. the kim regime is responsible for the horrific deaths of people not only within north korea but around the world. this time deeper resources together and act. rewarding them for reversible steps that it will help denuclearization has failed before so let's not by the same horse twice

for a pilot for to hearing from witnesses i will now yield to the ranking member. me minutes. >> thank you, chairman. thank you for calling this important hearing. also want to thank the witnesses today for your service to our country and your patience in what has to be one of the biggest diplomatic challenges in terms of moving north korea forward. as mentioned, this year marks the 20th anniversary of the agreed framework between the united states and north korea. our foreign policy approach towards north korea has always been challenging given that north korea's posture in the region is inconsistent, and at times aggressive. that said, throughout the years we have tried on numerous occasions to negotiate with north korea on denuclearization, also promoting the strategic patience approach. however, i continue to be very concerned as the chairman's mentioned with north korea's

nuclear ambitions, its aggression towards our allies in south korea and japan, and its dismal human rights record. north korea's testing of ballistic missiles and nuclear tests throughout the last 15 years is unacceptable and poses serious security concerns in the region. earlier this month north korea fired more than 100 rockets and artillery shells towards south korea's border, presumably in protest of joint u.s.-south korean military exercises. and our allies in japan, even as they attempt to promote diplomatic dialogue with north korea on resolving the abductions of japanese citizens, the kree nan people's army launched short-range missiles into the sea of japan in late june. these type of provocative actions towards our allies are deeply concerning. the u.s.-china relationship, along with our bilateral relations with south korea and japan is crucial in solving the interkorean conflict. we have to take a regional approach and we have to work

together with our partners in the region. the conflict has multi-lateral implications, and therefore is not only a u.s. interest. as the world's greatest democracy, we must take a tougher stance with the international community on north korea's threatening antics. north korea must view our partnership as a regional effort to support a peaceful and stable pacific region. we have to put the pressure on the north korean government with stricter sanctions so we can engage in diplomatic dialogue and make positive steps towards denuclearization. we should also encourage north korea to enforce the 2005 six-party talk agreements. north korea should be sincere with its commitment to the 2005 joint statement and allow iaea inspectors to renew their activity in the country. i'm also concerned with north korea's deplorable human rights record. north koreans do not have freedom of speech, movement or religion, they're also subject

to chronic starvation and a dismal public health system. the u.s., based on our values as americans, should remain a strong supporter and leader within the global community and promoting human rights. i look forward to reviewing our actions, positions and policies toward north korea as we work an denuclearization and their human rights record. mr. chairman, with that i'd like to yield back. and thank you for calling this hearing. >> the gentleman from california is recognized for opening statement. >> thank you. mr. king, welcome home. mr. chairman, thank you for holding these hearings. it was just a few months ago that you and i were at the dmz and also discussing north korea with president park and with prime minister abe. north korea doesn't trade with us, doesn't need us. it needs china from which it obtains enormous subsidies. we should be trying to change the behavior of north korea directly and, more importantly,

china with a combination of carrots and sticks, even though the north korean government is despicable and political we could all try to outdo each other and who could be more opposed to the government, both carrots and sticks are call for. on the carrot side, we ought to be discussing with north korea a non-aggression pact. they have asked for that in the past. it isn't our usual way of conducting state department business, but it's something they want, something we can give them, and if they ever see that mr. cheney might be vice president again, they might appreciate an official u.s. position against invasion. second somebody we can tell the chinese that even if there is unification, no american military forces will be stationed north of 38th parallel. as to sticks, we have to look at the lopsided trade relationship with china.

access to the u.s. markets is not guaranteed by the u.n. charter. north korea may not be quite as dangerous as other states because it is not as ambitious as iran. it seeks only to oppress its own people. but with a an erratic government, shown to be even more erratic in the last six months, and a growing nuclear stockpile, we have every reason to try to trim the danger posed by north korea. yield back. >> thank you. gentleman yields back. i'd now like to introduce our distinguished panel here this afternoon. glen davis, the ambassador. special representative to secretary of state for north korea policy. he was appointed in january 2012 to facilitate high-level engagement with other -- our other six-party talk partners. he serves as a senior emissary for u.s. engagement with north korea. he also oversees u.s.

involvement in the six-party talks process, as well as other aspects of our security, political, economic and human rights, and humanitarian assistance policy regarding north korea. special representative davies is a career member of the senior foreign service and served as the permanent representative of the united states to the international atomic energy agency and the united nations office in vienna. his prior assignments include principal deputy assistant secretary of state, bureau of east asian and pacific affairs, and executive secretary of the national security council staff. we welcome you this afternoon, mr. ambassador. i'll next introduce robert king. ambassador king became the special envoy for north korean human rights issue in november 2009. ambassador king works under ambassador davies and has the lead on human rights and humanitarian affairs. prior to his appointment, ambassador king worked on capitol hill for 25 years. 24 of those years as chief of

