.. is one of the most extreme in the world with 4.8 million people or 40% of the population facing life-threatening hunger. 2.5 million displaced and the economy in freefall. serious crime is now part of daily life. aid workers and their supplies their targets as well.

the violence in early july came about because the third president here was willing to work with the other to implement the peace agreement or to set up the security arrangements that were designed to prevent a return to fighting in juba. we saw the moment of greatest optimism since the signing of the august 2015 peace agreement. the establishment in late april at the transitional government could recite shattered by the irresponsibility and weaknesses of south sudan leaders here in both leaders lost control of forces during the moment of tremendous political fragility and government soldiers engaged in violence against civilian including attacks on south did these foreigners peered i would be remiss not to cause hearing praise the work of ambassador maliki and her team in juba. they have faced enormous hardships in doing their jobs

and their work has been frankly extraordinary. they have against long on research the engagement d-day to help the people of south sudan. they have done so despite to events that i know are on your mind. first on the night of july 7th , just a few hours after a deadly encounter between government and opposition security forces in the same area in the two vehicles carrying several diplomats were fired on by soldiers. fortunately because they were armored vehicles, the occupants were not injured. ambassador c. received an apology as well as assuring us that they would be a thorough and dictation. that day however was the same day that nature fighting broke out between the government and opposition. the second event was much more tragic. the uniformed government security forces against determining camp where 12

americans and that the country's south sudanese nationals relocated. the attack involved hours of looting, beatings, and the murder of a prominent south sudanese journalist, john cap blog. the site to discuss my personal condolences to john family and all the survivors of the attack. the attack occurred toward the end of two days of heavy fighting in juba driving out contingency. even near the u.s. embassy compound the sin is the embassy was alerted to the attack, ambassador fee contacted officials said she believes the command of their forces intended them to intervene to rest because centers of. i want to stress ambassador did everything in her power and resource is to assist us under assault at the camp.

our priorities was to protect their privacy and demand justice for them. my written testimony contents of your account of that day as well as what we are doing to ensure safety of our personnel. i would like to focus the rest of my statement on what i see is the way forward for at least a way forward. first comment in the wake of the fighting in juba in july, a political combination to avoid further fighting in suffering remains as important as ever appeared given neither president here in our vice president could -- we do not believe it would be wise for train to to return to his position in juba.

what is most urgently needed is the creation of a secure space in juba for an inclusive political process before further violence. that is why we strong as for the intergovernmental authority and governments called for deployment of a regional protection force to juba to provide for free and safe movement throughout the capital. the rpf should proactively contribute and allow for the demilitarization of juba but we must be clear that the government will need to allow the rpf to do its job. no political process can take place as long as large numbers of armed men and heavy weaponry remaining capital. stabilizing the security situation in juba is only the first dead. any political process to be credible and viable mass inclusive. what is needed is spurred leaders in and out of government to meet together to figure out how to jointly shoulder responsibility for preventing

further bloodshed. this can only succeed if those are willing to accommodate others. significant fraction of ds plm of other political parties. these groups must be deterred from supporting any further violence. they may see a path of peaceful engagement. south sudan leaders must also look ahead to creation of a professional comic inclusive national army and other security institutions. the need to articulate an ingredient security threat to reform by sending support for internment for dvds will depend among other things on the credibility of the information security sector and state. the transitional government should prioritize legislation

establishing an open consultant process for drafting and ratifying a constitution under which elections will be held at the end of a transitional period in addition, the government should prioritize legislation regarding the african union hybrid court in south sudan. recent opinions are they just 93% of south sudanese believe there can be no enduring peace about accountability. we agree. what i have described is a sequence of interdependency then. i'm describing them as a way forward, not because it would be easy to implement them, but because it is difficult to see any other path that does not lead to a future of repressive one-party rule, renewed conflict are most likely both. i not made about the chances of these things happening. our ability to influence events in sudan in cheerleaders towards more constructive behaviors

