at the closed deposition i expressed grave concerns about the degradation of the foreign service over the past few years and the failure of state department leadership to push back as foreign and corrupt interests apparently hijacked our ukraine policy. i remain disappointed that the department's leadership and others have declined to acknowledge that the attacks against me and others are dangerously wrong. this is about far, far more than me or a couple of individuals. as foreign service professionals are being denigrated and undermined the institution is also being degraded. this will soon cause real harm if it hasn't already. the state department as a tool of foreign policy often doesn't get the same kind of attention or even respect as the military might of the pentagon. but we are, as they say, the pointy end of the spear. if we lose our edge, the u.s. will inevitably have to use other tools even more than it does today. those other tools are blunter, more expensive, and not universally effective. moreover, the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as the policy

at the closed deposition, i expressed grave concerns about the degradation of the foreign service over the past few years and the fall yur of state department leadership to push back as foreign and corrupt interests hijack our policy. and other that's have declined to acknowledge that the attacks against me and others are dang rougsly wrong. this is about far far more than me or a couple of individuals. as foreign service professionals are being denigrated the institution will also be denigrated. the state department has a tool of fornls policy and does not often get the same attention or respect as the military might of the pentagon. we are the pointy end of the spear. if we lose our edge, the u.s. will inevitably have to use other tools even more than it does today. those other tools are blunter, more expensive, and not y univers universally effective. more over the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as the policy process is visibly unraveling. positions are going unfilled and officers ponder an uncertain future. the crisis proved from the impact on individuals t

your questions at the close deposition i expressed grave concerns about the degradation of the foreign service over the past few years and the failure of state department leadership to push back as foreign and corrupt interests apparently hijacked our ukraine policy i remain disappointed that the department's leadership and others have declined to acknowledge that the attacks against me and others are dangerously wrong this is about form far far more than me or a couple of individuals as foreign service professionals are being denigrated and undermined the institution is also being degraded this will soon cause real harm if it hasn't already the state department as a tool of foreign policy often doesn't get the same kind of attention or even respect as the military might of the pentagon but we are as they say the pointy end of the spear if we lose our edge the u.s. will inevitably have to use other tools even more than it does today and those other tools are blunter more expensive and not universally effective moreover the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as the policy p

>> i think it's important to have a nonpartisan career in the foreign service office. service, i should say. because what we do is inherently nonpartisan. it is about our national security interest. it's not about what is good for a particular party at a particular time. it has to be about the greater interest of our security. frankly, what is an increasingly dangerous world. >> could you briefly describe for us what brought u.s. policies you have sought to advance in your 33 years of service, and specifically in post-soviet states like ukraine? >> that's a broad question. certainly in my time in russia, armenia, kyrgyzstan, all of these countries are very different, as is ukraine. i think that establishing positive constructive relations to the extent that we can with those countries is really important. and that -- there are three basic areas. one is security, the second is economic, and the third is political. working all the sub issues your colleague mentioned many of then ukraine, as well. >> thank you for your service. i yield to the chairman. >> dr. when struck?

i expressed grave concerns about the degradation of the foreign service over the past few years. nd the failure. a state department leadership to push back as foreign and corrupt interests. apparently hi jack our ukraine policy. i remain disappointed that the department's leadership and others have declined to acknowledge that the attacks against me and others are dangerously wrong. this is about form far far more the me or couple of individuals. professionals are being generated and undermined. the institution is also being degraded. this will soon cause real harm if it hasn't already. the state department as a tool of foreign policy often doesn't get the same kind of attention or you can respect as the military might of the pentagon. the pointy end of the spear if we lose our edge. the us will inevitably have to use other tools even more than it does today. and those other tools are blunter. and not universally. attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as the policy process is visibly unraveling. leadership vacancies going filled and senior and mid-level officers

