i have reports are from 2010, 2011, 20 we cannot leave here and do nothing again. >> the balances that have been unexpended. it was a half $1 billion almost. the money is there. connolly: i'm going to yields to my good friend eleanor holmes norton. ms. norton: as to who needs when metro shuts down the federal government shuts down. we have evidence of that just recently. just try getting along without

metro. if you want the federal government at all. it is liability because the federal government didn't give us control over our own system. if keith d.c. not one thin dime. cityistrict is the only that has any responsibility for state functions. i agree with what mr. evans has said. i want to focus on the fact that for the first time in its history as i understand it this system is doing short-term borrowing.

in order to get operating funds is that true? >> yes it is. you have a rollover borrowing of about $500 million at this point. you are borrowing just to keep the system running. we've got to face this fast. there werehat, handwritten drawdown restrictions. to get any of the federal money that is due to you you got to voucher andand the effect. i do have any problems with that because of what fda found in terms of control and so i understand in the beginning that

after having had written correspondence over this it looks like to do this process and getting to validation. it looks like you have done your duty diligence but in the process this is why i'm talking my going forward. in the process you have so delayed getting funds through it. you had to go and do short-term borrowing. i don't care what it is just so it is streamlined waiting 10 or more days to get money that congress has already allocated to it. have we got a monitoring system that will allow us some form of rather thanawdown

the hands drawdown given the fact that you've gotten through all the controls except being validated? i'm just asking that you not throw the system deeper into debt than it already is. that looks like what we usually see what summary goes out of business. >> it is on the capital side, not the operating side. my understanding was that for the first time you had borrowed in the short term. >> it is short-term funding but it is short-term funding but as for the capital program. ms. norton: you are not done short-term borrowing? not in the history? they are rolling over.

they can't pay it. i am trying for a way to get this over with. here's the money wheel you. how close are we to is streamlined approach? been going through the validation process. i think we are getting closer. ms. norton: this is costing them money, in interest. it is a perfectly valid question to say give us the date we've tried everything else. to see when they get their old money in the new way. i will defer to mr. wellness who has been working with the viewer wmata.

>> we have paid $845 million to metro and metro brings us the request for payment. norton: when can they get off of these restrictions that are putting the more heavily into debt? in the coming months we will make sure that metro is doing the financial activities that we requested in our oversight review. during 2016 it is possible that metro will fulfill their tyrants that it can move off the restricted drawdowns but it will be up to metro. norton: i'm going to ask you to get me within 30 days a new proposed date when it will no

longer have to be on these kinds of restrictions. i want only to say to my good the idea ofvans creating a dedicated funding source. this has become a mantra. put a proposal on the table. anythinggoing to do about dedicated funding until somebody put something on the table for others to react to. i think that would move the ball forward. i thank you very much. >> we have exhausted the republicans on our side. >> i did know was that easy to exhaust the republicans. ms. comstock: i have heard some of the back-and-forth here. i would like to recommend to all

of my colleagues is to focus on who is general manager really set out some good things for we can all agree on some of the food fights and some of the things we've seen here. what we need to focus on right now. i would encourage everybody to work on the things we agree on first before we start any of these sites. i appreciate what mr. evans said . he is as capable as anyone who has been here. that over 10 years there have been no significant reductions in force resulting in the reduction of positions among backs office staff.

what do to immediately abolish this? some of the funding for the pensions will be for these positions that are unnecessary. you are trying to minimize the problem here. how can we help you immediately remove those redundant positions and put people where they need to be. when youthe people fire somebody for direct wrongdoing you are saving on the pension costs right there. for 10 years they caused all these problems and didn't do anything. those people need to be fired. we need to be taking the action that helps you make those changes. cultural change. so we can see your positive action here. i would like to work with you

and my colleagues on that type .f positive action >> i have already started to move in that direction. personnel changes. and trynize the agency to make it very clear to everyone that this is the way we that.e if you understand i'm not going to get into individual personnel issues. comstock: i know the hr department seems to be one of the departments that is not working very well. things like the maintenance department. they didn't have simple things like repair kits with necessary parts for common repairs. who has been running the maintenance office that didn't put those basic repair kits out there?

any auto body shop knows this. the person who is running this. i think is right helpful if we see people like that moving on to dotting capable people these kinds of basic repairs. hr people who understand how to move these people along. that the really shows problem is execution. we can all exit -- identify the problems. you have put out very good ideas. but if you are not able to move the deadwood out, that execution is going to be a real problem. let us help you move that deadwood along. you've seen bipartisan agreement on the faster you can get that deadwood out the more we can help you. >> i am moving in that same direction right now.

comstock: on the hr front, have there been any changes at this time? of, one of the the different parts of the agency were buried under operations. so i've pulled that all part and created a new internal support procurement.g maintenance, hr, labor. have a separate group that is under new leadership. they are digging through all those issues. comstock: we've asked some questions and i appreciate some of the people we been waiting to hear responses from.

we've been seeking basic information. like absentee reports. people get a lot of overtime and that is added to their pension. thatu have a global system is not a good game that we need to playing. a lot of those problems can be worked out there if we have a really good hr department. since i haven't gotten the answers on that i assume that that continues to be a problem. >> i thank the gentleman for her insightful questions. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. evans,nolly: mr. chairman mica talked about the

$783 million as if you were just sitting around watching soap operas and allowing this money to accumulate. betweenere a difference obligated funds and expended funds? mr. evans: yes sir. what the chairman was referring to was obligated funds. connolly: how much of that is for the purchase and delivery ?or new 7000 series cars mr. evans: i don't have those dollar figures off the top of my head.

when the tsunami hit japan that affected kawasaki which is the provider of that. the company went out of business. that slow those dollars up. we are in the range of where one day. mr. connolly: irish you to help dispel this myth that you are sitting on a lot of capital even what to do with. it is actually good and prudent until the your bills product or service is been delivered and has met your specifications for the expected quality. especially since the reason we are purchasing new real cars -- railcars is safety. the new cars aren't going to pancake like the old ones did. i think we have to get the data out there so that we dispel this

sitting on a are mountain of capital so why should we give you anymore. mr. evans: this is obligated money. we need new capital. run cars we can through the rosalynn bottleneck. to build ag to have new tunnel and it is going to cost billions of dollars to have a system that is not reliable and it will take forever to get anywhere. this is just one example of many that we need to capital dollars four. connolly: i would like to know how we compare to other transit systems that receive federal grants. i think we're in the same ballpark.

at this point i will yields to my friend mr. delaney from maryland. mr. delaney: the scale of this failure at metro is a most unimaginable. it has become a national embarrassment. i agree with my colleagues that it is a management problem. the system has been underinvested in. we haven't talked about the board and the governing system. you can always blame management for so long. ultimately a fiduciary board is responsible. this enterprises had a fiduciary board for a long time. if this was any other enterprise besides metro the board were then dismissed and a new board would have been appointed. you believe that the board of metro, if you had to certify it, that the board members have deep

experience in operations and financial management and sophisticated transit systems. or had tremendous experience in creating systems of accountability and metrics for their management team. you feel like you can certify that the individuals who sit on .his board they have a safety committee, obviously they completely failed. a finance committee, complete failure. customer service, complete failure. it just seems to navy that at some point we have to ask hard questions about who is on the board of this organization and are is their experience these people get positions because of political payback and they know nothing about ?ransportation why are we getting the best executives in the washington region?

