[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
WESTERN HEMISPHERE BUDGET REVIEW 2013: WHAT ARE U.S. PRIORITIES?
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 25, 2012
__________
Serial No. 112-152
__________
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
74-000PDF WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ELTON GALLEGLY, California ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois BRAD SHERMAN, California
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
RON PAUL, Texas RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
MIKE PENCE, Indiana ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
CONNIE MACK, Florida THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska DENNIS CARDOZA, California
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
TED POE, Texas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio FREDERICA WILSON, Florida
DAVID RIVERA, Florida KAREN BASS, California
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York
RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
ROBERT TURNER, New York
Yleem D.S. Poblete, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere
CONNIE MACK, Florida, Chairman
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
DAVID RIVERA, Florida ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey Samoa
ELTON GALLEGLY, California DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESS
The Honorable Roberta S. Jacobson, Assistant Secretary of State,
Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State. 5
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
The Honorable Roberta S. Jacobson: Prepared statement............ 7
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 30
Hearing minutes.................................................. 31
The Honorable Connie Mack, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western
Hemisphere:
Prepared statement............................................. 33
Material submitted for the record.............................. 34
WESTERN HEMISPHERE BUDGET REVIEW 2013: WHAT ARE U.S. PRIORITIES?
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 25, 2012
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 o'clock p.m.,
in room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Connie Mack
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Mack. The subcommittee will come to order. I first want
to thank everyone, especially our witness, for joining us for
our hearing today.
After recognizing myself and the ranking member, Mr. Engel,
for 5 minutes each for opening statements, I will recognize the
members of the subcommittee for 2 minutes each, for their
opening statements. We will then proceed directly to hear
testimony from our distinguished witness.
The full text of the written testimony will be inserted
into the record. Without objections, members may have 5 days to
submit statements and questions for the record. After we hear
from our witness, individual members will be recognized for 5
minutes each for questions to our witness. And I now recognize
myself for an opening statement.
It is a new year, with a new budget hearing, and things
look worse for the United States today than they did last year.
We spent approximately $1.8 billion on programs in the Western
Hemisphere last year, and we find that the region has less
economic freedom, an increased homicide rate and reduced press
freedom. If it was a private company generating this data
instead of the U.S. Government, it would be made clear that the
product is failing to provide desired results and the contract
would not be extended.
Unfortunately, these figures represent the outcome of the
U.S. Government's programs and this backsliding is compounded
by an increased lack of respect for the United States. The
headlines emanating from the Summit of the Americas widely
reported that the United States is isolated within the region.
You have been in a senior position on issues relating to the
hemisphere for over 10 years. During this time we have not held
the Organization of American States accountable for their
inability or lack of desire to act on behalf of democracy in
the hemisphere. Now we see the discussion of redefining
democracy gaining steam in the region. While it may be a
complex system of governing and is difficult to attain and
maintain, democracy has but one definition: Government by the
people.
It is clear that Cuba does not have government by the
people. Other nations in the region have mutilated government
by the people by utilizing executive power to alter
constitutions and by daily assaults on free speech. Democratic
principles act as a standard for protecting freedom. If these
principles slip within our region, the impact to security and
the economy will be lasting.
Over the past 10 years, U.S. assistance supporting
democratic efforts has been cut while the OAS has received
yearly increases. Nicaragua and Ecuador have worked counter to
freedom and received a boost in U.S. funding, and new global
climate change programs have maintained a healthy stipend.
Meanwhile, our allies were dragged through a negative campaign
on the free trade agreements, and frustrated on the Keystone XL
pipeline. Are we to understand that $78 million spent on
climate change programs outside of our country took priority
over enhancing business partnerships and the principles of
freedom for the citizens of our region?
Backsliding in the hemisphere is extensive, with attacks on
the press and business from Argentina to Ecuador, Ortega's
stealing the election in Nicaragua, Chavez's involvement in all
of the above while ceding Venezuela to drug traffickers and
terrorists. Billions of dollars are going to fight the drug
trade with countries who take a public stand against U.S.
policies, all while the region bands together to demand the
world's longest dictatorship in Cuba a seat at the democratic
gathering of nations.
Assistant Secretary, I look forward to hearing how you will
improve the markers on this declining state in which we find
ourselves. As I have said, and I am sure you agree, the
strengthening of our economy and the durability of our national
security starts right here with the powerful economies in our
region and at our borders. Unfortunately, our policies have
come down to promoting the lowest common denominator in an
attempt to maintain friends. In the end we have lost our
friends and our values.
I hope that you will explain how you will use your new
position, and a requested $1.5 billion to set the United States
on a more prosperous path forward, standing with our allies and
putting our principles before our adversaries.
With that I now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Engel,
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Engel. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
holding this hearing today. With the Summit of the Americas
having taken place in Cartagena, Colombia, just 1\1/2\ weeks
ago, this hearing is a timely review of U.S. policies and
priorities in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Before discussing our region, I would like to extend my
warmest congratulations to Assistant Secretary Roberta Jacobson
whose nomination was recently approved by the Senate. Roberta,
your work is widely respected and your abilities are highly
regarded by me and by many, many others. I could not be happier
for you, for the Department, for our country, and I wish you
the best of luck. And I am anxious to hear what you will be
testifying about today.
I must say, however, that your nomination was yet another
example of how the nominations process in the Senate is
failing. When individual senators can hold up qualified
nonpolitical nominees like yourself due to one agenda or
another, it just shows that the system is broken and the time
to fix it is now. Mr. Chairman, so Mr. Mack, if you are in the
other body I am going to count on you to fix the system.
Mr. Chairman, you and I were with President Obama as well
as Secretary Jacobson at the Summit of the Americas. We had the
opportunity to speak with leaders of the region about the
conditions in their countries, how they see the region, their
ties with the United States. We learned a great deal about how
our friends to the south view key issues including how to work
together to halt the illicit drug trade and associated
violence, and expand trade and prosperity to all people in our
hemisphere.
Personally, I would like to express my deepest thanks to
President Obama for including me in his delegation at the
Summit. It was eye opening to watch the proceedings, not from
the angle of the legislative branch, but through the lens of
the executive. And having been there, I must say that President
Obama, Secretary Clinton and the rest of the U.S. team
performed very well and represented our country with
distinction. I thank them for our efforts.
