return of american fugitives to face justice in the united states if we actually engage in direct dialogue with the cuban government and articulate our demands. when it comes to issues of confronting counter narcotics trade or addressing migration issues, it's a national interest of both the united states and cuba to have channels of communication between our two governments. diplomacy will make this possible. the cuban policy put the united states in the right path. we must remain clear eyed about several issues and we must continue to speak out about them. we cannot ignore the cuban government's record of human rights or human trafficking. every month there are way too many cases where the cuban government jails political activists for what they believe in, what they say publicly. freedom of expression must be central to all of our engagements with the cuban government. i know he led a human rights dialogue with the cuban government earlier this year.

and i welcome our witnesses' comments on this development. mr. chairman, as i said initially, we do welcome the witness that's are testify today. i thank you again for this opportunity for our committee. chair corker: thank you very much. now i will -- our first witness is the honorable roberta jacobson. she is the assistant secretary for state for western hem is sphere affairs. assistant secretary jabcobson established diplomatic relations and our second witness is ambassador thomas shannon. he is the counsellor to the state department. most recently served as american ambassador to brazil. among his duties, he's also served as senior director for the western hem is sphere at the national security council. we thank you both for being here. you can keep your comments as fairly brief as you wish and we accept your written testimony into the record.

we look forward to the questions that we will pursue. thank you. asisstant secretary jacobson: thank you so much, mr. chairman and ranking member for the opportunity to testify on u.s. cuba policy today and your interest in the hemisphere more broadly. let me underscore this unique moment in the america's for the united states. it's remarkable to see how u.s. relations with countries of the hemisphere are increasingly characterized by mature partnerships and shared values and interests. the partnerships we have with canada, brazil, chile, colombia and so many others is extraordinary. i am especially i had proud of the renewed commitment to working with central america and our $1 billion 2015 request that we believe will strengthen regional security, prosperity and good governance. since i last appeared in february, we began to see the administration's new approach on cuba providing space for other nations in the hem is sphere and around the world to promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in cube -- cuba.

at the summit of the americas in panama, engagement by the president and secretary reinvigorated our momentum. our approach drawn attention to the potential for greater political and economic freedom for the cuban people and the gap between cuba and other countries in the hemisphere. more americans are traveling to cube yashgs meeting cubans and building shared understanding between our people. we have see dialogue with people in cuba and issues like maritime and aviation security, set telecommunications and environmental cooperation. our future discussion onz law enforcement cooperation coupled with on going migration talks will expand the avenues available to seek the return of american fugitives from justice among other issues. and we're planning on future talks on human rights and settling american claims for property. most importantly, the new approach makes clear the u.s. can no longer be blamed as an obstacle to progress on such thins as access to information or connecting cubans to the world.

on thish u i'm a realist and as anyone who ever dealt with cuba knows realists, being a realist is essential. indeed, as the pre president made clear prior to his historic meeting with castro at the summit, significant differences remain between our two governments. we continue to raise our concerns regarding democracy human rights and freedom of expression. the policy is based on a policy that determines this tomorrow determine their own future by creating new economic opportunities and increasing contact with the outside world. these changes create new connections between our countries and help the private sector in cuba. but comprehensive changes in our economic relationship will require congressional action to lift the embargo and the president urged conditioning to begin that effort.

the administration's decision to recind cuba's designation as a state sponsor of taker itch was a fact-based process as the president has emphasized. while progress has been made if our efforts to re-estabilsh diplomatic relations, we are not there yet. there are still outstanding issues that need to be addressed to ensure a future u.s. embassy will be able to function more like other diplomatic missions in cuba and wrels in the world. but even today under challenging circumstances, our diplomats unite families through our immigration processing providing american citizens services, issue visas and aid in refugee resettlement. they work hard to represent the issues and values of the united states. our engagement with the broadest range of cubans will expand once we establish diplomatic relations with cuba and tomorrow we'll be holding a new round of talks with our cuban counterparts to advance these objectives.

as we move the process ahead, we hope we can also work together to find common ground towards our shared goal of enabling the cuban people to freely determine their own future. thank you. i welcome your questions. ambassador shannon: mr. chairman, ranking member and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. as the chairman noted, we submitted our testimony. so i will just hit a few of the high points. i would like to start by saying it's a pleasure to appear before you. roberta jacobson served as our diplomat in the americas. i want to address the regional context in which our cuba policy is unfolding and to lay out the strategic dimensions of our diplomacy. >> our purpose is not to defend or preserve a presence or restore a past, it is to create the future. and he noted that our global engagement whether it is diplomacy or force of arms is meant to defend one kind of future against another kind of future.

it is in this light that we should understand the president's policy towards cuba. the decision to engage with cuba and seek normalization of our bilateral relationship attempts to create a new terrain on which to pursue a future that correspondence to our values. our commitment to democracy and human rights and hope they know the benefits of liberty and know the sovereigns of their own destiny is no less for our action. the president has been clear about the commitment in our policy to enduring principles of self government and individual liberty. however, he is also clear about our inability to affect significant change in cuba act ing alone across so many decades. instead, he determined that our efforts would be more effective if we could position cuba squarely within an interamerican system that recognizes democracy as a right that belongs to all the peoples of our hemisphere. that believes that democracy is essential to the political

economic and social development of our peoples and has the instruments, treaties and agreements to give shape, form and weight to the commitments. it's our determine that is this kind of environment would be the most supportive to support the only legitimate agent of enduring political change in cuba. the cuban people. to understand this point better, it is worth while to take a closer look at what the hemisphere cuba is a part of looks like in the second decade of the 21st century. the americans and specifically americas and specifically latin america has anticipated

manufacture the events that are shaping our world today. it is a region that has largely moved from authoritarian to democratic government from closed to open economies, from exclusive to inclusive societies, from a development to regional development. there are a few points worth making in this regard. first, latin america is the first region in the world and the developing world to committee itself to democracy. it was also the first region to establish regional and subregional instruction tours to promote and defend human rights and to build subregional institutions and mechanisms for dialogue. because of this, it has also built shared economic understandings including a commitment to market economies free trade and regional integration. but perhaps most dramatically, latin america today is pursuing a second generation of change or trance formation. it is attempting to use democratic governance and democratic institutions to build democratic societies and states. the great experiment is to show that democracy and markets can deliver economic developmen and can address the social inequities of poverty, inequality and social exclusion. the profound changes unleashed in latin america show that democracy and markets can deliver economic development. and latin america used democracy and markets to launch a peaceful, social revolution that is transforming many countries

in the region and long lasting ways. our ability to promote profound and dramatic change in latin america is an example of what the united states can accomplish through diplomacy and engagementf we accomplished such a transformation in our hemisphere, why not try the same approach with cuba? better yet yshgs not try it in partnership with countries and institution that's are now prepared to work with us because of the president's new policy? cuba finds itself today part of a dynamic region where change is the watch word. it finds itself in a region where the change will continue to reshape political and economic and social landscapes in such an environment that the cuban people will find many models and partners from which to learn and choose. we should be one of the mod ldz and models and partners. thank you very much for this opportunity to speak. we look forward to your questions.

chair corker: thank you both. i want to thank the committee for the way that it has handled what i think have been really difficult issues since we began this year. and i know there is significant differences of opinion relative to the cuba policy that's been laid out. i'm really glad we have the differences of opinion represented here. i look forward to a robust q&a. one of the questions that i've had from the very beginning has been what are the specific changes within cuba that we have negotiated or asked for as it relateses to this policy change? it's my sense that there have really been none. i wonder if you might expand on that. it's been a question that most people have asked that have not been following the cuba situation nearly as closely as you. that is, are there specific things that we expect cuba to do in return for this change in

policy towards them? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think that as we move forward with this policy, what's important to understand is the majority of the things that the president did, he took action on because he believes strongly we believe that they are in our interests and in the interests of the cuban people. the change as lou for greater purposeful travel that, allow for support from americans to the emerging private sector in cuba. indeed the normalization to pursue engagement. normalization and re-estabilshment of diplomatic relations should be worked out mutually with the cuban government. they were not negotiated with the cuban government.

they were action ands policies taken unilaterally by us. we believe that over time, especially things like support for emerging private sector entrepreneurs and in particular the hopefully the increase in telecommunications and information technology in cubal make a big difference in the ability of cuban citizens to determine their own future. so they were not negotiated with the cuban government, per se. chair corker ambassador shannon : you want to expand on that any? ambassador shannon: i think she covered it. chair corker: ok. i was going to go in a different direction, but since you mentioned technology, it is

interesting that u.s. companies were going to be more involved technology-wise. but it's my understand thagt cuban government doesn't really allow much access relative to the outside world with communications. so i'm just wonldering we made a big deal out of that announcement. what is the net effect of it if the government doesn't allow citizens to participate in that way? asisstant secretary jacobson: well, i think it's very important that the cuban government has said as part of the u.n.'s efforts to open information to citizens around the world that they want to expand access for the cuban people. we are hopeful that that will happen. right now, there is not access for most cubans. it's very expensive. it's not available and it's not necessarily something they can have in their own homes. but the ability of the cuban kbost and cuba in general to have a more up to date modern infrastructure on telecommunications and information is something that is critical to the modernization of the cuban economy.

