[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ADVANCING U.S. INTERESTS IN THE
WESTERN HEMISPHERE: THE FY 2015
FOREIGN AFFAIRS BUDGET
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 9, 2014
__________
Serial No. 113-144
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
87-517PDF WASHINGTON : 2014
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio BRAD SHERMAN, California
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
TED POE, Texas GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MATT SALMON, Arizona THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina KAREN BASS, California
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
MO BROOKS, Alabama DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
TOM COTTON, Arkansas ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
PAUL COOK, California JUAN VARGAS, California
GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III, Massachusetts
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania AMI BERA, California
STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
RON DeSANTIS, Florida GRACE MENG, New York
DOUG COLLINS, Georgia LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
TED S. YOHO, Florida JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
LUKE MESSER, Indiana
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere
MATT SALMON, Arizona, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina Samoa
RON DeSANTIS, Florida THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
The Honorable Roberta S. Jacobson, Assistant Secretary, Bureau
for Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State....... 10
Ms. Elizabeth Hogan, Acting Assistant Administrator, Bureau for
Latin America and the Caribbean, U.S. Agency for International
Development.................................................... 17
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
The Honorable Roberta S. Jacobson: Prepared statement............ 13
Ms. Elizabeth Hogan: Prepared statement.......................... 19
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 42
Hearing minutes.................................................. 43
ADVANCING U.S. INTERESTS IN THE
WESTERN HEMISPHERE: THE FY 2015
FOREIGN AFFAIRS BUDGET
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2014
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 o'clock
p.m., in room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Matt
Salmon (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Salmon. A quorum being present, the subcommittee will
come to order.
I will start by recognizing myself and the ranking member
to present opening statements. Without objection, the members
of the subcommittee can submit their opening remarks for the
record.
Now I yield myself as much time as I may consume to make my
opening statement.
Good afternoon, and welcome to the hearing on the FY2015
budget and how the request advances U.S. interests in the
Western Hemisphere. I am grateful to U.S. Assistant Secretary
of State Roberta Jacobson and USAID Assistant Administrator
Beth Hogan for coming here to testify before this subcommittee.
As you both know, in these times of tight budgets, our
strategy and policy in the Western Hemisphere has got to be
focused on and reflect our vital national interests. By virtue
of our proximity and cultural ties, our economic relationship
with much of the Western Hemisphere is strong and increasingly
integrated. Our free trade agenda over the years has been
instrumental in building peace, prosperity, and the rule of law
in our region.
Since more than half of all of the free trade partners that
we have are in Latin America, U.S. businesses and the American
people stand to benefit from the strong trade and investment
relationships that we enjoy with these wonderful neighbors.
Assistant Secretary Jacobson, I commend your efforts to
build on these relationships, including your important work on
the Mexico High-Level Economic Dialogue and ongoing Trans-
Pacific Partnership negotiations. The work you and your
colleagues do to support the Commerce Department's ``Look South
Initiative'' is instrumental in helping U.S. small businesses
to learn more about growing export opportunities that exist
right here with our 12 hemispheric free trade partners. It has
been a priority of mine that this subcommittee be a loud voice
in favor of exporting our values of free enterprise in open
markets to promote economic growth and energy security in our
region. And, I have long believed that we have a real
opportunity to achieve energy independence right here in the
Western Hemisphere, thanks to our own energy renaissance,
Mexico's historic energy reforms that promise to increase
production, and Canada's vast resources.
While the administration continues its efforts to combat
climate change and reduce emissions in the Americas, it
inexplicably stonewalls approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline
project. The Keystone XL project would produce U.S. jobs and
increase energy security, and State Department's own
Environmental Impact Statement released in January concluded
that it would not alter global greenhouse gas emissions.
I believe that we must balance our environmental
stewardship with economic growth and energy security. My
concern is that the environmental agenda reflected in the
administration's budget for the region has not been balanced by
a commitment to enhancing our energy security today. This is
plainly seen in the administration's hostile delay of the
approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, damaging our U.S. energy
security and diplomatic ties with Canada, without, in the
administration's own estimation, providing any commensurate
benefits to climate or emissions reduction goals.
Our strategy for the Western Hemisphere should be to
continue to promote free trade, economic growth, and
prosperity. To achieve this, we have got to insist that our
regional partners uphold respect for democratic institutions,
values, and the rule of law. Without this, peace and prosperity
are in peril.
Nowhere is this truth more evident than in Venezuela today,
where opposition leaders and students are being imprisoned
without charges, demonstrators beaten, and at least 39 people
have been killed at the hands of Venezuelan police and
paramilitary forces.
The Organization of American States, 40 percent funded by
the American taxpayer, has been co-opted by the populist anti-
democratic left of Latin America, and has been shamefully
silent in the face of violence of impending economic
catastrophe brought on by President Maduro's authoritarian
policies.
As I said to Secretary Kerry at a recent hearing, it is
increasingly difficult to justify to the American people the
continued funding of such a feckless organization that actually
works against our interests and our values. The United States
must stand with the people of Venezuela with more than words,
and I will be interested in learning what specifically the
administration plans to do to compel Maduro to cease these
attacks against his own people.
Meanwhile, a year after Cuba was caught red-handed
violating U.N. sanctions and shipping weapons to North Korea
through the Panama Canal, the U.N. has yet to take strong
actions to punish Cuba for this egregious violation. And Cuba
continues to repress its people, while exporting its repressive
tactics around the region, fueling the anti-democratic policies
of Maduro, Morales, and Correa.
Also among the region's authoritarian and anti-democratic
bad actors we have Bolivia and Ecuador. In Bolivia,
authoritarian populist President Morales has made a political
calculation to reject the United States, expelling our
Ambassador, DEA, and USAID.
While right sizing of that Embassy has reduced the number
of U.S. officials and family members dramatically, in my
estimation we remain too large a presence for what the
relationship with Bolivia gives us.
The Department maintains that it is important to keep a
pilot light on in the eventuality of a new government. While it
can be argued that the costs of moving officers and their
families, paying for housing, utilities, and schools for their
dependents is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall
Western Hemisphere budget, our relationship with Bolivia does
not, I don't think, warrant the current presence.
Moreover, the constant threat of being declared persona non
grata makes the everyday work of a Foreign Service Officer very
difficult. And, cowering for fear of expulsion from Bolivia
should be beneath the United States.
In Ecuador, the administration has been looking for ways to
engage President Correa. While I have yet to receive a good
overview of Secretary Kerry's telephone call with Ecuador's
Foreign Minister, I do know that the Government of Ecuador
continues to systematically suppress freedom of expression,
threaten opposition and crackdown on civil society groups.
Meanwhile, Ecuador is on the blacklist for its permissive
money laundering environment and has been arbitrarily changing
trade and investment rules, creating an unpredictable
environment for U.S. business interests. I will be interested
in learning what the administration's policy will be toward
Ecuador going forward.
Like Bolivia, the current posture of keeping our heads down
for fear of expulsion should not be the chosen route for
dealing with authoritarian governments that systematically
attack democratic values and rule of law in our hemisphere.
Recent subcommittee testimony revealed a growing Russian
presence in the region, along with Iranian and Chinese
influence. Just as Secretary Kerry declared an end to the
Monroe Doctrine, Russia has announced their intention to set up
strategic bases in Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. The American
people want to know what the administration's strategy is in
dealing with this increased presence of our adversaries.
Finally, I, personally, am concerned with parts of USAID's
family planning focus in the region. As a father of four
children, I do not object to helping underserved indigenous
women obtain prenatal care. But when I learn we are providing
morning after pills and sterilization services, I can't help
but think this is merely pro-abortion and pro-sterilization
activists using taxpayer money to spread their anti-life
orthodoxy to the poorest region of the Americas. This, to me,
is not only an affront to the taxpayer, but it is a sinister
and shameless part of, I believe, this President's anti-life
agenda.
We agree that the Western Hemisphere is vibrant and rich in
resources, innovation, and human capital. With headlines mostly
dominated by crises and challenges outside our hemisphere, it
is imperative that we do not lose sight of the strategic
importance of this region.