getting the top executives in the washington region? are they the kind of people you would put up their resumes and say there is no better person in the country for this. is that the kind of board that we have? or is that really the problem. is not the type of board that is here. we have a 16 member board which is way too big. when i was on last time we had 12 and that was too big. we headed for federal representatives a few years ago. it is unwieldy to say the least. it is just too many.

taken people well don't come there with enormous experience. don't and they are there for a whole variety of reasons. sometimes they are there because nobody else would come. that is who you have is a board. it is never been clear what the board does. hashe past the committee criticized the board for being too involved in the operation. then there were complaints that was not at all involved. mr. delaney: that is what you because theyoard peopl will know what their job is. they look at the ceo and they say these are the goals. if you don't reach them, we will make a change. they have committees that ask the right questions. and the sure things are happening. whatever has to be done to fix the system which will involve

more capital there has to be a conversation about completely reconstituting this board. very good community regulations. actually getting some people sitting around the table to know what they're doing. we can't be sitting here looking at pictures of jumper cables there has to be a management structure and a governance one of the biggest embarrassments in my opinion is to bid on the board of this thing for the last 10 years mr.use you utterly failed evans: . evans: we had a report on

this five years ago and nothing happened. nobody is going to give up anything. every time we bring up this idea of changing the board everybody backs away from it. we need to do something here. mr. delaney: whenever this does to address this problem we should be putting on the table. members that real board . under sarbanes-oxley the board has to certify that the person is an expert at audit committee related matters. for whatever the company does. we need that kind of certification for these board members. evans: can anybody hear name the four federal board members? to delaney: i just look them up.

i could not certify that any of these people are experts. i am a fiduciary of the federal government's money and the state of maryland's money. >> the gentleman from maryland makes a very good point but i would caution my colleagues that federal law cannot dictate who was on the board of metro. tilde payingal law jurisdictions who they get to a point of metro. if federal law wants to do that we would have to change it. we don't pay an operating subsidy and so we can tread lightly and telling virginia and maryland ndc who will serve on the board. this is not a federal entity.

mr. byers: there was a recent story in the post about how the writers of the blue line have felt for years. closing the blue line for six months perhaps. it got people even more excited and upset. it has to do with the capacity lynn tunnel.ynn tun i am looking at how we can provide that service. exercise.chnical

mr. byers: you also mentioned to the search for the regional funding source. what did you have in mind. did you have any models? will we need to do within the >> other systems have a dedicated source of funding. whether gasoline tax or something else. virginia and maryland ndc have to agree on what kind of a funding source or tax or fee whatever you want to call it. is it a sales tax or property or some combination of them? we have just not been able to do it. i was just reading history. the tennessee valley authority where the federal government created from tennessee and arkansas is taxing district.

i haven't done anything beyond that. i am frustrated with the local jurisdictions inability to deal with it. i went back to the federal government because maybe they can help us out. we need help at metro. if we don't get it, we will be in serious trouble beyond what we are now. washingtonian read this amazing story about how metro got so bad. a lot of the story focused on the control center. they talk about an environment where training materials adequate, it was hostile to new hires. people work long hours just to get the overtime. it was very critical of the way the control center responded at that time. all these things wrap around the culture. what can you tell us to give us

some hope that you are making changes within the control center? i changed how the reporting relationship goes so i get more focused on the operations. on a regular basis. making sure they are playing by the rules. the larger issue you're talking about is not confined to the operations center. what i found is a strong disconnect between management and the front-line employees people feel in effect disenfranchised they don't feel a part of the business they don't take pride in the business that is what i am focusing on to

get the front-line people and the managers to understand that if they don't not tap into that is to bring job their resource up and not push it down. that, then they cannot work here. that is what we need to get this organization in the direction we need. >> in the ntsb report, it is recommended that they take over the safety aspect. the agency has very limited ability to oversee metro effectively. it has limited staff carry out the function. no ability to impose civil .enalties

documented criticisms of why you are not the right agency to do we are on the. >> job and doing the job. powers,ve enforcement most importantly we have the to takeo direct wmata corrective action when there are safety infractions. we have the ability to withhold funds. fundch as 5% to 25% of the to compel them to take corrective action. side we feelence we have the technical competence . we have put together an organization that has experience fra.faa and he leveraged resources to

augment the oversight efforts we have people working with us. and the office of the secretary. concerned about whether we can sustain this. we do have additional budgetary authority to augment our safety operations. that the response was the appropriate one. we need to act quickly. have the statutory authority. to oversee commuter rail. >> the chair recognizes the

ranking member. mr. connolly: you just told us that you have the statutory authority to withhold the funds. if the three jurisdictions do not form this oversight committee in a certain course of time. have you taken cognizance of the legislative schedules of the two respective states of maryland and virginia? >> yes we have. what we would like to see and we are continuing to provide technical assistance but we would like to see this move forward rather than actually take action to withhold funds. mr. connolly: i support what you are trying to do. .ne little word of caution be aware of the difference in the legislative schedules so we

are not asking them to do something they can't possibly to do on their legislative calendar. >> we could rather than would. ms. comstock: i think the ranking member. as a former member the virginia legislature, i can tell you we are only there from january i also march sometimes. that myo mention ,redecessor, congressman wolf he raised the same issues that mr. delaney raised. i appreciate the honesty. in looking at the expertise here. obviously there will be challenges to look at that.

mr. delaney that that needs to be looked at more thoroughly. i wanted to return to some of the management ideas. our new general manager has focused on it. i don't know if maintenance is an area that could be outsourced. ideas that will have in common and can improve. there are a number of things that i think we can do more efficiently by getting out of them to some degree. parking, we have 60,000 parking spaces. not something that we wake up every morning worrying about. it is opportunity for the private sector to do that. we have a model that has been around for years.

but i think with new technology there is opportunities for that. so we don't take away anything from anywhere customers. but to give them alternatives that for us will be cheaper. ms. comstock: you are already identifying ways to cut costs given the on-demand economy. to give now you have 24-hour notice for your trip. you could call up and make it happen very quickly. comstock: we could welcome the uber economy to metro. >> do we need that many people in a prime location? we're looking at that as well.

on the fair collection side. there are opportunities where it makes more sense to have other resources in place. i will continue to do that. ms. comstock: i really appreciated. we present really good thoughts that the general manager has already put into this. maybe focus on those things first and bring the cost down. we can have a similar discussion on that when we eventually solve some of these other problems. i appreciate your taking that approach. thank you. the chairman: let me follow up on what my friend mr. connolly was saying. with regard to jurisdiction. i don't know if you are .ecessarily the best group

i don't know if it was the right decision. we have got to get the system in a place where you are not a had a hearing talking about the safety of this system. while it may be germane today i'm hopeful that in the very near future it will not be a discussion that even comes up. we talked about googler a little uber a little bit. i have staff members who are uber to get to worko w because they can't rely on metro. that has got to stop.