and, therefore, we would like american companies to be part of bringing better information technology to cuba which is why the president felt it was important to allow american companies to do so. the cuban government hasn't yet made decisions to move forward with that. but there are american companies that are talking with the cuban government. and there's no doubt that there is a desire for greater information by the cuban people and we would like to do everything we can to enable that. chair corker: since we did not negotiate -- and i understand that -- for changes because we thought this was in our interest -- what is it you think will be the response by the cuban government? in other words, what do you think, even though we didn't negotiate or even though we didn't try to leverage in any way, what do you suspect that policy -- what are the policy changes that will occur inside cuba as a result of these changes? asisstant secretary jacobson:

well, there is already been under way in cuba, obviously some limited economic reforms. at built of half a million or more entrepreneurs to go into 200 or so approved businesses, business areas in private business, self employment. that is an area i think that is really right for support. that regulations support. i would hope there will be many more of these entrepreneurs emerging and that they will be able to prosper and expand and be agents for change within cuba. there is, obviously, very different views on political system as well as the economic system of cuba. the president's been clear about that. we think engagement by americans

with cubans that are there for limited travel and the ability for the private sector to increase and hopefully information to increase. and we're not sure what the cuban government will do in the face of these things. i think they're still absorbing our changes and making their own policy decisions. but we know from polling that's been done inside cuba that the narrative of the u.s. being responsible for economic privatization and other disadvantages of the cuban people is no longer blamed on the united states. that narrative is eroding. >> ok. thank you. i want to thank you for the time you spent in my office on another matter. i know we talked about the region in general. i wonder if ambassador shannon you might talk a little bit about the effect that this policy announcement has had on

our ability in the region to discuss other issues of importance. ambassador shannon: thank you very much, senator. this is an important component of our policy. because we believe that the decision to engage with cuba removes an irritant that has not only limited where we can work with some of our partners and others in the region, but it has also over time degraded some of our most important multilateral institutions, especially in the interamerican system, within the oas and summit of the america's process. i mentioned in my testimony the region built a series of subregional mechanisms and institutions to build dialogue. for the most part this is very positive. but in some instances, some of these institutions have been decided -- have been built and speaking in particular of the community of latin america and caribbean nations, to permit caribbean and latin american

countries to have a conversation among themselves with cuba where we are not present. and this is in the long term is not in our advantage. and, therefore, by working towards normalization, we actually create an opportunity for the interamerican system to reassert itself as the premier political economic and social institutions in the americas. i believe this is an opportunity that we need to take advantage of. but in regard to cube yashgs the region understands and knows that cuba is the only country in the hemisphere that has not made an explicit commitment to democracy and is not recognized through the charter democracy as a right of all the people of the americas. and although they have taken different approaches than we have we're now in a position to be able to press them to work harder on democracy and human rights issues inside of cuba.

chair corker: thank you both, and thank you for being here. senator cardin: thank you, and thank you for being here. let me quote from the human rights where cuba is a authoritarian station where elections are neither free nor fair. and quoting, "the principle human rights abuses were the abridgement of citizens to use government threats, extra judicial physical violence intimidation, mobs, harment, detention to prevent free expression of peaceful assembly, the following additional abuses continue harsh prison conditions, aesh contrary -- arbitrary arrest, selective prosecutions and denial of fair trials. then it goes on to say interfere with privacy, engage in pervasive monitoring of private communications, do not respect the freedom of speech. severely restrict internet access. monopoly of media outlines circumscribed academic freedoms maintain significant restrictions on ability of religious groups, refuse to recognize independent human rights groups, prevent workers

from forming unions, exercising the labor rights, most human rights aofficials were at the directionst government. impunity for perpetrators remain widespread. that is the most recent report from the state department. and the independent human rights organization, the human commission for human rights and national reconciliation have documented in the first four months of this year about 1600 cases of arbitrary political detentions which is the same was we have seen historic fli cuba over the last three years. i mention that because i want to get specific here for a moment as to how you intend to evaluate cuba's progress on the human rights and use our tools at our disposal to advance that. i use as an example the osce which is a consensus organization without enforcement and yet it's known globally for the commitment to advance human rights much it's linked to the groups.

i'm not aware of it having the same effectiveness in terms of advancing human rights. how do you intend to use the oas? how do you intend to use the united nations now that we removed this obstacle, as you see it as for having credibility to raise these issues? how do we intend to use u.s. leadership to advance human rights progress in cuba and how can we evaluate what we're making progress in that area? assisstant secretary jacobson: senator, thank you. i think there are a couple things. first, there's no doubt that we will continue to write human rights reports that are honest and unflinching in what they describe as going on in cuba.

that there continue to be these short term detentions that should not be going on harassing individual human and rights activists groups, 19 -- preventing them from having their rights exercised. and so there is a range of tools. one of which the president highlighted in terms of speaking out. but we also now have another tool at our disposal which is direct engagement including the human rights dialogue which will move forward. there is no doubt from the preliminary conversations we've had that we have very different views of human rights and universal internationally recognized human rights. in addition, in terms of international organizations and their ability to work with others effectively in those organizations, as you know cuba is suspended from the oas, they

have been since 1962. but the questions of looking at human rights issues in cuba as ambassador shannon said, whether they are living up to the commitments that all of the rest of us have made in the hem is -- hemisphere through the interamerican charter and human rights, those are tools which we are more able to use, reference and discuss with our partners who i think are much more engaged in having that discussion with us post policy engagement. >> how would that be reflected? i understand that. i said that in my opening comments. how can we know that we're making progress? what specific agenda items do you intend to do? and what allies will we have it hold cuba accountable? assisstant secretary jacobson: obviously, the best metrics of progress is on the ground in terms of, you know, whether it's a reduction in short term detentions or a growing ability

by cubans of all stripes to be able to speak and be able to exercise their democratic rights. i think the president was pretty clear on our also understanding the change is not going to come to cuba overnight. as we work on this, we have to understand that empowering cubans and to take their own responsibility for these rights there will be progress and there will be setbacks. we will speak out about those. we'll work with other countries in the various international organizations. i can't tell you exactly what the agenda, where we'll talk with other countries. we'll certainly do so at the oas. we'll do so in the u.n. bodies. whether that is the u.n., human rights council or other instruments such as those. >> what leverage will we exercise over cuba in regards to our expectations that they will make progress on these

internationally recognized human rights standards? assisstant secretary jacobson: i think one of the things that is most important is the ability to have embassies and to carry out the functions under the vee -- the anna -- vienna convention to travel around cuba and to be able to interact with the widest number of cuban citizens which we've not been able to do up until now. and that is critical that our diplomats be the first person observers of things which hasn't been the case in the past. that is obviously something we're work onging on right now. -- working on right now. >> what countries in our hem is -- hemisphere do you believe can you work closest with in putting pressure on cuba to comply with international recognized human rights? >> i think that the ambassador may have more to say about this. my own view is there are many

countries in the hemisphere that will work with us whether it's publicly or behind the scenes. countries that committed or obviously democratic countries committed to human rights. you know, countries around the hemisphere such as costa rica and uruguay and colombia and peru and mexico which have worked on tough human rights issues around the hemisphere and will be in conversations with us. many in the region in, the caribbean and central america will be working with us on this committed to the same principles. >> thank you. >> senator? >> senator, thank you. before i get to my questions i want to ask you, you discussed that we're if the discussions with the cubans and we have different views on human rights. i don't mean to say this is what you meant but let's be clear. these are not different views that are legitimate. this is a view of human rights we have and they have which under no circumstances fits under definition of human rights. their views on human rights were not legitimate. they're immoral. the notion can you round up people and arrest them because they disagree with the government, the theory can you

send thugs to panama to breed on activists. -- beat up on activists. we would say this up front right? they're flat out wrong and immoral in their views. assisstant secretary jacobson: we have said clearly that we don't think those views accord with international standards and the universal declaration of human rights. >> so the cubans are flat out wrong when it comes to human rights? assisstant secretary jacobson: on repressing people's rights to free speech and assembly, dwoent think they're correct. -- assembly, we don't think they are correct. >> there is no moral he quif lens between our rights and theirs? assisstant secretary jacobson: i didn't say that. i would not. that is not what i wanted to say. >> ok, i wanted to get that clear. let's talk about travel. the truth is going from hotel magazine, hotel magazine wrote a few years ago that -- a prominent subsid air yif the holding company that controls the entire cuban economy, it is

also the largest hotel conglomerate in latin america and the caribbean. they have the walt disney company's holds and run by a -- fidel castro's son in law. let me read something that the newspapers wrote a few years ago about this network. it wrote, tourist who's sleep in some of cuba's hotel drives rental cars, fill up the gas tanks and even those riding in tachies have something in common. they are contributing to the armed forces bottom line f you travel to cuba, if you stay in a cuban hotel, all likelihood you're staying in a hotel run by the cuban military. if you rent a car, you're renting it from the cuban military. if you fill up your gas tank you're filling up from the cuban military. and i would add that if you stay at a hotel, you're staying in all likelihood in a confiscated property. a land that was taken from a previous private owner who was never compensated for it. so when you travel to cuba and stay in a hotel, not only you are putting money in the hands of the cuban government, you're trafficking in stolen goods.

it was property that belongs -- belonged to a private holder some american citizens who were never compensated for it. so when we talk about increased travel to cuba and more commerce with cuba, what we're really talking about is ib creased -- is increased business ties with the cuban military for the most part. is that not an accurate assessment at this time? assisstant secretary jacobson: it is certainly accurate that the cuban state including the military runs many of those -- a large percentage of the hotels and other infrastructure. we also now have an increasing number of people's individual homes which are being used as hotels or b & b's and working on that. and private entrepreneurs moving into spaces to support the purposeful travel. >> then why wouldn't we limit our travel to say if you travel to cuba you can only stay at one of these hotels or one of these

other nongovernmental, nonmilitary owned facilities? why wouldn't we say can you travel to cube yashgs but can -- to cuba, but you cannot stay in a property that was stolen and can you not stay in a property owned or operated by the cuban government which includes even the foreign flagged hotels because they have majority ownership there as well. assisstant secretary jacobson: senator, our strong belief is though we are aware that there will be some financial benefit to the cuban government by the larger number of americans going to cuba, the benefit of those larger kmubz which could not be -- larger numbers which could not be supported only by individual homes, for example, the benefit to the cuban people of this larger number of americans going far outweighs the increased economic benefit that may accrue to the cuban government. >> just so i understand clearly, and bottom line is you agree. if you travel to cuba, you're staying in all likelihood in a stolen property that is in all likelihood run by the cuban

government. but that said, the fact there is americans present outweighs the benefit of having americans being able to travel and interact with cuba outwaegs the economic benefits that are going directly to the cuban military. assisstant secretary jacobson: i would say that it's possible those properties are confiscated. it's certainly the case that many of the properties are state owned. but we do believe that the benefit outweighs -- >> which property -- other than the private homes you talked about which are largely state owned as well, at least an individual is running it. other than the private homes which is still a very small sector of the economy, which cuban hotel is not oenld or -- is not owned or operated by the cuban government? assisstant secretary jacobson: i assume that most of them are state run, especially because the joint ventures even jent -- joint ventures are majority.