staff to congressman tom lantos. he was concurrently staff director of the foreign affairs committee of the u.s. house of representatives, democratic staff director of the committee and held various professional staff positions on the committee since 1993. ambassador king holds a ph.d in international relations from the fletcher school of law and diplomacy, tufts university. he has authored several books and numerous articles on international relations and we welcome you here this afternoon as well, mr. ambassador. i'm sure y . .the yellow light will come o. means you got a minute and we hope you wrap up as close as possible to when the red light comes on. we'll limit ourselves to five minutes as well. we'll begin with you, ambassador davies. you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. thank so much, senator bera, members of the committee, thanks

so much for inviting me and my colleague, ambassador king, to testify today on u.s. policy toward the democratic people's republic of korea, dprk for north, commonly known as north korea. the north korean regime is a global pariah working against the interests of its own people, its neighbors and the world. >> would you mind pulling the mike just a little bit closer? make sure everybody in the room can hear. >> that's better. it violates its obligations by pursuing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles posing a growing threat to the united states. our friends and allies and the global nonproliferation gime our friends and allies in the global liberation regime. they both them enormous amount of the scarce resources to weapons to a massive standing army and the vanity projects all on nine out of 10 north koreans have suffered. we have no illusions about that age are the regime. we have refused provocations with concessions. we have instead tighten sanctions and told dprk that

neither its occasional charm effects or his frequent aggressive behavior will lead us to accept a nuclear-armed north korea. i've call recent demonstrations robe and to engage with possible but will apply pressure is needed. despite dprk backtracking we remain committed to authentic and credible dean agrees a shunt talks but talks won't succeed until pyongyang recognizes and demonstrates that it will live up to its promises. regrettably the dprk increasingly rejects meaningful negotiations. instead instead it has unleashed a a multiple provocations and a strong condemnation and increased its isolation. just in recent weeks it has conducted repeated ballistic missile launches in violation of u.n. security council resolutions. these followed similar launches earlier this spring punctuated on march 30 with threats to conduct a new type of nuke lear test. the dprk says it wants talks

without preconditions. translation, it seeks open-ended six-party talks to gain acceptance as a nuclear weapons state and to camouflage its secret weapons development. we are not interested in talks unless their primary order of business is implementing north korea september 2005 promise to denuclearize. the republic of korea is squarely at the center of our efforts. there is no daylight between us on what we expect from north korea. president obama speaking in south korea in april expressed support for president progressive unification. the u.s. are up a alliance in its 60th year is stronger than ever. our day-to-day combined efforts to maintain peace and stability on the peninsula sends a strong deterrent signal to north korea that the security it seeks is not to be found in nuclear weapons. our growing u.s. rok japan trilateral cooperation also sends a powerful message of

deterrence to pyongyang. as north korea's last remaining protector and patron china has a key role to play in convincing north korea to denuclearize. that is why north korea remains at the top of a bilateral agenda with beijing. secretary kerry raised prominently there in early july. we welcome the steps that piercy has taken to oppose john yang's nuclear weapons program. since 2012 china has voted for two new rounds of u.n. sanctions and last year published a 900 item item control lists banning export to north korea. together with our allies and partners the end partners the seek to show it stands in the way of the secure future it says it wants. we continue to increase the cost of its illicit activities by unilaterally tightening sanctions. we work closely with u.n. security council and like-minded partners to ensure full implementation of the four key security council resolutions. the july 2013 seizure by panama of a huge cache of military gear

demonstrates u.n. sanctions are effective. the welfare of north korea's people is the central focus of u.s. policy. the vast majority who suffer from the government self impoverishing military first policy. the u. n. soper and report detail the systematic widespread gross human violations committed by the dprk. my colleague robert king effort many years demonstrate that human rights is a constant focus for us. the three u.s. citizens who are being held by north korea. their continued detention is a serious tumbling block to improve u.s. dprk relations. we will continue to advocate for their freedom and thank congress for its steadfast support in this effort. mr. chairman we aim to convince the dprk comply with its obligations and its isolation and respective rights of its people. each outrageous north korea asked his credits the assertion is driven to act belligerently

by the others' hostility. it is now clearer than ever that north korea is developing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles merely to prolong the camera shame and to obtain benefits from the international community. north korea alone is responsible for north korean actions and resolving the dprk nuclear program is a multilateral task. just as north korea's original aggression against the south was mad with a strong response from united nations standing up to north korea today requires a concerted effort by the entire international community. thank you again mr. chairman and members of the panel for the opportunity to appear before you today and i'm happy obviously to take your questions. >> thank you very much investor davies and we now turn to ambassador king. you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much mr. chairman congressman korea and members of the committee. i will focus on human rights aspects of a policy in which

there has been broad bipartisan cooperation. i want to thank you mr. chairman and committee members for your interest in the north korean human rights issue for the hearings are upheld, the meetings you have held both here and in seoul in tokyo with victims and their families. north korea remains a totalitarian state which seeks to dominate all aspects of its citizens lives including denial of basic freedoms and human rights. reports for tray of vast network of political prison camps where individuals are subjected to forced labor under horrific conditions and the government commits human rights violations including extra-judicial kid -- extra judicial prolonged arbitrary detention as well as rape forced abortion and other sexual violence. this past year we have made significant progress on efforts to increase international pressure on the north to improve its human rights. in march of this year the u.n.

