transitioning out of afghanistan in a manner that is done appropriately in keeping with the very large decisions that have to be made about helping the afghans defend themselves, working with partners and allies in that effort. and i think the underlying premise is certainly one that can be debated among americans of good faith. i believe that we were justified in going through afghanistan which is -- >> i want to apologize. i don't want to get on that subject. >> sure. i accept your apology. >> i do want to touch on something else to get a different perspective on the nuclear enrichment in iran. you know, we hear different stories. even in is tliz are debates. they say if they get a weapon,

it's not a threat. and, you know, to israel. so i'm sure there's a more nuance debate in israel than there is here sometimes. but isn't it true that iran has the right to enrich up to 20% for peaceful purposes? the way we talk and hear the discussion, they have no right to enrich. and don't they have that protection under the nuclear pro live treaty? but it never seems to have a balanced approach to that. the best i can tell from what i read, there is no evidence that they have a bond. there's no evidence that they're on the verge of getting it. and even the administration whether it's panetta or clapper or general dempsey, they're saying it wouldn't make any sense to have a preemptive attack on there. you could give us a sense of a proper balance here? because a lot of people are convinced it's syria and then iran. and i'm personally concerned about that.

the last thing the american people need is another war. we don't have the money. we don't have the resources. and the military is not ready for another war. >> nine seconds. >> congressman, i would direct your attention to the most recent director general's report from the international atomic energy agency, not an american document which outlines the concerns about the nonpeaceful use of civilian nuclear power. there is increasing evidence that what the iranians do is not consistent with, you're right, their right to have the peaceful use of nuclear power. and i'll be happy to get you a copy of that. i think you ask a very important set of questions. >> thank you so much, congressman. mr. ackerman, the ranking member on the subcommittee on middle east and south asia. >> thank you. welcome, madam secretary. always great to have you here. it's exceptional to me that sometimes you can't win for

winning. and even with the unprecedented victories that you and the administration have had in foreign policy area, some people continue to look at it, i guess i would call it the goldilocks game with the three bears. it is always too hot or it is always too cold. i think you got it just right. i think instead of goldilocks you're more like the guy on the ed sullivan show. he used to be up there with the 12 bowling pins juggling them at the same time, bouncing basketballs up and down over his knees and had the sticks with the plates on top and twirling in the air and nothing ever falls to the ground. nonetheless, you seem to have everything pretty much together. i don't want to jinx it, with all of the unprecedented problems in the world that we're facing all at the same time. and i just want to thank you and

congratulate you and the administration. three areas, north korea, egypt and iran hot spots, first on egypt, congratulations. the announcement that we just received within the hour that the flight restrictions on the americans has been lifted. i think that's miraculous. i know the great effort work that you have put into this both behind the scenes as well as publicly and how delicate this negotiation has been. does this indicate for us some sense of where power shifting and shuffling in egypt is going and who is exercising at least at this very sensitive moment or don't we want to speculate on that? >> well, congressman, we do not have confirmation that the travel ban has been lifted. we hope that it will be. we'll continue to work toward that. and, you know, the reporting is

encouraging but we have no confirmation. >> we always get stuff from the ap first also. north korea, congratulations on that as well. i know there is never any nexus between humanitarian aid and shifting policies. congratulations on the great coincidence of the 240 metric tons of humanitarian aid and it's happening coincidentally at the same time that the north core eve koreans have apparently agreed to a lot more transparency than they had before in us is sags of their nuclear program. were other countries parties or observers at this bilateral discussion we had with the chinese or russians or koreans or was that just us? >> the meeting was held in

beijing. the japanese and south koreans were involved in the back and forth of the negotiations. we also kept all of them informed. but no one else was a direct participant besides the united states and north korea. >> in reading all the reports of that, it says that they will allow inspection at young pyang. do we have access to other sites? or just that main site? or isn't that clear yet? >> that's not clear yet. i mean that was our principle objective and we obviously have to continue building on what was achieved. >> like some others that you deal with, you know more than others that they're masters at the shell game. and lastly, iran. congratulations on the biting effect that the sanctions are

finally grabbing them and taking effect to a tremendous extent. there seems to be a lot of indication that some of our allies, one in particular in the middle east is very concerned and interested in us letting down markers rather than saying all options are on the table. i suppose that's going to get more play in coming days. what are the red lines that the iranians cannot cross? are we going to make that public? or are we going to continue to do quiet negotiations on that? >> i think it's probably smarter for us to be pressing on the sanctions and the negotiations while we keep our objective of no nuclear capability absolutely clear instead of setting other bench marks at this time publicly. >> i want to thank you for not concentrating on strutting your