I know you all agree with that. I look forward to hearing
your testimony and working closely with you to better address
our strategic interests right here in our neighborhood.
And, with that, I would like to recognize our ranking
member, and you may want to defer to our ranking member on the
full committee.
Mr. Sires. I don't think so.
Mr. Salmon. You don't think so? [Laughter.]
If only he wasn't such a great guy, we wouldn't want to do
that, would we?
Mr. Engel. I thank the chairman, my friend from Arizona,
and my buddy from New Jersey. As the ranking member of the
Foreign Affairs Committee, I want to thank both Chairman Salmon
and Ranking Member Sires for holding today's hearing. Myself,
as the former chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee,
I feel very much at home coming back here.
Let me first thank Secretary Jacobson for her continued
excellent work in promoting an active U.S. policy in the
Americas. We have worked closely together through the years,
and I appreciate your hard work, your smarts, and your
professionalism. So thank you very much.
The Obama administration has set a new tone of partnership
in the region. I am particularly appreciative of Vice President
Biden's important new role on Western Hemisphere issues. While
U.S. attention has understandably been on Ukraine in recent
weeks, we cannot ignore the brave student protesters in
Venezuela who have been unjustly repressed by President Nicolas
Maduro.
I am grateful for President Obama and Secretary Kerry's
strong statements condemning the Maduro government's actions.
At the same time, I am disappointed by the silence of OAS
member states, many of which suffered domestic repression in
the recent past.
As this subcommittee is well aware, our actions at home
have a major impact on our neighbors in Latin America and the
Caribbean. This is particularly true with regard to the massive
U.S. demand for illegal drugs and the continued flow of
firearms from the U.S. to Mexico.
Today I sent a letter to President Obama signed by 81 of my
colleagues asking him to stop the import of military-style
firearms into the United States as provided under the Gun
Control Act of 1968. Enforcing this ban, as did Presidents
George H.W. Bush and Clinton, would serve the dual purpose of
improving public safety in the United States, and reducing
drug-related violence in Mexico, where there have been
approximately 70,000 organized crime-related deaths since
December 2006, including the death of a young man in my
district.
In addition, it has been 43 years since President Nixon
declared a war on drugs. Our programs have recorded a mixed
record of success, and I think the time has come for an
unbiased expert review of America's counternarcotics policies
in our hemisphere.
I, therefore, plan to reintroduce legislation, which passed
our committee and the full House in 2009, to create an
independent commission to evaluate U.S. drug policy in the
Americas. I believe this commission will help us to better
understand which counternarcotics policies work, which do not
work, and how we can have a better counternarcotics policy
moving forward.
I want to mention just two other things before I close, and
that is what has always struck me about Latin America and the
Caribbean is how a little bit of money goes a long, long way.
U.S. foreign aid is less than 1 percent of our budget. And I
know we are always looking to save money, but the fact of the
matter is it could really make the difference in many of these
countries, not only the difference in improving the lives of
people living in these countries, but the difference in terms
of forging a permanent and close working relationship with the
United States. That is why I feel we should be expanding our
aid in the Western Hemisphere. It really, really goes a long
way.
And the last thing I want to raise is Cuba and Alan Gross,
because he started his hunger strike, and I am totally in
sympathy with him. We have got to find a way to bring him back.
I think that there are many things which to me, through the
years, have shown the brutality of the Castro regimes. I think
the incarceration of Alan Gross is just par for the course, and
we need to do everything we can to get this American citizen
back home where he belongs, with his family.
So thank you, again, to the witnesses for being here today,
and for your continued commitment to these important issues.
Assistant Secretary Jacobson, Ms. Hogan, thank you both.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Salmon. I thank the former chairman and ranking member.
We are really thrilled to have you here today.
Mr. Engel. A lot of titles.
Mr. Salmon. Lots of titles.
And I am going to go out of order, and recognize the
gentlewoman.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Welcome
to our witnesses. I remain increasingly concerned over the lack
of action by the Obama administration against the human rights
abusers in Venezuela. According to reports, there are 39 people
killed, nearly 60 reported cases of torture, more than 2,000
people unjustly detained, hundreds injured, and what do we get
from the administration? Almost absolute silence.
Leopoldo Lopez, who has been unjustly detained in a
military prison for almost 7 weeks, now faces a 14-year prison
sentence just for protesting peacefully to promote democratic
principles. And, again, from the administration, crickets. Has
anyone from our Embassy even visited Leopoldo behind bars? Have
we made that public? Will the U.S. accept the Venezuelan
request to put an Ambassador in DC at the OAS?
As you know, opposition leader Maria Corina Machado was
prevented from speaking the truth about the crisis in
Venezuela, was stripped of her position in the legislature, and
what was the response from the administration? Nada. It is
shameful that the Obama administration continues to neglect the
suffering of the Venezuelan people. Maduro has accepted this
proposal by UNASUR to broker a peace talk between the
government and certain factions of the opposition. It is not
supported by the opposition as a group.
I remain very skeptical of this smoke and mirrors deal,
because I don't believe that UNASUR is an honest broker. The
Venezuelan opposition cannot negotiate if they have a gun
pointed at their head. Brazil has shown time and time again its
unwillingness to support human rights. Colombia is at the mercy
of Venezuela and the Castro regime, due to its misguided
negotiations with the FARC. In Ecuador, Correa remains on the
side of Maduro also as he tramples on democratic reforms.
And yesterday Secretary Kerry testified in the Senate that
the U.S. does not want to act in Venezuela because of these
bogus negotiations. But these protests have been going on for 2
months. Now we are using this sham of negotiations as an excuse
to not help the opposition, at least not take action to help
them in any way.
The President, as we know, issued Executive Orders to
sanction Russian violators of human rights abuses, and even up
to last week, Mr. Chairman, the President issued an Executive
Order authorizing sanctions for South Sudan. So I ask, ``Why
can the administration not issue the same order today on
Venezuela and hold human rights violators accountable?''
And what kind of regime in Venezuela are we dealing with?
As we know, it is a serial human rights abuser of a country.
Our own GAO report states, ``Venezuelan officials, including
those in the National Guard, have been bribed to facilitate
cocaine shipments across the border with Colombia.'' The
Venezuelan National Guard poses the most significant threat
because the Guard reports directly to the President.
This example illustrates the direct authority by the
executive over the National Guard that is responsible for the
killings in Venezuela with the help of the Castro regime and
the involvement of narcotrafficking.
The administration could do so much, Mr. Chairman, as you
know. It is shameful to have this silence, because Maduro hears
this silence. Now we are going to use the excuse of this new
negotiations period, but this negotiations ruse is a new trick.
The protests have been going on for weeks, and we have not done
anything.
And, lastly, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time on Haiti.
I was glad to lead a bi-partisan small delegation to Haiti, and
we were very happy to see improvements in our program, but of
course there is still so much work left to be done.
And I wanted to ask about two specific items that we saw in
our trip. We visited the SONAPI Industrial Park. We met a
factory owner named Stephan Coles, and his company is
interested in expanding the operations to the north at our
Caracol Industrial Park, and it provides good, quality jobs,
but he believes that USAID has not cooperated fully in this
matter.
And, secondly, we visited Project Medishare, which is
Haiti's only critical care and trauma hospital, and is run by a
constituent of mine, Dr. Barth Green, at the University of
Miami. So the hospital is having electrical troubles, et
cetera, wants to expand its operations, and I hope that your
office is able to help both of these programs in Haiti.
Thank you very much for the time, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Salmon. I recognize the ranking member.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, and
thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
Today's hearing on the Western Hemisphere's Fiscal Year
2015 budget appropriately follows the subcommittee's previous
discussion on U.S. engagement in the hemisphere. That debate,
and today's discussion, occur in the context of exceedingly
greater and complex foreign policy challenges in a region that
has evolved to become increasingly less reliant on the United
States.
While I do not believe the U.S. is implicitly attempting to
disengage from the Western Hemisphere, years of focus elsewhere
have come at the expense of a policy toward the Americas.
Hence, otherwise laudable achievements have been overshadowed
by the combination of an increasingly independent,
ideologically diverse region, and new and lingering challenges,
challenges to democracy and citizen security, and decreasing
U.S. foreign aid.