limited. the security council is representative just returned from a trip to south sudan and we were pleased the council was able to come to an agreement with the transitional government on several key issues including governments consent to deployment of the regional protection force and work with the u.n. mission already there. however, we now need to see those words turned into action. but the secretaries general support from the government is obstructing deployment of the regional protection force for continuing to prevent the mandate, we are prepared to support an arms embargo in the security council. beyond the arms embargo was 10 prepared to oppose restrictions on individuals involved in public corruption as official corruption has a long history in south again and has played a direct role in further conflict in the country. mr. chairman, i would've liked to come before the senate committee today with better

news. unfortunately we now face a difficult and uncertain path for south sudan. it is a frustrating and disheartening situation particularly for south sudanese. it is their putrid vapors weaker by the day. but then that our minds, we must continue to press south sudan's leaders to give peace a chance. thank you for inviting me to speak today and i look forward to answering your questions. being that mr. ambassador, thank you for your statement in your fine work. without objection, it are false statement will be made a part of the record. i do want to add my congratulations and thanks to the ambassador to south sudan, molly phee, who under unbelievably trying circumstances have been working around-the-clock to secure the peace and provide for access of humanitarian aid workers, which is one of the biggest impediments and why so many are dying of arbitration and why so

many young people, especially children and babies are succumbing to starvation. they are working hard and i want to thank her for her leadership as well. let me ask you about the zero-tolerance policy that the defense minister when i asked him what they would do against assault, he made it very clear he was going to call the president to get him to do it as well. we did meet with salva kiir and he said he would do it. we called back since been a little over a week. it hasn't been promulgated yet and of course the mere issuance of this statement without implementation is not worth the paper it's printed on. we hope the two go hand-in-hand. good strong statement. quote these service members, armed forces to account and put them behind bars when they

assault and kill and maim. your thought on that. secondly, ambassador lyman, as you know who will be testifying on the second panel her perform her job at her job admirably and with great distinction when he was a special envoy makes a point in his testimony that the new rapid protection force should not be under the u.n. mission there. we met with the head of the united nations mission in it she said they tried to get commanders to make the trip which is less than a mile away to save people under assault and they would go. it's happened several times. they have deprived rules of engagement. this is a theory about all over again. they have a robust rules of engagement in charter seven

powers. his suggested that the mission. your thoughts on whether that would be prudent with additional help and the access issue seems to me that people will die if there's not humanitarian access. but humanitarian workers are south sudanese, with a layer in a special category of race. her thoughts on what we can do there. when he testified last time, he put the agreement under four basic baskets which are usually inclusive of each other. macroeconomic reform and transparency in security sector reform and justice and reconciliation. as you pointed out and is pointed out by others, the hybrid court ought to be setup to hold people to account for impunity and crimes against humanity. the security sector reform seems

like the most daunting challenges about the militias and all the lack of chain of command that appears to be the situation there. your thoughts on the prospects for meaningful, systemic reform of the military. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. first of all, thank you for being such a strong advocate for the zero-tolerance policy on gender-based violence and southside infirmary that at the highest level during this visit in jupiter. it is something we are following up on. like many commitments that are made when we meet with south sudan, the promises are not always turned into reality but it is something that certainly is important and we will continue to push on that.

we will let you know what success or lack of success they may have been that regard. secondly, it's regard to the regional protection orders, there are a number of reasons why you can't propose then we have or did putting a regional protection force is part of the u.s. mission in south sudan. first of all, there is the issue of sunday and the separate stand-alone force under an african union or five which have faced problems and would have severely delayed ability to be deployed. there may not be always the fastest but i've been engaging on my many trips to the region and talking with chiefs of defense and foreign ministry officials as well as other senior leaders to ensure that the three countries that have pledged protection force,

ethiopia, canada and rwanda would be prepared to move their forces very quickly. we would be prepared to help them to move quickly and to do that. also, this was designed in a way that would be under one commander and that commander would report to the force commander that would have the authority and the mandate for the truth contributing countries to use that force for the very specific tasks that the mandate in u.n. security council resolution 2304. to ensure the free movement of people in judah to protect infrastructure including the airport in intervening should anyone be planning or engaging the attack on the u.n., on civilians, on a very broad mandate. again our discussions with the contributing countries has