stuff and delivering on the stake and not worrying about the sizzle. thank you. >> thank you. >> my colleague from florida, mr. rivera. wise man, staying around. >> thank you very much, madam chair. i learn from the best, from you. madam secretary, thank you so much for being here today. as you know, recently we marked the 14th anniversary of the february 24th, 1997 shootdown of the brothers to the rescue airplanes. and which as you know four americans were murdered over international airspace by the castro dictatorship. subsequent to those murders, the u.s. congress and then president clinton passed and signed into line the helms/burton bill which has never been fully implemented, as you well know, because of a provision which allows a waiver for a suspension every six months to that law for

implementation of that law. and that suspension i believe takes place around every january or february and at midyear as well. so we probably have just recently seen the obama administration suspend the law as it has been done twice a year every year since 1996. now the rational allowed in the law for suspending implementation of the law is twofold. number one, that it serves u.s. interests. and number two, that it would expedite a transition to democracy in cuba. given what we've seen in the last few years during the obama administration and what has been occurring in cuba in terms of the wave of repression against human rights activists and dissidents, given the deaths of several hunger strikers, given the recent persecution against the ladies in white peaceful

activists in cuba that have been calling for democratic reform. given the stern rebuff that former secretary richardson received in cuba to his recent overtours or negotiations. can you tell us just in the last few years of the obama administration that the helms/burt yonz law has been suspended, how has that expedited a transition to democracy in cuba? >> well, congressman, we take a backseat to no one in our condemnation of the denial of human rights that is continuing feature of the castro regime. and the particular instances that you mentioned are ones of great concern to us. we do think that increasing people to people contact, supporting civil society in cuba, enhancing free flow of information, promoting the

capacity for more independence economically and politically from the cuban authorities is in the interest of the cuban people and is in the interest of the united states. >> and we may agree to disagree on that. i'm wondering if there's any evidence of results as a result of that policy that the obama administration has been pursuing, do we have any evidence at all of any inkling of democratic reform or movement to democracy? is there anything positive that has resulted from the obama administration policy toward cuba that we have evidence, tangible evidence? >> in the last three years there have been considerable changes in cuba's economic policies which we see as a very positive development. we think having the cuban people given more economic rights to be able to open businesses, to have more opportunity to pursue their

own economic futures goes hand in hand with the promotion of democracy. i wouldn't, you know, claim that our movements were a direct cause. but they were coincident with. and in oppressive regimes like cuba, economic freedom precedes political freedom. >> then you would agree that there has been economic freedom. i dispute that. i don't believe there has been any real economic reforms, genuine economic reforms in cuba. but if you would agree that there have been and we can disagree on that, there certainly have been no political reforms or movement toward democracy notwithstanding the economic movement. >> despite our very strong objection to the treatment of allen gross, in our view totally unjustified charge and detention, a great number of political prisoners have been released. and, you know, again, that in and of itself is not final evidence of anything. but the fact that so many political prisoners were

released in the last three years is, in our view -- >> are you aware that those releases were followed by expulsions from the country? you're aware of that. they weren't released into the country. they were expelled from the country. >> i'm aware of that, congressman. and as i look out over the world and take a historic perspective, i see sometimes that political prisoners are released and expelled where they continue to pursue their democracy work and their advocacy from outside the country. so i think the fact is letting political prisoners go is a very positive development. i wish that they were inside cuba, continuing to, you know, agitate and advocate for freedom and democracy. but, you know, their voices are still being heard, especially in the new communications environment in which bloggers and others exist. >> i hope we'll continue. >> thank you. >> thank you, madam secretary. >> thank you, madam chairman and

madam secretary. i have a couple of written questions that i want to submit for your consideration. madam secretary, this may be one of the last times together. and so i want to publicly thank you for re-estabilshing america's influence abroad. especially towards the asia pacific region. as you stated and i quote, "the future of politics will be decided in asia, not in afghanistan or iraq." and the united states will will be right at the center of the action.efforts, i believe the united states will be front and center. so i thank you for bucking tradition for your first trip overseas. on your first trip overseas, you visited asia to convey a strong message that america's relationship across the asia pacific region are indispensable. and in your many trips since then from vietnam to cambodia,

to meyanmar and japan and beyon, you're about the business of making and keeping commitments that will pay dividends many times over. a plaud you for recognizing the importance of the pacific island nations in this multifaceted undertaking and that the context of this hearing to the foreign relations budget, i reiterate what you have stated. i quote, those who say that we can no longer afford to engage with the world have it backwards. we cannot afford not to. from opening new markets for american businesses to curbing nuclear proliferation to keep the sea lanes free from commerce and navigation, our work abroad holds the key to our prosperity and security at home. i wnt to also note for the record that when americans saw more on the independent state were hit by the most powerful earthquake in 2009 which set off