The administration's Fiscal Year 2015 request of $1.3
billion is 10 percent below the 2014 estimate, and 27 percent
lower than Fiscal Year 2012, all of which has given way to the
perception that the United States is not paying appropriate
attention to our hemisphere.
As the foreign landscape evolved, so, too, has our
respective diplomatic, economic, and security policies. The
U.S. may have been preliminary in the direct foreign aid
business, but as countries have demonstrated the economic and
institutional maturity to carry out activities on their own,
the U.S. has appropriately adopted its programs to support
these countries' capacities to address their challenges
independently.
This is particularly true in countries like Mexico and
Colombia, which together with Haiti, remain the three largest
recipients of Fiscal Year 2015 requests, receiving more than 52
percent of the region's funding. They also comprise the largest
cuts to the budget. Compared to Fiscal Year 2014 estimate,
Mexico's Merida Initiative is being cut by $70 million, as
focus is shifting to lower cost rule-of-law programs and as
Colombia has taken ownership of the security programs, U.S.
assistance is decreasing by $44 million.
We must try to strike a balance between citizen security
initiatives and traditional development programs that can
ensure peace and economic prosperity. Drug trafficking and
organized crime that plague the northern triangle of Central
America have spilled over into the Caribbean. Yet, compared to
Fiscal Year 2014, funding for CARSI will be cut by 20 percent
to $130 million, and the Caribbean Basin Secure Initiative will
be cut by 11 percent to $57 million.
There are, however, slightly reassuring aid increases at
the individual country level. Peru will see a 25-percent
increase of $94 million to support counternarcotics and
alternative development. El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras
will also see increases for traditional development programs to
reinforce security objectives. On the whole, the region is a
mixed bag of hope, opportunity, disparity, and insecurity.
There are new regional associations, such as ALBA and
CELAC, that exclude the United States but have mostly been
utilized as a medium to espouse anti-Americanism.
China's economic expansion and Russia's dubious meddling is
concerning. However, the U.S. is Latin America's largest
trading partner and source of foreign investment. In fact, the
U.S. sells more goods to Latin America than China.
Total U.S. trade with the region rose from $663 billion in
2010 to $846 billion in 2013, a 27-percent increase.
Additionally, cultural norms are being reinforced by trade,
travel, and immigration. And U.S. energy cooperation with the
region has expanded, but not enough to counteract Venezuela's
destabilizing Federal dollars and diplomacy.
Without a doubt, significant challenges remain. Alan Gross
remains in jail while Joanne Chesimard roams freely in Cuba.
Disparity is abundant, with nearly 30 percent of the region's
population living in poverty. Each year hundreds die along our
southern border in their aspiration to a better life through
crossing into the United States, while others remain threatened
by cartel violence.
With the exception of Cuba, democracy in the region has
progressed, but is still threatened by organized crime and
leaders that have abused executive power. The OAS is divided
and has been co-opted by factious or member states that have
either abandoned their democratic principle or have all but
forgotten their own history with military dictatorships. And
every day in Venezuela anti-government demonstrators continue
to express their frustration with the deteriorating economic,
political, and security conditions in the country.
Finally, in regards to the story regarding U.S. and Cuba's
Twitter program, what we have is an attempt toward mystery and
intrigue to USAID's human rights and democracy-promoting
initiatives, grossly exaggerating the facts. It would be a
shame if the intent of this story was rooted in an effort to
air grievances with the current U.S. policy or to discredit the
hardworking men and women of our foreign, diplomatic, and aid
agencies for non-related matters.
It is also unfortunate that some of the media are far more
worried about the program that dares to provide the means for
the Cuban people to freely communicate instead of highlighting
the poor economic human rights condition the Cuban Government
imposes on its people.
I commend and wholeheartedly support USAID's democracy
promotion efforts in Cuba and wish we could do more to support
the desire for freedom of Cubans and the countless others
around the world that yearn for democracy in the future.
Thank you.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
Mr. Duncan?
Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't have an
opening statement. I will just wait for the questions. I yield
back.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you. Mr. Meeks?
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will be brief.
First, I want to thank both Ms. Hogan and Assistant Secretary
Jacobson for the fine work that you do, and all of the men and
women at the State Department. I think oftentimes the work that
you do is unheralded, and you really represent our nation well,
as our State Department does as a whole. I think it makes all
of the difference in the world.
Earlier today, the full committee had a hearing,
Administrator Shah was here, and I think that there was a good
feeling, I received anyways, from the work that USAID has been
doing around the world in trying to make sure that we are
curing diseases and stopping young people from dying. We found
out we are getting the best bang for our buck when we work in
countries, and especially undeveloped countries, in that way as
opposed to circumstances where we have to go to war or anything
of that nature.
So I just, first, want to thank both of you for the work
that you do here in your capacity, with reference to others
like you who are similarly situated in the State Department.
Now, as to the Western Hemisphere, we need to make sure
that we focus, and I think that we are starting to do that, on
building strong relationships. It is our hemisphere; we share
it with the countries in Central and South America and Canada.
And sometimes I think it seems like we spend a lot of time
worrying about what other countries are doing in Latin America.
The number one factor, I believe, affecting U.S. relations with
Latin America is how the United States conducts itself in the
region.
So we have to spend, I believe, less time worrying about
other countries and more time getting our own policies right in
a post-Cold War period. Given what is taking place there now, I
might not be able to say ``post-Cold War'' again, but I just
think that how we deal with our neighbors, especially to our
south, that it should not be in the same manner that we dealt
with them when there was a Soviet Union. I can say that.
You know, during my time in Congress, the world has
changed. Latin America, indeed, has changed, and I think that
the region is now more capable, more economically secure, and
more open to the world. It is not just us, and I think that is
good for us in the United States, and we should see the fact
that Latin America has a broader set of international relations
as an overall positive and not a negative.
Now, not every country in the region is going to agree with
us on every issue. I understand that, and I think that is okay.
But part of building a partnership means listening to what our
other partners want, and trying to understand their point of
view. That is what has to happen. So I commend the
administration on building strong relationships with some of
the more like-minded countries. That is tremendously important.
We have got to build upon that.
But I also hope that you keep trying to establish common
ground with countries where the relationship is not so easy.
Our growing focus should be on issues like education and
entrepreneurship and making sure we are also focused on
capacity-building. That is another good way to do it.
I think that we are doing it in a good way with a number of
our countries who are part of TPP, as we do those negotiations.
That is going to help the whole region.
So I will yield back the rest of my time here, but I just
want to stop by saying I think that the glass is not half
empty; I think it is half full, and I just want to keep filling
it up. And I think that we would be better and safer in this
hemisphere by working collectively together on that manner.
Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Salmon. I thank the gentleman.
Pursuant to committee rule 7, the members of the
subcommittee will be permitted to submit written statements to
be included in the official hearing record. And, without
objection, the hearing record will remain open for 7 days to
allow for statements, questions, and extraneous materials for
the record, subject to the length limitation of the rules.
I would like to now introduce the panel. First of all, The
Honorable Roberta Jacobson is Assistant Secretary for the
Western Hemisphere Affairs at the Department of State. She also
served as a Senior Coordinator for Citizen Security Initiatives
in the Western Hemisphere and as Deputy Chief of Mission at the
U.S. Embassy in Lima, Peru.
Ms. Jacobson holds an M.A. in law and diplomacy from the
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a B.A. from Brown
University.
Ms. Hogan is the Acting Assistant Administrator for U.S.
Agency for International Development, Bureau for Latin America
and the Caribbean. Previously, she served as the Director of
the agency's Haiti Task Team, overseeing reconstruction efforts
after the 2010 earthquake.
Ms. Hogan holds an M.A. in international public policy from
Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International
Studies and an M.A. in national security policy from National
War College.
You have all worked with the lighting system many, many
times, and understand that when you come to the last minute the
light will go amber, and when it turns red we are out of time.
If you go a little bit over, I am not going to really call you
on it. So say what you need to say. This is too important to
not hear everything that has to be said.