i want what knowledge your and certainly say thank you. there is no tougher job in local politics. acknowledgeowledg that. going to take before we fix the problem? this is my fourth either hearing a roundtable that we've had about a mass transit system that i don't ride. people usejority of here the federal government whether it is 50% to 60%. even if it is higher than that, we've got to get it right. out who is inre charge. is it a 16 member board?

is it the new general manager? is it the coalition of people that put forward the people that we sit on the board? who's is in charge? won't it? who owns it? so has to own the responsibility. that is what i'm getting too. who do we hold accountable for system that has deferred maintenance and is not safe? who is that? mr. evans: it is myself and paul. the chairman: you can't have two leaders. if paul makes a decision that the board doesn't agree with what happens? mr. evans: we haven't faced that it. this is a big problem.

it is taken for years to get here. deferred maintenance. as we look at this is going to happen where the board thinks one thing and paul is the expert thinks something else. so paul says that does he get fired? mr. evans: no. i would defer to the general manager who i believe has the expertise that some of us on the board do not have. the closedown is a good example. i turned to paul and say what you want to do? paul said shut it down. and everybody got on board. of 16 new board members. this is not the board of one year ago. i believe it is a better board that we've had a long time. we support the general manager and what he is doing. he's going to come back in six

weeks with a plan to fix this. i will address the blue line. he have to come up with a plan to fix this. it is like a bridge going into georgetown that is about to fall down. if we close it entirely new in six months. if we do half is good take me 18 months and $12 million. convenience versus safety versus time versus money. we as a region have to decide that. chairman: closing the blue line for six months is not an option. you understand me? that is not an option. mr. evans: but what we are doing now is also not acceptable. three hours a night and single tracking.

chairman: i went through and look to the traffic. we could close down the metro on the blue line at 10:00 at night work all through the night and headed back up by 5:00 the next morning. have a normal work. period. do more work on saturdays and sundays. the number of people you affect is infinitesimal compared to during the week. i am not going to be getting calls in north carolina about the metro. mr. connolly will. barbara will. understand that what we endured for 26 hours will be multiplied by six months.

it is just not an option. you said we. is it him or is it we? who is in charge. ? i want to the next person who is sitting here to be in a safe -- say that it is safe and get their asking for money that we have given them. you're saying that he can make the tough decisions and the board is not going to fire him. as you have looked at this system, how much deferred maintenance should have been done that was not done? >> i don't have the number of front of me but i think the

approach is part of the issue the way we have been trying to do it. chairman: how many jumper cables were replaced between the deaths that we had several years ago and the day we had to shut the system that? the numbers of the sleeves are 65%. we tend to do things around a particular issue and not do these things together. that was just one issue. that is not dealing with the cable is lying and moisture. that is where we have to come out this thing. chairman: why would you say that those assessments have not been done? when we have an unbelievable

we all came toy, a meeting. we were determined to get this fixed right away and get it done. and yet what i heard from your testimony earlier was that we're going to wait to do another test to figure out the safety issue. doing right now based on what happened three weeks ago. did we do, who did what do it poorly? what did we learn? of atat occur on the day mcpherson square.

we have already initiated a new team that goes out every day to look at the cables. they do the entire system and it takes a month for that. i'm not sure that is all we can do. it has to be part of this overall plan is says we're going to fix the tracks we are going to fix the cables and the drainage system, we will fix those things as we go out there rather than keep you coming back and doing it piecemeal. chairman: how do you respond to the criticism that there is a culture within the family that

does not really emphasize safety or service. is there such a culture? >> part of fixing a problem is recognizing that you have one. i will just say thank you for your candor and your honesty. thank you for your leadership on the board. i have a request for the two of you. if you find that their board members that are trying to exert their influence over the general manager mr. evans are you committed to at least letting either me or the making -- ranking member know that that is happening. i believe that. manager, if you

are getting undue political .nfluence from the board are you committed to let the ranking member and me know about this? in a certain point i won't be here any longer. the chairman: i want to thank each of you for your testimony. i want to recognize the ranking member for brief closing statement. mr. connolly: i want to thank you mr. chairman for your efforts on this issue. this is the national capital transit system. happened and we came up with a way of putting it which is that we have witnessed a maddeningly decade-long descent into mediocrity.

it has imbued the entire workforce. if it doesn't get done in the timeframe, it is something else's problem. customers are unhappy, so what? answer your question is not my job. it is everyone's concern within the workforce that everything is everybody's job at a certain level. especially when it comes to public safety. what worries me about this deterioration of the application . this is washington dc. this is the capital of the superpower. it is always going to be a target tragically for bad people wanting to do bad things.

we cannot allow the deterioration of our metro system to become the soft underbelly of any target attacks. lives everysands of day depend on that safety. after the tragic attacks in europe, what more do we need by way of warner? warning?t this is just as being anal-retentive. this is about the security of our country. find aoves all of us to swift, efficacious solution to

the problem we have identified today. german from north carolina for his indulgence. chairman: i want to thank each of you. we have a task ahead of us. that task is monumental. mr. evans you talked about the fact that when it was originally put in place it was the modern era of the jets. i am old enough to remember the -- jetsons. it is time to bring it back to a point of honor and a standard that not only your constituents this comstock's constituents and mr. connolly's can all be proud of it.

i'm afraid it is going to end in your portfolio to fix it. days, i wouldt 90 like an update on what has been done. what is going to happen in the next 90 days. i think it would be prudent if we had a 90 day update so we can look at this. long-term we make any decisions on whether to close or not close i would ask that we really gets an input from those who benefit from the system each and every day. business,s no further the committee stands adjourned.

to try to educate the people about what the problem is. ice i got a chance to speak was able to put on the record what the problem is. >> you've been talking about $20 billion over 10 years. is that just to get it to the state over pairs or does that include the expansion? >> some of his expansion. like the rosslyn tunnel.

i have a little chart that breaks it down. >> have feared you think it is to ask for a regional funding source? >> how realistic is it? it has to be done. it is realistic because it has to be done. without it we will not be able to run the system. it will be unreliable and it not be safe. the $300 million is very important in the short term. we are $150 million short. system we neede that money.

we're going into labor negotiations. we're going to have increased labor costs. all those collectively are going to cost us more money. i am not increasing fares. i am not cutting services. >> some would say you should address safety first. >> they go together. without the money i can do the safety. what i'm focused on his safety and reliability of the system. and the money we need to address that. and the way to do this fastest cheapest and safest way to do it is to close something down. nobody wants to do that. you start moving away from that any see what happens. it costs more money. that is the decision we have to make.

without that the system is not going to work. we took the path of least resistance five years ago. >> you had a democratic house that was in existence for four years. i don't see republican versus democrat even being an issue. it is nonpartisan. mica has been a big supporter of public transit. and he is a republican. i think we educated everybody about what we need.

