but i think it is an important. i think americans are going -- how did we miss this and why did we spend so much money and loss of life in iraq to see what's going on now? why can't we do more? and i noticed in your statement that you said we set up the joc and baghdad. and i'm glad we have. i wonder why it wasn't set up sooner? you said, i think, six weeks ago, it was set up. this thing has been going on for a while so why didn't we work with the iraqis to try to afford that? i'm concerned about our friends in the kurdish region. i'm concerned that they're going to get surrounded. we didn't lose a single american life in the kurdish region during the iraq war because they're friendly. so i want to ask this. about the kurdish region. what's the administration's position on kurdish oil sports and what actions are exports and what action we're advising american energy companies that might be operating with them?

>> our position on energy exports from iraq is very clear. we support getting as much oil out of iraq as possible and on international markets from north to south. and we also support doing that in a way that re-enforces the overall stability of all raiira regions. when people ask, there's legal risk for taking oil without an agreement. we work very hard to broker an agreement and had an agreement on the table that was a very good one as early as four months ago that would have gotten all the oil out of the kurdish flowing and on to international markets and from the south to the krg. foye a number of reasons and which is that we're in the middle of a high political season in iraq. it was an election season and that was april 30th. i remain confident in the process of forming new government we can work with all sides to have a solution to this

important issue. the budget being debated in parliament, about a $120 billion budget, about $17 billion for the kurdistan region and we want to make sure the resources get to kurdistan. we've been very clear that it's the decision the prime minister to cut off salary payments of the kurdish north because of the oil dispute is unacceptable and should be reversed. we made that clear. we're working closely with our partners in the north and the government in baghdad to find a solution to the issue and through the process of forming the government, we have real opportunity to do so. >> my time is expired. >> will the gentleman-year-old for a minute because i wanted to follow-up on a specific statement. what i want to follow-up on was the comment you made about having eyes in the air and the difficulty of that. in august of 2013, that's when that is when a request was made originally by the government in

iraqi for substance. in march of 2014, they actually delivered an official letter to the white house asking for help. it is certainly true that originally they wanted armed drones to do this work but that was a negotiating position and they swiftly fell back to the position of, okay, you won't give them or sell them to us. then can you use them in order to hit these jihadist units? and all of this occurs long before june, when mosul falls, right? so i just wanted to put that in context, unless there's something that's don't understand here. discussions that i've had, that was my understanding through this as we were trying to get these drone strikes on these units even before they came over the border in order to give some kind of cover for the infantry

on the ground. >> the sequence was helping the iraqis with their held fire strikes with the information and the fusion cells we set up and moving the moving requests for direct support came in may and as alyssa has spoken to, our ability to do anything effect thifly writers a much more granular picture on the ground. we have that picture now but we didn't have that picture in march. >> as expressed, we don't understand why you wouldn't. you've also got signals intelligence and human intelligence. and frankly, you had a green light there for eyes in the air once they delivered a letter to the white house an official request, in march of 2014. so this doesn't add up but i'll go to dr. berra of california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank the witnesses. i think it's disingenuous threat for us to label what's happening

in iraq here in america or a fame your of any particular administration here in america. i think our troops did everything within their power to give iraqi iraq a chance. shed blood and spent billions of dollars to giiraq a chance. one of my staff is a wounded warrior iraq veteran and chatting with him, as veterans all around this country are saddened by what they're seeing in iraq. they did lose their colleagues. they did lose many men and women as we all did. in iraq. but we gave them a chance. we really did. there's also tragic to see what's happening to some of the civilians that served side-by-side with our troops, supporting our efforts in iraq. and the danger that they live under. so we really do have to do everything that we can to try to ensure their safety and serve their visas as we can.

but this isn't a failure of an american administration. this is a failure of iraqi administration and i think everyone in this body would be consistent but this is a failure of maliki administration. the tribal leaders that fat side-by-side with us in the search that made promises that were broken by maliki. systematically, dismantling some of iraqi's own defense forces in a way that we saw what happened in mosul. and they fell apart. now, i think in your own statements with ms. watkins, you said there's no military solution in iraq. you indicated that the iraqi people must do the heavy lifting on their own. can you expand on that and tell us what you think that heavy lifting would be? >> i think brett has spoken to some of the ideas that are

currently being battled about in baghdad to get toward that political solution. i think the point that i would make as we look toward towards any potential decisions the president makes for future action is we couldn't solve the iraqi political approximate for them when we had 170,000 troops. we couldn't have solved them if we kept in 10,000 troops in 2011 and we're not going to be able to solve them through our military support today regardless of what we decide to do. the iraqis have to get the underlying political differences in their system. isil is extremely capable and extremely dangerous but they are getting support fa trom the sun on the ground and it's critical to solve the problems so the sunnis turn away from the government. >> and in your assessment, if a new iraqi government was a more inclusive government that gave equal say to the kurds and the

sunnis and gave them a voois, do you sense that some of our former allies in some of therib leaders would take a different vie view? >> we have to be clear that isil is a military force and we've seen tribes try to take it on and they failed. we trained about 1,000 fallujaians in three months of training and in their first engae engagement trying to get in they lost because they are a highly effective military goergs and far better than the al qaeda and iraq ta we fought and for the awakening to get moving in those days it took a lot of effort on our part to degrade that network and that allowed them to rise up and fight it so i think it has to be taken in parallel. there will have to be military pressure against isil. at the same time there has to be a new government with political

accommodations made to isolate isil from the population but they have to run it parallel to be effective. >> if we're thinking this very strategically, new government forms in iraq that is much more inclusive. the sunnis within iraq become much more opened to not supports isil. our allies in the region potentially, from the sunni side, can also provide some support as well as looking at ways to cut off the funding and support 06 isil -- would that be a logical thought-through scenario? >> yes. i would add that i don't think the sunni support isil. there was an election on april 30th where they said anyone that votes we're going to kill you. they're very clear about that. in the middle of the proprovince alone we had a record turnout of 1.1 million people all sunnis voting for new leaders. isil threatens and intimidates

and rules but brut force and that's the reason they need to be confronted and isolated. but, yes, that's a sequence. first we have to continue to find ways to pressure isil. but a new government and providing a new platform and with new regional enagement and we hope when there's a new government and there will be, the regional capital fully embrace the government and mooirk inroads and regional integration which has not made many inroads over the last couple of years. >> mr. kissinger? >> thank, madam chair. i want to point out i'm a veteran of iraq and i spent a lot of time and sad to see it gone now. i'll be honest with you all, i think with this, everybody is kind of not saying it but what it seems like is the administration is paralyzed. they don't know what to do. the fear of getting involved in iraq again and getting sucked in

and with this reality that the worse case scenario is playing out right before our yoos and this administration bears some responsibility for that, i'd also like to remind folks that in america, we threw out the articles of confederation. we had articles of confed race and drew up our constitution. political solutions are not something we put in the microwave and expect to happen in a short amount of time. this takes time. with the encroachment of isis or isil, whatever you call it, this narrative of we have to have a political solution before we do anything, i would much rather see a flawed iraqi state where we could work a political solution than to see isis in a capitulated rai ed iraqi state. does the march 14th request exist to the white house in what could be included as air strikes. >> i'll check on all the correspondence we've had. >> you would know if a march 14th letter was hand-delivered

to the white house? >> i have a letter from may in which there's a very clear and specific request, i think, a lot of correspondence before then was not as -- >> you don't know of this existence? >> you'll get back to me if in fact it exists. >> i'll get back and we'll go over chapter and verse with all the correspondence we've had with the iraqis with this question. >> and it's fairly easy to get that quickly and we should have had an intelligence picture from when the iraqi government was asking for assistance in august, be now we have it. so we have the official request in may. we have a granular picture now. what's the holdup? i think the answer is not so much that we're still waiting for political solution. again, yai think it's the idea that the administration is paralyzed and doesn't know what

to do and meanwhile they are providing equipment to the government and we're saying we can't they're taking this assistance but they're fighting for their way of life so this is the time we have to say we're the united states of america with a robust military capability. surely we can have the intelligence if we decided may was the time, surely in three months we could have figured out a picture and begun to get engaged at that point. i want to take about the issue of hell-fire missile. it has a warhead of 20 or 18 pounds 2ke7d depending on the missile or target. the cessnas that have been retrofitted. on apache helicopter carries 16 of these hell-fire missiles. the idea of an apa choche missi taking this out is -- the idea of a cessna with one or two held-fire missiles being the