>> they're all state run. is there a privately owned hotel in cuba? assisstant secretary jacobson: i don't know, sir. i assume there are none. but as i say, there are the bed and breakfasts and individual homes. but again, i it this premise on which we're basing this is that the benefits of engageme in. purposeful travel are very, very great to the cuban people. and seen overwhelmingly by the cuban people as of benefit to them as surveys show. >> i want to talk about the internet for a moment. cubans, as you said, blamed the u.s. for lack of access to the internet and so forth. it's been couched as a lack of capacity. in fact, cubans say our own president said that, he said unfortunately sanctions on cuba denied them access to technology that empowered individuals aren't world." but i think you know that's not true. for example, there is no japanese embargo on cuba. there is no south korean embargo on cuba. and, yet, those technologies are not widely available either. is it not true that at the end of the day access to internet in cuba is not simply a function of capacity because there are multiple other countries aren't world that do not have an embargo on cuba that can provide cell or internet technology. is it not true the access to the internet and technology in cuba

is a result of cuban government censorship? assisstant secretary jacobson: i think the denial of access has been both one of policy and one of in terms of american -- access to american products also one of policy in the united states. we're taking one of those two things away. they are now able to have access to u.s. products which we always believe are the best in the world. and that leaves only policy. >> i understand. but there are still other countries -- i have a samsung. why isn't cuba selling samsungs. why do all these other countries not been allowed to come in and offer wi-fi? in essence, it's not a capacity issue. the reason why people in cuba don't have access to the internet is because the cuban government won't allow it. assisstant secretary jacobson: well, there is a question of infrastructure that needs to be present to utilize the --

>> but other countries could have provided that. assisstant secretary jacobson: they could have. so policy is clear a a big part -- clearly a big part of this. and we don't know whether that policy will change. they have said they want to modernize their telecommunications sector. >> so why didn't they do it with japanese? germans? any other country around the world that has internet and technology capabilities outside of the u.s. capabilities? assisstant secretary jacobson: i'm hoping they want our stuff. >> i understand that. assisstant secretary jacobson: and we'll be able to compete well. but we also see on the island many samsung phones, many other cell phone technology of the latest make but it's not connected to anything yet. >> it's connected to cuban government, internet telecommunications. assisstant secretary jacobson: and that will be the question. can they open to something that allows their economic development to be enter the modern world and connect cubans to the world?

>> senator boxer? >> mr. chairman, thank you. senator as the ranking member on the latin america subcommittee senator rubio is my chairman, i really appreciate the full committee looking at this. i do want to pick up on what senator rubio said but in a different way. you know, when you listen to my colleague, you think this was the only country in the world that we have relations with and we're starting to have relations with where the state owns hotels. a lot of my colleagues, maybe all my colleagues on the republican side, i can't be sure, but i think they voted to go ahead with the free trade agreement that includes vietnam. an out and out communist country, that pays a minimum wage of $.70 and owns all of hotels yet we still have relations. the reasons we have relations are geopolitical reasons. we want to work to change these places. so i think my colleague, with his line of questioning, has really proven the point, because russia, a lot of russian hotels

are owned by the country, china, are we going to start telling people what hotels to stay in in china and russia and vietnam and cuba? come on. we don't do that. we're not an authoritarian country. you know if people chose to stay in airbnb in cuba, that would make me happy. that's a san francisco-based company. i wanted to mention that i'm very proud, they're one of the first u.s. businesses to take advantage of new economic opportunities in cuba. that my colleague, some who sit on the committee, would take away. and in march, a new jersey-based telecommunications company announced an agreement to provide direct international long-distance telephone service between the u.s. and cuba. so relatives could talk to each other.

these companies have an opportunity to make an incredible difference in the lives of everyday cubans by connecting them to outside world. now, there's plenty of problems and challenges that we face. there's no question about that. and i was going to ask you ambassador, if -- or assistant secretary jacobson -- what had been the greatest area of progress with talk with cuba? what can we expect from the upcoming round of talks? if you can be brief and concise? assisstant secretary jacobson: i will. i think the greatest progress so far is just the acceptance by both sides that we do want diplomatic relations, that we want embassies, and our understanding that we will be able to operate in cuba in a way that allows us engage with more cuban citizens. that is incredibly important and we see that as really critical

to this engagement process. i think in terms of what we will talk about tomorrow it's really getting rest of the agreement for an embassy that operates similar to the way we operate in other -- in some other countries. senator boxer: thank you. assistant secretary, you testified in a subcommittee hearing, senator rubio and i held in february, about the impact of the president's new policy on human rights and democracy in cuba. and i asked you about the impact of the president's new cuba policy on u.s. relations with other countries in the region and the world. and you answered then that the reaction was immediate and extremely positive. those are your words. i was very pleased about than -- that. now we also discussed, then, the importance of engaging regional partners on issues related to human rights. has the administration been able

to leverage regional and international support for its new cuba policy to increase pressure on the castro regime for blatant violations of basic freedoms of its citizens? has there been any success so far in engaging our partners on those issues? assisstant secretary jacobson: well, thank you, senator. i do think that we've had conversations, certainly, with many of our hemispheric partners that have been more productive than they have been in the past. i would certainly second what senator cardin said about the fact that in panama the president was able to are a -- to have a round table on civil society with the president vazquez of ur ra guy that -- of uruguay that included two dissidents as well as 12 or 15 others from the hemisphere, that is something very unusual. they would not necessarily have sat with the u.s. president to do that before this policy change. and the cuban dissidents who

were there were able to connect with colleagues around the hemisphere, which wasn't possible in the past. i also think that the reaction of the panamanian government to things that happened in panama including government-sponsored nongovernmental organizations preventing the full exercise of freedom of speech in the civil society forum was very forceful on how to democracies operate, and that, too, was a change from what we've seen sometimes in the past. senator boxer: i think the fact that our regional partners got to actually meet human rights advocates is very important because a lot of times, you know, see no evil, that's it. but having spent time with them, i think is critical. so that's a very good report. now, cuban president raul castro has said he will step down in 2018. this means for the first time since 1959 cuba will not be led

by one of the castro brothers. reports indicate that president castro's grooming his first vice president to succeed him. can you talk about the importance of this transition of power in cuba and shed a little light on this first vice president? assisstant secretary jacobson: i'm not sure i can shed that much light in this area. what i can say is i do think that a transition that is taking place is not just one of, you know, a normal or even cuban election that is taking place in 2018, it's a generational change. and the exit of either of the castro brothers is very, very significant there are changes in the way that elections are going to be done in cuba, still not what we would like to see in a free multiparty election. but i do think it's going to be significant.

obviously, the vice president is the next generation of leaders. we have not met with him. we have not met with him, but i know many of you have who have gone to cuba, many of the co-dell have. there may be more knowledge in the congress than we have. senator boxer: i will close with this, i think this 2018 election is a real test for us in a way. if we can focus on democracy and freedom and fairness, it's a very specific thing we can work on, and i'm going to work on that myself. in close, may i put my opening statement in the record? >> without objection. senator boxer: thank you. >> absolutely. senator johnson?

senator johnson: mr. chairman, secretary jacobson, i want to kind of talk about the legal authority that president obama's using to take his actions. 1996, in reaction to the cuban downing of two civilian aircraft, congress passed the cuban liberty and democratic solidarity act of 1996, libertat act. the primary purpose, number one, assist the cuban people and redpan theirregain freedom and prosperity as well as enjoying communities in the hemispheric region. third one, provide for the continued national security of the united states in the face of continuing threats from the castro government of terrorism and theft of property of united states nationals. that was the purpose. it was noteworthy about the act -- what was noteworthy about the act is, it codified all restricts under the cuban system control regulations that were enacted or promulgated by the treasury department in 1963. it codified the cuban embargo. and what was noteworthy is that

this had a long lasting effect on u.s. policy options of cuba because the executive branch is blocked from lifting the economic embargo without congressional concurrence until certain democratic conditions set forth in law are met. let me talk about specifically what those conditions are. in section 203, it says that upon making determination under subsection c-3 a democratic elected government in cuba is in power. the president shall, upon determining that a democratic elected government of cuba is in power, submit the determination to the appropriate congressional committees. let me first ask has the president made a determination that a democratically elected government in cuba is now in power? assisstant secretary jacobson: the president has not taken actions under those aspects of the libertat act.