30 foot waves of a tsunami which have to this day not fully recovered and yet your office were among the first to stand with us. you fought to make sure that relief supplies were airlifted to us and your tireless efforts on behalf of those who did'go on notice. i thank dave adams for his help in this regard. and my request, madam secretary, you made it a point to visit my little district. and on behalf of the thousands of the men and women who proudly serve in the arms forces of our country, we're grateful for your recognition of their services. my people thank you for remembering us amid the many things you have done for our nation. madam secretary, it has been an honor to serve with you and i commend you for the initiatives you have taken outlined in this budget submission for the east asia and the pacific region.

i'm glad i still have a couple of seconds to ask you a couple of questions. madam secretary, can you reiterate again for the record our fundamental policy of engagement with the people's republic of china, especially fli reference to the crisis we're faced with at the south china seas? >> well, first, thank you for those very kind comments. but it's a great honor to represent the people of your district and to reach out to the south pacific region on behalf of our government. we are working to further a positive cooperative and comprehensive relationship with china. we think that is in the interest of the american people. both economically and strategically. we have welcomed the peaceful rise of china and we expect as china continues to develop that it will assume more responsibilities globally.

with respect to the south china sea, it has been our position that although we do not take any stand on the rights attached to any territorial claim, we strongly support a peaceful resolution of such in accordance with international law. that has been the position we have taken at the east asia summit because it's not only about the south china sea which is, as you know so well, a very important part of the world's oceans through which more than 40% of the world's trade passes. but it's also about how we resolve disputes concerning territories in or near bodies of water, whether it's the arctic or the south china sea. so it's very important we stand for the rule of law. and we stand for the peaceful resolution of any disputes and we made that known to our friends in the region as well as

to china. >> thank you, madam secretary. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. and madam secretary, lacking other members, mr. berman and i agreed to share our five minutes with you if that will be all right. >> i thank you very much. >> i'm going to ask about the keystone pipeline. so start the clock. >> i withdraw my -- >> as gas prices continue to soar burdening the american people in this time of economic hardship, we must continue to examine avenues to depend less on foreign oil from rogue regimes. in october of 2010, you mentioned that you were "inclined" to sign off on the keystone project because the u.s. will either be "dependent on dirty oil from the gulf or dirty oil from canada." what was it about the pipeline that led you to change your previous assertion and can you please explain why an additional stable source of oil from a

democratic ally such as canada does not deserve a national interest determination from the department of state? and mr. berman, if you would like to ask your question. >> a very specific question about syria. the security of the chemical and possibly biological weapons in syria should the assad regime fall. how real is the danger of these horrific weapons and substances leaving syria and falling into the hands of terrorists and terrorist groups? and what about a nonlug ar program to secure, dismantle and remove chemical and buy lodge wall weapons and technology from syria? >> first, with respect to keystone, what i said in 2010 was that energy security considerations exist and needed to be taken into account. but it had to be part of what is the legal and regulatory

requirements for evaluating any pipeline application that crosses an international boundary, the state department was in the process of making such a determination. and when it became necessary to make a decision, we did not recommend that the president say no but rather that the presidential permit for the project at that time be denied. and with respect to the national interest, what we were working on was a resolution of the very strong concerns expressed by one of the states through which the pipeline would move. a state at that time did not have its own process and needed to pass legislation, figure out what the alternative route would be and then, of course, it fell upon the state department to evaluate the alternative route. that had not yet been established when we were required to make our decision.

therefore, it was impossible to assess the impact of that new route that had been requested. now just in the last two days, transcanada has made a move through a letter indicating their intent to submit a new application. at the same time, they're moving forward with parts of the pipeline like from oklahoma to texas that don't cross the border and don't need state department evaluation or decision. so i think we handled this, madam chairman, in a way that was commensurate with the law and regulations. i strongly believe we have to increase our energy security. i strongly support the creation of our new energy bureau. just last week we signed an important disagreement with mexico to encourage boundary exploration in the gulf of mexico, something that was

legally in limbo. so we're committed to doing all that we can to help americans get the energy supplies we need. >> and now to syria if we can. >> now on to syria. well, you know, we are concerned. i think that it is an issue that deserves the attention of the international community. nun lug ar was in a permissive environment. it was after the soviet union had fallen, the new russian federation came into being. they welcomed our work with them as in kazakhstan and ukraine and other countries. at this time there is no permissive environment. but we're going to stay very focused on the potential dangers posed by any store house or depot of such weapons. >> thank you very much, madam secretary for your time. mr. smith from new jersey, the chairman of the subcommittee on africa, global health and human rights is recognized.