>> to hope that if we're back your 12 months from now that we are talking about a different system? >> i hope we'll be talking about how we have moved along. undo the systemic issues here. you will see a change in the organization. will be perfect? no.

there will be a difference. >> the headlines going to be house republicans reject plea for money. what is your take away from this hearing? >> it is something i've seen with all the stakeholders. they understand the importance of the system to this region. we have to get it right. they are not saying this is a dumb idea. they're saying look we can't survive without this. let's make it work. >> there were a lot of technical issues raised today. there is a lingering concern among everyone in the room that these fires are going to keep happening until all those things are replaced. you share that concern? i have to look at the power

in the entire system. you can't just point to one issue. some of the issues we've had with these cables, it has to do with fraying cable rubbing against something. we can't just spend all the resources we have on sleeves. that is the plan. [laughter] >> do you have a timeline on completion? i know that as of the only thing. >> it is rolled out. >> thanks, guys. [indiscernible] announcer: here are some of the hearings we are covering tomorrow. at 10:00, e-house transportation

subcommittee on the electric grid. live coverage on c-span3 and c-span.org. later a hearing on using service dogs with military veterans. the subcommittee on national security begins at 2 p.m. eastern on c-span3. ♪ >> washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you read coming up thursday morning, pennsylvania congressman charles dent will discuss the ongoing budget debate in the legislative agenda, his role as cochair of the group on fiscal and military issues, the 2016 president of campaign, and a preview of the april 25 pennsylvania primary. then california democratic well asman judy chu, as

the fair day in court for kids ask. every vulnerable immigrant involved in the proceedings receives legal representation. affairshouse political correspondent will talk about the obamas administration programs visa changes in the aftermath of the paris and san bernardino attack. the getting live seven eastern, on c-span. hours ofas 48 nonfiction books and authors every weekend. and here are some programs to watch for this coming weekend. on saturday at 10 a.m. eastern, book tv is live from maryland's state capital for the annapolis book festival. the:30, chasing ghosts, cost and efficacy of local counterterrorism efforts. some a night at 9:00, founder of

,mily's list discusses her book the rise of women in american politics. which looks at the rise of women elected to public office. she is interviewed by congress woman maxine waters. councilman waters: if we gave women can ability i raising they could go on and raise the additional money they needed to win. we were like little political venture capitalists, in today's terms the kickstarter for women. and we stand for early money, like yeast, and the dough rise. we haven't doing that ever since. tv.org for the complete schedule. announcer: addressing allegations of sexual abuse by human peacekeepers in conflict zones around the world, the senate foreign relations committee held a hearing to look into the allegations come and what the u.s. is doing about the issue. they heard from a former u.n.

diplomat turned whistleblower and officials from the state department. this is two hours and 20 minutes. sen. corker: the committee will come to order. i want to thank both of the panels for being here, and for your service. we, as a courtesy, and i guess as protocol, the way these hearings go is that we have the government witnesses typically first. and then, we have other outside witnesses second. today, not to show any disrespect in any way to those

panelists who are going first, i wish the second panel going first. so that you can hear the testimony, especially because of its -- because of its nature. my staff generally prepares comments for me to make on the front and i generally, with a couple of alterations, stick to them. today, i want to be very brief and just say that, look, we understand the importance of the u.n.'s peacekeeping missions. we thank you for being here to tell us a little bit about some of the progress being made. but i think all of us understand the terrible, horrible things that peacekeepers are doing to the people they are supposed to be protecting. the sexual abuse, what they are rendering to the populations that are in this helpless situation is beyond belief.

and i think all of us on both sides of the aisle get very frustrated with the process of focus that takes place at the u.n. but the lack of results that occur, and again i understand you guys are working hard, working in an environment that i find less than satisfying on every level, whether it is the security council in keeping agreements intact, or this kind of thing. let me just make a statement. based on what i know, and maybe i do not know everything i should, if i knew right now that the u.n. peacekeeping mission was going to go into north chattanooga today, which is where my wife is, i would be on the first airplane out of here to go home and protect her from the u.n. peacekeepers, especially if they came from certain countries.

i'm just telling you, here i am as chairman of the foreign relations committee, and if i knew that the u.n. was sending peacekeepers into my neighborhood, i would leave here immediately. i would drop what i was doing, i would catch the next flight home. and i would go home and credit -- try to protect my family from the abuse they put forth on the very people they try to protect. and you think about that, that is in north chattanooga. think about some of these isolated places, where people are in camps, where young girls are subjected, young boys are subjected to sexual violence by people that we are paying, the united states of america is paying -- the largest contributor, and this is taking place. so look, i know you are here today to share with us some of the progress that is being made. this is not you doing this. i got it. this is not directed at you. but i can just tell you, i am disgusted, disgusted by the

reports. by the actions of the u.s. peacekeepers, that taxpayers are paying for. and i hope that through this hearing and other actions that we will somehow figure a way to reel this in. again, if i knew they were going to chattanooga, i would leave here immediately to protect my family. so with that being said, i look forward to this hearing. i want to thank our ranking member for his desire and cooperation in having this. i thank you for your service to our country. but i hope we as a nation in sure some way that the very people that are sent to protect people are not doing the dastardly, terrible things they're doing to populations that are very vulnerable. thank you again. i turn it over to the ranking member. sen. cardin: mr. chairman, thank

you for your passion on this issue. it is not the first time we have dealt with problems such as this. this committee has taken i think the right position on trafficking persons, or the u.s. leadership has been instrumental in changing attitudes in so many places of the world where young people are trafficked for sex and abuses. this committee came in very strong in oversight to make sure the integrity and what we do it evaluating the progress on trafficking is not compromised by politics. and when you look at the united nations, we will not tolerate the united nations, under the auspices of the united nations, perpetrating the violence against young people. against anyone. so i agree with you completely. i first want to underscore the importance of the u.n. peacekeeping missions. 120,000 military and police

personnel, overwhelming numbers performing professional responsibilities in the appropriate way. with commitment and honor, protecting the vulnerable citizens from the south sudan to the golan heights. 16 missions around the world, four continents. the ambassador pointed out that the u.s. not only has a direct security entrance in the peacekeeping missions, and we contribute as the chairman pointed out to these missions at a greater percentage than any other country the world, but the value is for the u.s. i think ambassador power pointed out 8-1 savings to u.s. taxpayers to be able to use the international united nations peacekeepers rather than the united states having to fulfill that function. so there is certainly a very important benefits to the peacekeeping missions. and the overwhelming majority of those who are in there doing the work are doing it properly.

but the sexual abuse by u.n. peacekeepers must end. must end. those who are perpetrators need to be held accountable. there can be no exception to this. zero tolerance. and i must tell you, mr. chairman, you are right to be outraged. because we are talking about young children, who are very vulnerable, who are poor, who have been subject to the most difficult lifestyles, being enticed by food or money to do horrible things, under the united nations. that cannot continue. so, there has to be accountability here. and the thing that gets chairman corker and me so concerned are the reports that, at least initially within the united nations, the response was fragmented and bureaucratic.