for several decades stated that from the earliest days of her career in the foreign service she was excellent serious committed i certainly remember her being one of those people who seemed to be destined for greater things. her successor as acting chief of mission in ukraine a baster bill taylor described her as very frank she was very direct she made points very clearly and she was indeed tough on corruption and she named names and that sometimes is controversial out but out there but she's a strong person and made those charges in her time in kiev and bassy of a lot of it was tough on corruption too tough on corruption for some and a principled stance made her enemies as george can't told this committee on wednesday you can't promote principled anti corruption action without pissing off corrupt people and mastery of on of each did not just piss off corrupt ukrainians like the corrupt former prosecutor general and co but also certain americans like rudy giuliani donald trump's personal attorney and 2 individuals now indicted who worked with him eager for him and live part us s

all of us love. >> if you watch today was testimony, you heard what service means to a career foreign service officer. >> we are people who repeatedly uproot our lives and sometimes risk our lives for this country. this is more than me or a couple of service individuals. the institution is also being degraded. this will soon cause real harm if it hasn't already. >> that part right there was too much for our own chuck rosenberg. he's taken the oath more than once as a u.s. attorney at the department of justice and the fbi. so he took it personally today that ambassador yovanovitch who was trolled and attacked by her commander and chief has received no air support from her boss, the secretary of state. >> secretary of state is mike pompeii oo. like any leader i think he has three obligations. first the public, the american people, second to the mission of ohis agency and third, just as important to the men and women who serve in the agency. his silence is deafening. it's an act of abject cowards. i'm astonished someone who went to west point and an army officer does not have the spine to stand

career foreign service office big or service i should say because. what we do in is inherently nonpartisan is about our national security interests it's not about what is good for a particular party at a particular time it has to be about the greater interests of our security in frankly what is an increasingly dangerous world and could you briefly describe for us what broad u.s. policies you have sought to advance in your 33 years of service and specifically in poll soviet states like ukraine. well that's a broad question but i think that certainly in my time in russia armenia kyrgyzstan all of these countries are very different as is ukraine and but i think that establishing positive constructive relations to the extent that we can with with with those countries is is really important and that you know i mean there are 3 basic areas one is security the 2nd is economic and 3rd is political and so working all the same issues your colleague mentioned many of them. you know we certainly do that in ukraine as well thank you for your service are you to th

seems, that somehow a demonstration of personality loyalty to a political agenda from a career foreign serviceomehow be part of her or his job, is outside the bounds of what we've understood our diplomacy to be. nobody's being sentimental or naive about the nature of foreign policy. foreign policy has its political instincts. one of jim baker's -- one of the great secretaries of state in american history, he used to say, if you don't understand the politics of the nation you're dealing with, you can't be an effective diplomat, you can't have an effective foreign policy. that's a very different thing from asking for personal oaths, almost a test from that sense, in that sense. one of the things that evan and walter and i were trying to say in this piece is, it wasn't that along ago that you had a core of people who were not always right, self-evidently, but who did in fact have a fealty not to a particular president but to a set of ideas, to the constitution, to the notion that we should project freedom as opposed to catering to terratyr first during the second world war, and then during the co

at the closed deposition, i expressed grave concerns about the degradation of the foreign service over the past few years and the failure of state department leadership to push back as foreign and corrupt interests apparently hijacked our ukraine policy. i remain disappointed that the department's leadership and others have declined to acknowledge that the attacks against me and others are dangerously wrong. this is about far far more than me or a couple of individuals. as foreign service professionals are being denigrated and undermined the institution is also being degraded. this will soon cause real harm if it hasn't already. the state department as a tool of foreign policy often doesn't get the same kind of attention or even respect as the military might of the pentagon. but we are, as they say, the pointy end of the spear. if we lose our edge, the u.s. will inevitably have to use other tools even more than it does today. and those other tools are blunter, more expensive, and not universally effective. moreover, the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as the pol

at the closed deposition i expressed grave concerns about the degradation of the foreign service over the past few years and the failure of state department leadership to push back as foreign and corrupt interests papparently hijacked our ukraine policy. i remain disappointed that the leadership of others have declined knowledge the attacks against me and others are dangerously wrong. this is about far, far more than me or a couple of individuals. as foreign service professionals are being denigrated and undermined, the institution is also being degraded. this will soon cause real harm if it hasn't already. the state department as a tool of foreign policy often doesn't get the same kind of attention or even respect as the military might at the pentagon, but we are as they say, the pointy end of the spear. if we lose our edge, the u.s. will inevitably have to use other tools, even more than it does today. those other tools are blunter, more expensive and not universally effective. moreover, the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as the policy process is visibly unr