Many good things happened at the Summit of the Americas,
many good things that the United States is doing. You wouldn't
necessarily know that from the media coverage who was focusing
on the scandal, but believe me, there were many, many important
things at that Summit and I was proud to be a part of it.
Secretary Jacobson, I know the subcommittee is looking
forward to hearing from you on some of the key issues we are
monitoring in our region. I think we need to continue to assist
Haiti so it can rebuild from the earthquake. We will listen
carefully to your thoughts on how the drug crime is affecting
our friends in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, and
how our counter narcotics response is proceeding. We look
forward to your comments on the more challenging countries in
the hemisphere including Venezuela, Ecuador and others, and of
course, Cuba.
As Mr. Mack mentioned, many of the countries are demanding
that the next time there is a Summit that Cuba be a part of it.
I question and say, well, what is Cuba's responsibility? We
wanted to invite them, but what are they willing to do in order
to get invited? And so far I don't think we have seen very
much. And with the U.S.-Colombia FTA entering force next month,
we are hoping you will discuss how this will expand prosperity
in the region and create jobs in the U.S., but also your
thoughts on the status of implementation of the Labor Action
Plan.
So Mr. Chairman, I thank you again for holding this
hearing, and I look forward to the testimony.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Engel. And I would now like to
recognize Mr. Sires for 2 minutes for an opening statement.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Chairman Mack. Congratulations on
your confirmation. Congratulations on your appointment. You
have an easy job. It is only about, I don't know how many
countries we have but--I would just share a couple of things of
my concern. And first I want to thank Chairman Mack for taking
the trip down to the Summit. It was very informative. And it
was nice to see the Secretary there.
But in meeting with the different Presidents and the
different dignitaries that we met with, I took one thing away,
which is very important and obviously is also our concern, is
the drug problem. And one of the things that I took with me is
the concern that we are not doing a regional effort to combat
the cartels. I think that we put a lot of money in one country.
I don't think we put enough on some of the other countries. And
from what I gather is what happens, when we fight in Mexico or
we put some money in some of the other countries, the other
countries become roots. And it is that old expression of the
balloon. You squeeze it here and something else pop out
someplace else.
So I have been saying this since I got to Congress, that
our effort has to be a regional effort. This is not now that we
are in the minority, but when we were in the majority we always
talked about a regional effort. And it was just confirmed in
talking with some of the Presidents at the Summit. They are
concerned that they are not getting enough assistance to help
us fight the drug problem.
The other thing that concerns me is that it seems that we
are trending away from the Western Hemisphere and looking at
South-Central Asia and the Middle East, and some of the money
seems to be going there. I think that there is no better
opportunity for us than in the Western Hemisphere. And to take
money away at this time, I don't think is really the best
policy that this country can have.
And with that I will end, and I will let the Assistant
Secretary make her comments, then I have some questions for the
Assistant Secretary later. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you. And now I would like to recognize Mr.
Rivera from Miami for 2 minutes for an opening statement.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Madam
Secretary, thank you for being here. Very nice to see you again
after spending some time together in Cartagena.
In terms of my opening statement, I just want to give you
some of my reflections based on our trip to participate and
observe the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia. And
one of the biggest concerns that I took away from that Summit
was this notion that I believe President Santos had introduced
maybe weeks or months earlier. When the issue of Cuba's
integration into the Summit process came up, President Santos
talked about perhaps the need to redefine our definition of
democracy. Because as we know, one of the premises of the
Summit process is of course participation of democratic
nations. And I think it is a very dangerous slippery slope that
we get into if Presidents start talking about redefining
democracy, because I think there are a lot of tyrants around
the world and certainly in Latin America, or prospective
tyrants that could seek refuge in the notion that we somehow
need to redefine democracy just to make an accommodation or to
apologize for a communist, totalitarian dictatorship in Cuba.
So I want to explore that a little more in my question and
answer session, but I certainly want you to know that I hope
this administration will summarily reject the notion that
democracy needs to be redefined somehow in order so that we can
accommodate tyrants like the Castro brothers, because all that
will do is encourage further anti-democratic behavior in the
hemisphere.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. I would now like to
recognize our witness. And first of all, again, congratulations
on your appointment and nomination.
The honorable Roberta Jacobson currently serves as the
Assistant Secretary for the Western Hemisphere Affairs Bureau.
She has had a long and distinguished career, and we mean that
in a good way, with the State Department, and on issues
relating to the Western Hemisphere. You are certainly no
stranger to the committee, to the Hemisphere, and we value your
input and direction and look forward to a spirited conversation
about how we improve our relations in Latin America to do what,
I think, most people desire and that is see the cause of
freedom and democracy extended to all.
So with that I recognize the Assistant Secretary for 5
minutes for her opening statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERTA S. JACOBSON, ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF STATE, BUREAU OF WESTERN HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. Chairman
Mack, Ranking Member Engel, members of the committee, it is a
privilege to be here today, and it is particularly nice to be
back in this chamber after an absence of several months. And I
really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you, and the
support and engagement that this subcommittee has given to our
efforts in the Western Hemisphere. I also thank all of you for
being in Cartagena, Colombia, and I look forward to talking
about the Summit of the Americas with you.
We are fortunate that in our hemisphere we are
overwhelmingly presented with opportunities to advance U.S.
objectives and promote democracy and greater prosperity for the
United States and all the countries of the region. As you
noted, the President's and the Secretary's engagements in
Colombia demonstrated the power of this vision to expand social
and economic opportunity, but the Summit also provided an
opportunity to continue our work standing up for shared
democratic values in the Americas. We are especially engaged in
responding to threats against democratic governance and freedom
of expression, threats to citizen security and threats from
external actors in the Western Hemisphere that directly impact
the security of the United States.
The Summit of the Americas showcased the region's rapid
change. Although obscured by reporting on other issues, the
Summit highlighted the many practical ways that governments and
citizens in the Americas are coming together to solve problems
and build a more successful and connected future. President
Obama reinforced the spirit of partnership that has been at the
core of his administration's policy in the region. The
Colombian Government's program for this year's Summit,
including the CEO forum and civil society forums, was a
successful example of what Secretary Clinton calls ``the three-
legged stool of a democratic society,'' accountable
governments, private sectors creating opportunities and engaged
civil societies.