So, with that, I would like to recognize Undersecretary--or
Assistant Secretary Jacobson.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERTA S. JACOBSON, ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, BUREAU FOR WESTERN HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you for the promotion, but I am fine
where I am.
Chairman Salmon, Chair Ros-Lehtinen, and Ranking Member
Sires, Mr. Engel has left, but I was happy to see him again. I
am really happy to be back in front of you. It has been a
little while since we have talked, but I want to start out by
saying how much we appreciate the interest of everybody on this
subcommittee.
We have continued to talk in between hearings, and I am so
pleased to be here today and speak with you about the
priorities for the Western Hemisphere. This subcommittee's
support for U.S. assistance, our policies and our engagement in
the region have been crucial.
The Western hemisphere, as I think we have all noted, is a
vitally important region for the United States. It is home to
robust democracies, and our closest trading partners. But the
converse is also true. The United States remains the most
influential and essential partner for nearly every country in
the hemisphere.
I am well aware of the critique that the United States is
not paying enough attention to the Western Hemisphere. And,
honestly, I can't recall a time when an administration that I
served, either Republican or Democratic, was not accused of
paying Latin America less attention than it deserves.
This administration has maintained a remarkable level of
engagement on hemispheric issues by the President, the Vice
President, Secretary Kerry, and other members of the cabinet.
The President returned recently from his fifth trip to Mexico
and met last year with the leaders of Central America, Haiti,
Colombia, Peru, and Chile.
The Vice President has made seven trips to the region, four
in the last year, and the Secretary three, including an OAS
General Assembly. This high-level attention has allowed us to
advance a pragmatic, well-integrated, results-oriented agenda.
Every available metric--public opinion polls, levels of
trade and investment, culture and family ties, security
cooperation, and the lively democratic debate in many
countries--supports the view that the United States' engagement
and influence in the hemisphere is not waning, but actually on
the rise.
There are places like Cuba, Venezuela, and Ecuador where we
have less than the full and productive relationship we would
like, but the people in those countries admire and respect the
United States for who we are, for our values, for our social
mobility, and for our diversity.
We are particularly concerned with the deteriorating
situation in Venezuela where the United States has forthrightly
called on the Venezuelan Government to respect human rights and
the rule of law and begin a peaceful, inclusive dialogue that
will reduce the current tension.
President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Secretary Kerry
have each made clear our view that political prisoners must be
released and steps taken to halt the violence, including by
government-backed groups. I know the committee shares our
concern, and we welcome the strong support for democracy in
Venezuela.
Our commitment to democracy and human rights is unwavering
and remains the center of gravity of our strategy in the
region. Even as we work for a peaceful end to the crisis in
Venezuela, we are actively promoting our core priorities
throughout the hemisphere, creating jobs and prosperity,
expanding education and innovation, promoting energy
cooperation, and defending democratic values.
We have placed our economic engagement at the center of
this strategy. Our current efforts, as noted, include focusing
on the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations that include
Chile, Peru, and our NAFTA partners.
At the North American Leaders Summit in Mexico in March,
President Obama and his counterparts highlighted a shared
continental vision, providing new opportunities for job
creation and investment and deepened global cooperation. While
millions of people have benefitted from Latin America's
economic progress, millions also have been left behind, and we
must ensure they, too, can benefit from the tide of economic
prosperity.
Youth involvement is vital to our entrepreneurship
initiatives, including the Small Business Network of the
Americas, the Women's Entrepreneurship in the Americas
Initiative, and 100,000 Strong in the Americas Education
Initiative.
But prosperity cannot exist without security, and that is
why we will continue to invest in security cooperation with
Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, and Colombia, with a
focus on strengthening democratic institutions and the rule of
law to capitalize on earlier investments in equipment.
A more vigorous and focused energy diplomacy is another
core priority. The shift in the world's energy map to the
Americas has created huge openings for greater cooperation on
energy matters, including collaborating regionally to promote
energy security with responsible environmental stewardship.
Mr. Chairman, let me close by saying, again, that I am very
grateful for the support that this committee has provided in
the hemisphere and its leadership. I believe that we are united
in our vision of seeking to advance democracy, human rights,
social development, security, and economic prosperity in the
region, and that we have established a basis for strong
bipartisan cooperation to the great benefit of our nation.
Thank you very much, and I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jacobson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
Ms. Hogan, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF MS. ELIZABETH HOGAN, ACTING ASSISTANT
ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN, U.S.
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Ms. Hogan. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, Ranking
Member Sires, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, it
is an honor for me to testify before you today on behalf of
USAID. I am grateful for the committee's support of our
programs in Latin America and the Caribbean, and I welcome your
interest in reviewing our progress and our challenges that we
continue to face.
As Administrator Shah, who testified before you earlier
today had stated, our mission across the globe is to partner to
end extreme poverty and promote resilient, democratic
societies. Our best partners in this effort are democratic
states, because their commitment to growing their economies and
investing in their people makes our investments go further.
Increasingly, we have such partners in Latin America and
the Caribbean region where open societies, sensible policies,
and smart donor investments have helped fuel impressive social,
political, and economic progress. However, the continued
progress in the region is threatened by a persistent wave of
crime and violence that, if not addressed, will impede efforts
to promote inclusive growth, reduce poverty, bolster
resilience, and strengthen democracy. Central to USAID's
strategy in the region is crime and violence prevention.
Our at-risk youth programs, community policing, and justice
reform efforts complement the traditional law enforcement and
interdiction activities of our interagency partners.
Our prevention programs are also reinforced by education
interventions, which prioritize early grade literacy and youth-
focused workforce development for at-risk youth. There are
signs that our programs are making a critical difference.
Preliminary findings from the impact evaluation of our crime
prevention programs provide statistically significant evidence
that crime rates are lower and public perception of security
higher in the communities where we work.
As you well know, crime and violence does more than
threaten public safety and constrain growth. Equally as
dangerous is its corrosive effect on democracy. Despite the
region's impressive progress, we are witnessing democratic
backsliding in some countries. This includes constraints on
civil society, limits on press freedoms, and increasing
executive overreach. USAID remains steadfast in its support for
those who strive to build more open, responsive democracies in
this region.
To empower citizens to voice their opinions and hold
governments accountable, we continue to support civil society
groups and human rights organizations, while training
journalists to protect themselves and their sources.
The region is dealing with yet another threat to its
economic environmental resilience--the negative impact of
global climate change. Under the President's Global Climate
Change Initiative, we work on two fronts to help countries
manage this challenge. First, we help reduce emissions by
promoting investments in renewable energy and energy
efficiency. Second, we help countries adapt to changes in
climate by upgrading critical infrastructure, protecting
potable water supplies, and developing risk mitigation
measures.
Our efforts to end extreme poverty and promote resilient
democratic societies converge in Haiti where 65 percent of the
population is considered extremely poor. Today, the Government
of Haiti is leading a successful multi-national effort to
attract investment and strengthen its economy.
The United States Government is starting to deliver
concrete development dividends. Thousands of farmers are
earning higher incomes and increasing crop yields. New
businesses are creating jobs for the poor. Perhaps most
importantly, Haitian institutions are playing a more prominent
role in their own development.
While we are encouraged by this progress, the United States
and other donors can only do so much. Ultimately, the job of
creating the conditions under which businesses can thrive,
create jobs that eliminate poverty, depends on Haiti's leaders.
Only they can pass and implement legislation to fight
corruption, attract investment, modernize the justice sector,
and hold long-delayed municipal and parliamentary elections.
To strengthen the ability of countries to manage their own
development, we are increasingly using local entities to
implement programs and provide assistance. Perhaps nowhere else
in the world does USAID have as dynamic a set of private sector
partners as in this region. Increasingly, we are joining forces
with the likes of Cisco, Hanes, Intel, Microsoft, and
Starbucks, just to name a few, that will spur growth, create
jobs, open opportunities for youth, and alleviate poverty. Over
the last 2 years alone, we have leveraged $150 million through
public-private partnerships.
In sum, our development approaches include strengthening
local capacity, facilitating south-south cooperation, investing
in innovation, leveraging the private sector, and prioritizing
science and technology. We believe that these approaches will
help enable countries to leapfrog their biggest security,
environmental, and governance challenges, and join us as
partners around areas of mutual interest.