he has not invoked that part or any of the act to take the actions he's taken. senator johnson: he simply doesn't feel like he has to refer to the libertat act? what his he doing if he's not lifting the embargo? what is this? assisstant secretary jacobson: i think -- senator johnson: how is he skirting it? assisstant secretary jacobson: i think the president's made very clear that the congress is the only body that can lift the embargo, and as he said in his state of the union message, he called on congress to do so. therefore, he's made clear that he does not have the authority to lift the embargo. senator johnson; what's he doing? it seems like a lifting of

embargo to me. assisstant secretary jacobson: what he's taken are executive actions and regulatory changes within the executives' purview with the embargo still in place. as you know, there were, for years, exceptions and continue to be exceptions to the embargo in agriculture. his change is make their exceptions on telecommunications and to support the private sector in cuba. those are the kinds of exceptions to the embargo that are within the executive branch's purview. senator johnson: ok. do you basically agree with the primary purpose of that act, which i read earlier, basically to ensure the freedom and prosperity of the cuban people and certainly enhance the national security of america? do you think that's the two primary policy goals of this country toward cuba? assisstant secretary jacobson: certainly, the president's made clear that what we want is a democratic prosperous and stable cuba, which i think is similar to what's in that act. question of our own national security should always be paramount in our decision making. senator johnson: ambassador shannon, i was struck by your

comments about your attitude that democracy and freedom is flourishing in central america. certainly we have good examples, colombia, because of courageous leadership. i'm not seeing a lot of democracy flourishing in venezuela or cuba, from that standpoint. can you help me out in terms of what you're talking about? ambassador shannon: there's no doubt that democracy's not flourishing in cuba. and it's part of the president's effort to pursue a new approach to see what more we can do to help the cuban people begin their own political opening. as we look back over the last several decades, what's important to remember and acknowledge about our hemisphere is this was a region that was largely ruled by authoritarian government, some military, some not, but which has found through its commitment to human rights and its ability to organize and use inter-american solutions like the inter-american human rights court and the inter-american court of human rights to develop civil societies around human rights issues and use that to build democracy. whether it's chile in the 1980s our work in central america to face down insurgencies and move military governments to allow elections to take place for civilians to take over, whether

it's what we've done in colombia, whether transition to government in argentina, brazil, i think this hemisphere has distinguished itself over the past three decades -- senator johnson: i'm running out of time here. seeing as the primary purpose to continue the national security of america, is it -- is anybody going to make the case the castro regime has been helpful in promoting this in the hemisphere? is it not true that they are still supporting farc in colombia, supporting the repressive regime in venezuela? isn't that true, secretary jacobson? assisstant secretary jacobson: what the cuban government has done and what we asserted in the report we sent to congress is the support for the farc that we have seen recently is support for the peace process that's going on in cuba between the farc and the colombian government. obviously that was not always the case in the past but this time we think they're playing a

constructive role in the peace process. in venezuela, it's a different issue. but i think in many areas, we -- we do not see cuba in national security terms, we believe the engagement with cuba through diplomatic relations will be far better for our interests than the previous policy of isolation. senator johnson: the other purpose, to assist the cuban people and regain freedom and prosperity, as senator rubio's pointing out, u.s. is basically the only country engaged in embargo. cuba's been able to trade freely with the rest of the world. i'm not seeing the flourishing of prosperity as a result of that engagement? i mean, how in the world do we think being able to trade with the u.s. is going to improve their prosperity under the repressive regime of the castros? assisstant secretary jacobson: you're certainly right their economic system has not made them a magnet for the trade and investment of other countries that they're able to have. in other words, other countries

could have invested and been trading with them more than they are. but cuba has to change to make that possible. but they have been able to promote a narrative of the u.s.' s embargo and isolation from them as the reason for those economic problems. we have now taken that excuse away. it will be obvious that the problems are the lack of movement in their system. senator johnson: thank you madam secretary, vice chair. >> senator menendez? senator menendez: today is the 113th anniversary of cuban independence day. it is a bitter-sweet date given the cuban people's languishing for 55 years under dictatorship. let me be frank, i have deep concerns that the more these talks progress, the more the administration continues to

entertain unilateral concessions without in return getting agreement on fundamental issues that are in our national interests and those are the -- those of the cuban people. so i know you said in response to another question, these are things we did not negotiate, these are things decided unilaterally. i can't believe that. the cubans said, you want a relationship? you've got to return the three convicted spies, three convicted spies of the united states including one who was convicted of conspiracy to commit murder of three u.s. citizens in international airspace. check, we gave them the three spies. you want a relationship? take us off the list of state sponsor of terrorism. check, we gave them that. you want a relationship? stop or change the democracy programs that we do throughout the world because we don't like those democracy programs because they interfere with our totalitarian regime.

i wake up to an article from reuters, u.s. signals it could change pro-democracy programs in cuba that havana objects to cuba has long octobered to prot-democracy program which includes basic courses for my friends sitting in the press in basic journalism and information technology to the u.s. diplomatic mission in havana. check. bring us to the summit of the americas. even though cuba violates the democratic charter of the oas and one of your people say doesn't matter who's invited to the table, it what's talked about. guess what? the democratic charter, the message counselor shannon sent to the hemispheres, you can violate the democratic charter and still be part of the club. why not violate it if you think you're compelled to do so? pretty amazing. i have not seen any movement at all towards greater freedom. as a matter of fact, i would like to commend committee's

attention to someone inside of cuba, awe cuba blogger, peres, in "the daily beast." cuba's 12 most absurd prohibitions tourists will never see. i will read a couple of them. cubans can't access internet from their homes or on cell phones. not because, in fact, even technology infrastructure is not the case. they can't access because the government won't let them because information is a problem. so, yeah, they want to perfect greater infrastructure but for them to control it. you can't live in havana without a permit. the blogger goes on to say, can someone from l.a. live in washington, d.c.? the answer is obviously yes. but you can't live in havana without a permit from the government. no public demonstrations allowed. imagine that. no political parties are allowed except the cuban communist party. no investment in media and large enterprises. no inviting a foreigner to spend a night without a permit in your own home. among many others, you can't

bring from abroad 25 artificial fingernails. i ask it be included. >> without objection. senator menendez: human rights continue un unabated with more than 1600 cases of arbitrary arrest. this year alone, five months into the year. so, president obama may have outstretched his hand but the castros still have their fists real tight. you and secretary mole lynn now -- on alaskan -- monoloski, came before the committee, herald it there which downturn. we're skyrocketing back up in human rights wryviolations and including the reassist of the people who you negotiated to ultimately be released, several of them rearrested.

now, despite the desire to move into different direction, i see we get nothing in return. you have taken cuba off the terrorism list. charles hill wanted for killing a new mexico state trooper, and hijacking a u.s. civilian plane, both living in cuba, protected by the regime. the regime says we'll talk to you, we'll talk to you. even though your counterpart already said she got political asylum and she's not going anywhere, but we will talk to you about it. we'll talk to you about it. i hope my colleagues who are so passionate, and i listened to them about democracy and human rights in many parts of the world, but almost silent when it comes to cuba. somehow democracy and human rights is not as important as other places in the world.

i hope we can keep the same standard. let me ask you, madam secretary, to your knowledge were you or any member of the state department told not to push for sanctions on cuba in violation of sending migs and missiles to north korea in violation of the u.n. security council resolutions? the type of missiles that in fact were in hull of a cargo ship full of sugar being hidden where the migs of cuba were taken off to try to hide it? were you told not to push? was any member told not to push for sanctions at the u.n. assisstant secretary jacobson: not that i know of. senator menendez: did the u.n. sanction cuba? assisstant secretary jacobson:

they did not. senator menendez: they did not. let me ask you this, in the list of state-sponsor terrorism you got a letter that says that, in fact, cuba has not, never did, oddly the castro regime's assurances asserted the government of cuba has never -- this is in their letter -- has never supported any active international terror ump and the cuban territory has never been used to organize, finance, or execute terrorist acts against any country including the united states. do you intent for members of the committee to believe that the castro regime never supported any acts of international terrorism over the last half century? assisstant secretary jacobson: senator, i think what's crucial -- senator menendez: not what's crucial. assisstant secretary jacobson: sorry. senator menendez: do you believe, do you want the

committee to believe the cube be -- the cuban government has never sponsored any act of terrorism over the last half century? assisstant secretary jacobson: i can't say that i would urge you all to believe that it has never occurred, no. but -- senator menendez: i hope you don't mean to suggest that the historical examples of providing support to former armed insurgents in the 1980s including the n-19 in colombia the fsl in nicaragua, or that the fact that cuban military didn't shoot unarmed civilian planes carrying american citizen over international waters for which they are pending indictments from a united states jurisdiction against several individuals in cuba, i'm wondering are you pursuing that in your negotiations with cuba about them answering those indictments? assisstant secretary jacobson: that is why we're going to have the law enforcement conversation for the justice department to be able to pursue -- senator menendez: do you realize

some of those charges are against? assisstant secretary jacobson: yes, sir. senator menendez: and do you think you're going to engage in a conversation with them responding to justice? do you think the castros are going to say, yes, we're going to appear in a court? i don't think so. let me ask you one last question, if i have the chair's indulgence. you know, you all came here and said that, oh, there's a reduction of political arrests in january. as a sign that the administration's cuba policy was achieving results. not surprisingly these numbers climbed dramatically in the ensuing months with more than 450 political arrests in february, more than 600 in march, more than 1600 political arrests in total during the first four months of 2015. 1,600 in the first four months of 2015. now, as i'm sure you know, this past sunday, more than 100 activists in cuba were violently arrested including 60 members, follow their attendance at a church service. so i guess she was right when she said the cuban government

will only take advantage to strengthen its repressive machinery. all these women were doing was marching in white with a gladiola to church. and result of that is to be beaten and thrown into prison. that is not success. i don't get it. the final thing i'll say, mr. chairman, i have a lot of other questions but in deference to my colleagues and i appreciate it this is a one-sided -- i don't know what we've gotten in return. we've gotten nothing in return but the cubans have gotten plenty in return. if that's our way of negotiating, then we have a real problem on our hands. and the message we send in the western hemisphere, in venezuela, where we have -- i don't see ur partners engaging -- i don't see our partners engaging with us because we change our cuba policy, this opens door towards promotion democracy. we're not seeing democracy in venezuela. i'm not sure about it happening in other places in the hemisphere for which we have challenges as well. so i think that that is a hollow promise based on what we see. i appreciate the chair's courtesy based on my interest in the subject. >> thank you. senator purdue? senator purdue: thank you.