human rights council, in march of last year the u.n. human rights council established a landmark commission of inquiry to examine grave widespread and systematic violations of human rights in north korea. refugees from north korea gave the commission first-hand accounts of abuse and violence in leading international experts describe the government policies that repress their people. public hearings were held in seoul tokyo london and here in washington d.c.. video and written transcripts of those hearings are available on the u.n. web site. the commission's final report was one of the strongest and finest reports the u.n. has produced. the commission concluded that the gross violations of human rights have been and continue to be committed by the north korean government and its officials and in many cases those violations made the high standard, the high threshold required for proof of

crimes against humanity and international law. the commission woramalee presented this final report in march of this year after hearing from the commission the council overwhelmingly approved a resolution calling for accountability for those responsible for the abuses and for the creation of a field office under the high commission of human rights to preserve and document evidence of these human rights abuses. south korea has agreed to host this office. building on this momentum in april the united states with australia and france can be the first-ever u.n. security council discussion of human rights in north korea. the commission presented its report to north korean refugees spoke of their personal experiences. 11 of the 13 security councilmembers who attended that meeting expressed support for the reporting called for accountability for the crimes that it outlined.

as i have participated in the various u.n. meetings this past year to things that struck me. first it is clear that the north is feeling the growing international pressure, amounting condemnation of its human rights record has struck a chord in pyongyang. second with a growing number of countries critical of north korean human rights the only country to defend the north are the world's worst human rights violators belarus, cuba, iran, syria zimbabwe. mr. chairman another key human rights matter that i want to raise is our effort to increase access to information by the north korean people. that country is one of the most closed societies on this planet. internet access is preserved for a tiny tiny elite. it's illegal to own a radio or television set that can be tuned to any channel other than the official government media. anyone caught listening to foreign radio or television will be sent to a reeducation camp.

despite these consequences of listening to foreign media 35% of north korean refugees and travelers listen to foreign radio broadcasts in north korea. foreign dvds are now being seen by even larger numbers. 85% of those interviewed have seen foreign primarily south korean, media. some 2 million cellphones prevent north koreans from communicating with each other although only domestic calls are permitted in phone uses carefully monitored. because of the closed nature of north korea are international media efforts are among the most effective we have of breaking the government information monopoly. thank you for continuing congressional support for the broadcasting board of governors and the media it supports including radio free asia and the voice of america. finally mr. chairman i want to reiterate one point that investor davies has made. we have no greater priority than the welfare and safety of u.s.

citizens abroad. we continue actively to seek release on humanitarian grounds of kenneth a. bay matthew miller and jeffrey fowles so they may be united with their families. just as important is north korea address the issues ambassador davies has talked about in terms of security and nuclear issues it also must address its egregious human rights violations. the choice is clear. if north korea does not take this action it will continue to face greater isolation, combination and increasing pressure from the international community. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you very much mr. ambassador. members we will have five minutes of questions and i begin with my cell. ambassador davies on july 20 secretary kerry was quoted as saying north korea has been quieter. i wouldn't describe the historic number of missiles and rocket

and artillery launches this year so far have been nearly 100 s. quiet. i also don't believe that solely because north korea hasn't staged another nuclear test this year that we would necessarily call pyongyang's behavior quiet. can you perhaps clarify why secretary kerry is describing north korea as such and tell us how to justify that classification? >> mr. chairman the secretary said a lot of things and it was one thing that was said. thing to place it back in context the secretary was referring to the fact that we are now sometimes on for the last strategic provocation by north korea. it's been a while since they have launched a three stage intercontinental missile or tested a nuclear device. >> do you think you would want to rephrase that perhaps differently or would you? >> i think in context it's easy to understand what the secretary

was saying which is the the cooperation the collaboration and diplomacy that we have conducted with south korea, china and other partners in the process has gotten the message through to pyongyang that when it acts strategically when it tests a nuclear relation of the only country on earth two has done a business surgery the world will react. it will react strongly and unanimously. so i think that's what the secretary is referring to. sousley the case the secretary has spoken to this as of other senior officials that north korea's recent behavior is unacceptable. the fact that it continues time after time to launch these ballistic missiles and violate security council measures. >> i would certainly agree with you in the banisters and that is unacceptable. i certainly would not inquired but that's okay. i will turn to ambassador king at this time if i can. ambassador you have done a commendable job representing the

north korean human rights portfolio. understand the difficulties he faced during the administration doesn't make a human rights issue in my view enough of a top priority. i think at best a second-tier issue behind nuclear proliferation even if it's given sometimes lip service by calling calling it as top priority and constant focus is i'm disappointed that following the release of the u.n. commission inquiry report in my view little has been done. no human rights sanctions and no executive orders and no move for a vote from the security council. ambassador king can you tell us what is being done at this time to hold north korea accountable for the mass atrocities described in that report? it was a horrific thing to read and why there has been several movement since the report's release and then also are you aware there are three americans currently detained in pyongyang?