he resigned from the foreign service and gave two reasons. because what they said is so significant and at times mysterious, we're going to do something a little bit different tonight and read some of the most important passages word for word. we'll try to link up the moments that really build a narrative that according to these two officials, illustrate a state department in washington operating at cross-purposes from diplomats around the world and a white house that was undermining those diplomats for purposes that seem to have more to do with president trump's political interests than national security. we'll start with the sworn statements of ambassador michael mckinley. quote, the timing of my resignation, he testified, was the result of two overriding concerns. the failure in my view of the state department to offer support to foreign employees caught up in the impeachment inquiry and, second, by what appears to be the utilization of our ambassadors overseas to advance domestic political objectives. in other words, as both he and ambass

and dean at foreign service institute and taught national security strategy at defense university. she also previously served at u.s. embassies in kiev, ottawa, moscow, london and mogadishu. ambassador yovanovitch received honors for her diplomatic work, presidential distinguished service award and diplomacy and human rights award. two final points before our witness is sworn. first witness depositions as part of this were unclassified in nature and held at the unclassified level. any information that may touch on classified information will be addressed separately. second, congress will not tolerate any reprisal, threat of reprisal for testifying before congress including you and your colleagues. if you would rise and raise your right hand. i'll swear you in. do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing, but the truth, so help you god? let the record show the witness has answered in the affirmative. thank you and please be seated. without objection, your written statement will be made part of the record. with that, ambassa

has foreign service professionals are denigrated and undermined, the institution is being degraded. this will cause real harm soon if it hasn't already. the state department is a tool of foreign policy, often not getting the same attention or respect as the military might of are theagon, but we pointy end of the spear. if we move our edge, the u.s. will inevitably have to use other tools even more than it does today. those other tools are more expense or -- more extensive, blunter, and not universally successful. the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as a policy process -- the policy process is unraveling. senior and mid-level officers have an uncertain future. the crisis moved from an impact on individuals to institution itself. the state department is being hollowed out from within at a competitive and complex time on the world stage. this is not a time to undercut our diplomats. the a responsibility of departments leaders to stand up for the institution and individuals who make that institution still today the most effective diplomatic force in the world. a r

i am not just angry for you, i am angry for every single foreign service officers and every military officer who right now may believe a lifetime of service and sacrifice in excellence may be ignored by the president of the united states or worst yet attacked in language that would embarrass a mob boss. now in the president's defense and it is emerging from my republican colleagues today that this is all okay. because as the president memorably put it in his tweet this morning. as it is the u.s. president's absolute right to appoint an ambassador. i think that how and why we exercise our powers and rights matter. ambassador, when you are ambassador, do you have the right to ask the intelligence committee or the cia in an embassy of what operations they're doing? >> we talk about these things collaboratively. there are some things that -- in sort, yes. >> you have the right to ask intelligence committee in your embassy. >> why may you do that? >> sometimes operations may have political consequences. >> right. >> the performance of your duties, the interests of the united states gives y

it is despicable what trump and mike pompeo have done to our foreign service. they decimated our foreign service and we lost so many of our good career professionals and it will take years to replace them. i find it incredible that republicans keep whining about closed-door hearings, and they are the ones that set the rules up in 2015. guest: it is interesting because the republicans do not want to talk about the facts. they attacked the process, and they had the show of storming the hearing room when some of the people storming it had the access to be in the room. i think the democrats have set up a methodical process, gather information in the private hearings and will now release the transcripts and have public hearings. all of the people who have been questioned in private will be questioned in front of tv cameras. the republicans have been in the rooms. there are three committees and republicans have full access and equal time. it is deflection, and it is led from the president who does not want to talk about what happened. what happened is that the presid