thank you both for being here today. this is an important topic. in my canreer i've watched and seen the u.s. strategy of engagement china, vietnam, dominican republic, haiti, to mention a few. it's worked in some, it's not in others. i echo what senator menendez just said about venezuela, we buy $32 billion of oil a year. we haven't affected their regime one iota, that i can see. i have three concerns about what we're talking about today with regard to our changing our relationship with cuba. one is their continued support of terrorism. two is their human rights record that continue today. and, three, their activity in armed smuggling. we'll get to those in a second i have a very short question, i hope you'll be brief. 2003, cuba allowed iran to operate on their soil, we know about the attack on u.s. telecommunications. cuba's reported to have supplied intelligence services to venezuela recently and its allies. cuba provided assistance in safe

haven to terrorists including members of farc and the bask -- bask -- basque eta. they continue to harbor fuj -- fugitives, including one listed on the fbi's most dangerous terrorists. helping member of hezbollah slip into north america. a state-owned enterprise provided venezuela with advanced technology to provide illicit documentation to 173 individuals from the middle east between '08 and '12. that's ancient history, according to the administration. talk about recent history. just since president obama started the secret negotiations with the castro regime june 2013, a report of 15,000 political arrests, 2500 such arrests since the president's speech on u.s.cuban relations in december. to make it even worse, between february and march of this year alone cuba increased the until -- the number of politically motivated arrests by 70%.

as troubling as that is, i'm more troubled by cuba's continued nefarious activities with regard to arm smuggling. we know about the shipment of 240 tons of military equipment confiscated on the way to north korea but we are talking about february 28th of this year 2015 -- a chinese flag vessel was intercepted, over 100 tons of explosives, 2.6 million detonator, over 3,000 artillery shells, bought by a -- bought from a chinese arms manufacturer, on behalf of technoimport a shadow company from the cuban military. the question is, with this type of activity, what assurances can you give us, mr. ambassador i would like you to take a shot at this first, with this continuing and current activity, why should we be optimistic that just by opening up economic relations with these people this regime, that this type of activity will change?

ambassador shannon: thank you very much, senator. i can assure you that just by opening up economic activity we will not necessarily change behavior. it's a longer process in this. but in regard to the larger diplomatic environment and assistant secretary jacobson can address more specific issues, in regard to a larger diplomatic environment, the fact that these ships were stopped was significant. the fact they were inspected was significant. the fact that these items were found was significant and shows an ability to cooperate with our partners in the region to control and monitor this kind of activity. and this will deepen with time as people under stand that the broader purpose of our diplomacy is not simply to normalize relations with cuba and build a relationship with cuba that will change how we try to promote our interests in democratic values

but that it's also about how we enhance the integration and cooperation inside the hemisphere and partners of our s who have been leery of working with us around cuba issue because they do not want to get caught into the vortex of the powerful and historic animosity are going to be more open to engaging with us on this kind of activity. so i believe we're going to be able to do more in the area of security, we're going to be able to do more in the area of nonproliferation, more in the area of fighting drug because of this. >> i ask a follow-up on that mr. ambassador. why wouldn't we make that a prerequisite that better behavior would lead to open economic relations? or madam secretary, either one. assisstant secretary jacobson: i think, north, ifsenator, if i -- i think we all want the same

end. it a question of how we motivate that behavior or how we -- how effectively we can help support change. the president believes firmly that the efforts we made in the past, which were in fact to say you must change first and then we will engage, just didn't work to make the changes inside cuba. >> can i ask you a question on that? assisstant secretary jacobson: >> certainly. >> we have evidence, cause and effect of several other countries, britain, canada others having open trading relations with cuba. we're the only one embargoing and yet that engagement has not changed behavior. what makes us believe that today our opening up of economic relations with cuba will have that effect? assisstant secretary jacobson: i mean, i think that's a fair point. we don't know yet what the effect of this policy will be on the cuban government. we do see already the effect the beginning of the effect on the cuban people while we decry the detentions of the activists, we know there are cubans benefiting from this new policy in their independent businesses and in their belief that they're going to prosper and have a better life because of engagement with the u.s. the other thing i would say is, i'm very engaged with my eu

counterpart and with my counterpart in spain in working with them so that we can now work together, and when we work together, not just with our regional counterparts but with our european counterparts, that is more powerful. i think that could have a more galvanizing effect but it will be slow, i don't deny that. >> thank you. >> senator kane? senator kane: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to the witnesses. my colleagues have asked great questions about particular of the u.s.cuba discussion. i want to talk about the region. american and the caribbean 35 nations by the general count

nearly 1 billion people. i do my kind of back of the envelope math, 35 nations means 600 bilateral relationships between the nations in the region. some of the bilateral relationships are strong and friendly, some are weak, warm, cold, or they change over time. any other bilateral relationship in the americas that does not include normal diplomatic relationships other than the united states and cuba? i'm not aware of one. but you guys are the experts. assisstant secretary jacobson: no sir. senator kane: this is the only one of the 600 bilateral relationships in the americas that does not involve a normal diplomatic relationship. let me ask you this, i'm not aware of any war between nations in the americas, our two continent between nations, am i right about that? ambassador shannon: you are correct. senator kane: the only civil war, there are security challenges, obviously of many kinds because we're 35 nations and a billion people but the only civil war right now in the region is the war between the

colombia government and farc and another smaller terrorist organization that is currently subject to a negotiation that cuba is hosting where the u.s. is playing a role accompanying the colombian government correct? assisstant secretary jacobson: right. that's correct. and we're not accompanying but have this special envoy now. it's also the longest running civil conflict in the hemisphere. senator kane: i don't want to get ahead of myself, but if that negotiation works out positively, and we are then -- we have the ability to be too -- two continents, all americans, without war, without civil war, without war between nations that would be pretty unusual in the history of these two continents, wouldn't it? ambassador shannon: it would be an historic achievement. senator kane: it would be pretty unusual given other continents wars or civil wars in asia, wars or civil wars in africa, sadly wars or civil wars in europe. you talked in your opening testimony about the increasing

trade in the americas, majority of the american trade agreements with nations in the americas there's more trade between the nations in the americas. there has been a move in the last 30 years from governments that have been autocratic or military towards democracy, not that there aren't challenges problem children, we're human beings, after all, there are going to be challenges. you each have spent your entire professional careers working in the western hemisphere, is what you've devoted your professional lives to. tell us what it means to the united states of america to potentially be the anchor and the leading nation in two continents with no war, no civil war, complete diplomatic relations and ever increasing

trade in interdependence. talk about what that means to the united states of america. assisstant secretary jacobson: senator, i think those are incredibly important points. and for me, one of the things that i see in this hemisphere is not only the hemisphere's importance to the united states and to our people daily, whether trade, familiar ties, greing growing influence in culture we share and the way in the values in this hemisphere are the same as our but i also see this as a model with so many flaws that still have to be overcome, and challenged that we all face and -- and challenge that we all face and inequalities of, you know, systems and democracies even where they exist. but remember that in the transition from military to civilian government, truth commissions, and the process of that was first done in this hemisphere with argentina, a model that south africa looked at and eastern european countries looked at and others have looked ain the the arab world now. remembering also that the terrible adjustment of the '90s

on macro economic issues were things that this hemisphere went through first. now with the free trade agreements the broadening of those economic changes to be greater social inclusion and ensure that everybody's included in those benefits is taking route here first. i think it isn't just what we do for ourselves, it's what we are then able to do elsewhere including working with these partners increasingly capable on global issues that matter to us from climate change to the middle east to peacekeeping where uruguay per capita is the largest contributor of peacekeepers in the world. it not just a phenomenon we will be proud of here but one that is projecting outside.

senator kane: if i could add briefly, as we look out on to the globe and see some very demanding and some frightening security challenges, to have a strategic enclave in our own hemisphere, where we are fight ing no wars, facing nothing of significant insurgencies or terrorist groups and 0 are able to have commerce, both in manufacturing in services but also in political dialogue is a remarkable thing and a remarkable accomplishment. to have examples of societies that have moved from authoritarian government to democracy, have moved from closed economies to open economies, as i've noted, is a confidence builder for other countries around the world who are facing similar challenges because our hemisphere has shown that the democracy is not a status quo power structure. it's not about preserving privilege, it's addressing profound social problems and doing so in a peaceful way, in a transformative way. so i think we have a remarkable

platform in the western hemisphere from which to engage the rest of the world. and as the assistant secretary noted, and as i noted in my testimony, this is a region that's moving from global isolation to global engagement. one of most interesting stories of the first half of the 20 2 -- 21st century is not inter-american relation it's now how we interact with the rest of the world. we have four of the free trading partners part of the trans-pacific partnership looking for ways to transform their own economies by reaching across the pacific into asia doing so as democrat countries that support open markets, support free trade and support the international institutions that regulate trade is a dramatic accomplishment. and we'll have an impact on the larger economies in south america that have yet to sign up for these larger agreements. we are at a moment of strategic momentum. and if we are able to show that this hemisphere can function hemispherically around establishing priorities and building approaches to those priorities, and if we can show that through our dialogue we can present a consolidated face to

the rest of the world, we will have done something remarkable. senator kane: i thank the witnesses for their testimony. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to thank the chairman and ranking minority member for scheduling this hearing. this has been very informative and obviously an area where there's much interest here. i want to thank the witnesses and i want to thank them particularly for explaining that this new policy is not a reward for good behavior on behalf of the cuban government. obviously, there are concerns, huge concerns in terms of human rights that need to be addressed.

but i appreciate clear-eyed vision of that, that the administration holds. if you can just explain, miss jacobson, is it easier to have those discussions with regard to human rights or perhaps negotiating with fugitives for american justice if we have diplomatic relations or a better relationship and better contact than this situation, as it has been? assisstant secretary jacobson: it's only possible, really, with policy of engagement, those were things we couldn't do before. >> all right. thank you. that's -- that's important, i think important if this discussion. we on think, well, you know, is this a guarantee now, this greater engagement that any improvements will be in the offing. that assumes that we have a a good policy now that is yielding benefits. we haven't. we haven't for about 50 years now. and and now at least there's a possibility that we might be able to make some improvements and see increased freedom for

the cuban people. so i applaud the administration for taking this position and for pursuing this. let's turn to travel for a minute. it was said before that when people traveled some do stay in the hotels owned by the government and therefore revenue will flow to government. there's no doubt that will happen. but it's significant, as was mentioned by senator boxer, that companies like airbnb have gone into cuba now a company that has a website that books travel, mostly bed and breakfast for people in their private homes. i was looking at it while we were here, if you just scroll down, they have now i understand more than 2,000 listings in cuba. a bit of perspective, it took them months -- sorry, years in some of their other markets like san francisco to get up to 1,000 listings. you've got 2,000 listings. i think this is just, i think, a thousand over just about 50 days. so it's very significant.