Again, thank you for your leadership and for your support
of the work that we do in this region. I have submitted a
statement for the record, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hogan follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Salmon. Thank you very much.
Before we begin with questions, I would like to ask for
your help. I know that subcommittee staff has asked for
information in the past, and I have been disappointed with how
long it has taken to provide them with a response. And I know
you both understand how important it is to have a strong
collaborative relationship, so we can work on responses and
maybe improve those times going forward. I would really
appreciate it.
Assistant Secretary Jacobson, several of us up here have
spoken about concerns with Maduro's Venezuela and people that
have been massacred in the streets, as well as human rights
violations galore. The gentlewoman from Florida has talked
about how testimony before the OAS was rebuffed and not
allowed.
I am asking, what can we do? What is the administration
planning to do concretely beyond just announcing Maduro's
violent tactics? What is our game plan?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
question, and I think it is important. Obviously, part of the
strategy moving forward to get Venezuela--really, to get
Venezuelans talking to each other, which is what is necessary,
is rhetorical, is to respond to each repressive tactic by the
government and to support the notion that Venezuelans have
decreasing amounts of space in which to act, and, therefore,
they need an opening, an area where they can pursue their goals
and their dreams. The opposition needs much greater space,
whether it is in the National Assembly or the media, et cetera.
But a great deal of what we are trying to do is working
with other countries in the hemisphere, some of which are in
agreement with us in support of a more open system in
Venezuela, and some of which are clearly not. We have seen
that. But there are quite a few countries who are extremely
concerned about what is going on in Venezuela, and coordinating
with those countries is important.
We have said from the beginning that what we think is most
important is having an external presence for a real dialogue,
so that Venezuelans can talk to each other with some sense of
confidence, because the situation is so polarized.
Right now, you have the UNASUR countries, many of the
foreign ministers, in Venezuela. We have been encouraging that
process, but we also believe that it is very important that the
opposition feels confidence in the process moving forward, and
that whatever third party mediator or mediators, if there are
multiple--and there has been some obvious discussion in the
press about the Vatican--that those people create a space in
which everyone can have confidence to pursue their agenda.
This seems to be getting underway. We have worked closely
with a number of countries around the hemisphere and outside on
this possibility, and we hope that that will begin to make a
difference.
Mr. Salmon. I know the ranking member and I have both
expressed our frustration with the goings-on with OAS, and you
and I spoke privately about it as well. I think we have to send
a very clear message to them, at least from this body, that not
only are we watching but we are growing tired of their
shenanigans and their lack of response to important issues.
And there may be a time--I hope we don't have to do this,
but there may be a time when this Congress is going to have to
vote with its pocketbook. And I think they have to understand
that--we understand that dialogue and a free flow of ideas is
important, but this body is there to protect freedom and
democratic views and opportunities for the protection of human
rights.
And while I understand that there are a lot of the
subgroups within that body that do some good things, the
leadership at the top is impotent and ineffective. And, I--
rather than just wait them out, I think that they have to know
that our patience is wearing very, very thin, and I hope that
you all will share that message back with them, that it becomes
increasingly more difficult for us to justify to our taxpayers
that we are funding 40 percent of that organization when the
returns aren't very great.
I have another question real quick. It is regarding
President Obama's visit to Mexico for the North American
Leaders Summit. Ranking Member Sires and I sent him a letter
expressing some of our hopes for the summit. One of them was
establishing a High-Level Security Dialogue, much like the
High-Level Economic Dialogue that we have with Mexico.
And I understand that some progress has been made. You have
denoted some of that in your comments. I hope you will provide
the committee with some details of how the dialogue on the
security cooperation with Mexico is going, and what progress
you see happening, and what more needs to be done.
Ms. Jacobson. Absolutely. And I appreciate the question. As
you know, I have been involved in the Merida Initiative since
its inception, and I continue to believe that this is an
incredibly important part of our bilateral relationship.
I think you have seen, Mr. Chairman, that in recent weeks
there have been some significant strides in cooperation that
have resulted in the arrest of Chapo Guzman of the Sinaloa
Cartel, and I think that in the past year the cooperation with
Mexico has become ever-more fluid and more routine, and that is
a very good thing.
We had a mechanism under the previous Mexican Government
called the high-level group, which met on security. It included
about five different cabinet members. We needed to wait until
this new government felt comfortable that all of the procedures
were in the right place.
But I think led by Rand Beers at the NSC, and others, from
the Homeland Security perspective, as well as the NSC, the
State Department is beginning to talk with our Mexican
counterparts about how we can restart the highest level
security dialogue, because, frankly, the other members of the
team at the undersecretary and other levels have really been
working pretty productively over the last year, and I think you
are beginning to see the fruits of that, but it is definitely
not forgotten in the emphasis on the economic.
Mr. Salmon. My time has expired.
I recognize the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Assistant Secretary, I have had a few Members that have
come to me, because they are not on the Foreign Affairs
Committee, and they are very concerned about the violence in
Mexico. And I know the State Department travel warnings for
Tamaulipas, Mexico, and the southern border reflect the dire
security situation. Just last week, eight people were killed in
Matamoros, and the decapitated body of a former mayor of Nuevo
Laredo was found.
When can we expect the Mexican Government to respond in a
fashion similar to its previous actions in Juarez and Tijuana,
Mexico?
Ms. Jacobson. Mr. Sires, I certainly appreciate the
question, and this is obviously of great concern, and our
travel warning does outline for American citizens what we think
is critical that they know before they go to Mexico. Levels of
violence in Mexico are still far higher than we would like to
see them, far higher than the Mexican Government would like to
see certainly.
And what you see--and I think you implied as much in your
question--there was a time when Juarez was the place you could
not walk alone. You couldn't walk outside; it was terribly
violent. It is considerably better now. The question is: How do
you keep responding to transnational criminal organizations
which move and shift and don't have to respect the law? And I
think some of the models that the Mexican Government and we are
working on, especially with AID in strengthening communities,
is one of the most important things we can do.
We also have begun to work at the state level with Mexico,
in areas of Mexico, on the police. We have done very good work
at the Federal level, but the vast majority of policy in Mexico
are at the state and local level. So I think that this
government really does embrace a lot of the work that is
critical to making places safer, working with communities,
accelerating the judicial reform to make sure that cases are
dealt with and people convicted for crimes, and making the
police more effective and more respectful of those communities.
But I think it is a continuing sort of hard slog. We have
been encouraged, certainly, by our partnership with the
Mexicans in areas that have developed into very high crime,
such as Nuevo Laredo, as well as Michoacan and other areas, and
are beginning to work with them on the southern border.
Mr. Sires. Well, I would suggest many members are concerned
about the violence, and I think we have to relay that to the
government, that somehow this is impacting not just life in
Mexico but life in America also.
Ms. Hogan, do you think the USAID program is a proper venue
to set up Twitter programs in some of these countries? I am not
going to ask if you have a replacement for the Twitter program
in Cuba. I am not asking you that. I am just want to know if it
is the proper venue.
Ms. Hogan. I believe that anything that helps Cubans have
an increase in their ability to share information amongst
themselves is a good thing. I think what we have done in Cuba
over the past many years to promote information exchange, both
within the island and to get unfettered information from
outside the island, has helped to support activists in Cuba who
are pressing for broader democratic space.
I think this was a successful test, that there really is
interest there within Cuban society to have these kinds of new
technologies available to them, and I hope that they will going
forward.
Mr. Sires. I am starting to see in my district a great deal
of people from Venezuela. Obviously they are looking for
security, but the stories that I am hearing in terms of the
groups of people that come down on the demonstrators, and
beating them and, I mean, they actually have left because some
of the members of their families have been trampled by these
groups.
So I hope that this dialogue works, but I am not so
hopeful. I understand Cuba has 30,000 troops or 30,000 members
in Venezuela. Obviously, they also have--one of the elitist
brigades that they have, they call it Avispas Negas, which is
called the Black WASP group, which is in charge of maintaining
order in Cuba.