that it was not treated with the seriousness that it should have been treated. that is hard for us to understand. the entity that is supposed to bring world peace and stability condoning, through their inactions, those activities. so the past security council resolution, last march, i read it. it looks like an appropriate response. will it be enforced? will we be prepared, in fact, to repatriate all of the uniform personnel from countries that are not doing what they need to do? in training the personnel before they are in the theater to deal with sexual abuse issues, holding those who violate accountable, including prison time.

or if not, they should not be part of the u.n. peacekeeping mission. are we prepared to implement that? i say that because, mr. chairman, there are shortages of personnel. there are more countries now participating in the missions, including those from developing countries, that may not have the same access to training. so, will the united nations compromise the safety of young people, in order to meet the numbers in the peacekeeping mission? if they do, the chairman and i are going to do everything we can to make sure they do not have the resources to do that. we are not going to support that type of activity. so, there can be zero tolerance. and i really do look forward to the discussion we are going to have with our two panels today. and i do know that the people there in front of us are working every day to make sure that the united states leadership makes it clear that we will not allow, tolerate that type of conduct.

and we will demand that particularly under the u.n. banner that there be total accountability. and no tolerance for this type of activity. sen. corker: thank you, senator cardin. i very much appreciate your service here, too. very much. our first witness is the honorable ambassador isabel coleman. u.s. representatives for reform. our second business is the honorable tracey jacobson. principal deputy assistant secretary of state, organizational affairs. our third witness is major general michael rothstein. did i pronounce that correctly? deputy assistant secretary for the state department of bureau , political, and military affairs. again, we thank you all for the service to the country. i think all of you know that without objection your written testimony will be entered into

the record. if you could summarize in five minutes, i would say that i know you all are very busy. to the extent that you can hear the testimony of the second panel, it might be beneficial to you. but we thank you here now, and if you could to start in the order that i introduce you. i would appreciate it. thank you for taking the time to be with us today. isobel: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you ranking member cardin and distinguished members of the committee for inviting me to testify today on the urgent and shameful issue of sexual exploitation and abuse by u.n. peacekeepers. earlier this month, i had the opportunity to travel with ambassador power to the central african republic to witness the peaceful transfer of power to the country's newly-elected president. in many ways, the trip underscored both the best, and the very worst, of u.n. peacekeeping. the presence of u.n.

peacekeepers has been critical in stanching the ethnic violence that has led to the deaths of of thousands of people and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. but as we all know, minusca has troops have also been implicated in horrible sexual abuse. preying on the very people they have been sent to protect. during my time, ambassador power opportunity to travel and meet with the families of victims. their descriptions of the violence their loved ones have suffered at the hands of u.n. peacekeepers were really powerful personal accounts that, for me, cut through all the handwringing and, frankly, the

excuses about why this scourge has continued to persist for just too long. sexual exploitation and abuse by u.n. peacekeepers is not a new problem. it has plagued missions from bosnia to haiti, to the democratic republic of the congo to the central african republic. and let me read you just a short passage from an internal u.n. report documenting sexual abuse among peacekeepers. some girls, i am quoting, "have talked of rape disguised as prostitution, in which they said they were raped and given money or food afterwards, to give the rape the appearance of a consensual transaction." these words, i'm sorry to say, come from the zeid report, in 2005. we know from the scope of current allegations now, more than a decade later, these very same offenses are still occurring. and despite years of u.n. leaders insisting on zero

"zero tolerance," a culture of impunity has been allowed to fester. when ambassador power asked me last year to lead our mission's efforts to establish a new paradigm for really tackling this scourge, it was clear that an unacceptable lack of transparency and accountability were at the heart of the issue. yes, the u.n. published an annual report tallying the numbers and types of abuses by mission, by peacekeepers. but under pressure from the roop-contributing countries themselves, it withheld the nationality of alleged perpetrators. that made it difficult for member states to take collective action on tracking the status of investigations, and the outcome of disciplinary action to hold perpetrators to account. and in short, without

transparency, real accountability was at best, inconsistent. and this, finally, is changing. and senator, i share your outrage on this. to look back over so many years of words, rhetoric that has not resulted in true accountability is simply unacceptable. last year, usun led negotiations in the general assembly for a breakthroughs a finally on transparency, gaining consensus among member states to support the secretary general in his intent to name countries in his annual report. those countries with allegations against them, a long-overdue step. and as of early march this year, the u.n. is now reporting on its website in real time, along with credible allegations and the

nationality of the alleged perpetrators. and with this information, we are pursuing a comprehensive approach to track individual cases. and follow up with the appropriate authorities. in march, usun brought the issue of the security council, which adopted u.n. security council 2272 - another significant step forward for accountability. the resolution endorses the secretary generals decision to repatriate these units that have demonstrated a pattern of abuse. which is a clear indication of insufficient command and control. and the secretary general is empowered to repatriate all troops from a mission from a a particularoop or country. if not taking the appropriate steps to investigate allegations of personnel or not being held accountable. our goal is to see that resolution implemented as a powerful.

again infringing on the culture of impunity that has persisted for too long. the other part of the strategy is to increase the overall supply of peacekeepers. such that when military units or contingents are repatriated, there are others are bel-trained and vetted to able to deploy quickly to take their place. the u.n. has come a long way and in responding to this scourge of sexual abuse. with strong support from the united states, it has built up the investigative capabilities, increased trading of troops, and limited greater community outreach to increase awareness about sexual abuse. executed in of these for offenders, and is clearly given the shocking scale and gravity of the sexual abuse incidents being reported from the central african republic and other missions, these actions by themselves are not sufficient to address the crisis. the un's recent commitment to

greater transparency and accountability must, it absolutely must result in a long-overdue sea change that ends impunity. our work is not done. we continue to make it our highest priority both in new york and bilaterally to see perpetrators held to account and sorely lacking integrity restored to peacekeeping. thank you. sen. corker: thank you. stacey: mr. chairman, i am honored to be here with you today to talk about this horrific issue that demands urgent, meaningful, and sustained action. sexual exploitation and abuse by u.n. peacekeepers is a cancer that demands the most comprehensive treatment. and our well justified collective outrage is only useful if it is paired with action. i begin by noting the u.s. has long been a vocal advocate of increased transparency and accountability as it relates to sexual exportation and abuse by

peacekeepers. we are pleased that this push for transparency is starting to find its first traction. and while it is clear as you fallen far short of the mark. certain recent actions taken by the secretary-general reflect the new seriousness and create important new avenues for member state engagement. somef these steps include new and improved reporting systems for the community, their creation of a media response team to collect and secure evidence for use in investigations, withholding of payments to troops and police -contributing missions for their staff that have been sent home under allegations of misconduct. and the creation of a task force onall peacekeeping missions all sexual as flotation and abuse, i will also note that in february the secretary-general