i am deeply concerned particularly about their well-being and safety and jeffrey foul's is from right outside of my district in ohio. i'm told he is being brought to trial accused of carrying out hostile acts against the count country. can you provide us with an update about the situation and where in the process they have is to get these individuals released out of north korea and i certainly understand in a forum like this you have to be careful because they'll want to jeopardize their situation or put them in any more jeopardy than they already are so i understand that but agree we can handle that in a forum like this i would appreciate some comment. >> thank you very much for the question mr. chairman. with regard to the intention to north korean human rights eppolito was lyndon johnson that said we walk and chew gum at the same time. think that's what we are trying to do in terms of pushing both the nuclear issue but also pushing a human rights issue and

i think as we have talked earlier there is a lot that has been done this year with the release of the report. we have been attempting to use the u.n. report to continue to put pressure on north korea. in the u.n. security council have already had an informal meeting where we have 13 of the 15 members attend discussed the report and discuss its recommendations. we are also in the process of looking towards activity in geneva. we will continue our pressure in geneva, human rights council on the human rights report. we are also going to have discussions in the general assembly in october in which the commission of inquiry's report will be discussed. there will be a resolution that will be prepared and adopted for the general assembly by the end of this year. we are very active in terms of how we might further push this forward in terms of action by the security council.

with regard to sanctions we are looking at sanctions. one of the issues that we need to do is try to do whatever we do in concert with other countries. sanctions by the united states alone are very limited. we have very little relationship with north korea and very little economic connection. to the extent that we can work together with our allies and jointly adopt sanctions and look at the actions we can take i think the more effective those issues will be. a brief quick comment, the three americans who are being held in north korea are of great concern to us. we communicate with the north koreans are concerned and requested repeatedly they be released on humanitarian grounds. this includes mr. fowles as well as kenneth bayh and jeffrey miller. we are hoping to be able to have some progress on that. we continued to press the north koreans. we continue to work through the swedish government which takes

care of our interests with regard to american citizens there. i have briefed yourself on this. i know you are aware of that. if there's anything we can provide you directly i'd be happy to talk with you about it. >> i thank you for that. i'd like to continue to follow up with you on this staff level on mr. powell in particular. thank you very much. now recognize the acting ranking member of the gentleman from california mr. barra. >> thank you mr. chairman. ambassador davies in her opening testimony i think you've laid out the framework that said every movement forward really starts with a framework that was laid out in the six-party 2005 six-party talks as a starting point for us to move forward. also ambassador king and ambassador davies in describing north korea and describing this global pariah you describe the crimes against humanity and the human rights violations and it

is from this vantage point when you look at the camera shame if a regime that is less focused on its people and more focused on itself and creating and i emphasize with the difficulty of these negotiations. we can continue to further isolate north korea but we have also seen when we do that isolation how the cameras were same response in provocative manners. i think you've accurately layout that this is not a u.s. north korea negotiation. this is a u.s. japan korea china russia negotiation in the framework of regional stability. of those countries we all have a vested interest in creating a stable region that the key

really in this case lies with an active engagement on china's behalf. i guess ambassador davies i would like you to comment on the talks that we have had with china. how china is viewing the new north korean regime and comment on china's role in these conversations moving forward. >> happy to do that sir. thanks so much. china and north korea are not at their best historical moment right now. china was very vocal and active beginning over two years ago when the new third generation of leadership took over in pyongyang and signaling to the north korean regime that they would not support north korea taking provocative acts and north korea went ahead and did

it. so in a sense north korea has not been a good partner of china as of late. this has triggered i thank a debate in china about the nature of its relationship with north korea. the chinese have begun to take acts that are somewhat remarkable in a historical scheme of things. publicly signaling and warning north korea not to engage in strategic provocations publishing its 900 item control list, a control list which is somewhat dramatic cutting off banking relations with the foreign trade bank and the trade bank of north korea. also imposing strictures on customs controls and so forth. our role in this is to work with the chinese to try to figure o out, and this is the top down.

the president has been engaged in this in a series of meetings with xi jinping. how can in our bilateral diplomacy but also working with our partners and the five parties convince north korea that its future does not lie in pursuing bees -- weapons of mass destruction. its future lies in living up to the promises it made in the middle of last decade abandoning these weapons coming back into the international committee behaving better and the chinese have done these things. we have said to china that we appreciate it very much. we said there's only one problem with the acts that china has taken and that is of course they have not yet worked to fund mentally change the tactics of pyongyang so this is a work in process that we have made progress. i think the new leadership in beijing understands they can't