i am not just angry for you, i'm angry for every single foreign service officer. every single intelligence officer who, right now, believe that a lifetime of service and sacrifice and excellence might be ignored by the president of the united states or worse yet. attacked. language that would embarrass a mob boss. it is the president's defense and it is emerging for my republicans colleagues today. but this this is all okay. as a president so put it in his tweet this morning, a u.s. president's absolute right to appoint ambassadors. i am a little troubled by this idea of an absolute right. that does not feel to me like the system of government that we have here. how and why we exercise our powers and rights matters. you have the right to ask the intelligence committee and an embassy. what operations they are doing. we talk about these collaboratively. in short, yes. >> you have the right to ask the intelligence committee what they are doing. why might they they do that? >> because sometimes operations have political consequences. >> the performance of your duties,

i was in the foreign service for years, served mostly in the middle east or africa. during that time, i didn't see a lot of what you would call successes. there were not a lot of saving the world, stopping a coup, averting a humanitarian disaster , the kind of thing you might see madam secretary accomplish in her half-hour series. i was never really in that kind of position. perhaps the opposite, trouble seemed to follow me wherever i went. i saw a lot of military mutinies, and i served in iraq, served in sudan. none of which places you would call a triumph for american diplomacy. but thinking about this, i want intell a story from iran 1980. before i joined the foreign service, i had lived in iran. i was a teacher, a researcher. iranian.s i thought i knew the country fairly well. i went there as a diplomat. august of 1979. that was about six months after shah and alsohe about two and a half months before president carter decided to admit the deposed shah and a few weeks after that a group of iranian militants stormed the embassy. that's where the story starts. thise

and political interests above the united states as ambassador sonnen would later tell career foreign service officer david holmes immediately after speaking to the president trump did not give a expletive about ukraine he cares about big stuff that benefits him like the biden investigation that giuliani was pushing david holmes is here with us today is a foreign service officer currently serving as the political counselor at the u.s. embassy in kieve also with us is dr fiona hill who's job as a national security council senior director for european and russian affairs and compass the coordination of u.s. policy towards ukraine dr hill left the n.s.c. in july after more than 2 years in that position dr hill and mr holmes each provide a unique perspective on issues relating to ukraine dr hill from washington d.c. and mr holmes from on the ground in kieve in early 2019 dr hill became concerned by the increasing prominence of rudy giuliani the president's personal lawyer who was as she has testified asserting quite frequently on television in public appearances that he had been given some author

first, they'll learn about what a vicious and unconscionable act to remove this career foreign service diplomat. 33 years. the best of the best. she's precisely who we want representing our nation's interests in foreign capitals and she was removed as a result of a long-term insidious smear campaign orchestrated by the president's personal attorney, a corrupt ukrainian prosecutor, the president's son and some of the president's allies at his favorite tv station. and i want to say something about how you phrased the -- how ambassador yovanovitch felt earlier. that she felt threatened. when the most powerful man on the face of the planet says she's going to go through some things, that's not something that would cause any human being to feel anything other than incredibly threatened. but at the end of the day, the president is within his legal authority to have removed her. the second thing then, however, that i hope we learn is why. what was afoot here. what were the nefaruous ends being achieved? she was a fierce anti-corruption combatant in ukraine and helping to clean up that struggl

i am not just angry for you, i'm angry for every single foreign service officer. every single intelligence officer who, right now, believe that a lifetime of service and sacrifice and excellence might be ignored by the president of the united states or worse yet. attacked. language that would embarrass a mob boss. it is the president's defense and it is emerging for my republicans colleagues today. but this this is all okay. as a president so put it in his tweet this morning, a u.s. president's absolute right to appoint ambassadors. i am a little troubled by this idea of an absolute right. that does not feel to me like the system of government that we have here. how and why we exercise our powers and rights matters. you have the right to ask the intelligence committee and an embassy. what operations they are doing. we talk about these collaboratively. in short, yes. >> you have the right to ask the intelligence committee what they are doing. why might they they do that? >> because sometimes operations have political consequences. >> the performance of your duties,

but on the positive side with these great foreign service officers, one of the things you write about beautifully in the book is your effort in this gathering of data and opinions and expertise was there were far too few voices of diversity in the history of the foreign service and at those decision making processes and you came to miami here actually to announce a program about that. could you talk a little about that? >> yes, so in 2016 in the spring, i came to fiu and i shared for the first time publicly the work that we've been doing inside the obama administration aimed at increasing diversity in the national security work force. and not just the foreign service, the civil service, the defense department,the uniformed, intelligence committee, law enforcement because the national security agencies are actually substantially less diverse in terms of race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, you name it. every mention of diversity and certainly gender diversity, then is the overall federal service more broadly. and we cared about that not just as a matter of principle or