The initiative that we launched at the Summit included the
establishment of the Small Business Network of the Americas to
provide technical assistance to small and medium sized
enterprises and encourage American SMEs to take advantage of
the market in this region, announcement of the Women's
Entrepreneurship network, advancement of the President's
100,000 Strong in the Americas effort to increase student
exchanges, expansion of regional broadband capacity, and
support for innovations efforts in development. I am especially
enthusiastic about the United States' role in the creation of
Colombia's Connect 2022 initiative to expand electrical
connectivity throughout the Americas.
Through equal partnership and the power of proximity, the
United States is working with capable regional partners to
address key challenges facing the people of the Americas.
Increasingly, these partnerships do not require U.S.
assistance, as more and more countries become global players
and donors in their own right. At the same time, transnational
crime in the hemisphere has caused violence that makes day-to-
day life for some of the region's people intolerable. Sustained
U.S. engagement and assistance on this front is required to
counter these threats, to improve the lives of people
throughout the region and protect our security interests.
The administration's Fiscal Year 2013 request of $1.65
billion for the Western Hemisphere prioritizes our security
initiatives in Mexico, in Colombia, in Central America and in
the Caribbean. Our request for these initiatives reflect an
emphasis on enhancing capacity and strengthening institutions
over the long term. Our assistance draws on the capacity of
partners in the hemisphere such as Colombia and Mexico, and
other international donors such as Canada, the EU, Spain, the
Inter-American Development Bank and others. Our Fiscal Year
2013 request also prioritizes assistance for Haiti to support
the country's ongoing development efforts focused on sanitation
and health services, expansion of energy infrastructure,
economic growth to increase job creation, and improving the
government's ability to deliver needed services. In Mexico we
continue our shift away from heavy equipment and toward
institutional capacity building. We are continuing to work with
Colombia and its whole-of-government effort to expand state
presence in former conflict zones and protect human rights and
economic development.
During the Summit of the Americas, the President also
announced our intention to seek an increase to at least $130
million for our assistance under the Central American Citizens
Security Partnership in response to continued high levels of
violence in that region.
Finally, let me mention that democracy assistance is also a
critical component in achieving our goals, and our commitment
to democracy and human rights throughout the hemisphere is
unwavering. We will continue to support human rights activists
and fundamental freedoms around the world, including in
challenging environments like Nicaragua, Ecuador, Venezuela and
Cuba.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to
continuing to work with you to advance U.S. interests in the
hemisphere.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jacobson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Mack. Thank you very much. Thank you for your opening
statement, and I now recognize myself 5 minutes for questions.
I want to explore a little bit more with you the idea that
we seem to be cutting funds for supporting democratic efforts,
but we see an increase in funds that goes to the OAS. Can you
tell me why is it that it appears that--I will just say it this
way. It appears that we are making it more difficult for our
allies, and that the enemies of the United States tend to be
getting a pass. We see it through the FTAs and how long it took
in this drawn out campaign of the FTAs. We see it now with the
Keystone XL pipeline. In foreign policy, if we want to say it
matters to be a friend of the United States, but then when we
have the ability for a Keystone pipeline or for the FTAs we
drag our allies through the mud.
Can you kind of explain why it is that funding for
democracies has gone down while increased funding to the OAS,
when the OAS has, I believe, failed in its mission? And then
why do we tend to give a hard time to our allies instead of
supporting them with free trade agreements and Keystone XL
pipeline?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think I want to
start off by saying that we certainly are delighted that the
free trade agreements are entering into force, that we were
able to move those ahead, and that they are strong free trade
agreements that will serve both countries, in each case the
bilateral agreements, very well. We now have free trade
agreements that run from Canada all the way down through South
America in many countries of the hemisphere, and that remains a
very important part of our policy.
Mr. Mack. But you will admit that it was a very long time,
and you have to admit that the length of time it took to get
them done, in relation to how long it takes free trade
agreements to get done in other places with Latin America
countries and other countries, has made it difficult for us in
the hemisphere.
Ms. Jacobson. It did take a long time, there is no doubt.
But in the end, what we achieved in terms of agreements with
all of these countries, I think, were stronger agreements. The
Labor Action Plan and the implementation of that action plan is
making a difference on the ground, and we are delighted that
this is going to open up such new opportunities for American
jobs and for the economies in the region.
But when it comes to supporting democracies and supporting
our allies, let me start with, for example, the Citizen
Security initiatives, which while Mexico and Colombia are going
down, because those are countries that are capable of taking
over those programs certainly as many years after we began Plan
Colombia as we now are, but in places like Central America the
funding is going up because we know that our allies in Central
America who are fighting this shared responsibility with us
need more help to confront this problem.
But I also want to mention that in the OAS there are some
critically important efforts that the OAS has undertaken on
democracy issues where we think we have to continue to support
them including financially. That includes election observation
and reporting and reports that have come out in very
challenging environments such as Nicaragua. It includes the
Special Rapporteur for Press Freedom, an issue that I know many
on this committee are concerned about, and an issue that has
been under some pressure in the OAS where we think it is
important that we continue to fund those efforts.
Mr. Mack. Thank you for your answer. I don't know that I
completely agree. I mean if you just look this graph, it shows
that the freedom of the press in Latin America has been on a
steady decline.
[Graph shown.]
Mr. Mack. Again this is one of the things I pointed to in
my opening statements. I don't know that this is a show of
success for what is happening. And I think the OAS stands in
the way of democracy, and that we ought to be strengthening our
relationships with our friends and allies instead of turning it
over to the OAS. And I know you will disagree, and I am sure we
will have plenty of time to talk.
But I want to hit on this idea, or about Cuba for moment,
because it was disturbing at the Summit to hear the different
countries, so many of them, talk about wanting Cuba to be part
of the next Summit or be included in the OAS when Cuba is not a
democracy. And the idea that we are going to allow a
dictatorship to be part of an organization that is to promote
democracy, and even to go so far as to talk about redefining
democracy almost like trying to create a special space for Cuba
that shouldn't exist. I mean this is a country, and I think you
would agree with me on this that all the tools, everything that
needs to happen with Cuba is in their hands. With free and fair
elections, releasing the political prisoners, freedom of
speech, freedom of the press, becoming a democracy they would
be welcomed. But I am concerned about the overall take in the
Western Hemisphere that we are losing ground even with our
allies on this issue. And I would just like to get your
response to that.