thing that destroys these camps in syria and iraq is crazy. i think we need a robust military -- robust air strike campaign on behalf of the united states. when our troops on the ground get engaged in combat, we're very good. the marines and army are very good at fighting off the enemy but the first thing they do is call for robust air support to help them win that engagement. this idea that the iraqi military melted away or the iraqi military can take background with a hell-fire missile is unrealistic when our own troops who are well trained and have a great background and know how to fight wars call on a-10's, b-1's to come in and do close air support in order to come in and retake ground so i'm renewing the call to the administration for massive manned military air strikes. push back this very, very bad cancer that's encoaching on the middle east and target those in syria to understand the syrians. they are a very good fighting

force, isis and they're getting their training in syria and spilling it out to the rest of the place. i preesh yairt you all's service to the country. i appreciate you being here and i know it's a tough time and with that, i yield back. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, to the panel for being here. >> i've heard a lot of questions about what did we know or what could we have done to maybe, avoid the threat in iraq and syria? my question is is, how far back should we go? can you give me your opinion if

you have one, is what are -- war in iraq, the invasion of 2003, how that relates to the rise of isil? there are many of us in the country who think that was an act of malfeasance by our country and our president at the time who is not the current president and by this congress, to send our country to war in iraq. so i would like you, if you could, answer those two questions and if you have time to explain to me the difference between what might be some people say is paralysis versus first doing no harm. >> sure. so i can speak to the terrorist threat and why isil is particularly different and why we're paying such close attention to it. i think you know, it's the territory they now hold. the self-financing that they're capable of. not giving do nations and living off of donations but the

self-financing and self-sustainment. the span of control, the capability of some of their fighters. they are very, very experienced. and war tested. and then the number of western passport holders that we know of that have travelled to syria and engaged with them and other groups there. the isil's stated intent. we're coming for you, barack obama, retorically and what we know to be active plotting in europe so all of those things in combination make them, probably, it's safe to say, one of the most capable and the best-funded group in the region right now and that's what makes it such a particular concern. >> i can talk a little bit about the history and the questions you ask, i think, the historians will sort out. iisil is a group that we know. it's al qaeda and iraq.

cz zarkawi spaerked this. his plan has always been and i to haved to this in some detail in my hearing here in february. to establish a state. a state in iraq and syria. that's always been his focus and he said we're going to do it three ways. we're going to attack the shia majority in iraq consistently. their marketplaces, their mosque and playgrounds until they respond and then he says we'll united the sunni ranks behind us. that's always been his strategy. he also will attack any sunni, tribal shape, cleric who disagrees with him. that's very clear in his doctrine and he'll attack the kushds that tear open that territory in northern iraq. that was the stated strategy in 2004 and now the strategy of

them and we know what their ideology is and what is particularly scary about it now is it basically effectually controlled the state and it has ambitions to take the mantel of the global jihad from al qaeda central. so that's why it is a significant threat and that's why we're here and we thank you again for the time to testify about the situation today and that's why we look forward to consulting with you to get a handle on it over the weeks and months ahead. i'll have let the historians sort out what happened over the last 12 years. >> madam chair, i waive the rest of my time. >> mr. cook of california. thank you, madam chair. once again, i apologize. i'm usually the one that asks the questions about the role of qatar and you give me the same

answer. i understand what's going on. but i did -- i'm very, very concerned about maliki and his credibility which, to me, is absolutely zero. we get the folks that are representing camp liberty and ashcraft and what's happened in the past and you scant overlook that but what scares me even more is isil, isis and the pact that they went in there and they defeated four divisions. you know, history of the united states marine corp, the marine corp has never had four divisions in one place at one time. theyed that six in world war ii and three on i i give may and

you had groups with pickup trucks, ak-47's and what have you. it just shows that in terms of at least from a military person, the total lack of credibility in the maliki government. and obviously, they don't have any trust. the military, in the functioning or the lack of functioning federalism. so i'm very, very pessimistic on the future in terms of reconstructing the military, particularly when maliki and whoever is in there, if they're going to continue to go to the iranians and the revolutionary guards et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. and with hell fire missiles falling into the wrong hands i'm very, very nervous about this whole thing. it's been touched on a little bit i think from the united

states we have to recognize the changing geopolitical situation. it's been discussed about jordan and i think you're right. if we're not ready to defend jordan or be there for them, i think we're going to be in serious trouble. i'm a strong strong supporter of occurr kurdistan. we have to recognize that. the point has been made that not one military person was killed in kurdistan. the other one, i want you to -- i want to get your take on turkey. on how, in the past, they might be influenced because they surround this area and turkey, lately, and obviously, it's a big, big player where they are. also a member of nato and the fact that some of their behavior with the muslim brotherhood is very scary. could you address that, please? >> turkey remains a close partner of ours and yesterday, in fact, the state department,

we had an almost all-day dialogue with a senior delegation from turkey about a whole host of issues including isil. we recognized broadly that in order to squeeze them, when we focus on iraq in 2007 and 2008, we tried to squeeze them and it's really three prongs. you have to shut off the infiltration networks and turkey plays a big part of that and turkey will remind you that a lot of the source countries in which the global. h jihadist fighters are coming in and denying them a safe haven in syria and that's why we're focusing on training the month earn the opposition and kroming the space between them and helping the iraqis krom their sovereign space in iraq. that's the three-prong approach we have to try to take and the

conversations yesterday with the turks led by depth tear secretary and their undersecretary were focused upon that. and i think we have a fairly common understanding of the going forward with the turks on this. >> they've been living with this threat for a long time and they're extremely focused on what's happening in iraq and as a nato ally we're talking with them every day so i feel confident we know what they're focused on. >> i'm playing beat the clob. if you could comment again on the revolutionary gourd and their influence right now and whether they have replaced the american military completely? >> we remain a partner of choice for the iraqis. there's no question. $11 billion into the federal reserve including $193 million last week. again, i was there during the

crisis and there was a major vacuum and iran has stepped up in some ways to fill the vacuum in ways we are made very clear to the iraqis are not particularly helpful. >> thank you. >> i yield back. >> appreciate it. mr. conley of virginia. >> thank you, madam chairman. and welcome to our panel. i have to say that in listening to many of your answers, i hear a lot of aspirations and i share them, too. but i'm not quite sure whether they're realistically achievable anymore. for example, you made a forceful statement in response to one of my colleague's questions that there's no substitute for a strong central government located in baghdad. well, we've been there for 12 years and we've poured a trillion dollars into the country. we've lost precious men and women in fighting there. what, pray tell, do we -- how

does one achieve strong central effective understand iffal government in baghdad? effective government in baghdad? >> this is what the iraqis are grappling with right now and as they form their government they'll have some fundamental questions they have to answer about the future of hatheir sta. brett talked about the ideas on the table. >> i guess i -- my question carried with it the inference that maybe we need to re-assess. the vice president of the united states wrote an op-ed piece before he became vice president with leslie gelp and she said, frankly, what ought to happen in iraqi, what's lyingly to happen as well, is the sort of segmentation of iraq into three zones, the sunni zone, dominated zone and a shia dominated zone and a kurdish dominated zone. looking at the map today, that may be looked upon in retrospect, as a more

impressionable view than was accepted at the time? maybe we have to give up on the idea after 12 years of trying, on a strong, central, functional government that holds the whole country based in baghdad. >> i can't speak to the retrospective piece but i can speak do you know, what it would mean right now if somehow we decided to give up on a strong government in baghdad, centered in baghdad. who has in charge in that sunni dominated area? some very, very scarey people. and so while i think the idea may be interesting on paper, i just think in reality, based on who is in charge in these large parts of the country right now it's just a -- it's a much less favorable option than having a strong government in baghdad. >> of course, i take your point. but, i mean, the question is whether we should pour. blood and treasure into that hope. at what point do we recognize

we're going to have to at least modify the hope? it's not going to happen or not going to happen any time soon realistically? because if we continue to pursue a policy, however noble and desirable, that's not realistic and is going to get us in a lot of pain and difficulty, that's not a good foreign policy. >> one point, congressman, what i laid out in my opening testimony, is a way forward that that is focused upon the hard realities on the ground that we face now. that's within the fabric of the rairk constitution that can harness their very significant national resources to empower local communities in order to deny space to these terrorist groups. and that's a model in which i recognize is the principle of the ever evolution of authority and federalism which is embedded in the iraqi constitution.