assured us the troops he would deploy what the backing of their capitals to indeed force those tasks. i understand the skepticism many may have been looking at other u.n. missions. this seemed to be the most practical and expedient way of getting troops on the ground who could actually provide a security umbrella in judah. as i said in my testimony, just putting forces on the ground will not solve the problem. they need cooperation of the south sudanese government and in the peace agreement and security arrangements that followed, they were negotiated after the signing of the agreement in august 2015. there is a limitation of the forces that securing government and trained to come with the

opposition could have achieved that. the forces were at least 25 kilometers south side. that is at least a starting point for taking the heavy weapons and many security forces and getting them out. we would hope the government would cooperate in further reducing the city since as juba canfield more secure and so that there is room for political dialogue talked about. i'm humanitarian assistance, this is indeed a terrible situation since the outbreak of this conflict, 59 humanitarian aid workers have been killed making south sudan the most dangerous place for humanitarian workers, more dangerous than the area i am told. this is a serious problem, something they've engaged repeatedly on and in my visits i have engaged with president kiir, the defense minister and many others on this.

we keep receiving assurances that will be addressed that they simply need to have a specific example to go after individuals who might have been harassing aid workers, but frankly this has become a systemic problem. shortly after the fighting in july there was looting of stores in judah. it was very organized. the track came with the cream to take the generator from the compound. this indeed does need to be investigated and people need to be held accountable. that is the only way the message will get out that the government is truly serious, that humanitarian aid work or is in fair supplies by mats for the people of south sudan. this is going to be a continued

engagement with the government in judah. and security sector reform, the peace agreement in particular security arrangements negotiated after it call for a security and defend sector review board to outline sort of the end state of the security arrangements in south sudan. with the army but the play, security services, police, as better. that board had just begun meeting when things fell apart in july of this year. even under the peace agreement, it was perceived that it would not come to conclusions for eight months into the transitional. whereas the idea of beginning a ddr process has to start prior to that. what i am proposing and i said in my testimony is that we

really need to have an idea. south sudan has suffered for too long in a heavily militarized state probably understandable and that it was the product of a long liberation struggle. against the government in khartoum, almost if years of struggle. but it's time south sudan in order to peace and prosperity is to be unless demilitarized state. so can we get south sudanese to agree on the end state. if we agree it is a sustainable and reasonable and state, that is some thing we can hope you support. really, our leverage in getting a meaningful reform is that we will not fund things if it isn't a reasonable outcome. on the hybrid court, again the sheer frustration that this is

moving more slowly than we would like. i have engaged numerous times and their legal experts engage with the african union. we are on the verge of giving them $3.3 million to actually begin some of the work. we've encouraged them to move forward on establishing the prosecutor said that testimony senate against can begin to be collected before the court has established a judge's can decide on who would be indicted or who would be the debt by the quarter. that is something we want to push forward. i discussed that also that the african union special representative for south sudan, former president of mali who has been deeply engaged for the past year as well and try to sort out the problems of south sudan. thank you.

>> thank you again, mr. ambassador. i wanted to know if you could tell me the status of the former president of a sauna and if you could review the role he has played and then this dataset that. we talked about humanitarian aid and they know no one wants to see that end, but how can humanitarian aid get to the population? you mentioned the world food program and the organized theft that took place that i wanted to know if that was the government or the opposition. we have talked about an arms embargo and they mentioned that in my opening. i wanted to know what is the position of the administration and whereas the south sudanese getting their arms from now? i also wanted to mention a couple of area.