to the unprecedented step of sending home an entire contingent from the democratic republic of congo who had been working in central african republic, based on credible allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse. this is the first time that the secretary-general had taken such a step, it sets an important precedent and we believe it sends an important signal to other troop and police contributing countries. we particularly welcome the secretary-general's action to identify the nationality of those uniformed personnel accused of sexual abuse. including, including this information online and in real time. troop and police contributing countries have the ultimate responsibility for the discipline of their personnel. and by providing this information publicly, the u.n. can motivate these countries to do much better. it also allows member states to track performance, to recognize serious patterns of abuse, and to use diplomatic weight to urge

the u.n. to repatriate units that have a systemic pattern of misconduct, and to ban countries from peacekeeping where appropriate. this new level of information is has also allowed us to direct our bilateral engagement where it is most needed. last month, we launched an effort to reach out to every country on the u.n. list, to a accomplishevels, to three goals. first, make sure they were aware of the report, and the allegations concerning the troops. second, to demand credible action in terms of investigation and holding those responsible to account, including through prosecution. when appropriate, where crimes have been committed. and thirdly, to the defined as areas where the u.s. might provide capacity building assistance to better investigate and prosecute crimes involving sexual exploitation and abuse. i would also note that the secretary-general's report

included allegations against civilian persons of the u.n. identified different agencies, and based on that information we are following up directly with those agencies to make sure they take all necessary actions. mr. chairman, any instance of sexual exploitation and abuse does very real damage to the credibility of the institution of peacekeeping. a tool that has never been more important for global peace and security, one in which i wish the united states relies to stabilize conflict that could spiral out of control. last year the president hosted the leaders' summit on peacekeeping. and issued a new memorandum reaffirming our strong support for u.n. peace operations to modernize these operations. these efforts are well-timed to bolster action on sexual exploitation and abuse. for example, new commitments and the presidents summit last

year included 40,000 troops and police. and this should send a message to these countries that piece peacekeeping is no longer a seller's market. new capacities should allow the u.n. to prioritize better performing troops for deployment, and to replace replace contingents potentially withdrawn for misconduct. my colleagues are well-placed to speak specifically to issues of the reforms we have pursued at the u.n. and the training that we provide, and the capacity that we provide to peacekeeping troops in the field. i will conclude by saying that by the very mandate, the vast majority of u.n. peacekeeping troops are serving under a mandate to protect civilians under threat of physical violence. exploiting or abusing these same vulnerable people is appalling and and unconscionable breach of trust, and we greatly appreciate this committee's

attention to the issue. and share your outrage at what has occurred. sen. corker: thank you. general? gen. rothstein: good afternoon. thank you for letting me speak today. like my colleagues, i am very deeply troubled by what brings us here today, and the things we have to discuss about these instances. among my duties at the state department, i am responsible for providing executive leadership for the global peace operations initiative. toill take a few minutes talk about sexual exportation and abuse. gpoi is our flagship security assistance program. it focuses on building capacity for other countries to deploy other missions. for the most part, it is a training mission, although we

also focus on building self-sufficiency, training for themselves. an important to note, one of our key program objectives is to promote the role of women and to promote better gender integration into their operations. gpoi has been very successful at helping other countries step up to their responsibilities for security. it also allows us to focus our military and other priorities besides peacekeeping. to date, the program has facilitated the deployment of more than 200,000 personnel to 29 different operations around the world. and today, gpoi partners, although they only comprise 40% of the intruding countries, well punch well above their weight class by providing more than 70% of the troops performing of mission street through our diplomatic engagement of as my

colleague mentioned earlier, we are working to expand the base on the number of countries the number of troops available for the u.n. to support these missions. and i would at a what my colleague said, we think this will help by having more troops out there raise the standard only for mission performance, but also for conduct and discipline. now let me be clear for the record. i think i share the sentiment of everyone in here. that each and every instance of sexual exploitation and abuse by any peacekeeper is actually on acceptable. unacceptable. not only for the harm it causes directly, but also fundamentally undermines the mission and legitimacy of what is trying to occur. now, gpoi is very deliberate and restructured to address exportation and abuse. in execution, we directed all permit individual unit training, it has elements of academics and things that go against built into the training. we start in the classroom, move on to scenario-based training, and then we move on to the exercise-related training, about

the individual unit and leader levels. we pay particular attention to training leaders. because we are keenly aware of the very important role that leadership plays, and how the significant positive impact of effective leadership can have in range once they are down mission. gpoi is also most women and integration. we specifically seek out women because we understand the positive impact that can have. over the past five years, the 50 active countries that are our partners, they have nearly doubled the number of women for you in peacekeeping. and to give you a point of contrast, 71 countries that are not gpoi partners and do not participate, they have had a decrease of 60% of the ones being deployed. i'm very comfortable that gpoi

is having a positive impact in this area and that influence. now, while we are proud of the effort to address the issue, and i do believe we are shipping the outcome positively, no amount of training, no integration is a panacea. as we know there are far too many serious incidents that still occur. my colleagues, i'm hopeful that recent policy changes to promote transparency will help. they have to continue to follow through. and if the gpoi partner fails to follow up on those allegations, failing to take responsibility in the jurisprudence system, we toe to be ready as a nation consider suspending security assistance. we have to take a deliberate decision and how we do that. in the end, well-trained and well disciplined and well-equipped units, they are the very building blocks to effective peacekeeping. and while there are many success stories out there, we are well

aware of the track record is not perfect by any means. and so, whether it is indirectly or directly, through ongoing training, through expanding the role of women, we remain committed to improvement overseas with the u.n. and our partner countries. to rid us of the scourge of sexual exploitation and abuse. thank you for your time. i stand by for your questions. senator corker: we thank you for the testimony. look, my guess is that you all are as upset as we are. you work in an organization, that whether it is at state, certainly at the u.n. making something happen. it is almost impossible. and my sense is that you do probably welcome my hearing like this to highlight the problems that exist. my understanding is that the level of violence, sexual abuse,

the kinds of things are happening to vulnerable people that we are supposed to be protecting, is actually much higher than reported. because the very people out there, "protecting" populations are also protecting in many cases protecting the human rights workers who may be reporting this. with that assumption, ambassador thatan, be appropriate -- reporting levels are far lower than they otherwise would be? people out in the field, peacekeeping folks are there to protect them, too. and there are concerns about the in the field, making reports. isobel: thank you for the question, senator. i think you're absolutely correct to make the assumption that levels of reporting are below what they actually are. i think it is for a variety of reasons.

i think that what we are seeing in the central african republic, with a lot of the allegations coming to light now, in particular parts of the country, are because the security situation is improving. and we are now able to send more people out to some of these remote areas, where you have had a single country contingent, which in and of itself is a risk factor, which the u.n. is now recognizing, that in remote areas where we should not have single country contingents. i think you are seeing an improvement in security, allowing people in the community to feel more safe and comfortable in coming forward to report abuses. and what i can tell you mr. chairman, in the coming months, i think we're going to see more allegations coming to light. i don't think we have nearly seen the end of this problem. as the u.n. shines a spotlight on this issue, and we are going to see more allegations, not fewer.