like if region that exists in the kurdish region. a process for doing that through the iraqi constitution. >> but again, i agree with you. but that ought to be how it works. but the maliki government has significantly alienated a huge part of its own country and in the process has opened the door for recent activity to isis. that's the reason they had so little difficulty in addition to the iraqi four divisions which we haep helped to train and equip. but they lost a huge amount of political good will if they ever had it among their own countrymen. how do you restore that in a timeframe that stabilizes the situation and can forcefully push back isis. >> we had to make sure the election happened and happened on time and that's something we focused hard on over the last

eight to ten months. it happened. 14 million iraqis vote. they chose a speaker. that kicked you have a timeline of 30 days to choose a president. once there's a president there's a 15-day clock to select a prime minister and days to form a cabinet. they'll get through this on their timeline and come out with a new government and again, we remain hopeful that the government will reflect a fairly broad consensus among the principle groups. the presidency, for example, is the choice the kurds are coming up with their nominee for the presidency and we hope to have that done soon and that will kick off a timeline to choose a prime minister. >> i happen to be in this political vacuum period where they have to form a new government but once they do it will begin a process of a genuine dialogue about these issues you face and i hope with this committee we can be a part of the dialogue and inform them as best we can. >> madam chairman my time is up. i hope the state department and

pentagon both hear bipartisan skepticism. good will, i hope you're right but the skepticism being expressed in this committee today is very bipartisan. >> thank you. now we turn to mr. perry of pennsylvania. >> thank you, madam chair. violation of u.s. and sanctions what support is the maliki government receiving from iran currently that you know of? >> the question of sanctions under those provisions something we're looking at closely because it's a very complicated question, actually. >> well tell me, what kind of material support you know of and then we'll try to figure it out from there. >> it's another question i'd like to follow-up with you in a closed session we can discuss in some detail. >> all right. do you do you know? >> sir, i really think in a closed session we can much more specifically answer your question. >> all right. i get your point. knowing that iran is supporting

if insurgency in yemen, is the yemen model as sponsored in some sort by the president, is that realistic, viable for iraq? didn't that -- isn't that fairly complicated that iran is a essentially an add var,en enemy of the united states that we're barely working with on i treaty regarding their nuclear program which many americans, myself included, disagree with? what position do we put ourselves in and how can we trust the maliki government to move forward knowing their complicit and relying on iran and can we expect the folks to receive better treatment knowing they're collaborating with iran than they are now? >> so i would say -- i want to make sure i understand your question about the yemen model. it seems like you're implying that the iraqi government is

completely under the sway of the iranians. >> i don't think it's completely under the sway but wering the yemen model as viable and iraq add my openic and irresponsible, even mentioning that kind of indicates cluelessness of the administration, in myti estimation. i wanted to get you're feel on it. >> i'm not completely understanding you're question. if question is could the yemen model work in iraq. >> is it viable? yes. it could work if we had different people in iraq in power and a different circumstance in my opinion so that's not the circumstance. is it viable now? do you see the yemen model viable now in iraq? >> i think if i unwhat you mean by yemen model meaning work very closely with the central government on a prm. >> yes. >> first of all right now we're working with the iraqis on the ground.

we have our own people that need security and we rely on the iraqis to provide that security in baghdad. i think what we're trying to figure out is the answer to that question. by sending folks out and understanding the iraqi security forces and whether they are viable -- >> don't you think it's a little irresponsible to come out with those statements when you're trying to understand the circumstance. moving on, japan and germany, essentially defeated by coalition force including the united states, prooebably didn' want us to stay. what responsibility does the administration have, understanding they disagreed with our actions, the united states government's actions in iraq, and i'm respecting that. but who responsibility do they have to secure the gains of the previous or present administration? do they have any? >> do the iraqis?

>> no, what is our response snb ability? >> do we have any? >> we have invested incredible amounts of blood there. my husband is an army officer. we met there. as a country we've invested so significantly in that country so of course we're invested in making sure it continues as a viable state and doesn't become a breeding ground for terrorists. >> having spent time there as i did, do you believe circumstances on the ground would be different had we maintained a sofa? and using the excuse, and i say "excuse" that the government couldn't get itself together enough to get support for it, we get that. they didn't want us there. that's a big surprise. didn't we have some responsibility to make sure it happened? the president's got a pen and a phone. if he had said staying what are you going to do about it? would things be different? do you think things would be different if we would have stayed in some fashion providing some security? providing some intelligence?

providing some oversight of a fledgeling government and we earned a victory for and literally almost installed piece by piece? >> i think that things may have been different but i don't know that we wouldn't be in a similar situation to where we are today based on the fact that we still lack political accommodation at the heart of it in baghdad. >> thank you very much, mr. may perry and we turn to mr. weber. >> you said our objective to make suhu a saw isis can never safe haven there? have they overnighted with lightning speed? >> depends on how you characterize "lightning speed" congressman. >> in your opinion would you characterize that as lightning speed? >> that answer caught them off guard, frankly.

>> baghdad could have fought hitler something about blitzkrieg, wouldn't you agree? >> isil has proven to be very -- >> do you remember when they asked how they can withstand the attacks? do you remember that question? >> i believe so, yes. >> okay. here's my question for you. how confident are you that camp liberty can withstand more attacks? >> again, i want to mention i visited camp liberty a number of times. >> have you ever stayed there? >> well, i have not stayed overnight there but i've lived in trailers under repeated rocket attacks so i know what it feels like and i've just -- >> do you think they'll all be killed before or after baghdad falls? >> congressman, i think that's a bit of a hyperbolic question.

>> you don't think it's a threat? >> their e located very near where our people are located. >> you don't think it's a real possibility? >> i'm not -- again, i'm happy to come address the specific security apparatus we have at the airport. >> okay. do we write them offer? >> certainly we don't write thm off. it takes a substantial amount of our time and energy every day to focus on this question and we have a senior adviser on the state department that does this full time. >> in your remarks earlier you're said let me tell you why this matters. does camp liberty matter? >> yes, of course, it matters. that's, again, why with a senior official at the state department dedicated to this issue full time to the secretary and he'll be on a plane tonight? >> does it seem odd to you that we have -- with the calamity on the border, some 60,000 plus crossing our southern border and getting, quote, refugee status or asylum status here but we

can't get the same thing for camp liberty? does that seem odd or ironic? >> i think, congressman, the administration made a decision to bring in up to 100 residents of ramp liberty to the united states and we believe that's a significant decision. which also should enable other countries to do the same. >> you see all the yellow jackets behind you? have you seen those? okay. you think that's an important issue for them? >> it's a very important issue to us. >> well the actions don't seem to follow-up that idea. you and i talked back on february 5th hearing about the t-walls and they begin to get put in place or for a short time and it seems like they ended pretty quickly thereafter. i would say, not only is it an important issue for those here to support some action on the administration's part, to help camp liberty but obviously it's also important for camp liberty and i think the administration

has let them down. that a priority. what is the answer for those camp liberty residents? how do we make this a priority before it gets so bad that there's no hope for them? what's the answer to that? >> we're determined to do everything we can to get them out of iraq. their safety will depend on them getting out of iraq. that's why we have to find third countries to take them. we have made the decision to take in 100 -- >> should we encourage them to go to mexico and come up to the southern border? >> again, if the mexicans were willing to take a number of residents we would certainly support that decision as we would any other country in the world that's why we have a senior adviser focused on this question. he's on an airplane tonight going to countries in europe, scandinavia, east asia and everywhere and wooir making progress but we need to keep at it. that's why we put a million dollars into the new u.n. trust fund so countries that might not have the resources are able to

take these people in and bring them to safety. >> i have 30 seconds left. what do we need to do? >> sir, we're trying to figure that out right now. >> trying to figure it out? how long have they been there? >> since late -- mid to late june. and i believe it is important to have a prudent thoughtful responsible approach before we jump? >> it's not going to be prudent if they all get killed before we do something, is it? >> sir, i think that it is critical we have a thoughtful regional approach to this problem before we jump in. >> i hope you will encourage the administration to get real thoughtful real fast. madam chair, i yield back. >> please to yield to the new member of our committee from florida. >> those from camp liberty, thank you for coming. you made your point with the newest congress person here.