-- other items. >> thank you, congresswoman. then he stared at the joint monitoring and evaluation commission. he was appointed by each had to fulfill the role of a committee made up of south sudanese parties as well as the members of egad +-plus-sign members of the peace agreement. he chairs monthly meetings of the group and its function is to oversee the implementation of the agreement and where the parties get stuck in implementing he is to recommend ways forward and if the parties are blocking implementationfrom a spree courses to breathe toward to egad come to the african union's peace and

security council and the u.n. security council. he said a number of reports. he has tackled issues such as problem of the 28 states, the impasse in the seating of members of the transitional legislature and other elements of the agreement that the parties were unable to actually find a way to implement because they were not working in good faith with each other. after the events of july 8th to 11th, they temporarily come those operations and has now gone back to cuba. one of the tasks that the security council asked to undertake is a security workshop for the arming of forces that should remain in juba. i understand the president has convened a meeting held in the 22nd and 23rd of this month to look at that.

those are the types of back to the peace. we are one of the major supporters and have contributed over $3 million to the operation and we believe it is a critical component for successful implementation of any part of the peace agreement. it has been criticized by the government in particular for being a usurping government authorities. we see it as the new trucker picture of the agreement. on humanitarian access, i would like to clarify one thing on what secretary kerry was expressing in the press conference and never will be. i really think what he was expressing there was not a plan to cut off humanitarian assistance but rather a frustration with the could you need interference with the

humanitarian assistance that we are providing and really trying to put south sudan's leaders that they have to get serious about dealing with this. post a message via >> i wasn't referencing secretary kerry really. i know there are concerns about that here. >> so again, how do we get the humanitarian assistance delivered? it is a systemic problem and it partly related to the criminality. the wfp warehouse incident occurred after opposition forces were driven from the capital so it would have to have been government forces doing that looting. again, that is the type of thing that needs to be investigated and examples need to be made of people involved in that it is ready. of the people the government claims it has invested for living in an aftermath aftermath of the fighting in july, it is not clear to us that any individuals are particularly

involved to be in lockstep for involvement in this attack. and then the arms embargo. but we have tried to do with the arms embargo as it is a major tool is to achieve progress towards peace by threatening. we have used that on a number of occasions and we think it's one of the race ends the government is looking at allowing the deployment of the regional protection force because they know if there's impediment to that, the united states and many other members of the security council are already on record as supporting the arms embargo. most importantly what they heard by the representatives went to jupiter this past weekend was the unanimous vote of the city when we pass a resolution even though some may have its day

in.net it is the security council you have to take seriously. as i mentioned in my testimony, that the secretary-general reports continued obstruction of his followers, we are prepared to move ahead and as we said in security council resolution 23 or four, which we have depend on the rehab in appendix resolution to be voted on which is an arms embargo resolution and we are prepared to look at other tools such as sanctions. i must say her record in getting additional people sanctioning the security council has not been good. we have but we thought was a very good case back a year ago with fighting flared up in the molokai area after the signing of the peace agreement in the two generals who were responsible for this, paul malone on the government side

and john stallone on the opposition side put forward for sanctioning and several members at the council balked at upper. so even when you think you have a clear case, it's not easy to get the council to agree on that. to be effective, travel sanctions need to have the backing of broader communities just in the united states. >> did you mentioned where is the primary place that they get the arms from? >> they seem to have the bike on the road the former soviet union area. i think most of them come in through the gray or black arms market. i don't have specific countries that i can attach to specific

arms platforms because obviously the government goes to some lengths to keep that information to itself. but clearly it has sacked last arms. >> which is why wonder about the effectiveness of an arms embargo. >> satisfied an arms embargo has to be something done by the security council so what will have been from assured that oddly and the way to the international community behind it. >> before yield, i just want to bring attention to someone in the audience who was a former intern who was part of the lost boys and loss grows that has been living very successfully in the united states and the united states in a sleeping enough or with other lost boys and loss grows because they are all grown we actually plan to next week introduced legislation calling for the program that would be