senator corker: which countries are the ones that are the worst, name them. isobel: i wish i could say that this is just a couple of countries. but what we are seeing is that it runs the full gamut of countries, from countries with seemingly very well-trained and equipped, disciplined troops. the french forces have been named. two countries, burundi and the , the drcs, gabon troops themselves. the moroccans, there are many , many countries that have these allegations. so i cannot point a finger at one being particularly bad. we do know that in the central african republic, the contingents that have been repatriated, where troops from the republic of congo and the democratic republic of congo and they were repatriated

because there was -- corker: i apologize. i have to give things then within a certain time. i have a whole list of countries here. that it is beyond belief that some of them -- germany? other countries, let me ask you this, if i can ask some personal questions, have you all had kids? do you have a family? u.n.u know you and security, u.n. peacekeeping mission was going to your neighborhood right now, would you not have the same response i had, that you would rush home to protect your family from the peacekeepers? would that be your response? honestly, would you please tell me? isobel: mr. chairman, i have five kids. and when i was preparing for the testimontoday, last night, and

i had to talk with my daughters about what i was doing and what i would be talking about, it was a very difficult conversation. what i can also tell you is that, having just recently returned from the central african republic, i'm so thankful that my children are being raised in the united states. and in an environment where rule of law is primary. and in the central african republic, i met people who are the victims of sexual exploitation and abuse. their families have suffered it directly. and i asked them that question, would you prefer that there are no peacekeepers here? and i did not know what the answer would be. ambassador power and i sat with them together. would you prefer, given what you have experienced on the peacekeepers returned home? all of them, they all said no. what we want is accountability

and we want justice to be served. senator corker: let me ask you this, what is wrong with the secretary-general of the u.n.? this report, the one that you referred to, it is 10 years old. what is wrong with him? what is wrong with him? i mean, if he does so inept that he cannot call the body like this to keep this from happening over and over again? and we are just now beginning to put processes in place, what is wrong with him? isobel: i would say those processes have been put in place coming out of that a decade ago, but they have not been put in place. senator corker: that is my point. how do we put up with such inept leadership at the united nations? how do we do that? isobel: i do not think it is

ineptitude. i think it is a reluctance to take on the opposition on troop-exhibiting countries that do not want to deal with this on a transparent way -- senator corker: we have the law here called the leahy act that says when we know this, we withhold money. have we withheld money? i cannot gived: you an example of where we have withheld money for these things. the good news is, up until recently, we do not have the kind of visibility that we needed to be a will to pursue these things. now certainly with the leahy law, we do not go forward with doing security assistance anymore. and that is out there. all units that we train already go through that

training. any training that we have done has been vetted through the leahy process. i think what is good about what i think weg now, would all agree that to happen sooner, but we are now getting more information coming through from the u.n. that we do not have access to before. and that will allow us to do it better than we have done before. senator corker: let me just, we make it was second round with you all, but i look at the list of countries that are violators. most of them are, many of them limited this way, they receive aid from the u.s. in other forms. i do not understand why we continue to send money to countries outside of the u.n. that allow this type of abuse to take place. so, i do not think we are using the leverage that we have. i think we should be withholding payments to the u.n., until this ends, or doing some level of reduction. but it does not seem to me -- it seems to me that this is not that important to the u.n. or they went done much more

about it over the last 10 years. -- or they would have done much more about it over the last 10 years. by the way, the people you talk to, i would say they are somewhat fearful to say they don't want to be there, with officials in your presence. but i just don't think the united states is using the atelers that we have, not your level but other levels, we're not stopping this. i think the u.n. is in great jeopardy of building enough critical mass around here, where severe penalties should be taken against them, with withholding of funds from them because of their ineptness, their lack of concern, their lack of care.

after 10 years, to continue to allow this to occur, i hope that actions -- i plan to be part of actions taken against them. because it is obviously something that is not important to them. otherwise, this could've been stopped a long time ago. ineptness, lack of a moral compass, lack of concern for vulnerable people. senator cardin? senator cardin: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to first thank you all. and i mean that. this is not easy work. and we appreciate your commitment and passion to get this right, on behalf of global vulnerable people. thank you for your commitment. i do acknowledge the fact that we do have more information than we had a year or two ago. my staff has given me a copy of what is on the u.n. webpage, on those who have been accused

of sexual abuse. looks like approximately, since the beginning of 2015, i'm rounding, but it could be 90 , somewhere that range, episodes involving the same number of victims. and of all those cases, i went through it quickly, only four have been finalized with any jail time. and i also point out what the chairman said, that these are the reported cases. we know that in some countries, the seriousness of this issue, even though it is globally acknowledged of being the worst types of conduct, but in some governments and some countries, it is not considered a serious issue.

and that means that the reporting is going to be spotty in some of the missions. and then the pressure that is on the command structure has always been there, we saw that in the u.s. command structure when we were dealing with trafficking of military facilities located in other countries not participating. and took us a while before we could change the culture. and we know that is also a problem. but my specific question to you is, it is one thing to get the secretary-general to withdraw the mission, if they do not do certain things. and i am all for that. the two sections that i see in the united security council resolution 2272, which we just passed last month. the chairman is right, this has been going on for a long time. and we finally got a un security council resolution passed last month. section 4 deals with gathering evidence, but most of that section deals with, rightly so, how you deal with victims and making sure the mission is well-trained, etc.

and then, section 9 says it take all member states to concrete steps in combating impunity for sexual exportation. exploitation. what are we doing? what is the united states, our leadership doing to make sure that those who have perpetrated these horrible acts are going to end up in jail? tracey: thank you for your question, senator. it is a very important topic. i think you hit on something key here. we have talked about what the u.n. is or is not doing. but the crux of the matter is what are the police contribute ing countries doing to hold those perpetrated these crimes accountable? based on the new reporting we have of nationalities, we finally have a tool that allows us to go to those countries, to see what they are doing, to urge them to do better.

and i think you mentioned the four cases from last year that have gone through the whole process. there are at least another 20, where trials are occurring now. 20 trials in the democratic republic of congo. that that government is conducting against peacekeepers who have been accused of this. also, the republic of south africa has an on-site court-martial that is going on right now. so, we're starting to see the actions taken, that these countries now know that we know what they're doing. we know where the troops are coming from. and that we are going to continue to shine a spotlight on the issue. we sent a mission just last month, this was the subject of high-level discussion with our ambassadors who were all back here in washington last month for the conference. and we have been very clear with countries that we have gone out that this is not just one

sort of discussion. that we're going to be coming back regularly to determine what they're doing and holding their feet to the fire. senator cardin: let me just underscore the point of the chairman made. i support peacekeeping. a lot of u.s. taxpayer money goes into it. i have a right, as a senator, to know that section 9 of the un security council resolution is being enforced. i do not believe that the countries that have people who have perpetrating this, some of the countries will follow through. with this requirement of combating impunity, making sure that the perpetrators are held accountable and are serving prison time. so, what are you going to do to provide me with information on how we are doing and every one of these countries that have perpetrators, as to how their

system of justice is handling this, acceptable to international standards? tracey: senator, it is very important that we continue to follow up with each of these countries in a repeated way. we are doing that, happy to provide you at any time with the results of our conversations -- senator cardin: i want to be a little more proactive. i want to know what you plan to do, working with the members of congress, to keep us informed in a timely way, as to how every country that sends peacekeepers to countries, the systems that they have employed to deal with those who are perpetrated these type of acts -- i want to make sure that no one is being left -- first of all, i don't think we have enough. i do not think -- i think we had be more proactive. the united states, making sure that those were victimized have an opportunity to come forward.