>> thank you very much. welcome, madam secretary. let me associate myself with the remarks of our distinguished chairwoman on cuba. we had a hearing a couple weeks ago with dr. oscar bichet who had a 25 year sentence. he is out of prison but he's not out of prison. he spoke via telephone right here. and the man is unbelievably brave. he is calling for freedom, human rights and we've got to be very hard lined, i believe, but also very prudent. i would hope that the gentle lady made a very important point about not attending and i hope that will be the case. let me ask with you regards to the iranian person. we'll have a resolution on the floor later on today. if can you speak to the iranians and to the world, there is a ratcheting up of persecution against christians cha is unprecedented. i held two hearings on the coptic christians, the kidnapping of coptic christian girls who are forced into islam as minors and then given to a

man in egypt who happens to be muslim is outrageous and act of trafficking and it is not an isolated incident. it is a serious on going and pervasive human rights hearing. i held my first hearing on the global persecution of christians on february 15th, 1996. it was getting worse then. it is now awful in china, north korea, we all know people are tortured to death simply because they are christians if you can speak to that. i would like to ask you if you would in a very specific and yes or no answer might suffice, i thank you for the briefing on bosnia and the work you're doing to try to bring bosnia into nato as well as the other countries that are in line. is there any instance, madam secretary, or instances where the obama administration has withheld or has threatened to withhold or plans to withhold or uses its voice and vote and international lending institutions to reward with debt relief or loans or to deny such

or in any other way provide a retaliatory means based on that nation's policies on abortion and based on that nation's support or opposition to resolutions at the u.n. regarding abortion? >> well, as to that second question, congressman, i'd like to take it for the record. it had so many parts to it. i don't want to give you an answer that is not as accurate as i can make it. i'll certainly get back to you on that. as to the very troubling case of pastor kani, you are 100% right. his case is particularly egregious. but it is unfortunately part of what we see as increasing zrem discrimination and persecution on the basis of religion. in some parts of the world it's islam and other parts of the world, it's christians. wherever it occurs, it is

deplorable against freedom of religion, against human rights that are universally recognized. the states has condemned the sentence against pastor nardar kani. we have pushed very hard, reached out to like minded countries, international organizations to get a stay of execution, to get him released from prison. he's done nothing more than maintain his faith. and it is absolutely contrary to every element of the universal basis for human rights that someone like that would be condemned to death for being who he is, worshipping as he chooses, exercising his freedom of conscience. so we call on iran to honor its own constitutional commitment to the protection of religious freedom and its obligations under international law. they can begin by commuting this death sentence and letting this man go free. >> if you could get back on the other question. >> yes. >> as quickly.

we hear from u.n. ambassadors that were some were fearful that we to lose foreign aid if they didn't back the united nations. you're shaking your head no, i'm happy to hear that. if you can provide a definitive answer, it will be helpful. you probably saw the state of articles that china is changing the policy slowingians on the one child per couple policy but not the law itself. that is one of the headlines thatta h yahoo news had. the fact that there are so many missing girls as we all know the estimates are in excess of 100 million missing girls systemically exterminated simply because they happen to be girls. and by 2050, i had a hearing on this very recently, i had 38 congressional hearings on human rights abuse if china, by 2020, 40 to 50 men won't be able to find wives because they've been systemically eliminated. so kline is becoming and will

increase as a trafficking magnet. i'm almost out of time. if can you really speak out strongly against forced abortion, forced sterilization and for the baby girls in china who are suffering. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. mr. sherman, the ranking member on the subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation and trade is recognized. >> madam secretary, glad to you have back here. i want to join so many of my colleagues who praised your work for our country and how much you've been able to accomplish with less than 1% of our budget. i've got a lot of topics to cover. i would expect that you would just want to respond for the record. but interrupt me at any point if the spirit moves you. the first is to focus on georgia. we have been very generous to the republic of georgia. it is a region in southern georgia with