the two of you thank you for coming. and thank you for your service to our country. i'm not this isn't an easy moment for you and it's never easy to be the point of the speer in this kind of a situation so i respect you for coming and speaking straight. and i ask you to speak straight to me, too. to use your words, there's some hard realities here, right? and i cannot you've estimate those realities. people are dying. and these are people that don't deserve to die. and we've been there for a while. it feels like a perilous situation to me as our enemies consolidate friends, allies and territory. which will certainly some day, threaten our friends, israel, and maybe even us, if i'm getting the drift of what's going on here as the newcomer.

and then in that back drop it feels like we've bet on a team that is divided maybe artificial artificially put together. and a coach that we and you as an administration, don't have full confidence in. that sounds like a bad situation for us to be in. as i hear the talk today, it also feels that this lack of leadership, therefore, causes a deterioration in safety and where there's a deterioration in safety there's a deterioration in culture. people losing lives in their own culture feels like a bad situation. it threatens us longer term. if i'm capturing correctly what's going on here.

so in that vacuum of chaos, you all are making decisions that will affect us eventually and people on the ground immediately. for my constituents, i think what would be good is two things. number one, each one -- each of you give me a very brief summary for those that aren't experts. that don't know all the missiles. that don't know all the thingsed here. what's your sum ray way forward? where is the administration taking us? i don't want to get into the partisan bickering. i want to understand where we're going and where we're going to be six months from now. and then, secondly, i would like to understand what can this committee do to help? save lives and protect people i'm not interested in assigning

blame. i think history will sort that out. i think it's more helpful if you tell us where we're going and if we like that math, how we can help to get there. and so i can understand it and, therefore, take it to my constituents. i know this question is a little different than most but does it make sense to you two? >> yes, congressman, i thank you for the very thoughtful question and i think, explaining this to your constituents is critical about why this matters. a lot of the history on iraq, i think it can add a clouded view on why this continues to matter to the united states. >> but i want you to look forward with me. >> okay. let me say three things. first, when this crisis began as i stated in my written testimony, we had to get precise picture on the ground and i want to speak from my first hand

experience. president obama immediately ordering a surge of intelligence assets, moving an aircraft carrier into the gulf and ordering special forces to get to the ground to get a picture that was all done and there's been a lot of talk about the 2011 sofa. that was done under another permanent agreement we have called strategic framework agreement. that's permanent and it allows us to assist the iraqis in ways to protect our interests. we get a clear picture of what's happening on the ground and we're getting that and it will become clear on the days ahead through the assessment being undertaken by the military. second, we had to get the political process on track. iraqi had an election. 14 million iraqis turned out to vote, 62% turnout. higher than most elections all around the world. that shows the democratic aspirations of the rooiiraqi pe. they want a new government. a new parliament just convened with 328 members and they're in working to form a new government and we have to be behind them and encourage them and as soon as the new government is stood

up and it will be, we need to embrace it and give it every chance to succeed under if strategic framework agreement because it's in their interest and ours and also in the interest of all that we have sacrificed in iraq. that in a nut shell we have to get a better picture on the ground and better eyes to know what we're doing and secondly, get the political process on track which reflects not just if political leaps but the aspirations of 14 million iraqis that voted and once the government stood up we need to embrace it and give it every chance to succeed. >> so in summary, we wait until the new government is formed and then give that government full support? >> we're not waiting. we have people on the ground now to do significant things under the strategic framework agreement which exists with the futuew wrooirk iraq government the one before that. >> thank you very much. and no mr. marino of pennsylvania and then after that, mr. collins of georgia. >> thank you, chairman. good afternoon, the two of you.

thank you for being here. unfortunately and i don't mean to be facetious. vow have drawn the stick to be here and be with us. as i tell individuals that come and testify, you should accommodating in your reviews. that's a up the group. -- that's a tough group. we all had one intention in mind. it's a different way we seem to want to go about it. the issues, there's no question, complex is not enough of a word to explain what's going on over there. i understand the two of you have been over in iraq and so you know first hand what things are like. i visited there twice, short

periods of time. and you can respond to this if you'd like to. several moments ago you stated that there would be no difference if troops were left in iraq, 10,000 just pick a number. but troops were left there and have have no impact on what's taking place in iraq to repel isil. did i understand that correctly? >> so let me clarify. this just came up a couple of minutes ago as well. it's not that there would be no difference. i don't know exactly how it would have been but i know it wouldn't have forced the iraqis into a political solution that only they can make. >> none of us know how it would have been but i'm glad you clarified the political statement. >> the political piece and that's critical. >> it is critical. but i somewhat disagree with that assessment because i've read and studied this extensively and probably not

nearly as up to date with it as the two of you are. but i've been reading military reports and listening to experts from tactitions, et cetera, and they disagree with that assessment, if there would have been troops left there, and make no mistake about it, a lot of this is maliki's fault. i was reading an article in the new yorker, if troofs were left there, it would have had an impact on maliki, they probably could have clipped his wings, preventing him from doing what he should have done and didn't do. but it would also have an impact on isil as well. can you tell me what the difference is now since president obama has sent some troops over there now? if sending the troops over

there, if not leaving troops there would really not have made a difference, why -- what is the intent behind sending troops now? would that not make a difference? >> do you understand that question? >> i think so. we have sent up to 775 troops. 475 of that total are for the security of our people and -- >> support, et cetera. >> exactly. >> the other 300 are there to assess and answer those very questions. and i think the important thing that has changed since even just a year ago is the threat from isil that that poses to us to our allies and our partners, and the importance that that puts on pushing back on them. i think if your question is, what more can we do?

we should have left 2r5troops a now we're considering putting them back in. we're trying to figure out if additional troops on the ground would help in that fight. >> i'm ambivalent to this because i don't want to see more people come back in a body bag. we did have the civil war under control by the troops left iraq. do you agree with that assessment? >> i agree that the sectarian violence that had been raging in iraq at the height of the war was significantly diminished, significantly by the time we depart departed. >> do you have any comments on my questions? >> it's a tremendous honor to be before this committee i think

again 2011, we just -- the requirements to get something through the iraqi parliament is not possible. we have the strategic framework agreement, where we are now is that we have been fully embraced to do training, to do advising, to do all sorts of things, what we are undertaking is a careful view of what to do to be most effective. we'll have more concrete way forward in terms of what we have decided will be the most effective. that is the conversation going on now internally. >> thank you very much. >> mr. collins of georgia is recognized. >> thank you madam chair, i appreciate it looking back, i'm not going to do that. i'll just say this, in reference to my friend from pennsylvania, i've been there when they were put in body bags and i am appalled if we did so little -- do not accept the political

answer that we couldn't have gotten it through. also, there was a political issue here at home, in which the president made a promise to get out. there's political aspects on both sides, let's not kid each other that we're doing that. i'll be honest about that and i won't go back. i want to look forward and look at this, that is a concern for me. we spent a lot of blood and treasure, and to leave it like it is now is very, very concerning for those of us who were there. going-forward is a concern for me. iran has used its close relationship with iraq, and it was growing toward the end anyway the u.s. has time and time ago to asked iraq to stop allowing iran to use their airspace. what is the position iraq has taken to have iran cease these

fights? >> we continue to discuss that issue, it's unclear in terms of what is on specific flights and the iraqis aren't going to completely shut down their airspace. it's an ongoing conversation, it gets into some sensitive information which i would be happy to follow up with you in a different setting. >> i agree. there's a lot of conversation that is needed to have here. there's a lot of things we're dealing with the iranians on right now, that there could be issues we could use pressure points, i'm concerned about their continued involvement in this messed up soup of syria. i want to move, though, to the amf, to the president's 775 million, which 475 are there for additional embassy security. under what authority is the president deploying this force? >> as part of our -- the 775 in