ran by us, by this date department to allow some of the former lost boys and loss grows to return to south sudan. those individuals who have come here, have got their education, have been successful in want to go back and give back to their country, obviously no one but just they go back right now, but given the length of time it takes to do legislation, we would hope a program like that was his suited. it is spontaneous and suggested that suggested by many of your college that it is something we might consider. i just want to mention that i must admit questions for the next witness. >> mr. donovan. they make mr. ambassador, thank you for your service to our country. two things i would like for you address if you code for a is the recruitment of children into

fighting these battles and the other is the un's mission in south sudan's inability to protect the workers go in there on humanitarian missions. the last thing if you have a moment, you spoke about the path of peaceful engagement. i was curious about how you think we get there. >> thank you, congressman. child soldiers, the number was spread out above 16,000 supposedly recruited during the course since december 3rd team. voters had been a problem in south sudan but where this current conflict and something we had engaged very robustly with the administrative said prior to december 23rd seed in which we were making some real progress in getting child soldiers out of dsp l.a. in

addressing those who read many of the militias of the country. >> what ages are you speaking about? >> i've heard of children as young as 10, 12 been involved. could be even younger in some cases. but this is something we have been cause by engaging them on. during the height of the conflict they were recruiting both sides, opposition and government and utilizing militias. many of these militias are traditional youth organization that go on traditional cavalry and they are sort of no distinction there in terms of age of majority of people and so they ended up being swept into the fighting. so that is part of the problem. clearly has the look and i talked about a security site and stay, clearly we want to see a security sector and date that

the government would support that would have no place at all for child holders. we will continue to engage on that. the state department last week issued a very direct statement condemning the use of child soldiers in south sudan and continue practice there. the problems in protecting humanitarian workers. i think egad the u.n. mission in south sudan on december 1423rd team, after the trouble started in chiba, they had kim said juba and other towns. there are bases became the sanctuary of tens of thousands of south sudanese and this was sort of a new move if you vote

for the u.n. to let the on to their bases in such numbers. but we think it is the right thing to do at the time and that it saved thousands of lives to have that happen. what has resulted is the u.n. is now saddled with somewhere between 150 or so thousand people that are actually now and a few of their own facilities, and around camps, that they have to provide static protection and in many instances they don't control much of a perimeter around where the camps were and so it takes a fair number of troops should be able to provide static protection. so this means that there are fewer troops available for moving out into the city and to the countryside. but we have had numerous successes. for example, back in april of this year, ambassador phee work

and juba and the u.n. mission to put in a forward base a leader which is in unity state. so it was a hot spot for humanitarian need and the humanitarian community was demanding protection there. the u.n. did establish a forward base and that enabled humanitarians to access an area that had not been able to get to for almost two years of the conflict. so we have had successes like that and we talk specific cases, but the ability of the u.n. to be able to move about the country as well as in juba has been restricted by the government. two helicopters shot down by government forces over the years. one before the conflict and 1 cents. they need to get government

permission to fly and make sure that it's safe. the government does not always get. i would go back to the problem is perhaps partly a myth but also the government which is not allowed to do all that it could do to facilitate humanitarian assistance delivery end up functioning as one of the four key functions so they clearly understand that. >> if you could spend a moment because my time is expired about your vision on how to get this path of peaceful engagement. >> well, the first step is getting juba secured so that there is some space for political engagement. now, whether those sitting in juba now who feel that they can implement the agreement where they are, why would they go forward on that? the answer to that is that you

have to ensure that these people who have been driven out over the past two months and others that felt already excluded from the peace process, if they are not given a peaceful path forward, a political path forward is going to result in more widespread fighting throughout the country and can this government afford that? is that what it wants its legacy to be a south sudan goes down with more and more fighting in more and more parts of the country. it's going to have to be pressure on the leaders for sure, but frankly it is the only way forward that's going to have this open up some political space and have this discussion with others. >> thank you very much, sir. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. ambassador, let me come back to a question that my colleague,

ms. bass asked you because your response was a little troubling with regards to arms than where they are coming for and where they are not coming from. are you suggesting in your testimony that we don't know? because you said it was a great market. we have unfolded full intelligence, even in that region. are you suggesting that we don't know or that you can't say. >> congressman, what we do know i would have to address in a different setting than this. >> that is fair enough. i want to make sure we clarify. here is my concern, ambassador. i have followed sudan in south sudan before there was a south sudan. it has been a passion for my family from a humanitarian standpoint.