as foreign service professionals are denigrated and undermined, the institution is being degraded. this will cause real harm soon if it hasn't already. the state department is a tool of foreign policy, often not getting the same attention or respect as the military might of the pentagon. but we are the pointy end of the spear. if we lose our edge the u.s. , will inevitably have to use other tools even more than it does today. those other tools are more expensive and not universally , successful. the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as a policy process -- the policy process is unraveling. senior and mid-level officers have an uncertain future. the crisis moved from an impact on individuals to institution itself. the state department is being hollowed out from within at a competitive and complex time on the world stage. this is not a time to undercut our diplomats. it's a responsibility of the departments leaders to stand up for the institution and individuals who make that institution still today the most effective diplomatic force in the world. congress has a

>> yes, i do. >> to an entire generation of foreign service officers? >> i work with a lot of young people, many of whom go into foreign service. they're reluctant now. you have no idea what's going to happen to you if it's going to be politicized as an institution. >> also whether washington or the white house cares about what you're doing or believes in it. in fact, it's quite clear they don't care about what you're doing. john, what does it say about the administration that a u.s. ambassador was being smeared by the president and his allies on the global stage, and the ambassador wasn't even convinced she was physically safe and had to learn about this from ukrainian officials? >> it's amazing. she's like somebody who was hit by a train and didn't even know she was on the tracks. and she said that she couldn't even imagine, as late as her testimony, the six and seven months she'd been through already. now, what happened, anderson, in her revelation point was very interesting when she heard the rumor of the report in the hill publication, the intervie

one thing that's come out of this is that there are a series of career foreign service officers mr holmes today dr hill and also people like lieutenant colonel vandeman. dedicated members of the armed services and intelligence operations that are pretty unnerved by the trumpet ministrations evident attempt to run a shadow foreign policy in opposition to sort of american foreign policy goals so that's one thing that came out another thing that dr hill pointed out is that this effort by donald trump essentially to adopt a russian initiated and now just credited conspiracy theory of ukrainian intervention in the 2016 election continues to undermine foreign policy again trumps sort of repetition of these debunked russian claims dr hill is worried it is undermining not only american foreign policy towards ukraine but also domestically the security of american elections and domestic policy generally that's pretty weighty stuff i mean we're describing the u.s. president. basically using russian talking points how concerning is that. dr hill said something. to that effect she wanted to sort of di

in her testimony, she explains how the director general of foreign service called her at 1:00 a.m. in the foreign quote, she said that there was a lot of concern for me. that i needed to be on the next plane home to washington. this is about your security. you need to come home immediately. you need to come home on the next plane. she goes on the say her removal was the result of a smear campaign orchestrated by rudy giuliani and his business associates. parnus is willing to comply with the congressional subpoena. we will honor and not avoid the request that they are proper. yovanovithch said she was told that quote, i really needed to watch my back. yovanovitch said they raised concerns. the official told her, it was dangerous to get involved because it would appear ukraine would be getting into u.s. politics. she also testified she felt threatened by president trump. she said she was shocked the president would speak about me or any am baskbassador that way foreign counterpart. i'm joined by peter baker. thank you. this is ominous because it talks about what happens to someone esp

. >> georgetown students are lucky to have you, we are lucky to have you in foreign service. i again want to thank you for your tremendous public service. shifting gears to corruption in ukraine. in your powerful deposition you described, quote, we have long thaund anti-corruption efforts must form an essential part of our policy in ukraine. there's a window of opportunity to do that. why is this important? and why is this important to us? put simply anti-corruption efforts serve ukraine's interest bus they also serb ours as well. is that still your testimony? >> yes. >> and particularly at the critical time in 2014, after the ukrainian election, you testified that the ukrainian people have made clear in that very election that they were done with corruption. correct? >> yes. >> and you also testified that the ukrainians thought it would be a good idea to set up this architecture of a special investigative office that would be all about the crimes of corruption, correct? >> yes. >> and i know this was before you arrived at ukraine but you are aware that the first case that the