retain the status quo forever. this is a case where i think if we keep at it in a multi-bilateral endeavor with rok at the core of our concerns and diplomacy china also quite central if we can ultimately make progress. >> and if we look at the north korean regime that is provocative and potentially unstable in the region as an interdependence increasing trade between korea and china, japan and china, ourselves and china are economies are increasingly interconnected and we all benefit from a stable region that allows trade to occur. there's a real -- china has to recognize that an unstable region is not in china's interest and really create some problems so we do have to move forward on the regional conversation. i hope china is increasing the

pressure and increasing and isolating north korea. they are on the right path so thank you and i yield back. >> that the gentleman's time has expired. we will now recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania mr. perry is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. gentleman thanks for being here. i was a little late so i missed some of your testimony that listen to some of the answers to the questions. it just gave me some new questions and some new things to think of. mr. davies when you talk about we have made gains one of my questions is going to be the strategy of strategic patients and many contend it really hasn't done anything and my question would be what are the significant results of that? quite honestly i feel like asking what other significant or insignificant results and maybe i should first as the strategy of strategic patients, what is

the timeframe of this? are we looking at 1000 meters? is this my lifetime because convincing north korea's leadership that this isn't their pathway to the future, i mean who are we kidding? does anybody in this room think that these people have the same mindset about their future that the people in here have? the leadership? may be peasants, maybe the underclass, maybe the people cited in the human rights council report have that view of some brighter future possibly and that they should change. what would motivate the people at the top to change anything? i'm really curious. let me give you a question. what are the significant or insignificant results? how long is the strategy supposed to go and what makes you think these folks would change the mindset whatsoever?

>> i have been at this job for two and a half years and i have never described the policy is strategic so it predates me. it's inactive. secretary of state windy was asked about when he came into office said no that's not our policy. our both the strategic impatience with north korea and will continue to do everything we cannot to have a kaffeeklatsch and convince them out the logic of that but to use pressure in particular to point out to them that there's only one way forward and is the peaceful diplomatic path forward living up to their commitments and promises they made freely 11 years ago and it's going down this path of denuclearization. i think what they care about the most is pyongyang this regime is surviving. they want to preserve the status quo. they don't want anything to rock their boat. it's the world's only historical example of a dynastic communist

system father to son now the third generation. they want to keep that party obviously going on. what we are seeking to do with china, south korea, japan, russia and the rest of the international community is pump up the volume of the message to north korea that that's the road to ruin for north korea that trying to pour scarce resources into the development of these expensive weapons systems while also trying to feed their people which they have not been able to do adequately for now almost a generation isn't going to work. what they need to do is give up these weapons, began to play by the rules begin to live up to their promises. >> i know this is completely interrupting and a return to listen but i have a limited amount of time. pumping up the volume on the rhetoric, they are hoping to keep it going and as for someone in the west or coalition partners telling them it's not going to work from their

perspective it's worked for three generations. we are not going to rock the boat and with all due respect folks the human rights council includes the rights -- likes of cuba and the democratic republic of the condo in some of these bad actors that abuse their own citizenry and acting like that's going to be a vehicle to shake north korea's leadership office foundation. i would like to have whatever folks you are drinking in eating everyday because you have a wonderful view of some rose-colored future. to me, we at the united states. listen i'm not trying to pose upon a 20-year-old failure in my opinion so it's not fair to impose all of this upon you. .. 30, 40 years and expecting a different outcome.

if i'm here in 40 years we'll have the same conversation. you can go ahead and comment. >> we're not just talking about diplomatic messaging and sending them nice letters. we're talking about cutting off inputs through sanctions, and there's great successes. when panama rolled up the largest shipment of north korean conventional weapons in july of last year on a korean freighter trying to go through the panama canal that was an indicator the rest of the world gets the message. when 80 countries condemn north korea's decision to test a nuclear device at the beginning of last year and took action to join with the sanctions regime internationally to impose costs on north korea, that's what we're talking about here. no, we're not talking about an attempt to convince through a high school debating society. we're talking about reduce their

running room, prevent them from selling their weapon systems that they need to sell in order to get inputs for their weapons program. but we're also talking about keeping a hand open to north korea if they have this change of mind. that's the diplomacy part of them. i was engaged with them at the beginning of 2012. we cut a modest dale with them to give them a chance back which is security guarantees. they chose not take it. instead they launch ad rocket in honor of the 100th anniversary of his grandfather's birth. that was his choice to make. the result was near universal condemnation and action taken by nation states. it's a little bit like watching paint dry. i understand that. the cold war took three generations. sometimes these problems are so big they take patient application of increasing amounts of pressure accompanied by diplomacy in order to get these actors to realize they are going down a path that's leading them nowhere.

that's our strategy. and the alternative, we're all ears. >> the gentleman's time has expired. i would like to associate myself with the frustrations of the judge from pennsylvania. i think well said. the gentleman from virginia is recognized for five minutes. >> well if we're associating ourselves with frustration i'm frustrated too and i'm sure you are and everyone in the audience is. i'm not quite sure what the relevance of our frustration is to fashion a public policy that creates change. and i would like to explore that with both of our witnesses. first of all, as you know, or may know, we managed to build the other day on the floor, chairman royce and myself that passed unanimously adding to the sanctions regime on north korea and i assume you both probably were aware of that and welcome your reaction.