total were notified in the three war powers notifications that came over to the hill. >> all right. so article 2, still adheres to the war powers resolution, they've been there for 30 days at this point. after the 60 day mark which authorizations in force will the president use? which one is going to -- i mean, which one are we looking to use? >> i'll just say exactly what the president has said, any future decisions regarding our military act will be done in close consultation with the congress, and one of those issues to be discussed will be the specific legal authorizations through which the administration determines the president has that authority. >> at this point in time, the question would have had to come up that we're about 30 days away from using this, the question

would be we've thought about this, which are you going to come back and ask for a new authorization? this at some point in time has to be asked. saying, we'll think about it in 30 days, frankly, is not satisfactorily to me. >> there's a number of legal authorities about the specifics in this case will be determined in close consultation. >> let's discuss the iraq ailment for a second. at what point does the iraq aumf without congressional repeal, or at some time not using it, this administration chose to withdraw in 2011 the authorization is still valid, or are we going to keep it for ad inif i night um? i think there needs to be an honest question that needs to be discussed. how longer we going to have that on the table? >> it's also an issue, it's a legal issue which i would defer

to the lawyers and administration. >> i'm sure they're not going to beat down our door to come talk about it, at this point. that's why you're here for that. >> like i said, this is just concerning. i believe we left with no real strategy, we're not having to deal with it, for those of us that did deal with it on the ground are very frustrated about it. one last thing before -- i appreciate you coming up the hill. we're going to have a difference of opinion. i know you're limited by what you can or cannot say. which is understandable but not satisfactory. i want to tell you each, the secretary of the state department, any other agency, the united states needs to continue to employ all necessary means to protect those there. it is our obligation and right. studying it forever is not the option. that needs to stop. the next time i hope someone comes to this committee, they're saying, here's what we're doing, not that we're looking at it, that's very disingenuous in a

lot of ways, because we've been looking at it for a long time n now. with that, i think there are a few matters here, especially concerning use of force. there's a lot of legal options -- yes, there are a lot of legal options here, we need to decide what are we going to do it under, and not just make it up on the fly, because we're not sure what to do. >> thank you so much, mr. collins. thank you, mr. engle, and thank you for the panelists and the audience and media. with that, our committee is adjourned, thank you. keith ellison talks about the recent conflict between

israelis and palestinians. after that, tom rice speaks about the lawsuit against president obama. washington journal's live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> earlier today, president obama was in kansas city to discuss the economy, where he discussed the gop lawsuit to sue h him. here's a look. >> so there's a bunch of stuff that needs to get done. unfortunately, the main vote that they've scheduled for today is whether or not they decide to sue me for doing my job. first of all, don't -- first of all, here's something i always

say, do not boo, vote. booing doesn't help. voting helps. >> but think about this, they have announced they're going to sue me for taking executive actions to help people. so, you know, they're mad because i'm doing my job. and by the way, i've told them, i said, i'd be happy to do it with you the only reason i'm doing it on my own is because you don't do anything, but if you want, let's work together. everybody right now says this is a political stunt, but it's worse than that, because every vote they're taking like that

means a vote they're not taking to actually help you. when they've taken 50 votes to repeal the affordable care act, that was time that could have been spent working constructively to help you on some things. and by the way, you know who's paying for this suit they're going to file? you. no, no, you're paying for it, it's estimated by the time the thing was done, i would have already left off, so -- it's not a productive thing to do. >> that was part of the president's remarks from earlier today in kansas city. you can see all of his comments later in our schedule or any time at c-span.org.

american artifacts on american history tv, this weekend our visit to the national security archives at george washington university reveals declassified documents about the golf of tonkinen vietnam. president johnson had broad powers to wage war in southeast asia. american artifacts sundays at 6:00 and 10:00 p.m. eastern while congress is in recess, american history tv will be in prime time from 5:00 to 8:00 eastern. american history tv on c-span 3. with live coverage of the u.s. house on c-span and the senate on c-span 3. on weekends c-span 3 is the home to american history tv, with programs that tell our nation's

story, including the civil war's 150th anniversary, visiting battlefields and key veents, american artifacts, touring museums and historic sites. history bookshelf, the presidency, looking at the policies and legacies of our nation's commanders in chief lectures in history. and our new series, real america featuring archival government from educational films. c-span 3 created by the cable tv industry, and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook, and follow us on twitter. >> the nominee to the u.s. ambassador to russia testified before the senate foreign relati relatio relations committee today. mr. taft was the u.s. ambassador

to ukraine until last year, his testimony is followed by other nominees, including ones to be ambassador in botswana, brunei and costa rica. this is 2 hours. >> we have three panels today, i'll chair the first panel, which will be the nomination of john francis taft. the second panel and earl robert miller to be the ambassador to the republic of botswana. stafford fitzgerald haney to be ambassador to costa rica.

let me welcome our first nominee. mr. taft has been a foreign service officer since 1962 and deserves to be given every consideration of the committee. let me say the geopolitics is vastly different from what we confronted in the last hearing in 2011. in my view, we cannot afford to wait to send a a.m. bass store to moscow. before we begin, i just want to express my concern about russia's violation of its obligations under the intermediate range treaty. it is vital that they comply with their obligations under the treaty, and eliminate any prohibitive items in a verifiable manner. the imf treaty is a cornerstone

of the european security. the treaty sought to eliminate the nuclear threat to western europe and the european parts of the soviet union, the fact that russia is violating its obligation is another sign that under president putin, russia is operating in a manner that threatens the security of all european states. we cannot delay in sending someone in view of that reality, in view that president putin enjoys soaring approval ratings, but doubles down on his reckless course in ukraine, a lot of innocent life with the downing of the malaysia flight 17 by prorussian levels. not when the ukrainian army is making advances in the east. putting weaponry into the irresponsible hands of militias.

i signed a letter to president obama last week asking for immediate sanctions against russia's defense sector, including preventing russia from providing weaponry to the ukraine. we need an ambassador in moscow as events continue to unfold. i hope both sides of the aisle will agree to accept officer taft's ambassador. he's a lifelong student of russia and the former soviet republics. we need his knowledge to deal

with putin's disrespect of ri t rights. we welcome you ambassador to the committee, i'm going to call upon senator corker for his remarks. when senator corker's finished, please invite, recognize any of the members of your family that are here. i understand you've had a multidecade partner in your effort and we appreciate your willingness to allow him to serve his nation. senator corker? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'll be brief. i want to second the comments that have been made about your 3r50e6 previous service, and thank your spouse for coming out of retirement. i know you're living here, there are grand babies in the region,

and yet you're willing to head back to russia to serve your country. i think there's been a lot of frustration, i know there has been by most, relative to the sanctions that have been put in place i do want to say i applaud the sanctions that have been put in place, the day before the malaysian flight was shot down. we haven't seen the details yet, but it looks like us and europe have come more closely together. you go to russia at a time that was mentioned is very important, i think your service in the other countries nearby are very helpful, not only to all of us, but to those countries and russia, everyone here knows that russia had to agree, in spite of the service in these other countries, which obvious ly the

believe pose some threat to them. they have to agree he is our nominee. you are going there under challenging circumstances as has been mentioned. it was announced that we're going to bring forth these charges relative to the imf treaty, makes it additionally a challenging time. this is the type of issues we're seeing in eastern ukraine and crimea, should they get out of hand, can lead to some really terrible global issues, and i think all of us have been concerned again that the tepid response we've had may embolden putin to continue on. it now appears that possibly he's beginning to get some degree of push back with the country. hopefully that's the case.