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the
President and the Secretary have addressed this issue very
well. We certainly agree with you that democracy is not a
relative concept, it is a universal concept. And it is
enshrined in documents in this hemisphere, in the Inter-
American Democractic Charter, and in the Summit process from
2001, when democractic governance was required of those
participating in Summits. And so we too look forward to the day
when Cuba can participate in the Summits, but that day has not
come yet. So we feel very strongly about that, that that is a
requirement to participate.
Mr. Mack. You would also say it hasn't come yet because it
is Cuba's responsibility, not the responsibility of the United
States or any other country in the hemisphere to turn a blind
eye to what they are doing in----
Ms. Jacobson. Absolutely, absolutely. The road map has been
set out for Cuba to take that path and enter back into the
inter-American system.
Mr. Mack. Thank you. I would now like to recognize
Congressman Engel, the ranking member, for 5 minutes for
questions.
Mr. Engel. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. You and I
agree on much of what needs to be done vis-a-vis the United
States and in Latin America policy. One of the reasons I
supported the free trade agreements with both Panama and
Colombia was that I think it is important that we let our
friends know that there is an upside into being allies with the
United States. I think that there is a geopolitical reason for
us to do these things and I think that is very important. And I
do agree with the chairman that we have to show countries that
it is good to align with us, not with the Chavez' of the world,
because we are reliable. So we share that. I do, however, think
that the President did a very good job, and the administration
did a very good job in the free trade agreements. It is very
difficult, very politically tricky, and the President did it.
And it is done and I commend the administration for doing it,
and I think we are going to see more things like that.
I also agree with the chairman that the OAS is a far from
perfect organization. But I think where we disagree is I
believe it is the best we have. If we don't strengthen the OAS
and if we start pulling back so that the United States does not
have as much influence as it does on the OAS, we are going to
find that the alternatives are far worse. For instance, I want
to ask the Secretary how does she view the CELAC? Is it a
competitor to the OAS? Shouldn't we be concerned? I believe we
should. That the U.S. is not a member but many of the countries
antagonistic to the United States in the hemisphere, including
Cuba, are.
So it is almost like be careful what you wish for, because
if there are these other organizations that do not allow the
U.S. or Canada to participate, I think we are better off
staying with the OAS, strengthening the OAS, not pulling funds
away from the OAS, and going with the organization where we
have influence and where we can help to shape things the way we
see it.
And I do agree with both you and the chairman that, and I
said it in my opening remarks, that Cuba needs to do a lot more
before it can be admitted to the OAS or the Summit of the
Americas, and I almost find it preposterous that they refuse to
do more. They still have Alan Gross, an American citizen, and
yet they think that they can just become members of all these
organizations without making a change. So I am wondering if you
could talk to me about CELAC and OAS and these other things
that I mentioned.
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you very much, Congressman. I think we
agree on a lot of these issues. Multilateral diplomacy has been
a big part of this administration's push. We think that when we
act with other countries in the hemisphere we get better
results, we have a stronger position. The best form for doing
that, we believe, is the OAS. It is the longest standing body
in the hemisphere. It has got institutions that have been
developed to carry out some of its functions, technical
functions, whether that is election monitoring or the Special
Rapporteurs on various issues that I think are very important
at giving voice to some of these democracy issues and others.
CELAC, honestly, is very new. It is hard to say where it is
going and what it will be like. Obviously there are lots of
different regional organizations, some of which do not include
us, and have existed on and off over the past number of years.
So I think it is a little bit early for us to say whether CELAC
really becomes a competitor to the OAS. Our goal is to support
the OAS and to continue to view the OAS, which someday will
have, I think, a democratic Cuba as a member and thereby
include all of the countries of the hemisphere, as the primary
multilateral vehicle in the hemisphere.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Can you talk a little bit about the
Summit of the Americas? We all went, all of us up here, all
four of us up here. And if you listen to the media you hear
about the scandal with the Secret Service but you don't hear
about the good work that was done. What is your assessment of
the work that was done at the Summit?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you. I guess I would start out by
saying that the sheer fact, and many of you spoke about this,
the President spoke about this, the sheer fact that we were in
Cartageda, Colombia, safely for a number of days in a
hemispheric gathering was pretty remarkable after the decade-
plus that Colombia has been through. And I think in some ways
Colombia's leadership of this Summit demonstrated just how far
they have come and the kind of partnerships we really do want
to create throughout the hemisphere. And so I think Colombia,
as the host and leader of this Summit, was very significant.
Similarly, I think the way they structured this, and I made
reference to this in my statement, the way they structured this
Summit was a very important model. By having a CEO summit where
the private sector really, for the first time, was able to have
a true dialogue with the leaders, and a civil society summit,
they set up a model which really can serve us well in the
future. These Summits can't be government leaders isolated from
those two other constituencies in the hemisphere.
But lastly, I would note that although there was a lot of
commentary on the lack of a political declaration signed by all
the leaders at the end of the Summit, it isn't the first time
that that has occurred. And unfortunately, we didn't have
consensus on every issue. One of these as you know was Cuba,
there were others. But what is, I think, missing from a lot of
the commentary is, there was huge amount of support for 16
other paragraphs that everybody agreed on. The importance of
focusing on energy both traditional, conventional, and
renewable. The importance of education to make societies more
competitive in the 21st century. The importance of empowering
women and small businesses. So unfortunately, the focus in the
press wasn't on those pragmatic solutions, but there was a huge
amount of discussion on those in the Summit itself.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Engel. I would now like to
recognize Mr. Rivera for 5 minutes for questions.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to raise
the specter of the recent visit between President Obama and Mr.
Medvedev, Putin's puppet, in Russia, in which President Obaman
expressed flexibility or a willingness to be more flexible with
respect to U.S.-Russian relations after the upcoming election.
And Mr. Medvedev's response that he will of course inform his
master, Putin, of the President's willingness for flexibility.
Because in essence what the President was signaling to our
allies like Poland, a great ally, that we are willing to throw
them under a bus on an issue like missile defense, and risk our
own security as well once the nuisance of an election is behind
President Obama. I think that was an extraordinary message to
be sending to our allies, and a very dangerous message to be
sending to our foes.