i mean i assume you support it and hopefully if it becomes law we can use it as another tool in the bag. ambassador davies? >> for us it's a third rail to comment on pending legislation. i think sanctions are a tool that's a value, and i think we demonstrated that through the actions we've taken unilaterally and working with our partners around the world. we remain very open to further sanctions options. whether they make sense to deploy them to use them i'm committed to finding a multilateral way forward. i wish there was a silver bullet fired to solve this problem. >> let's explore that just a little bit. where do you think the pressure points are -- i mean i heard what you were saying about china which was quite intriguing, but in some ways if china has lost leverage over the regime at

pyongyang then where are the pressure points that the west can turn to or south korea can turn to the try to rein in behavior or, you know, reward good behavior, punish bad behavior. where are those leverage points? >> sure. well china hasn't lost leverage. they've just decided there are limits to the leverage that they are willing to exercise. so when it comes to food and fuel for north korea, china is absolutely critical in that respect. so there is more that china can do. but we think it works much better if the world in particular the neighbors in north korea act together on this, supported by the rest of the international community. so, this is the achilles heel. it can't feed itself because it's broken its own economic system, hollowed it out over the

years. so in terms of ways to put pressure on them, these are some of the ways that we can use to do that. >> and i appreciate that. but the normal kinds of leverage when you look at sanctions regimes, you know, we're looking at it on russia right now. well the ruble is exchanged. they have a stock market. they have external investment. they have trade flows. all of which can now be influenced in a way they were not as influenced when they were the soviet union. so they are feeling some heat. we don't have that kind of leverage with the north korea regime, do we >> we have limited leverage because we have almost no trade with them, that's correct. >> of course, they use their nuclear program as leverage over the west in terms of food supplies, emergency food supplies and the like. >> that's correct. >> yeah. >> i should say one of the biggest points of leverage is the strength of our alliance

relationships particularly south korea because it's their peninsula and japan. our ability to defend our friends and ourselves against north korean threats is a huge part what we have. >> let me explore the china relationship again. if i understood your testimony in a sense there's been a reassessment in china of the nature of relationship with pyongyang. is that your testimony >> they are debating it. >> they are debating it. do you believe as part of that debate the new leadership in beijing -- first the economic ties to some korea is for more than north korea? >> sure. >> given they are a stakeholder in the success of the capitalist korea economy do you believe

they are more open to pressuring the north for say market reforms similar to their own? >> they've been trying to convince north korea for years to engaging reform of their economy and the north koreans have resisted that. >> what leverage are the chinese prepared to use to rein in belligerent behavior, try to achieve some of those market reforms, and are they prepared, do you believe, in some kind of timetable to move eventually towards an accomodation with the south if not outright reunification with the south. >> this is one of the fascinating conversations that have occurred during the recent summit meeting between the president of china and president of south korea. beijing is voting with its feet. president of china has met multiple times with its

counterpart in south korea. has yet to travel to north korea. things are changing. i wish they were faster. these are the changes i'm observing. >> the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. how has ruhani's regime changed the relationship? >> we watch any prolie feration or signs of proliferation between him and his regime. >> any suggestion that north korea and iran have intentionally focused on different aspects of nuclear weapons capability to speed up the final result of both countries. >> you're starting to get me deep down into intelligence matters. these are the sort of things we would be happy to brief you on

in a closed hearing. again, a matter of serious concentration and strong study by the administration. >> given iran and newark's cooperation in the past, do you think it's likely that north korea would share any future nuclear test data with iran? >> that's calling for speculation on the part of the witness. i just don't know. >> i don't think we're bound by the federal rules of civil -- >> i'm sorry. again, i mean i think intelligence information -- >> the witness will answer the question. >> thank you, urinyour honor. >> you may proceed. >> pardon me could you restate that. >> it's a concern of iran and north korea have cooperated in the past. >> i think there's every incentive between them to

cooperate to some aspect of this that's correct. >> you don't think, the rihani regime hasn't changed any of that dynamic that has led to the cooperation in the past? >> not that i'm aware of but one would hope there would be changes. >> a report suggests north korean energy needs have been met by iran and that iran's desire forea armaments have bee met. what do we know about trends in oil consumption by north korea and if they are stockpiling iranian oil? >> i'm not aware of iran oil to any great extent i will say to north korea. i'm not aware of that. >> switching to russia a little bit. how have increased tensions between russia and west affected russia's relationship with north korea? >> well, russia's relationship with north korea fundamentally

changed in 1989/1990 when the soviet union disappeared and the client relationship that existed did you say appeared and so now they have a very, very small economic relationship quite frankly. they have a political relationship. but it's not nearly as important as that between beijing and pyongyang, between china and north korea. >> so you don't believe that the russians have intensified or accelerated any weapon sales to north korea in recent years? >> i'm not aware of anything significant in that regard, no, sir. >> you know, north korea skirts international sanctions in a lot of different respects. you know, one thing, i believe they are one of the largest suppliers of counterfeit cigarettes in the world believe it or not and counterfeit currency as well. any current administration actions to close these loopholes and more rigidly enforce the