the stories come to the true stories that have been told will break anyone tired on why it's so much has not only been done, but has not been done so i appreciate you being a special envoy, juror workfare at be very complex and difficult situation. but i've also come to find out is that from both sides, those who would we supportive of sudan and those who would be supportive of south sudan in a particular position, they believed that the united states has failed to live up to the promises we made and that we make threats that we don't follow through on. even some of your testimony here today would seem to underscore it out when we talk about arms embargo or sanctions, does it

not have a chilling effect when we ask for sanctions and they don't get passed by the u.n., that there is no consequences that life is going to be like it always has been. >> first of all on the threat and in particular the example that i gave up the two generals. even then, while we were trying to get them on the list, we were using that as leverage to get them choose the fighting than they were both told directly that we were going to sanction them. we were proceeding in new york to do so and the only way they could get out of this would be to stop the fighting. well, while the sanctions committee did not prove that, it did have the beneficial effect of the fighting died down in the same timeframe. so cause or effect, you know, i

can't prove it. >> the results speak for themselves. if we make too many idle threat that are not active by action, ultimately would have been his become irrelevant. and i certainly do believe our country and the state department is using all of leverage points to accomplish the task at hand on dealing with the issue in south sudan? are we using every leverage point do we have? >> congressmen, i think we are using up the leverage points we have. some take some time to develop. sanctions cannot be imposed even bilaterally under u.s. law without rather expensive package that could hold up in a court of law. and so, sometimes when you think you need to move again someone,

you find the actual evidentiary aerie requirements are not there. this is as you mentioned the idea of idle threats. one reason we don't take names to the security council. we don't think we can get them through. it is also a sitdown with the arms embargo, we will move on this and put the full weight of the united states behind trying to achieve this if you don't do x or y. >> the reason i ask as it sounds like you brought back a little bit of secretary kerry's comments here today and i guess why would she want those back. >> and certainly not trying to walk back with the secretary said. >> is what it sounded like. you go ahead and clarify. that's why a mask impair >> humanitarian assistance is something we provide a stymied. >> that it is something we must prioritize. some groups are using it

appropriately. there is more need than ability even for a very prosperous nation that the united states. do they understand that there is a priority for humanitarian relief? if they don't understand, please let them understand it based on the ceiling. >> it came across with the secretary said that something that made very directly that they are not the only place in the world that needs humanitarian assistance. >> this comes from someone who is my kids collect money and chance to give to countries or hear it it is not out of a non-compassion are. one other question. i think there is a new blog about ngos and 80% of those ngos having to beat south sudanese citizens. is that correct? are my notes correct amount?

tell me about the implications. if that is indeed correct, would that not have a chilling effect on some of the work that the ngos have done and could do in the future? >> this ngo was sent in to spend the making for a long time. something that engaged on several occasions with president kiir on. there is a provision that the percentage of work or is that ngos need to be south sudanese. this is something many countries do to try to ensure that aid workers and aid organizations are hiring local staff. there are a number of problems with the bill that we pointed out. a lot of them have to do with the lake access the registration requirements and also very vague references to sort of what is allowed and what is not allowed.

it allows the government to interpret whether an ngos doing the right thing or not. >> let me ask you be specific. in this new law d.c. and having the potential of providing a less humanitarian relief to some of the most needy in the country >> we see this as having the potential impact on the ability of ngos both international and local to operate. >> does their president not see that? >> i'm sure that they do see that. >> they think they will go ahead and fund and create a jobs program. >> i wouldn't see this as a jobs program. most ngos probably too high of more than 80% of their staff being local. >> why the need for the law? >> that's a good question and these are the issues we've raised repeatedly over three years for this is that under consideration.