I know that in Cartagena after the Summit there was a lack
of consensus as you just cited regarding a statement inviting
Cuba to participate in the next Summit. And I know some of our
diplomats saw that as some sort of a victory and that thus
maybe we should tone down expressing our concerns on this
matter, because of course that is what diplomats do. They don't
want to make waves. But I believe President Obama's colloquy
with Medvedev gives me grave concerns on a host of foreign
policy and national security issues.
So let me just ask you specifically and directly, did
President Obama or any member of this administration
communicate to representatives of any government, any private
assurances of flexibility after this election with respect to
Cuba's admission into the Summit process?
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, we did not.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you. Let me ask another question very
directly. If President Obama is reelected and assuming you
continue in your post, which I hope you will, and assuming Cuba
remains the totalitarian dictatorship that exists today when
that Summit comes up again in Panama, will the United States
attend the next Summit in Panama if Cuba participates?
Ms. Jacobson. I have to say, Congressman, there is so many
hypotheticals in there.
Mr. Rivera. There is only two. President Obama being
reelected, and Cuba being a totalitarian, communist
dictatorship that is on the list of terrorist sponsors by your
State Department, that your State Department has issued. You
have placed Cuba on the list of terrorist sponsors. If those
conditions exist at the next Summit in Panama, will the United
States participate if Cuba participates?
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, I can't say definitely what
status Cuba will have 3 years hence--hang on 1 second.
Mr. Rivera. Today's status.
Ms. Jacobson. But if nothing changes then neither would our
position.
Mr. Rivera. So if nothing changes in Cuba with respect to
their governing structure, and there is an effort to include
Cuba, and indeed that effort succeeds and comes to fruition,
the United States will not participate in the Summit of the
Americas in Panama, is that correct?
Ms. Jacobson. What I can't do here is make you a promise on
behalf of the President. I can't speak for future action by the
President. But what I can tell you is nothing will have changed
in our view that Cuba should not be part of the Summit process
until they are a democracy and have made changes. If those
changes have not come, we will not believe they should be part
of the Summit process and we will have to confront that at the
time that the Summit is being planned. It might include lots of
different options.
Mr. Rivera. Well, I hope a very clear signal will be sent
by whatever administration is in power in the White House after
these elections. That under no circumstances will the United
States provide credibility, legitimacy, credence, to a
supposedly democratic process when such an anti-democratic
regime like the Castro dictatorship would be participating.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. Now I would like to
recognize Mr. Sires for 5 minutes for questions.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, let me
congratulate the Secretary of State and the President for
holding firm on not allowing Cuba in the Summit. I know it was
not easy. I was very disappointed that the OAS was hiding under
a rock in not making any comments about this issue. So that is
disappointing.
At the same time, I was more disappointed of what happened
with our security forces, not only for ruining the Summit for
the President, but really ruin it for the people of Colombia in
what they have done over the last 10 years. They tried to put a
new face on this hemisphere. They worked so hard. And yet the
news out of Colombia is about what went on with the security
forces. They all should be dismissed. There is no room for
that. And I feel very bad for the people of Colombia, they
worked very hard. And some of my Colombian friends have talked
to me and said to me, for 10 years all we see on CNN and all
these other stations is the terrorists in Colombia and what is
going on in Colombia. And now after this Summit, what we see is
about prostitutes in Colombia. So it is really a sad commentary
on those people that, and I know that not all of them did it,
but those ten or twelve people that were involved it is really
a sad commentary.
The other thing is, I want you to talk to me a little bit
about this idea that maybe we are shifting money from the
Western Hemisphere and put it on the Middle East and Asia. I am
very concerned. I really think that what I took away from the
Summit in talking to some of those Presidents is that they also
are concerned, and they are our closest neighbors. And
especially what is going on with China trying to get a foothold
in all these countries. So can you just speak a little bit to
that?
Ms. Jacobson. Absolutely. There is two things I want to
mention. One is just, before I turn to the assistance, just how
much engagement we have with countries where there is no
assistance component. You just saw the visit of President Dilma
Rousseff to Washington from Brazil, the Secretary went on to
Brazil after the Summit. We have just multiple dialogues with
Brazil. Brazil is shifting in their relationship with us vis-a-
vis assistance, to become a partner in donating assistance to
Africa with us, working together on food security. So some of
the closest relationships we have are no longer defined by
assistance because the countries have graduated, have outgrown
assistance. And that is a very good thing. But it doesn't mean
there is less of a partnership with those countries.
In other cases we have countries where we have had very
intense, very large aid relationships like with Colombia, over
about 12 years, and that aid is on a downslope, because of
Colombia's success and because of their economic ability to
assume greater financial responsibility. Again it does not
signify a lessening of our commitment to Colombia. It signifies
the gradual and managed transition of an aid relationship to
one where Colombia can take on more of that responsibility.
In Mexico the shift is from some large pieces of equipment
that are expensive, frankly, that we put in the beginning of
the Merida Initiative despite how long it took to get things
there, to one that is much more intense on training and
building capacity which, frankly, is cheaper than helicopters.
So I think it is important to recognize that while some of
those numbers are going down slightly, the intensity of the
cooperation is just as great and in some cases it is
increasing.
I think that is also true in Central America and in the
Caribbean where the capacity is not as great, where we really
do have to stay engaged longer. We have tried to maintain those
levels of funding and in some cases increase them because we
know there isn't as much capacity. So while I know that there
is a lot of attention on the Middle East, on Asia, on other
parts of the world, we think we have done a pretty good job at
defending levels of assistance that will enable us to maintain
those intense relationships on issues of critical importance to
the U.S.
Mr. Sires. I am glad to hear that, because one of the
concerns that some of the Presidents especially in Central
America have is that they are going to become the root, or they
already have become the root where the drugs are going to be
transported. And they are fearful that they do not have the
means to stop it. So I do hope that we keep concentrating in
those areas. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you. And if the Assistant Secretary doesn't
mind, we would like to have another round of questions, and
they just get easier.
I want to go back. There is clearly a difference of opinion
with the OAS, and I respect that other people have a different
opinion than mine. But what concerns me about the OAS is, we
saw what happened in Honduras, and I believe that the OAS
instead of standing up for the people of Honduras and their
democracy and constitution, instead sided with Chavez and
Zelaya. And in fact, I think that our own administration had
the wrong position and the State Department had the wrong
position.