sanctions that you would like to expound on for a minute and ten seconds. >> sure. from the standpoint of count counterfeit goods, there was a day it was a booming business. that day has passed. we watch that very closely. north korea will, obviously, stop at nothing to try to gain resources to use, to develop its weapons program and that's why we concentrate so much energy on nonproliferation not just unilaterally but with our friends and partners. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. in listening to your testimony i think it's rather interesting, again, with one of the key players with basically the rogueness of north korea and

what they are doing in their relationship towards iran should be at least something studied a little bit more and using your words and i may have gotten this just a little bit wrong. but it was something to the effect of study and watching what is going on. that to me -- and i want says something in your testimony, it says ultimately, mr. chairman, our policy aim is to bring to realization that north korea must take steps necessary to end this isolation. in light of that, what we'll call the desirous goal what many experts contend that administration strategy of strategic patience of wait and see have not yielded anile results but has served north korea by offering more time or affording more time to pursue its own objectives. what's the administration's assessment of its strategy of engagement and strategic

patience? >> our assessment is that we've made some progress not nearly enough. we got lot further -- >> what would you say your greatest accomplishment is? >> our greatest accomplishment is in achieving in just the last couple of years two united nations security council resolutions with teeth that had attached to them resolutions. these were unanimously achieved. china voted for them. russia voted for them. hezbollah, hamas, iran this whole nexus of issues we're doing more than studying and watching this. obviously what we're doing is seeking to disrupt illicit shipments, enforce these sanctions. we're doing it with our partners. we know they naturally would like to deal with each other. we are doing everything we can to prevent that from developing. >> what other things beyond two united nations resolutions which may or may not have the teeth or

enforcement some would like to see, beyond that what's the next step. what is the next big accomplishment. what is the next big thing to ensure what you say is your own goals, to encourage north korea to become a model citizen which under the current leadership i'm not even sure it understands the definition of model citizenship. it's a discussion here to have. what would be the next process? >> we would settle for north korea starting to do what it promised to do a long time ago and has tentatively started to do in past which is to take steps in the direction of denew c -- denuclearizing. eventually the dismantlement in the nuclear weapons program. that's what we've been engaged in for many years and we made

progress in particular with china keeping the solidarity of china and rok with us. no daylight between any of the three allies in order to get north korea moving down that path of denuclearization. we're in a pressure phase. that's what we concentrated a lot of pressure on is putting pressure on north korea so it understands it only has one option and that's the peaceful option of denuclearization. >> i understand that. i discussed with it my very capable staff. but there seems to be at least somewhere along the line for north korea at least some ways around what has been quote put in place for strategic containment and isolation for them because at this point some of that is just not, in fact, if anything there's been actual, i don't want to say regression but not a lot of progress shown.

they seem to be happily going about the fact that they are isolated and would like to get back but they want to do so on their own terms. i guess the concern and the good part and you appreciate the chairman having this discussion is just simply the fact of working with others which is a good thing but somewhere there's a gap in the system. somewhere there's roug nation, others who will have dealings with north korea and not pursue these assets and i think that's where maybe a situation which there's a much bigger stick along with a carrot that can influence this and especially with our south korean partners in this process as well. so, again, i think it's not an easy situation to answer and i appreciate your answer. >> thank you. >> the gentleman yields back. we'll go a second round which will be two of us so should be wrapped up in ten minutes or so and we'll have votes here shortly. i'll begin with myself here.

recent recently japan and north korea have re-engaged on japanese nationals being abducted in the '70s and '80s and froze relations in the past number of years. i met with a family whose daughter was abducted by north korean agents back in 1977 at the age of 13. i met with them a number of times over the years as well as a number of families. it's truly a sad and outrageous story. pyongyang further agreed to investigate the abduction of japanese in return for lifting of some sanction. it's a sad state of affairs you can leverage kidnapped citizens for relief in sanctions. what do you think is the likely outcome of this agreement? what is north korea's motivation for re-opening the

investigations and how much advance notice did the administration have before japan and north korea reached their agreement? do you have any concerns about these negotiations considering north korea's long record of deception and deceit? >> well, we stand with japan in terms of their desire which we completely understand to resolve this humanitarian catastrophe. i met with that family a number of times myself. we understand why not just the government but the people of japan want this resolved and we support their efforts. the japanese have kept us very closely informed as they these limited steps with north korea. and we've indicated to japan and we've said publicly that we're supportive of all of the efforts that japan is undertaking as

long as they are undertaking transparent ally and what's ver important for all us is the shared concern of japanese we have the concern of the north korea nuclear missile threat. we'll watch and supportive of it and see where it heads. north korea is now on the hook. they got to conduct this investigation that they promised the japanese they would conduct so we'll be watching very closely to see what kind of results the north koreans come up with and whether or not it meet the tests that the japanese are imposing on them. >> thank you. also ambassador davies in your prepared statement you said that china is quote north korea's last remaining patron, unquote. considering its budding