i know he's been riding a strong popularity because of what he's done. i hope our nation and others will get him to move away from the types of actions he's taken. and more importantly, i hope you as ambassador will do everything you can to make that happen. i know your access to putin will be a little different. i'm very glad you're willing to do this, look forward to your testimony. i will say on the confirmation, this committee has been incredible as far as getting nominees out on a bipartisan basis very quickly to the floor, i hope in this case, many of them have been held up as we know i hope in this case, we'll figure a way to get you out very quickly and get you on your way to russia, thank you. >> your full statement will be included in the record woud objection. i may have to interrupt you, we

have a tenth member who's on his way here. senator durbin is on his way. with that, the floor is yours. >> thank you very much. i'm grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today as president obama's nominee for -- to be the next ambassador to the russian federation. i'm grateful to you and senator corker and mccain for the kind remarks you've made about me and my wife. as someone who's been a private citizen for the better part of the last year i have appreciated and admired the work of this committee on russia and ukraine, but more broadly on foreign affairs. if i'm confirmed, i will continue to work closely with

the staff on my assignments. we fair some difficult times with russia since the end of the cold war. i would like to say that our relations with russia are in serious trouble, the future is uncertain. the u.s. can't ignore the international challenge by the order imposed by the ukraine crisis. russia's efforts to annex crimea which we will never accept have shredded the fabric of freely adopted obligations that have kept the peace for nearly 70 years. >> russia's policy of destabilizing parts of ukraine violate the sovereignty of its neighbor. russia itself observed the independence and territorial integrity of ukraine. as you said, as president obama

and many european leaders have emphasized, security is vital. the horrendous shooting down of the malaysian airlines has shocked many people. we must continue to talk clearly to the russians and make sure officials and citizens understand american policy, our interests and values. >> at the same time managing this crisis will require that our own government continues to know as precisely as we can, what the russian side is thinking, what their objectives are, and why they're taking the approaches they do, even when they find them unacceptable. if given the opportunity to serve, i will try to do just that, engage in frank diplomacy. one of the great privileges of my career has been to lead committed americans overseas.

if confirmed, i will do my best to lead the highly professional and motivated team we have in moscow and across our three consulates across russia. i would like to recognize my wife in front of all of you, she has been my indispensable partner in my career. she's made her own unique contributions to representing our country in every post in which we have served. i know she will do that again in moscow. i would like to thank my wonderful daughters. they make me proud every day, they've been supportive of my work throughout my career. kathleen is here today along with her husband andy, my daughter christine is unfortunately at home -- or fortunately at home taking care of our 10-day-old second granddaught

granddaughter. her husband is here with us today, and as is my wife's cousin marjorie and her husband. mr. chairman, thank you nor letting me make those remarks. i'm prepared now to answer any questions you might have. >> well, most nominees take a full five minutes, i want to congratulate you on your brevity. >> this is the experience after you do this four times, sir, you get to -- >> let me twist welcome all of your family, and we appreciate again their willingness to share you with the nation and your service. and since i am sanctioned and cannot go to russia to visit you if you get confirmed, i hope to be able to have an open line of communication with you so we can talk about issues as we move forward. >> absolutely, sir. >> what is -- i thought that

after the tragedy of the malaysian airline flights, that president putin would have a different vision of where he was at, that he would change course, that it would be an offramp, but he seems to have doubled down. how is it, his invasion of crimea, what is going on here, up ends the international order. i know when i was in europe, the europeans are in shock, they never thought that was going to be their challenges. they thought security challenges were going to be in the context of modern terrorism. >> how do you look at that reality, knowing that you're going into a set of circumstances under which, in stead of what we think would be the normal course of eventses that de-escalating, moving in a different direction would be the response to a response where we see putin doubling down? how do you view that? how do you engage in that as you go to russia?

>> well, i think the -- as you say, the $64,000 question is, what is exactly president putin's approach at this point? you were not the only one who thought that this horrible trage tragedy, to disengage. i do not know specifically what president putin's plans are. i note like you, that the sanctions that the -- europe has increased substantially in sanctions today, going into sek toral areas, according to what i read in the press, my understanding is that we are now going to add some additional sanctions ourselves. i would also note as you mention that we saw this week criticism of putin, specifically the press interview that was given by his very old friend and adviser, former deputy prime minister,

who was quite clear about his concern -- not just with the ukraine crisis and the impact this was going to have on the economy, but also the individuals in the society, the ultranationalists who he was quite critical of. we know from different press articles and other things, that many in the business community are very concerned at the way things are going, this isn't just sanctions. i know from my work at rand that there are businessmen who are not sanctioned or not party to this, but they've lost deals, because they lost foreign capital they've counted on to expand or continue operating some of their -- the pressure is clearly there. i can't tell you, i wish i could tell you how i see all of this. i think we need to, as i said, keep the pressure on, and to give -- continue to give president putin an opportunity to find a way to de-escalate this crisis and to bring an end

to the conflict in ukraine, along the lines that the president has outlined. >> what do you think should be our response to the administration's statement that russia has violated their treaty obligations? >> i think this is a very serious matter, senator. it goes to the core of trust. i understand that in international relations, trust is one component, but i hope that the russians will seize the opportunity that we have offered to come to the table, to meet with our experts, to try to resolve this, to shelf this particular weapons system, so -- and to bring themselves back in compliance with the imf treaty. >> and i would assume if you're confirmed this is an issue you will drive significantly, because there are those of us who knew about this, based on what was classified information.

now that it's become public have been concerned about where this is leading and where it's heading. if you look at the multiplicity of the actions russia has taken, you begin to wonder how much the international order has been upended by president putin. >> i agree with you, sir. i would say that back in the soviet days, one of the things i spent time on was arms control. i will do my best to press this issue when we're in moscow. >> if we can't go ahead and deter or change -- get russia to change course. one of the hopes is that -- i am really concerned that we who lead the world in a shale revolution are going to help the

russians create a russian shale revolution that will give them more gas and greater ability to leverage it as they have leveraged it in ukraine, as they are leveraging it against europe. the last thing i think that is in the national interest and security of the united states. is to have our technology sold to the russians so they can have a shale revolution, so they can have more energy, they can have more resources and more leverage against europe and similar countries. i hope you're going to look at that closely with the department. i think that is a sanction that has long term consequences for the russians in terms of both what they can do moving forward and what the consequences are economically. >> i will, sir. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your opening comment. >> the imf treaty was relative to approximate locations to russia. therefore the violations were

violations that if they continued were violations that would have had an impact on europe in general. my guess is, some of them were aware of these violations due to their intelligence. you see this having any impact relative to the other issues we're dealing with russia on right now? >> i think it goes to the -- >> i'm talking about the european community we're working with. >> the allies are being briefed at nato today or tomorrow. i'm not sure exactly when, to go over this, they like the committee has been apprised of the problem before they've known of it. i think our european allies should be concerned. the imf missiles are the ones that most apply in the -- you know, to the european continent. we worked very hard in the '80s to get that treaty to preserve the security and to make the security of europe indivisible

from our own. >> when you talked about offramps, hopefully we will continue to look at possible offramps for putin as the chairman mentioned. you would have thought the downing of the passenger aircraft would have been the perfect offramp. instead he turned into the wind and doubled down. what types of offramps do you see as being possible in the future with actions being as they have been from him. >> i watched secretary kerry this morning on television, when he appeared with the foreign minister of the ukraine. the secretary was again emphasizing, sir, that he had talked to foreign minister lavrov this morning. to meet at any time to do this, based on the peace plan that president porshenko has

outlined. the secretary seemed to indicate that he was ready at any stage to engage in something like that i think a lot depends on what the policies of president putin are. >> the hague recently ruled that russia had, you know, basically stolen $50 billion from shareholders of ukos. it seems like there are numbers of issues that are occurring right now. i assume you'll be forceful in pursuing that to its ends and we had u.s. shareholders who also were damaged in that process. >> yes, sir. in all my career, in my other assignments, one of my top priorities -- and i will certainly do that. i'm cognizant there is a

provision in the accountability act which obliges the administration to help american investors who were victims of this -- and i will certainly do that. my embassy and i -- i think the embassy has already been engaged on this, and i will certainly continue to do that. >> senator corker, if you would yield for a moment. when i intend to do, when senator corker finishes his line of questioning, recess, meet off the floor quickly, have a successful vote, come back and continue the nomination. senator corker? >> i've had ample time to spend with our nominee, i'm thankful he's willing to do this, we had a long, long conversation yesterday so in order to expedite our business meeting i'll stop and thank him again for his willingness to serve our