So I don't know why we continue to, the idea of
multilateral, bilateral, if you are part of an organization
that ultimately brings down the overall strength of democracy
in an attempt to try to be friends with everybody, that is not
getting us anywhere. And you keep pointing to the work it does
in monitoring elections. There are some who think they do good
work monitoring elections, but there are some, including
myself, that don't.
We will have a longer discussion about this and maybe we
will invite you back and have another hearing on the OAS.
Because I do believe that they stand in the way of democracy
building and protecting democracies in Latin America instead of
supporting democracies. And there shouldn't be a question.
People shouldn't have to guess where the OAS or the United
States or any other democracy would stand on these issues. And
like Congressman Sires said, sometimes when they are quiet on
issues as it relates to Cuba, it causes a lot of problems here
in the United States.
But I wanted to turn quickly to Argentina. I believe, and I
have for awhile now, that Argentina is up to no good and is
turning away from freedom, democracy. We see it with the taking
of business assets, when they play shenanigans with us,
accusing the United States of doing things, and then we know
that there are court documents and court proceedings that they
continue to ignore. So I just would like to get from your
perspective, from the State Department's perspective, where you
see Argentina in its relationships to the United States. Do you
see it one that is challenged or one that is on solid footing?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that
question. And I guess I would say it is a difficult
relationship, and it is one in which we are working very hard
to try and focus on the things we can move ahead on, focus on
the positive.
I was in Argentina in February. I studied there as a
student. It is a place I have a great fondess for. And we are
trying to move ahead in areas that we can and that are
positive. But frankly, there are areas of the relationship that
are very challenging and which are not moving ahead, and some
of those are Argentina's relationship to the international
financial community.
You made reference, I think, to some of the outstanding
claims, the arbitral awards by ICSID, as the acronym is known,
which Argentina has not paid. That was the reason that we
announced at the end of March, recommendation to suspend
Argentina's GSP privileges, certain trade privileges. We think
that Argentina needs to get itself back into a positive
relationship with the international financial community both
for their own economic future and for the system and those
creditors in the United States and elsewhere. So that continues
to be a very challenging part of the relationship.
The security relationship is also not back to normal yet.
We would like it to get there, but since the incident with the
DoD plane over a year ago, we have not been able to work as
much on issues like narcotics trafficking that we would like
to. So we are still committed to working with Argentina on lots
of issues, counterterrorism, educational issues, et cetera, but
there are challenges in that relationship.
Mr. Mack. Thank you very much, my time has expired. And
Congressman Sires, do you have another question? You are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Sires. Can you talk a little bit about the progress
that we have made in Haiti with the money that we have given
them, in terms of infrastructure and basic services? Because I
know a lot of people are concerned that we are putting a lot of
money in Haiti and maybe it is not getting to the people. So
can you just talk a little bit about that?
Ms. Jacobson. Sure, thank you. There is no doubt, I think,
in anyone's mind that we would all like to see the assistance
that has been appropriated for Haiti and that is being
delivered to Haiti, implemented faster and affect people on the
ground faster. I think the last year has seen an acceleration
of the implementation of those funds. Half of the rubble from
the earthquake has now been cleared. That took a very long
time, but that is critically important. You have the number of
internally displaced persons going down from about 1.5 million
to below 0.5 million. People moving into housing. Obviously
great efforts being made against cholera to try and control the
spread of that in sanitation and health services.
But there is still a huge amount to be done, and there is
no doubt that we have to continue to, frankly, keep our foot to
the pedal here because there is a huge amount to be done. And
frankly, some of that needs to be done with a Government of
Haiti that has a Prime Minister in place. And so as you know
the Prime Minister, previous Prime Minister, has resigned. He
is in caretaker capacity. A new Prime Minister has been
nominated, passed by their Senate. And we are hopeful that that
person will be passed by the lower House and that then we will
able to accelerate the efforts still further. But there is a
great deal more to be done.
Mr. Sires. I know that the private sector has helped
immensely in Haiti. How is the coordination between the private
sector and us in terms of whatever is needed to work together
on?
Ms. Jacobson. I think that is obviously a critical part of
the reconstruction effort. There are a number of major
projects, whether it is port projects, whether it is an
industrial park that is scheduled to open fairly soon, the
private sector role in all of this and its coordination with
the international community and the donors has been critical
throughout. And that communication will continue to be very
strong.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Sires. Mr. Rivera, recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, it
has been the policy of this administration since it was
inaugurated vis-a-vis U.S-Cuba relations, to loosen travel and
trade regulations and sanctions on the Castro dictatorship. The
result of that policy, which I often refer to as unilateral
concessions to the dictatorship, have been well documented.
A wave of oppression across the island. Cuba continues to
harbor fugitives from U.S. justice including cop killers and
drug traffickers. Cuba continues to be on the State Department
list of sponsors of terrorism, even going to the extent of
taking and holding a United States citizen, Alan Gross, hostage
in Cuba with an expressed willingness, as Bill Richardson's
trip to Havana demonstrates, an expressed willingness to try to
trade that hostage to the United States. Is there anything else
the Castro dictatorship could do that would actually trigger
this administration to tighten sanctions?
Ms. Jacobson. Well, Congressman, let me start off by saying
that the People to People programs, the regulatory changes to
allow purposeful travel to Cuba are not designed as anything
that benefits the regime. They are designed to benefit the
Cuban people. They are designed to allow more contact outside
of government for Cuban citizens and American citizens in
particular areas. And so we don't see those as positive for the
Government of Cuba but for the people of Cuba.
We have kept all of the embargo provisions in place. As you
know those are, by law those are not ones that could change in
regulation, and there is no plan to change those at this point.
We have also engaged with the Cuban Government only on issues,
frankly, that are in our national interest. That are in our
national security interest when it is critical to our interests
to do so. So we believe that we have kept a very firm line on
sanctions with the Cuban Government but tried to open up space
for average Cubans separate from their government.
Mr. Rivera. Can you cite any progress in democratic reforms
on the island that have resulted from that policy?
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, I can't give you specific
examples yet of areas in which citizens have yet been able to
exercise more freely, political rights. I wish I could. But I
do believe, and I am sure that you would agree, that American
citizens are often the best amabassadors for our country. And I
do think that that increased contact helps bring us closer to--
--
Mr. Rivera. Well, of course that contact did not begin with
this administration. We have always had travel, family
unification and other types of licensed travel to Cuba, and it
hasn't resulted in any democratic reforms.