and for the most part, or virtually all of these listings are people in their homes, people who will benefit from visits by americans and others and there's less of a chance that that money will flow through the government. increased travel will go to the cuban government but what cost to the cuban government? i always felt if we lift some restrictions the cuban government may seek to impose some of their own, because on -- obviously they want revenue but fear -- they fear what else the freedom that might come with the increased travel. but i've often also said if somebody's going to limit my travel it should be a communist, that's what they do.

not our own government here. that's not our purview. that's not our prerogative to limit the travel of americans. so, with regard to cuban-american travel i think it is significant. the president lifted some restrictions a few years ago. miss jacobson, can you tell, or ambassador shannon, what has happened in that regard in terms of increased travel over the last couple of years with the policy changing with regard to cuban-american travel? assisstant secretary jacobson: thank you, senator, very much. i think that it's clear that in the regulatory changes that the administration has made over the last few years, to increase the ability for families to see each other, for cuban-americans to go to cuba, as well as the changes most recently in december, there have been many more cuban-americans traveling, there have been certainly it's been critical to us, i think to ensure that remittance amounts go up and they did dramatically in the most recent regulatory

changes because in many ways they have been the capital that has founded some of the most important private sector emergence. almost certainly continue to do so including some of these private homes that are serving as on airbnb. people who want to run their own businesses who are allowed to in areas that the cuban government will permit but don't have the resources to do so and can be helped by folks in the united states. >> well, thank you. as one who traveled frequently to cuba over the last 15 years i can tell you for several years there, it was tough to see any change or progress because the cuban government, it it seemed they would loosen controls when they needed to and tighten them again. but traveling there over past couple of years has been a

significant difference. and i think it's because of the increased travel, particularly by cuban-americans that you see the type of entrepreneurship that has been allowed but will likely continue now, much tougher to turn and reverse, that certainly is the feeling that those of us who traveled down more recently have gotten and i think that will only increase with increased american travel. there are, like i said before, no guarantees that anything will happen but change is more likely to occur with increased contact from the u.s. let me touch on diplomatic relations and the appointment of an ambassador to cuba. how will that help with regard to those who do business legally, american whose do -- americans who do business legally in cuba under the new reg and and increased number of americans who travel what benefits will they have if we have full diplomatic relations

that they don't have now? assisstant secretary jacobson: obviously our intersection in cuba already provides some services in beth of those areas. -- and both of those areas. but i would say that having a u.s. ambassador, having full diplomatic relations is always at a highest level, the representative of the united states -- of the president, and being able to advocate for those businesses, u.s. businesses, that can operate legally, being able to advocate for them against competitors, being able to support americans while they're there, it also critical to us that we have sufficient staff to be able to support the influx of people and americans who are going to cuba so we can provide those services. we and only do that with full diplomatic relations. sen. flake: thank you. in close, i want to thank rank minority member for mentioning freedom to travel act that has sponsorship of the majority of the committee, 10 of 19. we look forward to pushing that forward.

chair corker: thanks for your interest in this issue. senator udall? sen. udall: thank you, mr. chairman. really appreciate you holding this hearing and doing it, you and senator cardin, in such a balanced way, very much appreciate that. i'm honored, senator flake, to be on your freedom to travel bill. i think one of the things that is so important is opening cuba up to travel and there couldn't be better ambassadors than our citizens going down to cuba and visiting what we're all about in terms of democracy and human rights and those very, very important values. and i, at the beginning, want to say, i very inch support this policy of normalization. i think we're turning the page on a failed policy that's been going on since the early 1960's, we're moving to empowering the cuban people, empowering cuban entrepreneurs, and i really

welcome this new chapter of normalized relations. it was mentioned earlier about -- you were asked several questions, really appreciate you both being here and all of your hard work observe the years in this area -- about the private sector. and i have looked for reports on what's happening down there. i think it's fascinating, in terms of the growth, dramatic growth in the private sector 2013 brookings report -- there are probably more because that's an old report -- looking at close to 1 million classified as private sector. you have 500,000 legally registered to self-employed and you have another 570,000 farmers who own or lease private plots working solo or in cooperatives. and as i think is mentioned in your testimony, there's an organic sector also working there, organic farming and organic marketing.

in addition to that, there's another estimated, from this report, 600,000 to 1 million labeled private sector but they are considered illegal by the cuban government. so there's also a sector there that's growing. so you have these two large sectors which could be in the range of 2 million. i think that's what, when we travel down there, when we engage down there when our commerce is -- these are the folks that we're helping. these are the folks that we're helping grow. these are the folks that we're empowering, and i think that's a very very good thing. now, this -- one of the areas that i think is critically important -- and is increasing our agriculture interaction with cuba -- so i am also proud to be

on senator -- in addition to senator flake, senator hide camp has a bill to increase sales i'm on that. and this week i'm introducing the cuba digital and communications advancement act also known as the cuba data act, with senator flake, senator durbin. the goal of the legislation is very simple. give u.s. telecommunications companies the opening and certainty they need to inrest and hope cuba open to the world and and give the cubans the into tools they need to engage in a 21st century economy. share information and communicate more efficiently with each other and the world. secretary jacobson, both you and the president emphasized access to internet is a cornerstone to the new cuba policy. it's one of the least wired countries in the western hemisphere. things we take for granted, such as e-mail on phone, basically

nonexistent in cuba. what are the major challenges cubans are facing to access the internet and what can u.s. companies and the congress do to open up cuba to the global internet? asst. sec. jacobson: thank you senator. thanks so much for your interest in this and the conversations we've had. i think obviously a huge part of the obstacles to the cuban people right now are sheer access to internet connected devices, whether it's computers or whether it's, you know, smartphones. when they are access, that access is expensive, it's also prohibitive prohibitive, even when the cost came down for the public to access internet it was still extremely expensive. for most cubans it was a half month's wage. then there's a question of whether everything is act sell ibl once you get on the web and

whether there are things that are blocked. so there are luge challengehuge challenges for the average cuban. i think there is a combination of reasons for that, but the cuban government fundamentally has to make decisions and we obviously want to encourage in every way possible that information and access to the internet be made easier, cheaper, you know, available and open for the cuban people. that will take a variety of decisions by the government that we're encouraging them to take by encouraging american businesses to have those conversations with them and these are the means to do so. sen. udall: the goal, as i think you said in your testimony madam secretary, of the cuban government is to have internet access for 50% of its population by 2020. so they have stated this goal, we're trying to move there.

this is the goal that u.n. has made for developing countries around the world. is this goal achievable by cuba? if the united states telecom companies were allowed to invest in cuba, how long would it take to completely wire the island? asst. sec. jacobson: that's a great question, senator. i'm not the best of tech experts but i will tell you that the tech companies that i speak to had conversations either with cuba or about cuba believe it is absolutely possible. and in terms of how long it would take a lot depends on what the cubans decide to do what kind of infrastructure they put in. sen. udall: thank you very much for those answers. mr. chairman, just a final comment, i know that all of the things that have been mentioned here that are problems, that we don't agree with, problems as challenges in cuba, we just have different goals to try to go those things changed. and as the last note, i'd like

to express my support for the extradition of charlie hill. extradition of criminals, i think, is an important part of any normal relations between countries, charlie hill, who allegedly murdered a new mexico state police officer and hijacked a plane must be brought justice and i know the state department shares this objective. i hope we continue to make this a priority until we get it done. thank you, mr. chairman. chair corker: my sense is there may be additional questions, and i'll defer my time for others who may wish to ask additional questions. senator rubio? sen. rubio: thank you. a couple points i wanted to touch on. this internet thing is important. i've talked about it extensively in the past. as i listen to the conversation there's a perception the reason why there's no internet infrastructure in cuba is because the u.s. hasn't gone into build. the cuban -- the telecom industry in cuba is run by the

government, a holding held by the holding company run by the son-in-law of raul castro. the bottom line virtually every telecom company in the world -- there are dozens of advance the companies in world not in the territory of the united states -- have had access to the cuban market and they've not been allowed to build out or dropped out of joint ventures. the fact that american infrastructure will be allowed to come in does not mean the cubans will allow it. here's why, they don't want the cuban people to have access to the internet. china they have the great firewall. they have access to internet in china. china has both nationally owned and private companies in china offer telecommunication infrastructure but the people do not have access because the government places filters upon it. this is a government that won't allow you to bring certain books

on to the island. a government won't allow you to read certain newspapers on the island. this idea that they are going to somehow allow at&t and verizon to say, yes, come in, build all of this infrastructure unfetterred access to the cuban people, as absurd. they cannot survive an internet opening. so we can pass all of the laws we want, the cuban government is still going to place filters and you still have to work through their telecommunications company in a joint venture in order to build infrastructure on the island. as far as travel is concerned, i think airbnb, fantastic, they're building this up. the point, number one, even private operators on the island, bed and breakfast, whatever you call them, still pay an exorbitant fee to the government for the right to provide that service. they gamed that system to get their hands on money. that being said the vast majority of people that travel to cuba will not be staying at one of these facilities. they will be staying at segregated tourist destinations where tourists are brought in, experience that facility, and

then leave. and the money's going to the cuban military. i've heard discussion about vietnam, china. look, we have full travel to china and vietnam, they're not any more democratic than they were when all of this started. so i think it proves my point, economic openings do not lead to political openings by evidence of china and vietnam. the point about the cuban military, in addition to the fact that the castro regime stole 6,000 properties owned by u.s. citizens or companies of which zero dollars have been compensated this is the cuban military that has four, four senior officials, three senior officials indicted, for the murder of four floridians, indicted in u.s. courts. that's the cuban military. this is the cuban military helping smuggle heavy weapons to north korea without consequence. they were caught, no u.n.