So I would urge you, and I would hope that the OAS would
say something about this--they are talking about us interfering
in other countries. Here you have a country with 30,000
members, and another one within our hemisphere, and I am
concerned about the Russians, the excursions in the region, the
Iranians in the region. I hope we are tracking all of this.
I think it was a bad mistake to say that the Monroe
Doctrine is not in effect anymore. I think we needed that ace
in the hole.
Thank you.
Mr. Salmon. I thank the gentleman.
Recognize the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
Madam Secretary, to continue on the issue of Venezuela, has
anyone from our office even visited Leopoldo Lopez who is
behind bars in a military prison? Will the U.S. accept the
Venezuelan request to put an Ambassador in DC? And, if so, why?
Secretary Kerry is now hiding behind the proposed UNASUR
talks to keep from acting. So, Madam Secretary, what has been
your excuse for the past 2 months for not acting before this
false negotiation sham? Why can the administration not issue an
Executive Order today on Venezuela to hold human rights
violators accountable?
And I wanted to bring to your attention--I am sure that you
have already seen it--the statements made by Nicolas Maduro,
the supposed President of Venezuela, who won by fraud, he says
that he does not need to negotiate, and these are his quotes:
``There is no negotiations in Venezuela. I will not participate
in one.'' He says, ``I don't have anything to negotiate with
anyone about, and I will not negotiate the Socialist
Revolution.''
And the countries that are pushing this sham of
negotiations are countries that have remained totally silent or
else complicit in the murderous rage of Nicolas Maduro. Brazil
has not supported any of the student-led protests siding with
Maduro. Colombia, silence; Ecuador, silence or siding with
Maduro.
So these are the countries that are leading the
negotiations, and they have already taken their position in
favor of Maduro and have voted that way with him in the OAS.
And these are the leaders of the negotiations, and these are
his quotes from today--Nicolas Maduro. So now we are saying we
can't push because we have got these negotiations. They are
false. Only one group of the opposition is for these
negotiations. The vast majority are not for it because they
know Maduro says, ``I don't need to negotiate with anyone.''
And yet, so I ask you, have we visited Leopoldo Lopez? If
not, why not? Are we going to accept a Venezuelan Ambassador in
DC? Why would we? And why don't we put in the Executive Order,
as we have done in Russia, who have violated the human rights
of folks in Ukraine. We have barred them from entry into the
United States. We have frozen their accounts. We have blocked
their properties. The President has done so. He has taken
action in South Sudan as recently as just a few days ago.
Why are the Venezuelan people not deserving of this help
from the United States?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me start out and
take these sort of in order. We have made very clear that we do
not believe Leopoldo Lopez should be in prison. We believe he
should be released. We will continue to make that assertion.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Have we visited him?
Ms. Jacobson. No, we have not.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Have we made any attempt to visit him?
Ms. Jacobson. We have not visited him. I don't----
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Do you consider him a political prisoner
or a common criminal?
Ms. Jacobson. Well, we certainly don't believe that he
should be in prison. I do think that he is being penalized for
peaceful protest. And if they have charges against him, which
they have now finally brought at the end of the 45-day period,
I don't see any reason why he should not be allowed out of
prison, frankly, to continue peaceful work.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Have you put out a statement of support
for Leopoldo Lopez or calling for--are we going to send anyone
from our Embassy to visit him? What a strong statement that
would make because, as you know, he is not going to be the only
one who is going to be held in jail. If Maduro sees that the
U.S. does nothing when somebody is brought up on trumped-up
charges, Maria Corina Machado is next, and so will other
leaders.
Ms. Jacobson. And two mayors have already been relieved of
their position and charged with crimes.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. And we did what?
Ms. Jacobson. And we will continue to speak out in
opposition to those kinds of actions. I think it unlikely we
would be allowed to visit Leopoldo Lopez.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. We don't know if we don't try.
Ms. Jacobson. I understand that. But we have been very
clear about our opposition to the repressive tactics that this
government has used against people trying to conduct their job
as mayor or peacefully protest. And we will continue to be
strongly on the side of----
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. We have visited Alan Gross. We regularly
visit Alan Gross in prison, and those trumped-up charges.
Leopoldo Lopez, as you stated, are trumped-up charges. He is a
political prisoner. We should send a message by visiting him.
Ms. Jacobson. I appreciate that perspective. We are able to
see Alan Gross because he is an American citizen, and we have
that right under the Vienna Convention.
But let me just go through some of the other items. You
talked about the proposal to put a Venezuelan Ambassador in the
United States. We feel very, very strongly that this is not
about the bilateral relationship between the United States and
Venezuela, and, therefore, we are not taking action to allow a
Venezuelan Ambassador in the United States yet because we think
the action needs to be in Venezuela, with Venezuelans talking
to each other and our doing everything we can to facilitate
that, not to allow the distraction of charges against us or
making this about the United States and our bilateral
relationship.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. I only have 30 seconds left.
Ms. Jacobson. I am sorry.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. What about the Executive Order? We have
acted in other countries. Are the Venezuelan people not
deserving of having their violators held accountable?
Ms. Jacobson. They surely are, ma'am, and that is one of
the reasons why, as the Secretary and I have both said, we are
holding in abeyance implementation of any restrictions, be they
visa sanctions or revocations or further sanctions, which we
believe we have the authority to take, while we see, in support
of the opposition, whether these conversations are going to go
anywhere.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. But these conversations, you will agree,
are just brand new. That is the new excuse. So that is why
Secretary Kerry--I know my time is up, so I won't belabor the
point. But that is the new excuse. The protests have been going
on for 2 months while the administration remains silent.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
The chair recognizes Mr. Meeks.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me turn the area of focus for a second. I have been
concerned about African-Colombians and those that are
indigenous to Central and South America. These groups have been
substantially marginalized in the hemisphere.
And I will ask Ms. Hogan, and then also if you want to
answer, Assistant Secretary Jacobson--but my question is, what
programs have you provided to promote greater social inclusion
for those traditionally marginalized groups in the hemisphere?
Ms. Hogan. Thank you very much for that question. In fact,
just Friday of last week, we signed a new memorandum of
understanding with a very popular Latin rock star named Carlos
Vives, who is going to be the first Ambassador for inclusion,
focusing specifically on Afro-Colombians. He is from Colombia.
He is not Afro-Colombian, but he is very dedicated to
showcasing the rich cultural heritage and music heritage that
Afro-Colombians are contributing to Colombia and to the world.
And so he wants to use his celebrity to shine a light on
that. And working directly with him, we are going to help
organize conferences and events whereby we can actually help
raise resources to invest in Afro-Colombian communities.
I know this morning Dr. Shah talked to you about the work
that we are doing with Afro-Colombians in the private sector in
terms of training them for modern economy jobs. We thus far
have seen 1,000 Afro-Colombians move into jobs in 100
companies. And by the end of 2016, we hope that number will
grow to 10,000.
But in other parts of the region, we are also very much
focused on the indigenous populations. In fact, in Guatemala,
almost our entire program is focused on the western highlands,
which is predominantly indigenous. And we have focused our
health resources, education resources, food security sources,
to help them reach parity with other Guatemalans who share
middle income status. And so we are doing it there, we are
doing it in Peru, and we are doing it in Honduras as well.
So it is a very important part of our program, because as
we see development gains in the region, we also see certain
vulnerable populations falling behind. And so we are all about
promoting inclusive growth. And if we want to do that, we need
to reach out to these indigenous communities, and we are doing
so.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you for that, and that is tremendously
important, and throughout the region, because I did say
African-Colombians, which I have been focused on, but those of
African descent throughout, and those who are indigenous,
because they all have been marginalized. And, as a result, one
of the things that I see, and I can equate because we still
have educational problems here in the United States, and trying
to make sure people are educated, I know how we pushed
ourselves up.
I think that there is a critical need to develop education
in some of these communities also throughout that has been
marginalized, and this is something that I think that, as I
have traveled throughout the region, many of these countries
are struggling with.
So my question is, what can we in the United States do
better to address the education and the skills gaps in all of
the Americas?
Ms. Jacobson. If I could start. This is incredibly
important, and I think it is one of the things that really is
central to all of the other issues, because unless we address
the education gap you can't provide real economic opportunity,
and that obviously has led to some of the security problems.