country in this way. >> thank you, senator. >> ladies and gentlemen, i would like to call to order the second panel of the united states senate committee on foreign relations, considering three ambassador nominees. i'm pleased to chair this committee. all three of our nominees have impressive records of accomplishment. i'm looking forward to hearing their pry orders for advancing america's interests. dedicated a large portion of its capable military to addressing wildlife trafficking. there are challenges in terms of having the second highest

hiv/aids rates in the world earl miller is a career foreign service officer currently serving in johannesburg. his knowledge of the region, previous service in botswana. next we consider calo verde, grown to become a stable democratic middle income country. in part due to our strong investment ties and shared regional concerns, including narco trafficking off the coast. mr. donald heflin brings significant experience. gained regional expertise as the deputy leader acting director of the state departments of west

african affairs. last but not least, we consider brunei, brunei recently implemented a new penal code, which includes measures such as the death penalty for adulttry, homosexual acts and disgracing the koran. these more restrictions will apply to all bruneians including those who are not muslim. brunei is an increasingly important partner for american interests. it opposes territorial aggression by the south china see. it's imperative our ambassador achieve our goals. mr. craig allen spent three decades working and living in asia. he recently served as deputy

assistant secretaries of china. he served in johannesburg, beijing and tokyo. i'd like to invite my colleague to make any opening statement he would like before i invite our nominees to make their opening statements. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i met with two of you in the last little bit in my office, look forward to your testimony, and thank you for your service. >> i'd like to welcome our nominees and encourage you to take the time to introduce your families and friends who we all know are an essential part of your service in government. mr. heflin? >> it's my honor to be here today as the president's nominee. i'm grateful to president obama

and secretary kerry for this tremendous vote of confidence and this opportunity to come before you, i wish to acknowledge my daughter sarah, who is here with us today. she's currently a junior in tennessee. and lived in six countries growing up. her first posting started when she was eight weeks old. i regret my parents didn't live here long enough to be here today. they devoted their entire lifetimes to public service. the ten islands that make up the islands of cabo verde. they enjoy a multiparty political system. it is a story of progress, prosperity, political stability and democracy. cabo verde in the united states have enjoyed warm relations since we opened our consulate there nearly 200 years ago. there are more than 450,000 americans in cabo verde.

many of these families immigrated to new england. they participate fully in the life of our great country and many of them wish to invest in a prosperous future. the united states and cabo verde are partners on a number of important matters. among them, maritime security and trans national crime are key. the government strongly supports counter narcotics maneuvers. they're a model in the region for strategic partnership. if confirmed, it is my goal to maintain and enhance this multilateral and interagency corporation. u.s. engagement in support of cabo verde's economy is bearing fruit. producing significant gains in all three of its projects. first, improvements in transportation networks, facilitating integration of internal markets. improving water management and

soil conservation. and third, support to cabo verde and micro finance institutions. it is my hope to engage cabo verde in consolidating these gains. they're continued strong governments resulted in selections as the first country in the world to qualify for compact. which began in 2012, and is focused on carrying out wide reaching reforms in the water, sanitation and management sectors. these two compacts support cabo verde's economy from aid dependency to sustained private sector led growth. prior assignments in africa, and african affairs. similarly, if confirmed, i will draw upon my 27-year career in foreign service including my service in mexico, to effectively lead the u.s. mission in cabo verde.

i look forward to mentoring entry level officers. if confirmed, my number one priority will be to promote the safety and welfare of american citizens in cabo verde. i would be pleased to answer any of your questions. >> mr. miller? >> mr. chairman, ranking member flake, it's a great honor to appear before you today as president obama's nominee as the next ambassador to the republic of botswana about i'm also deeply grateful for the support that my wife anna and sons andrew and alexander. during my 27 years in the foreign service, i've had the privilege of serving in senior leadership positions, a variety of challenging posts. over the past three years, as the u.s. council general in johannesburg, south africa. i managed the rapid growth of one of our busiest regional

support and training centers. our agency is larger than many u.s. embassies in africa. mr. chairman, botswana is one of africa's great success stories, it's one of the continents longstanding democracies. our current engagement in botswana underscores the regional and in some instances, global partner for the united states. our joint efforts to combat hiv/aids has made a worldwide contribution to the evidence base on hiv treatment and contribution. i would draw on my experience to be a strong advocate in botswana, a partnership between our two nations that trains officials from 34 african countries. botswana hosts international broadcasting bureaus, voice of america relay station. serving most of the american continent.

botswana has worked with us to promote democracy and human rights. it's taken principle stands on these issues. botswana has a strong military to military relationship with the united states, botswana defends forces is u.s. trained and one of the continents strongest supporters. botswana has many key assets u.s. investors look for. stability, a reputation for transparency. respect for rule of law, and generally favorable investment conditions. the southern african development community is heads quarter ed - recognizing regional integration is essential of southern africa. botswana is a regional leader and strong partner on conservation and environmental issue issues. botswana does confront serious

challenges. botswana's hiv problems is the second highest in the world. the decline in diamond reserves -- diamond resources dwindle, the country must find an alternate source of revenue or it could up end the country's development trajectory. botswana suffers from income inequality, poverty, high unemployment, aging infrastructure, and a need for a more skilled labor market. women are disproportionately affected by hiv. the united states is keenly independented in botswana maintaining a strong, stable and reliable partner. potts want to is an example of what is possible in africa, and why it matters. if confirmed, i would work to enhance botswana's potential and support the country as it addresses its economic and environmental health challenges. mr. chairman and members of the committee, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. i'll be happy to answer any

questions you may have. >> thank you, mr. miller. >> mr. chairman, ranking member flake, members of the committee, thank you very much, it's a great honor to appear before you today, before beginning my testimony, it's my privilege to introduce to you my family. my wife our two children. it also gives me great pleasure to introduce my very proud 90-year-old mom, my brother and three nieces. as a veteran foreign service officer with six previous assignments, i want to thank my family for their extraordinary flexibility, patience and many sacrifices. in particular, i'd like to thank my wife who's forsaken her own career for our family, giving me the opportunity to serve the american people overseas. mr. chairman, if confirmed it would be an honor to serve my country as the united states ambassador to brunei.

the united states and brunei have enjoyed strong and prosperous relations since 1850 when our two countries signed the treaty of peace, commerce and navigation. still in effect today, this treaty has underpinned our close cooperation for 160 years. the united states and brunei have a long history of working together to promote peace, stability and development. and if confirmed, i hope to continue that tradition and strengthen our relationship for the 21st century. today the united states relationship with brunei rests on two central pillars, the first is growing economic partnership, and the second is expanding regional cooperation. our economic partnership is manifest through rapidly expanding trade. in 2013 american companies exported $559 million worth of goods and services, to brunei, and we regularly enjoy large bilateral trade surpluses.

recently brunei purchased $600 million worth of u.s. military and civilian aircraft. our bilateral economic cooperation is further demonstrated by rapidly increasing investment flows including $116 million worth of american investment in brunei in 2012. finally, as you noted, mr. chair, brunei was a founding member in the launch of tpp negotiations, and indeed they're a key part of our effort to finalize a high standard agreement for the 21st century. the second pillar of our relationship with brunei concerns international issues. they chaired asean last year. the united states and brunei have cooperated on a number of matters of great importance to southeast asia. for example, we have launched the joint english language

enrichment program for asean, a $25 million initiative. brunei and indonesia joined us in founding the u.s./asia comprehensive energy partnership. the export/import bank of the united states and the energy department of brunei's prime minister's office are collaborating on a $1 billion program to finance exports in the region. we have an active and growing defense relationship. highlighted by brunei's active participation in annual exercises with the u.s. specific fleet. brunei has hosted a large humanitarian exercise, which brought together service members from the united states and the region. certainly there are challenges, mr. chairman. as you noted, brunei's sharia law has caused serious concerns. the first phase of this law went

into effect on may 1, we are concerned that the code criminalizes certain aspects of freedom of religion. and we're concerned over some of the punishments that have been announced for future implementation. we're also concerned as you noted, mr. chair, that it criminalizes consensual same sex conduct between adults. freedom of religion are fundamental human rights. while we understand that no physical punishments have been implemented under the current phase of the law, brunei should ensure that it's law prohibits torture or other cruel, inhumane or degrading punishment. while officials have offered assurances that the standards that will be applied under the sharia system it will be almost impossible for there to be a conviction that would result in sentences such as stoning or amputation. the threat of such extreme