it's a problematic law. >> if you put as a special envoy to their highest government officials a sincere concern for members of congress on this new law that potentially could humanitarian relief that needs to get to needy families and citizen could be stopped because of the unintended consequences of a new law and that we would ask them to reconsider. with that, i yield back, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ambassador, you know, you paint a very bleak picture of what we've talked about here today and the testimony you have given. we talk about a government that has lost control of its military from time to time, and

opposition that's gone, a government that rated humanitarian aid on which i sit on the committee that helps appropriate the money which is concerning to me. as a catholic is also concerning to me that this would have been in this day and age that we as americans wouldn't be able to do anything about it. the only thing it seems like you said that we have leverage to uses this arms embargo. we keep threatening to use it but we never get there. maybe it might be a political thing to use an arms embargo and that in some kind of failure to government. i hope that is not the case. i hope it is a sincere boy or a sincere intention of this government to use an arms embargo because what can it hurt if we actually do it? if this guy controls the government, there was no opposition. he's used the term over militarization. if that is true, the only thing

we can control is how much militarization is in that country, then what can it hurt if the united states does take the lead to say that enough is enough. we've got diplomatic envoys being shot at. we've got all kinds of crimes that we've talked about against its own citizenry. if that humanitarian aid and food been seized upon. the opposition has fled. we've got a government that lost control of its own military and we keep threatening to use the arms embargo as if it is something that more may be if we say this one more time, we will put this security force and their 44,000 people, which i've got to be quite honest with you, i don't think they're going to do anything. i think this will keep going on and on and we will be back here at the next hearing talking about how this has failed.

i just want to know what will it hurt if we do it? is it an admission by the administration that we failed in south sudan? is that the problem? >> congressman, as i said, it is a major tool in to be effective it has to be done multilaterally. >> ray. just do it. just use the united states as the leader of the free world and do it and other people will follow. who cares if it is unilateral. that doesn't make any sense. we call coalitions all the time that people follow us because we are the number one country in the world. we are the sole superpower. >> ray. because it is an important tool would use it effectively and are using it effectively out to leverage a way forward for south sudan to get it back to a path of peace and political dialogue. >> do you believe we are going to create this space in juba

like you said there's going to be elections and a political process in the constitution and all that. do you really believe that unless we do something affirmative? >> something affirmative is trying to get the scores of gunmen kicked your to be demilitarized. this is the leverage we are using to get there. now come to south sudanese may very well not cooperate with this in which case we are forward entrée prepared to move forward as well as other sanctions. >> okay, i hope you do. >> the frustration level, we hear it. >> you are on the frontline. i appreciate your service. i just don't believe any of this stuff is going to work anymore. i don't think the security sports is going to work. we need to move forward with an arms embargo now and staff as much bloodshed and killing as we can to protect the food and humanitarian aid that mr. meadows talk about getting in there by however means we

need to figure out how to do that. the only thing left to do is help the people starving and being oppressed. trying to talk about elections in that kind of stuff, i don't buy it. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. rooney. >> thank you, mr. ambassador. what is your best assessment of the anticipated timeline for the protection forces in generation deployment and how long do you expect the negotiations with the government will continue on the composition of the rps? how long will that they didn't have any countries that ip immediate region outside rwanda indicated they might consider providing troops to the rps. -- rps. >> okay, on the timeline, but i have been told that the military

leaders in the region as they are prepared to deploy troops very quickly within a matter of weeks after there is permission from the government to go in. they've made it clear they are not fighting their way into juba. but if the government in juba accepted the scores and provide land for it to be bivouacked don, what i have been told is fair prepared to move the troops quickly. moving equipment will take a little bit longer than that is something they've indicated they might need some help with. >> maybe i wasn't clear that question. paragraph he denies the troops are prepared. what is the length of time that government is likely to engage in negotiations? that is the unknown. >> there's also questions about how fast countries can