One of the things that I think is working particularly well
is, as part of 100,000 Strong for the Americas, the Educational
Exchange Initiative, but also as part of our dialogues in both
Brazil and Colombia on the elimination of discrimination and
racism, we have been able to promote exchanges and interactions
between educational institutions with historically black
colleges and universities in the United States, with the Indian
Tribal Colleges, as well as with Hispanic institutions in the
U.S.
All of those give a perspective on the United States that
isn't always widely known in the hemisphere, and offer
opportunities for those communities to access education in the
United States.
The other thing that we really need to do is focus on
community colleges, which we know in the United States provide
an invaluable opportunity for those who may not go to a 4-year
university. This is a concept which is not well-known or
understood in Latin America, and we are providing opportunity
for kids who would never have had the option of coming to a
school in the United States to learn a trade or a vocation
before.
Mr. Meeks. Let me try to sneak in one last question, if the
chair--I beg his indulgence. Just the thought of this--we had
conversations about the problematic governments that we have,
et cetera. I was wondering whether or not there has been any
areas of success in our engagements with problematic
governments, because we are having this conversation and
whether there is anything.
Ms. Jacobson. I guess what I would say real quickly is just
there are always areas that I think we can cooperate in. With
Ecuador, most recently, they are very interested in doing more
on education. So we have been able to continue programs on
indigenous languages in Bolivia that AID and others work on.
So my own view is places like Nicaragua where we work with
the police in counternarcotics quite effectively, there are
bright spots even in some of the toughest places, and we have
to try and continue to hold to our principles in those
countries and speak loudly about them, but look for areas where
our interests do overlap.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
The chair recognizes Mr. Duncan.
Mr. Duncan. Thank you.
Thank you for being here. The administration requested $1.3
billion for Latin American and Caribbean region. This is about
10 percent below the FY14 estimate, and about 27 percent lower
than the amount provided in 2012. This budget also reflects
cuts to the three largest U.S. security programs in the
region--the Colombia Strategic Development Initiative, the
Merida Initiative in Mexico, and the Central American Regional
Security Initiative.
But it increases things like development assistance and
clean energy initiatives and family planning programs. So as
chairman of the Oversight Subcommittee on the House Homeland
Security Committee, I have heard of the importance of the
security programs in the Western Hemisphere and their impact on
U.S. border security efforts, et cetera.
Further, when we consider the documented efforts of Russia,
China, North Korea, and Iran to establish footholds and
increase their influence in this region of the world, and then
we hear from Commander of US SOUTHCOM in his testimony back in
February, he admitted to U.S. intelligence gaps and truly
knowing the full awareness of Iranian and terrorist support
networks in the region, so I am baffled, really, at the
priorities that are reflected in this budget.
So how does cutting worthwhile security programs, while
beefing up development, citizen security, clean energy
initiatives, family planning programs, how does that secure--
serve U.S. security and our foreign policy interests?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Congressman Duncan. I think one of
the things that I want to be clear on is, while there have been
reductions in the Merida Initiative with Mexico and the
Colombia security programs, in both of those cases those were
anticipated reductions as partners became better able to take
over their own security.
With the Colombians now, it is critically important that we
not reduce our programs too abruptly, but they are increasingly
able to do things after a number of years of working with them.
In fact, they are able to deliver security, training, and
experience in capacity-building even in places like Central
America, which has made them an invaluable partner.
So I think that we are going to continue to see just as
much engagement and just as much progress in those places even
with lower investments in a tough budgetary environment.
On Central America, the only thing that I would say is I
know it has been reduced somewhat, but it is still a very high
level in Central America because there the challenges have been
resistant in some respects to change. So we did not take that
down any lower than a level that we felt would continue to
provide engagement with each of the individual countries which
are still confronting terrible problems. I will let my
colleague deal with some of the other development content.
Ms. Hogan. Thank you very much. I would just like to
underscore what Roberta said about government stepping up and
investing more in their own development. In Mexico, as an
example, the Mexican Government puts in $10 for every $1 that
we invest there under the Merida Initiative. And in Colombia,
for the government institutional programs that we support, like
the Victims Assistance Unit, like the Reparations Unit, et
cetera, et cetera, we are putting in only 1 percent of what the
Colombian Government is putting in itself.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, we also see the
rise of private sector actors engaging in this region and
investing more heavily in not just corporate responsibility but
also, as I mentioned, workforce development, because they see
it in their interest to train youth who don't have the skills
they need to come in to work for them. And so increasingly we
are seeing that as our investment glides downward, it is being
picked up by both governments and the private sector.
I wanted to talk about family planning for a moment to
simply say that it has been a success story in our region in
that back in the '70s when statistics were first collected only
1 in 10 women had access to voluntary, safe, affordable, high
quality family planning assistance. Today it is over 67
percent, which is why we phased out of family planning in most
of the countries in the region. We are only doing it in three
countries--Guatemala, Honduras, and Haiti. And we are also
going to be phasing out of Honduras very soon.
And then, finally, on global climate change, the reason we
are investing heavily in global climate change is because it is
not only affecting people's lives but their livelihoods. In
Haiti, as an example, we saw 1 year where after having
significant gains in agricultural yields through our Feed the
Future Program, our Food Security Program, they had two
droughts and a hurricane, and it completely wiped out all of
those gains that were made.
And so adapting to climate change through the use of new
seed varieties, for example, and energy efficiency and
alternative energy is a way in which they can reduce their
economic loss as well as the loss of life which exists in Haiti
after these kinds of violent weather events.
Mr. Duncan. Speaking of energy, we can have a whole hearing
on whether climate change is manmade and whether we can have
any impact on that or not and what the policy of the
administration is doing to further an agenda.
But I would like to hear how you are proposing to work with
Latin American region countries on energy. And, look, I
understand the solar panels that you have put up in areas that
don't have electricity, and how you can improve the quality of
life, and all of that. You don't need me to go there; I am with
you on that. Okay? I understand a lot of that.
But I would like to know, how are we working with Mexico?
How are we working with some of these other countries on energy
security? And let us focus south because Keystone Pipeline, the
chairman has already mentioned I believe. So I would love to
hear what some of the priorities are there.
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you. I really appreciate that question.
I think actually the future, in terms of energy and energy
self-sufficiency, in this hemisphere is one of the most
exciting areas we are looking at. But there is no doubt that
when you talk about energy security and energy improvements,
right, whether it is in North America where all of the
countries are producing more energy, or in Brazil where you are
looking at presalt deposits, or Argentina which has both oil
and shale gas, you have big sections of this hemisphere which
do not have energy resources, and which need support to make
sure that they can try and access sustainable economic growth
with energy that is not always going to be imported oil.
In particular, in Central America and the Caribbean, we are
looking--the North American countries need to look very
carefully at how we can help those countries. Central American
countries, some of it is connectivity. We have this Connecting
the Americas 2022 Program, which is designed to connect the
grids and make sure that electricity gets further out in these
countries.
In some places, that runs up against tough government
resistance because of entrenched interests, but there is energy
throughout the hemisphere that we can help bring--depending on
the regulatory environment and bringing investors to countries,
so that they are not as dependent on a single source of energy
such as many in the Caribbean are on Petrocaribe.
Mr. Duncan. So just finishing up here, how about export of
LNG to the Caribbean countries?
Ms. Jacobson. This was a subject that was of great interest
to all of the Caribbean countries when they have met with both
the President and the Vice President. And both have told the
Caribbean countries and the Central American countries that
they have heard that request, and they are definitely going to
take it into consideration as we make determinations on export
of LNG.
Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I went over time, and
I appreciate your lenience.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
Mr. DeSantis, you are recognized.
Mr. DeSantis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
How would you characterize Russia's influence in the region
and given what we are seeing with Putin, his impulses vis-a-vis
Eastern Europe? Do we foresee him continuing to try to increase
his presence and his ability to project power in the Western
Hemisphere?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you for the question, Congressman. I
think that what we have seen over the recent past is the
Russian relationship with the hemisphere has been both
economic, commercial, and, to some extent, military--that is,
weapons and other equipment sales. And some of those have
increased, although I would emphasize that the balance in the
hemisphere has not changed. It is still very low in terms of
Russian equipment or military sales.