i think we have to be more direct with the political structure within the united nations to make sure that every country, perpetrators are identified, so that we have by country what is happening. and that we follow every particular case. because, quite frankly, i do not have confidence in their system to provide justice. international justice, not u.s. justice. and i think the more transparency you can put into this, the more important it is. i want you to come back to me, this committee, and tell me what we are going to be receiving on a regular basis, as to what is happening in every one of these countries. in holding the perpetrators accountable, and how those trials are going forward, and whether in fact you can say with confidence that they have taken steps to prevent impunity for those who have committed these crimes. will you do that? tracey: yes, senator. thank you. in fact, we have already certain

a certain exercise to do just this. there is a whole team of people behind me engaged on this everyday. we are putting together essentially, what we want to do -- combine the new transparency we are getting on the u.n. with our own information that we get from our embassies in the field. we are preparing what we call a data haul, but it is an actual effort to go out to every country that hosts a peacekeeping mission to answer a series of questions based on our own observations, engagement, our own analysis, so that we can bring that information back to washington and do exactly what you say. to make a determination about whether the countries are doing the right thing or not. senator cardin: so, senator corker and i, we talked about this. the leahy rule, which i support, giveates that we do not aid to countries that do not live up to international

standards. holding them accountable for these types of atrocities would not be contrary to international norm. you will have to help us draft the appropriate type of oversight to make sure that the countries understand that they must act to prevent impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes. understood? tracey: yes, senator. sen. cardin: otherwise, we will draft. you may not like the way we drafted. i will just warn you. tracey: understood. we are working in the appropriation language, which does require the kind of certification you are describing. and we are looking forward to working with you to put that information together. sen. cardin: thank you. sen. corker: senator isakson? sen. isakson: i appreciate you and the ranking member focusing on this. commentsreciate your

to the u.n. regarding transparency. you know, putting in a year-end report, how many violations of rape against women, not much transparency. and putting it on the website is good, but a lot of victims were ould not know a website if they saw one. they are in a remote part of the world. i want to echo what senator cardin and corker have said. holding these people accountable in some way, if not the least by withholding funds until they comply with human rights. but here is the question. senator corker and i went to darfur, one of the many things i learned is that rape is a military tactic in africa. it is not a violation. they teach it. senator corker: that is right. senator isakson: when we went to darfur, we do not see a man younger than 12 or older than

72. they had all fled. the women had fled. they had weathered and in due endured much pain. they look like they were that old. the army that came in raped the women to break the family. the son is conscripted to the family. this is an ongoing practice. i am not just speaking of africa. but it is one place i know where it takes place. and unless there was a significant consequence of the united states funds, and this may address your organization we are just in the wind. the wind. these people are talking to us. i want to make that -- that was not a question, more of a statement -- which brings me to the question? general, is there any burden on countries, any status regarding accountability to which those peacekeeping troops will be, in the event they create a

felony or a crime? general: thanks for the question. i will have to defer. i know there is a memorandum between the country and those countries that go to a mission and the country they're working in. but i do not know the details of that, to be able to unwrap that further for you. i don't know if i could turn it over to you, ambassador? isobel: there is a memorandum of understanding, and a model that is negotiated every three years. that negotiation is coming up in 2017. and strengthening the provision to be very explicit and incredibly direct on sexual expectation and abuse is one of my goals for the upcoming negotiation. off of that model, there are specific mou specifics that are negotiated between the country and the u.n. what i can tell you center is

that this is not a problem at its core of lack of words on paper. this is a problem of political will. and it is a problem that has persisted for too long, where words on paper have been ignored. words on paper have been disregarded. so, even within the existing mous, the tccs have not abided by that. , we will not tolerate that going forward. senator isakson: as long as these troops, many using sexual violence as a tool of war, if deployed as a peacekeeper if they are known -- however, if all of a sudden because of the initiative the u.s. takes, and becauseace-loving take we start holding all people accountable, will start serving punishment and time for rape and violence against women or whatever it might be, the world d will get out really fast. the u.s. is the best at making

agreements, putting words on paper. but not the very best at putting those words to working light. fe. so, my point is that if we could get to some sort of status of forces agreement between countries that supply troops and the u.n., requiring the agreement between them and the country they are deployed in, having a concrete, not you must establish a force in 90 days, but that you will be liable and punished for rape, murder, or whatever capital felonies we want to include in there, the most egregious of which, and then do an example of it, that withholding money are the two things that will get these guy'' attention. the rest of them, we don't have anyone's attention right now. not whatsoever. and it is a frightening thing. and i think that the gpoi, which is an agency, which is a vision of the state department, right?

general: yes, sir. that is a department under my leadership. sen. isaacson: i would hope you would work with the trade part of the u.s., working if you could fight violence against women with the agreements we make in commerce. senator coons and i just enforce domestice markets for united states chicken. the terms of the african growth and opportunity act, the trade agreement between the countries. people do not like rape or violence, they sure do like like to eat. and they like to have commerce and trade. if you predicate participant in those things, with them being committed to ending violence against women and sexual violence as a practice, them way can start going a long towards making something happen. that is the kind of leverage that really makes a difference. i am not belittling the annual report or the website. but i'm telling you it is one thing to tell names on a website, another thing say you cannot trade anymore.

we have gotten countries in africa to change labor laws in order to get in compliance. we had to start importing chickens. it seems to me that the state department should leverage some of the benefits we do on a daily basis with countries around the world who may provide peacekeepers, see where you could not tie the two together. then all of a sudden, you have a big stick and some of his country. others, you ain't got nothing. pardon my english. so i would just suggest that that would be one way to make an economic impact in terms of better behavior from some of these countries. thank you, mr. chairman. senator corker: thank you. one before going to senator coons, what kind of political resistance exist to keep soldiers from raping and abusing young girls and young boys? what kind of resistance do you face at this united nations body? body.

>> the resistance mr. chairman control oring up any jurisdiction with respect to how issues of conduct and disciplined our handle -- conduct and discipline are handled. they have resisted our efforts to increase transparency on these issues. out of fear that it would dishonor their troops. it would dishonor peacekeeping. what i can tell you is the dishonor and what i say to them, the dishonor is not being transparent, the dishonor is and not being processed -- not prosecuting credible allegations -- two -- what you're