sanctions, no u.s. sanctions. this is not just the cuban military. this is a cuban military that uses access to funds to carry out the sort of grotesque activity. we're not doing business with the cuban people. you may eat at a home somewhere, but this is still a very small part of their economy for the vast and enormous majority of americans that travel there, and that includes congressional codells, journalists, everyday american citizens you will stay in a government-run facility every dollar will wind up in the hands of the cuban military that soernss sponsors terrorism by smuggling arms to north korea, and cuban military that uses every access it it has to funds to enrich themselves and repress the cuban people. so there is no economic opening to cuba. there is an economic opening to the cuban military-run holding company. chair corker: thank you. senator cardin?

sen. cardin: let me briefly, then i'll yield to senator menendez, in regards to some response here, 2 million cell phone users in cuba. when i was in china they do block full access to the internet, although the u.s. embassy site on air quality is one of the most frequently visited sites by china nationals, the only reliable information they can get about air quality. our engagement will bring faster connectivity and more quality connectivity to the people of cuba, i'm convinced of than the technology is there, senator rubio points out. it's a matter of making it available and the people of cuba will demand that. and let me just also me also point out, in regards to the act, it provides for licensing authority by the administration which is common in these types of legislation. there are authorities included

in the act. i look forward to a robust discussion. chairman, i would yield the time to senator menendez. chair corker: senator markey. sen. markey: thank you, mr. chairman, very much. welcome and thank you for all of the good work which you have done. over the years there's been a clearly an isolation from our country that cuba has had to live with. and i very much appreciate this administration's attempts to normalize relations. i think it is important and step in the right direction. and i think the actions which you're taking beginning to make it possible for us to envision a day where we truly have normalized relations with cuba but it's not going to happen overnight and clearly cuba itself has to deal with

behavioral changes that are not going to come easy. but that said, i think the process has opened and i think we're going to head in the right direction. i know senator udall has already talked about this and it's important to focus on it, the relationship that exists between information and freedom. i think there is a huge cultural combatibility with cuba, otherwise the red sox would not be signing all this money to sign cuban players. they have mastered that part of our culture. and hopefully we'll be able to be able to broaden that even

further. talking about internet and talking about telecommunications, can you just outline a little bit for me -- i may have missed the detail that you gave to senator udall, but what is your hope in the terms of transfer of sale of telecommunications technology into the human marketplace? asst. sec. jacobson: thank so much, senator. the regulatory changes are fairly -- fairly broad in terms of what can now be sold and provided to cuba in the telecommunications and information area. that could be hardware, whether cell phones or other forms of computers that can now be sort of not just donated as they could be before but sold to cuba. people in cuba, and it also is services that are providing information such as the phone

card and phone service that idt recently in new jersey signed with the cuban government to do other forms ever telecommunications work. i do want to be clear, it's true that all of this takes a decision by the cuban government to move forward with modernization in their telecom sector. that is certainly true. american companies can be able to under our changes participate in cuba but the cuban government has already said it wants to modernize and said things to the u.n. and we have to see if they really take those steps. we want to be part of it if and when they do. we want to encourage them to do so. i think as others have said, we think the cuban people want that as well. sen. markey: i think the more that we have american tourists down there, the more that we have a cultural exchanges and

students in cuba, the more normalized to that extent is more likely that the cuban people, cuban students are going to be saying to themselves, why can't we have that technology? and it's -- it's a resistance by the way that existed in our own country. our own country did not want to move to the digital revolution. our cable and telephone companies did not move to it. there wasn't one home that had digital until we changed the laws. we had to incentivize those companies. we were going nowhere. same thing with cell phones, cost 50 cents a minute and we didn't have one, ordinary people, some wealthy businessman gordon gecko had in wall street had one but not ordinary people. in 2001 in africa, only 12 million people -- 12 million people had wireless devices. today it's 800 million. we move to these devices rapidly

in america but they are doing in africa as well. the more it insinuates itself into individual countries it changes the culture and business relationship it's not uniform. no question about it, but you can see it, where it works. it works big time. i think the same thing is going to be true in cuba. the more we can move these devices in and the more the people in the country demand they have access to it so they are not the last country in the world without access to modern technologies. i think we're going to see dramatic telescoping of the changes that we're hoping that will happen in that country. and so that's why of all of the sectors, that's why radio and tv

were always focused on by the reagan administration. they understood the importance of this. and the hoping which you're talking about here, kind of puts it in the mind of many cuban ordinary citizens, why not, why not us? so what is the level of negotiation or discussion that is going on in terms of these telecommunications technologies? who are we speaking to? who ultimately makes the decision inside cuba? asst. sec. jacobson: all right thank you, senator. we had -- there's basically two tracks if you will, one is government. that is beginning of conversations with the cuban government about telecommunications and the other obviously are many, many private sector conversations with the cuban government to which we're not party but we obviously know about that they are taking place. on the government side, we had our ambassador for international communications policy danny sepulveda two months ago now that is the first time we had

that conversation with the cuban government at an official level meeting both with their telecommunications ministry as well as their telecom provider which is state run, to talk about sort of what kind of infrastructure they are interested in and how we have done things in the united states in terms of the regulation and access issues as well as obviously many, many u.s. companies have had conversations with the cuban government and they are beginning to think about the request for proposals if you will of their own telecom sector. >> the quicker we can move them in that direction, the quicker their whole society changes and it's happened all over the world, they will not be immune to you. thank you both for your great work. sen. corker: without objection i would like to enter into the record on behalf of senator rubio a letter to him dated

february 18. from the u.s. coast guard and if there's no objection i'll put it in the record. sen. flake: thank you, mr. chairman. just wanted to clarify a few issues, we talk about telecommunications, saying the cuban government may not allow this and it's up to them and we may not control them, that's true, they will allow what they will allow. but we've had a policy for decades that has not yield the results we want the question it's this policy compared to nonengagement that we had before and we know what nonengagement has yielded. the cuban government may or may not keep their promise to make sure that 50% of the cuban people are wired by certain time. we have no control of that. we have control of what is in our national interest. and i think it's more likely

that it will occur that under the former policy we had. also, with regard to a statement made that whenever american traveler goes to cuba every dollar ends up with a cuban government, that simply is not the case. that may be said by those who haven't traveled to cuba recently. but many americans travel to cuba. and it is true that you can't travel to cuba without some revenue going to government. that is certain. but the notion that every dollar spent ends up in the hands of cuban military is not the case. you have entrepreneurship is a testment to the fact that some money does flow to ordinary cuban people. that is then particularly the case with the travel of

cuban-americans over the past couple of years. i should mention, when that policy was announced a couple of years ago the cuban-americans could travel not just once every three years but as often as they like. there was talk here in congress about reversing that, you can't have that, that's not good for the cuban people and not good for america. i can tell you there is no serious talk today about reversing that because why? because when americans get more freedom, we tend to enjoy that and want more. and i would suggest that a year from now, the notion that we would reverse this policy that is allowed more americans to travel to cuba and to help cuban people have access to more technology, more capital, more values and more contact with americans will seem as absurd as

reversing the changes that were made with cuban american travel a couple of years ago. so again, i applaud you for what you're doing and look forward to working with the administration as this policy unfolds. chair corker: thank you, senator menendez. sen. menendez: thank you, mr. chairman. let me ask you when a cuban-american sends or visits their relatives in cuba and give them a lit money, the only place really to buy something is the dollar store, isn't is that true? if you want to get something? sec. jacobson: i believe certainly there's -- there's more in those stores to buy. sen. menendez: by the way, who owns the dollar stores? >> they are state run. sen. menendez: ok. the government. and so if i want to send a remittance to my relative in cuba, the cuban government takes a slice, right? >> they do but the relatives probably want a part of that anyway.

>> let's not deny the cuban government is greatly enriched by these resources, which is why it has been its number one foreign policy objective. let's talk about what full diplomatic relations are. you're going to having this discussion tomorrow i understand. what normalized relations are. the "washington post" ran a story suggesting that the talks to restore diplomatic relations were held up because they were unwilling to allow us to send secured shipments to a secured embassy and number of staff necessary to operate a future embassy and unwilling to remove the military presence around a future embassy. let me ask you would the state department to agree to establish a embassy in havana in all diplomats aren't able to travel freely through cuba? >> senator, what i can tell you, we have to have an embassy where diplomats can get out and travel and see the country and talk to

people. we have restrictions on the way our embassy travel in terms of notification to governments in many countries around the world that range from 24 hours to 10 days. we are going to do everything possible to make sure that we have the least restrictions possible but our -- sen. menendez: we will accept restrictions that all of our diplomats and embassy would be able to travel through the country? asst. sec. jacobson: we will make sure that the embassy is on a par with the way we operate in other places that are restrictive environments but -- sen. menendez: would you agree to conditions in which we can't send secure shipments to supply a future embassy without the regime rifling through them?

asst. sec. jacobson: senator i'm not going to necessarily layout all of the negotiations for -- sen. menendez: why not? wait a minute. >> senator, let me -- sen. menendez: do we not have a united states congress have the right to understand how you are trying to establish diplomatic relations. the nation needs to know in what conditions we're going to have or not have relationship. are you going to allow the cubans to rifle through your diplomatic -- with impunity or insist you can send something to the embassy as we do in other places in the world. asst. sec. jacobson: we believe in the viability of the diplomatic pouch and it's critical to resupply a future embassy and important to supply the building now that has maintenance and upkeep. that's a critical part of our discussion. sen. menendez: will you accept conditions less than that? asst. sec. jacobson: we won't accept conditions in which we can't securely supply our facilities.