relationship with russia and illicit networks with countries in the middle east, iran especially, i wonder if that's completely accurate and the recent economic trade deal between russia and north korea comes as an opportune time for yang yang. provides pyongyang with an economic boost that it needs to counter the sanctions and to counter balance the chinese who have been putting some pressure on them but not nearly enough. for russia this deal undermines u.s. efforts to cut off north korea's financial and economic well being while enhancing its own web of influence vis-a-vis the u.s. for example in the ukrainian crisis. can you tell us what sort of goods russia is providing to north korea, weapons or oil or gas or food or whatever and how

is the russian/north korean relationship is being considered in efforts to effectively pressure north korea since russia is also trying to bolster ties with china. is anything being done to counter this trilateral cooperation between these nations. >> mr. chairman, the russia/north korea relationship is very small in terms of trade and some of the steps that moscow announced were basically recognition of the state of afirst. they announced some debt relief for north korea. nobody in moscow expected they would get that debt repaid to begin with. the trade is measured in a few hundreds of millions of dollars a year. they talked about some new projects that could be of

interest. infrastructure projects. these are longer term nunds takings. so farther a bit at the margins. so we stay in touch with the russians. i go out to moscow and talk to them about this problem. we have a shared interest in denuclear izatio denuclearization. we may have tactical differences that we'll continue to work on. right now i think it's fair to say that the agreement, the level of agreement we have on strategic issues with russia outweighs some of these deals that you're talking about at the margins now. >> thank you very much. my. >> i'm is expired. gentleman from california is recognized. >> thank you. my staff has given me an article from yesterday's paper that says north korea threatens nuclear strikes on the white house.

i won't take that seriously other than maybe they are watching some dvds from hollywood as well that are getting smuggled in. i do take seriously that they continue to try to develop longer range missile technology and so forth and as they acquire and develop that technology they really are a threat to not only our regional partners and allies but then, you know, guam and some of our territories all the way to hawaii that we do have to take very seriously. and that does create a sense of urgency in moving things forward. you know, my colleague from virginia, kind of underscored the challenge here. sanctions with the regime that does not seem to care about what happens to its people are very difficult.

and the kim regime is not taking the interest of the north korean people at stake here. so they are the ones that clearly are suffering. so we have a limited tool box here. just thinking those various jones, your opening testimony was touched upon where china is north korea's last remaining patron. what would happen if china joined us in the sanctions if we're just thinking through and really did cut north korea off? how would north korea respond? >> well, china has said that they support fully united nations sanctions and i talked about some of the signs that the chinese are beginning to take unprecedented action in that

direction, signalling to north korea they will pay a price if they don't come around in particular on the nuclear issue. this is why when we talk to the chinese we try to talk about how we can work in concert to bring pressure on tnorth korea in a surgical way. we're going to keep at that because we think increasingly the core chinese interests in stability on the korean peninsula and our core interest in security that these are converging concerns. and we are seeing signs for the first time in decades that the chinese also recognize this that their stability will be affected unless we can address proactively north korea's pursuit of these weapons. so that's where we're

concentrating our energy, and we're saying to the chinese there's more you can do. we respect the fact you'll make decisions about how you do it. but we need to do more. and it's more effective if we can do it together with our partners. >> we're increasingly showing north korea there really is only one path forward, that is de-escalation, de-nuclearization and becoming a more conventional nation. you know, shifting to a different scenario, again north korea continues to posture with, you know, missiles towards the south korean border and so forth. again not helpful. what would south korea's response be at this juncture, i think south korea has shown incredible restraint given some of north korea's provocation in recent years. if, in fact, there was a misfire

accidentally or intentionally that were to land in the south korean city, seoul is not that far away, what have the south koreans indicated their response would be at this juncture. >> the south koreans are increasingly resolved should there be a provocation on the park of north korea they will respond. in 2010 there were two deadly attacks by north korea on south korea including that resulted in deaths of south korean civilians. so this is what our alliance with south korea is all about. ensuring that together we can present this united airlines front on the peninsula to north korea and they can understand that they can't repeat the aggression that they perpetrated on the south in june of 1950. those days are gone. best path forward is, in fact, the vision that's been laid out by the president of south korea

who has talked about a path forward involving peaceful u ff unification. so par pyongyang, north korea has rejected that. >> i want to make sure people in south korea know that as one of our close allies in the region we do stand with them in the right to defend themselves. >> absolutely. >> to make sure those listening in north korea understand that we stand with the north koreans. >> job one for us. >> thank you very much. gentleman's time has expired. i think that is the end of the questioners this afternoon. we want to greatly thank the panel and for your testimony. members will have five days to revise their statements or submit questions in writing. and if there's no further business to come before the committee we're adjourned. thank you >> thank you.

. .