foreign service who were still in the room and can give sufficient testimony one of dr hill's points today were counted in the 1st of 2 july 10th white house meetings in which song one simply expressed that there was a quid pro quo necessary this was a moment in which john bolton essentially excused himself from the meeting and expressed some pretty serious reservations about the policy making so even though some of the individuals that the white house had been most directly involved are not testifying people in the room have still been able to give enough evidence. how concerning is this to you. about what what this happening on the on the stage on the world stage the the image the integrity of the department of state that there have been career officials career diplomats who have been attacked personally by the white house sector say has not come to their defense and there have been members of congress that are trafficking in and conspiracy theories how how is all this being seen. you see 2 different things going on one is that the white house is appointing members are essentially

cust om airily what is a foreign service officer to do when something like that happens? or has it been your experience that that so rarely happens that you have a private citizen working, you know, for the white house or working under other motivation, bipassing state department policy? >> let me give you an analogy that i think people would understand. i know your dad for example served in the air force. >> and state department. >> and state department. >> so he was a foreign service officer. >> imagine if you're going to -- let's say you're soldiers going to war for america, and somebody from the outside, a private citizen comes along and says, i'd like all the soldiers to move in a different direction, we would be up in arms over that. these are officials who follow very strict clearance, security, talking points, procedures, process. so to have the former mayor of new york enter into this scene, to have frankly an ambassador who does not have ukraine in his portfolio, drop in to kyiv in the middle of all of this, any american who understands that you work in a system

biden well let's take a look at the 4 officials who testified on tuesday jennifer williams a foreign service aide to vice president mike pence she's listened to president donald trump's ukraine phone call and i said it struck her as inappropriate which will be testifying alongside left and could alexander vandeman who also heard the phone call at the center of the inquiry and a little later in the day the committees will hear from could volcker that's the former u.s. special envoy for ukraine and he's denied participating in any effort to dig up political dirt on joe biden and the national security council's former official in charge of overseeing russia and europe policy will also give evidence to morrison had told investigators that he had concerns over trump allegedly withholding u.s. aid to ukraine to force an investigation into biden we'll speak to our white house correspondent kimberly hellcat shortly but 1st let's go to heidi show castrato she's joining us live from capitol hill and democrats will be hoping heidi that this quartet can flesh out the story so far. that's right particula

i'm a graduate student at the school of foreign service. i wanted to know if we can take any lessons from the fall of the wall, especially our american response to the fall of the berlin wall, in the plight of other parts of the world. i am thinking in particular hong kong today. another semi-autonomous region an upswelling of independence wave. address this generally to the panel. thank you. >> hi. [inaudible] thank you everyone for being here. this question goes directly to the united states [inaudible] paula dobriansky. looking at the soviet union and china as a threat when it comes to state issues, and do you [inaudible] to more domestic policy issues and that created sort of a vacuum of not watching adversaries like russia and china and led to a predatory arc where we have a new space race happening now, and i wanted to get your opinion on that, thank you. joel: why don't we start with paula and then who wants to talk on hong kong? paula: i will say a word on the hong kong question. my answer is yes on that. i think there are a lot of

he is a career foreign service officer. he has previously served in moscow, new delhi, kabul and bogota. he has served on the national security council as special assistant to the united states secretary of state. two final points before our witnesses are sworn. first witness depositions as part of this inquiry were unclassified in nature and all open hearings will be held at the unclassified level. any information that may touch on classified information will be addressed separately. second, congress wno reprisal or attempt to retaliate against any u.s. government official for testifying in front of congress including you or any of your colleagues. if you would please rise, raise your right hand, i will begin by swearing you in. do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? let the record show that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. thank you, and you may be seated. the microphones are sensitive, so you'll need to speak direct