But let me just go, I only have a minute left, to Venezuela
very quickly, because my understanding is that in January of
this year you were sent documents from the Venezuelan Ministry
of Justice implicating Hugo Chavez in covering up a case
involving a 2.2 ton shipment of cocaine in November 2005, and
that according to these materials, President Chavez was
notified in writing of ``sufficient evidence linking then
Brigadier General Henry de Jesus Rangel Silva in a smuggling
case'' and that rather than ordering an inquiry of this
denunciation of Rangel Silva's involvement in narcotics
trafficking, Chavez has actually named him his Minister of
Defense. And I am wondering what action, if any, was taken to
expose this apparent criminality.
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, all I can say on that is that
when we receive information about potential wrongdoing,
allegations of wrongdoing in Venezuela as in every other
country, we make sure that we pass those documents to the
relevant U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and
continue to look at those very carefully for potential future
actions.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mack. Thank you very much, Mr. Rivera. I have one more
round of questions, and if you don't mind, well, we will make
this the last one.
One of the other issues that was talked to quite a bit
during our meetings at the Summit was this notion of legalizing
drugs. And I wanted to first give you a minute, if you would
like to, here on the record here in the committee, state the
official position of the administration and State Department
and our U.S. Government.
Ms. Jacobson. Sure. Very quickly I can tell you that that
is not a direction the United States Government believes we
should go, that legalization is not the answer to this problem.
But we understand the frustration of countries with the
violence and the difficulty in confronting trafficking, and we
have to discuss a whole lot of options to confront it, but we
don't believe legalization in the way to go.
Mr. Mack. Thank you. I think it is important. Obviously
this is an area where we agree very much, and was concerned
that there was so much talk about it in Latin America at the
Summit on this idea that dialogue is good. Well, dialogue is
good, but there are certain things you don't put on the table.
And we think that legalizing drugs is one of those issues that
just should not be on the table. We know in the United States
we have an epidemic on prescription drug abuse, and those are
legal drugs but it is the number one killer over cocaine and
heroin combined. I just wanted to give you an opportunity here
on the record. So I think that is an area we agree.
The last question that I have is, I want to talk about
Mexico a little bit. The drug cartels in Mexico have certainly
evolved over time, and there is no doubt that they are
operating in countries other than just Mexico. We know that
they are operating here in the United States. We know that they
have, operating in Central and South America. And the Merida
Initiative, although I think we all think it is good, I am not
sure that it is a program that is situated to handle the
evolution in Mexico. And I know it is a touchy subject. Every
time I bring up counterinsurgency we get our friends that
aren't happy with me.
But I believe that if we are going to be successful in
confronting these insurgencies in Mexico, then it is going to
take an all-of-government approach. And I am concerned that the
Merida Initiative lacks some of the ability to do that, and I
would like to just get your opinion on those issues.
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think you know
that I have worked on Mexico for quite a long time, and I
completely agree that a whole-of-government approach is
absolutely what is needed. What I think is important to
remember is that the Merida Initiative and the foreign
assistance that the State Department administers, which we work
with our colleagues in USAID within the State Department in our
International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Office, but also
with our colleagues in DEA, in FBI, in DHS, both ICE and
others, is only part of what we work with Mexico on. There are
also programs under DoD and for the U.S. military to work
jointly with counterparts in Mexico on training. So we feel
like we really have crossed the law enforcement and security
force spectrum to include all the best ideas to respond to the
threat and to work with counterparts.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, I appreciate that. But I guess that I
see it a little differently, and we are back to this kind of
silo mentality. And what I am talking about is, how do we
approach this where when we do an all-of-government approach
that all of government is actually working together in a
coordinated effort? And absolutely I know that there are many
agencies, departments in the U.S. Government that is
participating in Mexico, but I am concerned about the
coordination. And that I know that there has been advances. But
I think if we have a program that is going to look at it as
one, if you will, that instead of having the silo mentalities
of how we are going to deal with the insurgents in Mexico,
because look, frankly, the people who live along the southern
border are fearful. And so you have drugs and criminals and
terrorist organizations that are trying to move north across
the border, and you have guns and money that is moving south.
So it is a shared interest to secure that border and also
to ensure that the insurgents in Mexico don't have the ability
to continue to operate in the United States and in Central and
South America. So I think this whole-of-government approach
needs to be done under one spectrum instead of the silo effect
that we have now.
I will just leave that with you, and thank you very much.
Next is Mr. Sires for 5 minutes.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have a situation in
Venezuela where the President is obviously in Cuba for
treatment and elections are in October. One way maybe that the
OAS can become useful is by sending monitors to the election
process and be observers. I was just wondering if anything like
that has been discussed or anything with the OAS, and then do
you know what kind of plans are we making in case Chavez
doesn't leave Cuba?
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, we certainly believe that
international and domestic election observers will be very
important in Venezuela, and we would strongly support election
observation missions for the October elections. There is
obviously lots of different organizations that may be able to
do that. Within the OAS context, the Venezuelan Government
would have to request the OAS monitor the elections. We hope
they will do that. And we certainly are talking with partners
and folks around the hemisphere to encourage election
monitoring. But we think it is equally important that domestic
organizations be able to monitor the elections within
Venezuela.
And in terms of the issues of President Chavez' health, we
really don't have any more information than everybody else has,
but we are obviously watching things very closely making sure
we have good information, reaching out to Venezuelans of all
stripes as we have over the last number of years, and will
continue to do regardless of his health status.
Mr. Sires. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Sires. Now I will recognize Mr.
Rivera for 5 minutes for questions.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you very much, and pleasantly surprised
that we get another round. I didn't know we would. So maybe I
will ask about Cuba.
And something very interesting happened in the Summit, and
again just want you to kind of have a full association moment
here. But Congressman Sires and Congressman Mack and
Congressman Engel and I, we were in some meetings where I
remember some of us asked Presidents of Latin American
countries, why is it that there is this push to reintegrate
Cuba into the Summit process so vehemently amongst some
Presidents? And we actually had Presidents tell us in a moment
of candor that the main reason is because many Latin American
countries fear upheaval and civil unrest among the more leftist
sectors of their society, labor groups, student groups,
nongovernment organizations that are very sympathetic and have
alignments and nexus with the Castro dictatorship. And so in
order to prevent those types of disturbances and civil unrest,
they kowtow to the Castro brothers. We actually heard that from
Latin American Presidents.