We have also seen the Russian comments recently, or others
in the hemisphere, talking about renewed Russian presence. As
you probably know, Russia closed its last base in the
hemisphere in Cuba in 2002. In many countries in the
hemisphere, it is constitutionally prohibited to have foreign
bases.
And our information thus far is that no country we have
spoken to is in the process of opening any Russian bases in the
hemisphere, but you can be certain that it is something we are
continuing to watch very closely.
Mr. DeSantis. And so what would the administration's policy
be if, for example, Russia wanted to reestablish a base in Cuba
and Cuba was supportive of that?
Ms. Jacobson. I am always wary of hypotheticals. But it is
something that we have made clear we would have difficulty
with, and we certainly hope the countries in the hemisphere are
not looking at that possibility. But right now we don't see
that happening.
Mr. DeSantis. With respect to Venezuela--and I join some of
my colleagues who would like to see some more movement there--I
think that those folks are really fighting against a corrupt
regime. Can you give us a sense as to the extent to which, as
it stands now, that regime is being propped up by Castro's
regime in Cuba?
I mean, I know I have read that there are tens of thousands
of Cuban troops that are in Venezuela. So what is the
administration's position on the extent of Cuban influence in
this Venezuelan situation?
Ms. Jacobson. Well, certainly we have seen the same
information that I think all of you have in terms of the
numbers of Cubans in Venezuela. They are high. There are a lot
of Cubans there. Whether that has had a determinative effect on
how Venezuelan decisions have been made is not entirely clear,
quite honestly, but obviously it is something that concerns us.
Similarly, though, it is very clear that Cuba is highly
dependent on Venezuela's oil, and so that is a relationship in
which each of them obviously has a great deal at stake. At this
point, that is one of the reasons we think it is so important
for all Venezuelans to have a voice, because it is important
that the decisions ultimately be made by Venezuelans, not by
any outside country.
Mr. DeSantis. Absolutely. I look at a place like Bolivia,
and it just seems like there is a lot of bad actors that have
really a leftist government. I know there is Cuban influence,
Venezuela influence. I have read, and I wanted to get your
thoughts on the extent to which the Iranians are trying to
exert influence in the region generally, but I specifically
have heard reports with respect to Bolivia.
Ms. Jacobson. We watch the Iranian presence very carefully,
because as has been said before by my bosses, we do not
consider it benign in the hemisphere. It is something we do
watch and worry about and monitor.
At this point, we don't see an enormous amount of Iranian
influence in countries like Bolivia or Venezuela, not
necessarily for lack of trying. There are lots of agreements
signed and there are visits. What we don't necessarily see is
implementation or completion of those agreements. They tend to
be more rhetorical, designed to convey a sense of influence
that we don't necessarily see taking place on the ground.
But that does not mean that we are not going to be watching
it very closely. And as we have done in the past, when there
have been entities in the hemisphere that have engaged with
Iranian ways that either violate U.S. sanctions or U.N.
sanctions we will take action to sanction those organizations
as we have done with a number of organizations in Venezuela
over the years.
Mr. DeSantis. Great. Well, thank you for that.
And I am about out of time, so I will yield back the
balance to the chairman.
Mr. Salmon. I thank the gentleman.
If you have time, I know the ranking member and I each have
another question. And if you have another one also, Mr.
DeSantis, that would be great.
Just a comment on Mr. Duncan's concerns about LNG and the
Caribbean. I don't think the issue is the State Department. The
State Department I think is very, very helpful where we have
been considering that. Every time I have talked to your folks,
they have been very, very supportive. The problem is the
Department of Energy and getting the permits going.
And I have also had numerous meetings with folks from our
energy industry, oil and gas industry, and they are capping the
gas off. And they are burning off excess gas because we have so
much surplus right now.
And it seems like it would be an incredible opportunity for
us not just to be able to create jobs from the sale of that
gas, but also from a geopolitical perspective, it would be so
great. We would able to further enhance our trade relationship
with those countries in the Caribbean. So any chance you get to
talk with your counterparts in DOE, we would really appreciate
your thoughtful suggestions to them to maybe get off the dime a
little bit.
Assistant Secretary, you mentioned the 100,000 Strong
Program, and I noted that included in the list of countries
eligible to participate is Ecuador. And we have discussed they
are not necessarily a real good partner as of late, and not
really heading in the right direction.
Yet Paraguay is not included among the eligible countries,
and they have been making a lot of reforms, trying to be a good
partner in the region. And I am concerned about the message
that sends to the people of Paraguay. Is there something we can
do about that.
Ms. Jacobson. No. Let me clarify. Everyone is eligible to
participate, and certainly Paraguay is. I was actually just in
Paraguay about 10 days ago--a great relationship, a lot going
on, and definitely a place where we want to increase the
educational exchanges, among other things.
Mr. Salmon. Okay. Well, that is good, because I have had
folks from Paraguay expressing some concern. And so if that is
the case, then maybe it is just a lack of understanding.
Ms. Jacobson. We had a conversation about it when I was
there, and I think there was a bit of a miscommunication, and
we are now working to move ahead on increased partnerships.
Thank you for that.
Mr. Salmon. Okay. That is great.
Mr. Sires.
Mr. Sires. I just have one question. I was wondering why,
as I look through my notes, we are increasing funding to El
Salvador, where they also may receive a second Millennium
Challenge Corporation Compact worth $277 million. Why hasn't
the administration decided to prioritize aid to El Salvador as
compared to other countries in Central America?
Ms. Jacobson. Let me just start that off, and Beth may have
some additional comments. First of all, the approval of a
second compact for MCC--and I don't like to speak for them--but
it is my understanding that the approval of the second compact
for MCC was quite a few months ago. And because elections were
coming up in El Salvador, it was important to hold off on
moving ahead because there was going to be a new government.
So that has been held, and we now do have a government that
will be taking office in June, I think, is the inauguration,
and then we will see about moving forward on that. But El
Salvador had met all of the criteria for a second compact. El
Salvador is also a partnership for growth country, and,
obviously, that is something that is more Beth's lane than
mine.
Obviously, we are hopeful that we are going to be able to
work with this new government, and there are some signs that
some of the people being appointed to positions such as from
the private sector into the economic team, that there is a real
understanding of the importance of working with the private
sector.
El Salvador still faces huge challenges. Its murder rate
has gone back up. And so there is a real desire I think to work
with El Salvador and on the issues that they face. But,
obviously, with the new government coming in, we will have to
see how that relationship plays out.
Mr. Sires. They still have a big gang issue.
Ms. Jacobson. Yes. No. I mean, that is a huge issue and one
that is important to us, because we see the connections to it
here in the United States. As Beth noted, the communities where
we have worked have seen reductions in crime, and our hope is
that the new Salvadoran Government can try and replicate those
models to reduce some of the gang violence and some of the
prevention for young people going into gangs in the first
place.
But let me assure you, frankly, that Honduras and Guatemala
remain extremely high priorities for us. It is not really a
question of one or the other. All of them confront huge
challenges.
Mr. Sires. Ms. Hogan?
Ms. Hogan. Well, I would just like to add a point to
elaborate a little bit on the decrease that we are seeing in
crime and violence in the communities in which we are working.
We are going through a comprehensive evaluation of our citizen
security programs, particularly our violence reduction
programs.
And what we--we have finished the Guatemala--excuse me, the
El Salvador chapter of this study, and what we have seen is
that in the communities where USAID has invested in crime and
violence reduction strategies, there has been a 33-percent drop
in robberies, a 67-percent decrease in homicides, and a 110-
percent decrease in extortions and bribery.
So we have got a model that is working. We are also doing
these evaluations in other countries, and we look forward to
bringing you that evaluation when it is available and briefing
you on it, because I think, we have found a model that works.
Mr. Sires. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
Mr. DeSantis, did you have an additional question?
Well, I think we have asked the questions that have been on
our minds, and we really appreciate all of your thoughtful
responses.
There is no further business, so this subcommittee is
adjourned.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 3:28 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]