>> i had the pleasure to work with david holmes over at 8 years, my foreign service career. we served together in india. we worked together in the state department. in my opinion, he embodies the highest values of public service. honor, integrity, and non-partisanship. absolutely. >> does what happened today, i mean, as somebody who serves in the service, you heard the ambassador yovanovitch said that the state department is follow h -- hollowed out from the inside. >> we've seen an exodus from the most experienced and talented diplomats across the board. people like linda thomas greenfield, anne patterson, joe yuan. nearly every region of the world. and yovanovitch, still a foreign service officer and does exemplify that incredible courage and commitment and -- >> a point the republicans were making, she's still employed, the same amount of money. her career effectively over in terms of getting a foreign posting as an ambassador. >> i think she described the manner in which she was removed was something that was just a front to 33 years of incredibly dedicated selfless serv

they look at the hardships of the foreign service.ho absolutely does not value anything the foreign service does. and so, it's not at all surprising to me that there is this major drop. the question is, you know, in the future can we recover from this? can we get a secretary of state who really cares about the foreign service. and understands the foreign service and 185 countries or whatever, they extent the view to do things. and yet we have an administration that seemingly couldn't care less. >> what are we talking about when we talk about recovery. this is not the kind of thing. thousands of years environment experience have walked out the door. tillerson left. and people have not signed up because they've seen the bullying of the foreign service. and diplomacy is on diplomats. our interests suffer, right? and with this administration, not only have you seen this kind of cutting but you've seen this at the base of the idea that there will be people who serve one add manition to the next. and so i think we're going to have to -- the

the wall school of foreign service, here at georgetown university.ing its centennial. another school's dean, doctor joel devlin, doctor hellman, [applause] the programs is is your start. [applause] >> thank you very much sam. let me welcome you here on this beautiful glorious day an important day. on behalf of the school foreign service georgetown university, and her bmw german, european studies. let me say also, our sponsors for this if it. the georgia barbara bush foundation, reagan institute and atlantic council. history is punctuated by critical moments. grievance open up and possibilities for fundamental change in the world. that these critical moments, the importance of leadership and diplomacy of intelligence and careful analysis become essential to shaping outcomes. and these are then moments that are the essence of what we do here at the school foreign service and what we have been doing now for a hundred years and the oldest school of foreign service in international affairs and united states out is in the spirit that i am excited that we h

has been undermined well these foreign. service go out and marry queen trouble in ukraine in syria in libya everywhere you have civil wars wherever these highly professional foreign service gets involved and heels predictions before have all been wrong she's a bad expert i don't know why trump took her it was a mistake 1st because she betrayed him basically what we saw was betrayal of your own boss and 2nd i'm going to go forward if you want to he was interviewed. in 2015 right after you know the crimea thing and after their history just started to us here is what she says to figure all putin doesn't know the limits he will certainly go further than ukraine he would destabilize other countries and of court well this is to put it mildly neck europe information and now the whole nation is supposed to believe fiona here when she says something about highly professional foreign service. russia definitely definitely destroying m.h. 17 and she says it all under all how does she know russian don't any 17. can she be sure russia occupied g

i'm a graduate student at the school of foreign service. i want to know if we can take any lessons from the fall of the berlin wall, especially our american response, in the plight of other parts of the world. i am thinking in particular hong kong today. another semiautonomous region independent for an way of life. i address this generally to the panel. thank you. dr. hellman: another question. >> thank you for being here. goes to united states ambassador dobransky. at thecally looking former soviet union and china, as a threat when it comes to space issues. do you believe we veered from the fall of the berlin wall to more domestic policy issues, and that created a vacuum of not watching adversaries like russia and china, leading to a new space race happening right now, in the national security space? i wanted your opinion on that. paula: i will say a word on the hong kong question. just a footnote on the hong kong question. my answer is yes on that. i think there are a lot of lessons and application to what is happening in hong kong. i was