globalize. in terms of that, this is what the secretary-general's report, which should come out and will be discussed next week and the council will be about. if the government moving forward to accept this force? the message that was given by the security council visit the secretary gave with regional leaders including the south sudanese in nairobi on the 22nd of august was a clear message and we expect this force is going to be deployed in going to be deployed as envisioned by egad combat troops from the country's committed to this mission of actually ensuring freedom of the land, protecting the critical infrastructure including the airport and preventing violent action comes to protecting civilians in a more robust manner. those true future breeding countries have agreed to that machine. we don't want to enter into negotiation on his contributors

will be, what arms they will need, how many of them can deploy. that is foreseen in what their mission will be. and so, that is where we get to this idea of using the threat of moving on an arms embargo and other sanctions if indeed the government tries to delay this. so far, their actions have been on the one day to say yes come in the next as they may be and then say probably yes again. this isn't something we are not going to have patience for it to drag on. >> that leads to my second question, mr. ambassador. what influence does the united states have with south sudan to encourage them to develop a more inclusive transparent and accountable approach to government and one of the teams might be due to accelerate that process?

>> when i was here in april, we were actually looking at trying to help a transitional government to succeed. one of the pillars of the peace agreement i mentioned was this idea of economic reform and particularly strengthening the transparent they have financial management that is something we believe needs to happen in south sudan. msn. as they mention in my testimony, we are continuing to look and utilize information, to utilize sanctions available, particularly travel sanctions for corrupt this is and to send the signal that being in charge in south sudan is not about just enriching yourself. trying to change a little bit of the mentality of those who might get the country going forward. a very important component, how

do we get them to do it? our main leverage is what is it they want from us? at that point they were clearly looking for support for their budget for their economy and they've recently come out again and said to the international community, we need $300 million from me this year. that is not going to be forthcoming unless these types of reforms occur. >> my final question, mr. ambassador, the strategic daddies have suggested that it may be time to put south sudan i might port by the u.n. to administer the country until institutions exist to manage politics and to break up the conflict. if such an initiative were to be considered, i do think it would be a reputed given the

sensitivity and the security council for the u.n. action perceived to threaten south sudan's sovereignty. it seems like that would be a very difficult to move forward on. >> i've seen that proposal. but what a bad idea. frankly the u.n. cannot impose this on a members they. the african union has had no appetite for putting one of its member countries under an international trust issue for guardianship. whatever you want to dress it up and call it. that is something i don't see that we would have been a support or impractical and i don't see how this sounds it needs would ever accept it. the visceral reaction they have had you been to the role of

overseeing implementation of the agreement as an extra sovereign force, the reaction that they have had for the initial reaction to the regional protection force was not one more soldier who will fight and. you get the idea of how that would be received in south sudan. >> thank you. i thank you, mr. chairman. before we go to our next panelist, i would like to ask you and make it a point to always be with the bishops, faith community, protestants, whatever it might be in any country. a very, very good exchange of direct deletion aspect of what the church would provide and humanitarian assistance. are we fully utilizing the faith community in south sudan? secondly, there's an article september 6, very disturbing.

i was briefed in south sudan without defending of the polis ever sent into two of our vehicle is as they passed by the compound by his troops. thank god nobody was hurt. the state department says they do not believe our vehicles and personnel were specially targeted, but the article points out that 50 to 100 rounds were pumped into those two vehicles. the armored suvs tout laminated card with the american flag on it and also the diplomatic plate number is up and peered army investigating this? do we believe that was by design or by ms. tate? even by mistake is bad enough. and finally, we've had sanctions for two years. the office of foreign control are well laid out come the child. sanction against first is contributing to the conflict in

south sudan. i am wondering if we're looking at that too expanded and make it more robust in terms of those in meet the criteria so well laid out two years ago in the sanctions regime. >> mr. chairman, engaging with the fate-based community, yes we do engage with them both within south sudan and also the vatican. we have been in touch with them on numerous occasions and comparing notes on south sudan and they have also engaged in that the senior cartels who went there and a number of the religious leaders spoke out during the visit of the u.n. security council this past weekend in favor of the regional protection force being deployed and moving for