sen. menendez: would you agree to open an embassy if you aren't granted a number of staff you need to operate it efficiently? asst. sec. jacobson: not if we can't have the number of staff we believe we need, no. menendez: are you willing to open an embassy of the castro regime doesn't remove its military cordon from around the building, which is basically a way to intimidate average cubans from approaching our facility? asst. sec. jacobson: we will not open an embassy unless we believe that the security outside the embassy is appropriate to protect our installation but we will also make sure that it is welcoming of cubans into the installation as an embassy, the way we do around the world. sen. menendez: let me ask you, you agreed with me ultimately that the castro regime statement as to relates to that they have never supported, never supported any act of international terrorism is not true. so if you agree that these statements by the castro regime are categorically false, how can

you explain to the committee why you would think you can believe any assurances about the regime's current or future conduct if they both face lied in the first place? asst. sec. jacobson: what we were looking at in the assurances is not necessarily whether or not their assertions on behalf of all reported history for the cuban government are -- we agree with every statement of the past, what we have to look at is what the requirements are under the law which talk about the rejection of international terrorism which they have made and lack of police support or any evidence for support -- international terrorism. sen. menendez: partially lie to you but not fully lie -- asst. sec. jacobson: senator, we have differences in what we -- they do not believe they have ever supported international terrorism.

sen. menendez: they sent you a letter and the state department quoted that particular section which it's incredible to believe that section you buy into. the red cross under the president's announcement was supposed to have access to cuban jails, has that taken place? asst. sec. jacobson: we do not say the red cross would have access -- sen. menendez: what -- you announced they would have -- i understand it was access to cuban jails. asst. sec. jacobson: i don't believe we ever said that the cubans had agreed to that. what we said was that we were hoping that international organizations would renew their discussions with the cuban government about those issues, including the red cross and u.n. >> has the red cross been able to get in freely? >> not that i know. >> last question. we talk about telecom access and a lot has been discussed about that.

in late february, the first vice president who senator boxer referred to as the -- looks like he would be the next heir in the election. there's no election, it's a selection, can we agree on that? >> we can agree that what the cuban government calls an election is not what we believe meets international standards. sen. menendez: it's the cuban communist party and that's it. he gave a long rambling speech the second highest official in the cuban government about the internet in cuba. the affirmation that the regime's internet strategy would be led by the communist party. given the communist party's half century long effort to deprive the cuban people of the most minimal standards of freedom of the press and information, would you have the committee believe that the communist party won't make every possible effort to block access to all content that it deems undesirable similar to what we have seen in other closed societyies around the world?

asst. sec. jacobson: when more people have access to the internet, even if governments try to prevent them seeing things they don't want them to they are remarkably inventive in finding ways to do so. sen. menendez: let me ask you this. can we have your assurances that the state department and the united states government will take all possible steps to ensure that the cuban people have access to navigation technologies to get around regime censorship. if we're going to say we want u.s. companies to develop this infrastructure in cuba certainly we could have technologies so the cuban people are truly free to see any site they want. asst. sec. jacobson: certainly i hope that the majority and vast majority or all of the cuban people will have complete access to the continue internet.

sen. menendez: i'm asking you if we're going to license companies under the liberty act, can't we make a condition of that license that they have navigation technologies so senator flake and udall and markey, everyone who wants access to the internet, we're in common cause on that, actually can get access to the internet? what's so difficult about suggesting the technology? asst. sec. jacobson: i don't know we can do that but i know -- sen. menendez: any condition we want as a condition of sale. i wrote that section of law when i was in house of representatives. i know what it says and you can put conditions on it. i hope to hear back from you whether you will insist on that as an ability to have u.s. companies -- if we want access for the cuban people to have the internet, which i do. asst. sec. jacobson: i do as

well, senator, but i also want them to be able to have those deals go through and to make it the most effective way that more on the island can have access -- sen. menendez: a deal without full access to the internet is a deal to an end without access to the critical information that we think can help liberate the cuban people. thank you, mr. chairman. sen. corker: thank you. any other questions? i want to thank the committee again. i know there's a lot of adverse views about this proposed new policy. and actually a policy that's being implemented and i want to thank the witnesses for being here. if you would, the record will be open without objection to the close of business thursday if u.s. are promptly, we would appreciate it. thank you for your service to our country and with that we are adjourned.

>> the new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress with colored photos of every senator and house member, plus contact information and twitter handles. also district maps, if all. map of capitol hill and a look at congressional committees, the president cabinet and state governors. order your copy today. it is $13.95 plus shipping and handling on the c-span online store at c-span.org. >> for he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother. be he near so vile, this day so gentle his condition. and gentlemen in england now abed shall think themselves accursed that they were not here. >> one drop of blood drawn from thy country's bosom should be

thee more than streams of foreign gore. >> director of the shakespeare library, michael whitmore, talks about shakespeare and how politicians use quotes from the famous playwright in their speeches. >> sometimes you have to go with the music of the words the poetic images, the sound, the rhymes and also the way in which senator byrd did -- you can cause and linger over a long phrase and stop and keep going. i think he has really using the rhythm of the language which is something shakespeare did so brilliantly so he can take english and put it into high gear at one moment and slowdown. that is something that shakespeare lets you do if you are a politician. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific. >> good night, good night. parting such sweet sorrow.

>> a new report was released this week on retaliation against military sexual assault victims. human rights watch and protect our defenders was responsible for the report. this is 45 minutes. >> thank you for coming today for the release of our report -- embattled retaliation against sexual assault survivors in the military. we appreciate you coming today. i would give you an idea what to expect. we will start with the video which will be five minutes and then make inroads, researchers and the human rights division will summarize nine and a member randa peterson his program and post policy there will give a few remarks after that phipps

as someone who was a commander and also witness retaliation herself and at the end we have sierra bridges who will be available to answer questions about her experiences in the air force. i'm the senior counsel on the u.s. program of human rights watch. >> reporting sexual assault in the military is not easy. you hear the stories. they all have the same ending. and never end well. joined the military in 2008. before all this happened, my initial goal was to outrank by father who served for 33 years. >> we interviewed 150

servicemembers and veterans across all branches of the military that reported sexual assault. we are talking about serious threats, harassment, job opportunities, promotions, disciplinary actions, criminal charges, for many people they found reporting was the beginning of the end of their career. >> often times when you report sexual assault, the person who committed the crime is somebody who also you work with and live with. you share the same friends, same acquaintances, same employer -- there is no escape. >> there were rumors going around in my squadron that i was a troublemaker, that i was a liar and i was isolated from my squadron. i didn't feel comfortable going

to squadron functions. she said so and so touched her. i don't believe that. once the air force realized sierra was not going to give up, that she was going to continue to pursue this, i absolutely feel our daughter was retaliated. one of the supervisors sent out an e-mail to the other workers within her area and telling those individuals not to communicate with her. >> we have the concept is team and a view the person who made the complaint as somebody not a team player versus the person who committed the crime. >> retaliation can mean more sexual harassment. >> theit escalated where got to the point where i thought they were purposely put me on shifts with the

individual that assaulted me. there was an incident where unfortunately i had to go over to the office to return some keys and he forced me on top of his desk. he started masturbating until he was finished. >> a number of survivors alike they started looking for things they've done wrong and were writing them up for performance evaluation which can be used to create a record to discharge you from the military. >> previously, he had gotten an award for being an outstanding worker with intersection but now, she was not the good air man because these infractions were hard to disprove. she was late for work but she had permission. this was stuff that was commonly done. >> i was relieved to finally be

leaving what i consider to be my hell. i was also sad. i felt like a failure. i had a lot of goals and it just hurts to see all that go down the drain. >> we know that 62% of our survivors that report are retaliated against yet there's nobody prosecuted. when no one is held accountable for retaliation, it sounds that a horrible message. the message is keep going. keep doing it. >> the military needs to taken serious by action. they need to show the people who retaliate against survivors will be held to account. for many people retaliation is far worse than sexual assault itself because they have faith that the military would support

them and then to have their peers and supervisors that they would give their life for treat them this way is devastating. >> good morning. last month, defense secretary ashton carter addressed officers in training about the estimated 18,900 sexual assaults in the military last year. he describes sexual assault as a disgrace in any form any particular challenge in a particular disgrace to the u.s. military. today we are here to talk about soldiers on the frontlines of that challenge. the servicemen and women who bravely come forward and report that they have experienced sexual assault and harassment. without question, reporting sexual assault of the u.s. military is an act of valor. that is an act of tremendous courage in the face of danger. reporting is an act that puts

servicemembers careers on the line and lay in a profound and personal drama. it is an act of valor for many is motivated by a deep motivation -- deep devotion to the military, values and safety of brothers and sisters in arms. however research shows the act of valor is not reported -- rewarded, but punished. our analysis finds military service members who reported sexual assault 12 times as likely to suffer retaliation for doing so they had to see their nerve is also a servicemember can make it. in the research further apart, my there were many interviews and 150 were survivors. in noted to focus on the current content for recent reforms, the report we released today is based primarily on the accounts of 75 survivors were currently serving or left service since

fiscal year 2012. the picture of retaliation is stark. threats and bullying by peers and supervisors, including threats, vandalism attacks via social media. the physical and verbal abuse to be intolerable in any context and the military environment is also inescapable. military retaliation is not limited to a nine to five work day and cannot be escaped with two weeks notice. service members are not coworkers with the perpetrators and friends -- they live together especially for junior , enlisted servicemembers the military controls every minute of their time and aspect of their lives. many servicemembers are bound by contracts to the military for fixed year terms. the retaliation we document was not limited to servicemember peers, survivors are labeled

troublemakers by superiors targeted for disciplinary action , undeserved or out of line with common practice. supervisors move victims to poor work assignments, remove them from their career track and cause them to miss out on training or deployment. survivors on the career fast-track receive recognition for outstanding performance suddenly found they were denied medals or are getting poor performance reviews. this data more like a they would not have their listener renewed or would be added to it yesterday discharge. interview after interview, service members told us that reporting sexual assault marked the beginning of the end of their careers. some survivors face court-martial or discipline for minor misconduct like underage drinking or adultery but only came to the military's attention as a result of their coming forward to report actual assault. this is not how a military that wants to end sexual assault treats the soldiers coming forward to put a stop to a problem plaguing the