>> yes. >> you're both senior women in the foreign service. you had an opportunity to meet her before? >> yes. >> and she says there's trouble coming. want to give you a heads up. correct me if i get this wrong and i don't know a lot but it's coming from the white house. i'll kale y i'll call you later. >> yeah. that sums it up. >> but you're literally that evening honoring this anti-corruption activist, is that right? >> yes. >> and not just any woman but a woman you said was horribly attacked and killed for her efforts. and she wasn't just killed. you said she -- you said i believe that someone threw acid on her. >> that's correct. >> and i went and i checked during the break and it turns out she -- she was horribly injured and it took four months for her to die. is that right? >> a very painful death. >> why would somebody attack her with acid? there are easier ways to kill people. why do you think they did it with acid? >> well, i think they wanted her out of the way but i think the message was this could happen to you, too, if you continu

i'm a graduate student at the school of foreign service. i want to know if we can take any lessons from the fall of the wall, especially our american of otherin the plight parts of the world? i am thinking in particular hong kong today. this generally to the panel. thank you. hi. thank you everyone for being here. goes to doon brainsky. looking at the soviet union and china when it comes to a threat do you fear we have went from the fall of the berlin wall to more domestic policy issues and that created a place whereed to a [indiscernible]. i wanted to get your opinion on that, thank you. paula: i will say a word on the hong kong question. my answer is yes on that. i think there are a lot of lessons and application to what is happening in hong kong. i was in australia and the australians are very engaged in this. our approach, not publicly but behind the scenes, is helping the demonstrations taking place. excellent question. with regard to space and of the united states and russia, you focus on a question that is key in foreign policy. ther

performance so far what i told you larry i thought he really should back up his team these are fine foreign service officers who serve republicans who serve democrats who keep on the foreign policy of the united states going in a very competent way in a very dedicated way and they risk their lives in a way that i like our soldiers risk their lives especially. forces rest their lives their intelligence officers risk their lives in fact someone did a calculation once and as many foreign service officers die overseas as a percentage of the service as military so it's wonderful what they do and the secretary of state should be there saying i got your back but this one says i'm turning my back what's happening to our. can since you have well i think the whole thing that's going on is the decline in the sense of trust and decency larry i remember when you and i dealt together a lot with president reagan it was impossible for reagan to treat anybody with anything but decency and it was true of tip o'neill his main opponent in the democratic. race i remember one time i was told by frank. frank. hold on i g

i mean, first of all she had been in the foreign service for decades, served in some tough places andever experienced something like that because nothing like that had ever happened before. because that's not how we conduct foreign policy in the united states. the other thing i take away from this, nicole, is so much of the focus has been on this one phone call. this was a multimonth-long effort to essentially completely corrupt the relationship between ukraine and united states to serve trump's interest because she didn't want to go along with rudy giuliani moonlighting the secretary of state and trying to get this dirt on biden. for that you've got the president of the united states disparaging her to a foreign leader. not only does that not serve the national interest of the united states, it actually actively undermines the national interest of the united states. our national interest in ukraine is to have a solid working relationship, a solid assistance relationship where they get the military they need. trump essentially was putting all of that at risk just to get this one outco

we are grateful for georgetown university and the foreign service for helping to host us and the atlantic counsel and we are also grateful for the reagan foundation and their institute helping to host this event. we have many many people here who should be introduced and i'm not going to ask everyone to stand was important and i'm not going to ask everyone to sit who is important so other more important people can stand. i am here to say that we are proud to have laura welsh clark here, the president's daughter. [applause] and his granddaughter. [applause] we also have folks in the atlantic counsel here. [applause] british robinson is here from the barber bush literacy foundation. [applause] we also have the eu deputy head of delegation's michael curtis here. [applause] and the chairman deputy chief of missions richard boyington is here. [applause] this is a remarkable day because we are remembering a truly remarkable event. i am about to introduce someone who i have the greatest respect for. above all i know three absolutes about the speaker that i will introduce. first the world changed

as foreign service professionals are being undermined the institution is also being degraded. it will soon cause real harm if it hasn't already. the state department as a tool of foreign policy often doesn't get the same kind of attention or even respect as the military might of the pentagon but we are, as they say, the pointy end of the spear. if we lose our edge, the u.s. will inevitably have to use other tools, even more than it does today. and those other tools are blunter, more expensive, and not universally effective. moreover, the attacks are leading to a crisis in the state department as the policy process is visibly unraveling. leadership vacancies go unfilled and senior and mid-level officers ponder an uncertain future. the crisis has moved from the impact on individuals to an impact on the institution itself. the state department is being hollowed out from within at a competitive and complex time on the world stage. this is not a time to undercut our diplomats. it is the responsibility of the department's leaders to stand up for the institution and the individuals wh