punishment still raises concern. to these ends we regularly communicate with brunei regarding fundamental human rights and encourage the government to uphold its commitments. we are watching closely to see how the law is being implemented. mr. chairman, ranking member flake, thank you for inviting me to testify before you today. and giving my nomination your kind consideration. i'm pleased to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you mr. allen, we'll start five minute rounds. if i could first, two questions on maritime security. i'm particularly interested in how we engage the diasporo in diplomatic and political issues. there's a sizable cab low verde community in new england. what could we do to more

successfully engage the african diasporo in the united states which is a critical commitment lacked by china and others. >> it often leads the way in our relationships, including our economic relationships with african communities. the community in new england has shown interest in investing in the open economy of cabo verde. right now the sky is the limit. for instance, i'm looking at trade figures recently between the u.s. and cabo verde, are fairly low. typical exports from cabo verde to the u.s. about 1 to $2 million. and the u.s. to cabo verde, 8 to $9 million. there's also a very interesting proposal on the table from one of the new england colleges to open a campus in pria to begin to prepare students to come up and study at the university

level in the u.s. it's my something my predecessor may well push over the top during her time there, and if not, i intend to. >> i will follow up with you assuming confirmation, on how to to do that. you referenced narco trafficking is a major concern, in addition to illegal fishing. can you explain the extent of the cooperation between the united states and cabo verde in combating both that are co trafficking and illegal fishing in the western coast of africa? >> happy to. we've had engagement in all different levels with different agencies between the united states and cabo verde. regularly conduct exercises and ship visits down there, we've given them three ships, including a 51 footer that they put to good use. their problem is in the sea lanes between them and west

africa. and traffic coming over from south america and heading up toward europe, we also help them start a command center, in which they have performed an interagency group to start control of their own water, which as you know, in african countries. sometimes over fishing or other economic losses from the waters. with the small and very able coast guard, the command center, we worked with them on -- our coast guard works with them close closely they've been a very good partner. >> thank you, mr. miller, you referenced botswana is one of the most stable capable militaries, and we have a close police training relationship. they're also a strong supporter of africom. what else do you think they could do to play a role in supporting regional security efforts and what more could we

be doing to combat wildlife trafficking? issues with some of its neighbors are preventing predictable long term success, i think we have a real challenge in wildlife trafficking. >> thank you for the question, senator. i've seen firsthand in south africa, the devastation caused by the increasingly sophisticated and lethal wildlife trafficking syndicates. the botswana defense force is the first line to combat trafficking. it's a highly regarded well respected defense force. we have a number of programs in place to assist. and the government of botswana with anti-poaching operations, including classes on anti-trafficking investigations. money laundering investigative courses to strike at the root to the cindy cats that are behind

many of the trafficking outfits in the region. we're strong supporters of botswana establishing a wildlife enforcement network for southern africa in botswana, the only way we'll solve this problem is through regional and ultimately a global approach. >> thank you. >> well, thank you. and thank you to your families as well. the sacrifices that they have made and continue to make. i know it's quite a commitment. i spent one year overseas with -- we had a child just a year and a half old in namibia and i look at that and think, you know, the difficulty that is to have one child away from cousins and parents, grandparents and everyone else. you've done it many, many times, your service is appreciated. all the families in particular.

mr. heflin, with regard to cabo verde, the millennium challenge -- we're in the second iteration, what did we learn in the first? what lessons are we taking what forward and how can we make sure that we expand on the benefits? >> money and challenge corporation has not quite finished its after-action report on the first compact. the second compact, it was decide ds d to spend the first years getting the legal and regulatory framework if place. once that's done, and only once that's done, we will move onto construction and other spending. >> mr. allen, trade surplus is a pretty good surplus. we've got -- how much of it traditionally is military equipment? is that typical, year-to-year?

or is that just lately? >> thank you, ranking member. the trade surplus and the trade numbers are quiet volatile. last year, wed delivered several aircraft and that skewed the numbers. we have a number of other aircraft, large aircraft deals in the pipeline. and, thus, i would consider a rising tend in u.s. exports to grenada in the foreseeable future. aircraft, consumer goods, food and a good number of other commodities, as well. >> the oil commodity is certainly shrinking from where it was. how much longer are they looking to rely on it for as long as they can? they're certainly looking to diversify and that will be a lot of your role and certainly i think why they have so much interest in the t.p.p. and we appreciate their leadership and help that i hope it's something that congress can give the president the tools to actually

give a fact to. but in the area, there's day virs fi diversification, what are they doing? >> sir, id share your sentiments entirely with regard to t.p.p. the imf, this week or last week suggested it would be trending upwards towards 6% this year and next. and so their economy is doing quite well. in terms of downstream, they're developing tourism exports. and develop other segments of their economy that are employ more citizens and integrate themselves better in the region. >> mr. miller, having spent much time in the area i spent a year

in south africa and six months in zimbabwe. actually, when i got back to college, i wrote my master's thesis on explaining electric in zimbabwe in the '80s. now, we've determined what that hold is, it's brute force. now, all of us are trying to explain the holding as on the rest of africa. and it's been very disappointing to see particularly, the other countries what has gone on in zimbabwe. botswa bot botswana was one country that was so critical. what can you do in your role to make sure that there's appropriate pressure and appropriate stand taking by sada

countries, at least, standing up to what should not be counted in zimbabwe. >> president karma has taken some lonely and courageous and principle stands within sadic as a proponent of human rights and democracy across africa, including zimbabwe. he supported the global political greemt and sent a robust election delegate to zimbabwe for elections. they both enjoy full diplomatic relations, but botswana is not shy about criticizing what it sees as human right ins zimbabwe. i would look forward to working

with ambassador bruce warden and his fine team on the region of human rights and good governance issues. >> i think all we need to do is make sure these countries stand up for their own standards. please, pass on our thanks to that. >> again, thank you all for your service and i have no doubt that you'll serve the country well in this capacity.

>> thank you, mr. senator. if you would just speak further about how you're going to address the issue of sri law and how some challenges that may create for us for the progress on tpp or our relationship? >> thank you, chairman. virtually, i share your sentiments exactly on shri penal code. i think that the first thing we need to do is monitor implementation, watch very closely. and thus far, they're in the very early stages of this. we therefore need to monitor closely. we need to increase our dialogue on the importance of human rights and the expectations of human rights 234 bernai. we need to remind the government of bernai when it becomes

necessary of their beryl national human rights obligations. we need to speak out in our favor of principles and with the people of bernai. with regard to tpp, it is useful to note that bernai was a founding member. it's also important to note that economic exchange is an important way to broaden support for the universal value that is we hold true vis-a-vis the specific strategy for tpp, i would have to refer you to ustr

which is, of course, leading those important negotiations. i look forward to being a parter in with them to ensure the pass sang of tpp and ensuring that our human rights are known. and hopefully respected. >> we're giving you a long career in commerce, i would be interested in how you view intellectual property rights, whether you view them as central on tpp with bernai. and how essentially, you think advocating for a regime in trade that respects and protects american intellectual property rights, how central do you think that is? >> thank you, senator. i believe it's absolutely essential. intellectual property rights are core to our economy and future

economic growth. i look forward to working with the government of bernai further and clean up and improve the protection for intellectual property rights. within the context of tpp, those negotiations are on going. >> thank you very much, mr. allen. with that, i'd like to thank all three of our nominees today. i have'd like to also thank, if i might, mr. miller's wife anne and sons andrew and alexander and christopher and caroline. thank you all for you support. i know there's many others here as well. we're grateful officer your willingness to serve s. there

another panel follow thg one? we will keep the record of this panel open until noon tomorrow and i will resays for a third panel. >> this third panel of the senate committee foreign relations is called to order. i indicated that the witnesses should take their places. these are not witnesses, they're nominees: what we'll do is do a brief introduction of each of the three. and then i iv ask them to make opening statement ins the order that i introduce you. and following that, i'll have questions for each of you. normally, we would have other mm