President Calderon from Mexico was here yesterday. We met
with him. And I asked him what he could cite as the success of
over 50 years of engagement by Latin America in Cuba, what
democratic reforms they can cite. Because they always call our
policy a failure, so I asked him for the successes in terms of
democratic reforms of engagement in Cuba by Mexico and other
Latin American countries. And his response was, well, we were
able to extract Mexican citizens from Cuba's prisons. And
again, he stated how Cuba had these relationships with
terrorist organizations like the FARC, but they never had
terrorist problems in Mexico precisely because of their
friendly relationship with the Castro brothers.
And so you have so much experience in Latin America, and I
am just going to ask you that whatever candor you can give here
within the parameters of being a diplomat and a representative
of the U.S. Government, does any of this ring true to you?
Ms. Jacobson. I guess the part that rings true is that all
politicians have different constituencies to engage with, but I
also think the President said it really well when he talked
about moving beyond left and right. And there are universal
standards that we in this hemisphere have signed up to, and I
think some of those old debates about the left and the right
domestically in countries throughout the hemisphere are just
not as relevant as they used to be.
Mr. Rivera. So do you believe that Latin American leaders
fear the connections between the Castro brothers and leftist
elements whether they be terrorist elements or civil elements
in their societies, and therefore that is why they seem to be
so compliant toward the Castro dictatorship?
Ms. Jacobson. I think it is very hard for me to assert what
they may feel or----
Mr. Rivera. I am asking just based on your experience as a
diplomat throughout Latin America.
Ms. Jacobson. No, I appreciate that. I really do, I
appreciate that and I appreciate your confidence that I can
ascertain sort of the reasons behind this. But I certainly
think as I said, I guess, in the start, they all have
constituencies. So there may be some element of political
evaluation that this is an issue on which the left cares
deeply, and they may want to address that particular
constituency.
Mr. Rivera. Well, I appreciate that. I have 1 minute left
and I would like to ask you with respect to the Millennium
Challenge funds in Central America, particularly in El
Salvador. We have seen what has been happening with El Salvador
and confiscation of U.S. investments in El Salvador and so
forth, and in other countries in Central America. Do you think
it is time for perhaps the United States to reassess our
relationship in terms of these programs with these countries
that are having, I guess, offensive behavior really toward U.S.
interest in these countries?
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, I think it is very important
that we pursue issues of potential expropriation or takings of
properties with governments whether it is El Salvador or others
in the hemisphere, and we are going to do that pretty
agressively. But I don't think we have come to the conclusion
that it would necessarily be productive to end relationships
through the MCC or other of our assistance programs which go to
some of the poorest in those countries, and we continue to
believe are very important programs. That doesn't mean we are
not going to work on the issues of potential takings or
expropriations.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. And for the last question,
Congressman Engel is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have all mentioned
Cuba and I mentioned Alan Gross. I am wondering if you could
just update us. Is there anything new about him? It is just
really an outrage that the Castro government continues to hold
him on trumped-up charges, and it is just a disgrace. Anything
new with that?
Ms. Jacobson. Mr. Engel, I really wish I could bring you
some new news there. I truly do. This is an issue that I have
been working very hard personally, but more importantly so have
my boss, Under Secretary Sherman, and the Secretary and others.
And we have used just about every means that we could to try
and get Alan Gross home where he belongs with his family. We
had some hope that the Cuban Government would take the
opportunity of the Pope's visit to make this gesture and to
release Alan Gross. His mother's 90th birthday was just about
10 days ago while we were in Cartagena. She is very ill with
lung cancer. There is just no reason to hold this man and not
to allow him to be home with his family. And we will continue
to use every mechanism that we can, but I have no progress on
that front to report to you.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. We have all made the point that Cuba
has not moved at all toward democracy and why it should not
participate in another conference if it hasn't changed.
Democracy aside, and that is the most important issue, but
something as small as this, the Government of Cuba has shown
its total intransigence on every matter, not just democracy,
not just allowing political pluralism, not just to human
rights. This is an American citizen who does not by any stretch
of the imagination deserve to be incarcerated. And they won't
even budge on that.
So it is very disheartening that people want to still give
them a free pass and say that we should just keep a blind eye
and just pretend, that it doesn't matter what kind of
government any country has, we are all of the same. And I think
that undermines the organizations and the countries that talk
that way. It really diminishes them.
Could you talk to me about the CIFTA treaty, the gun
trafficking CIFTA treaty. The State Department has confirmed
that the U.S. in compliance with CIFTA, and is this true, and
what is the status of treaty and efforts to get it ratified in
the Senate?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Congressman. We, as you know had
sent the CIFTA treaty, the small arms treaty, to the Senate
after it was signed in 1997. What has changed since then, I am
happy to say, is that the treaty is on the State Department's
or the administration's list of priority treaties, and that is
as of last October when that went forward to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee. So we are still hoping that there will be
movement on that treaty.
Most importantly, I think it is important to make clear
that there are no U.S. laws or regulations that would have to
change for implementation of the CIFTA treaty. It recognizes
legal rights to own guns and weapons, and we do not believe
there is a conflict between the CIFTA treaty and the laws and
the rights that American citizens enjoy. So we hope that it
will move ahead. We think it is important in the hemisphere.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Let me ask you a question about
Colombia. I mentioned before that I supported the FTA with
Colombia, and I believe that Colombia is a tremendous example
of a country that works with us, is a strong ally, and I can't
say anything more. I am very pleased with the fact that they
have done everything expected of them. But can you tell me if
Colombia has fully implemented the Labor Action Plan? Because
there has been some talk that they have not, and if that is not
true, which sections still require implementation and is there
a firm timetable for implementation?
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, I think that Ron Kirk, the U.S.
Trade Representative said it pretty well in Cartagena when he
talked about the Colombian Government reaching all of the
milestones that we expected and hoped for in the Labor Action
Plan. They are clearly making serious efforts to protect trade
unionists, to ensure that there are prosecutions of cases of
violence against union leaders, and that we were pleased enough
with that progress obviously for the free trade agreement to be
put into effect. But I will tell you that there still are
things that need to be done, and we will continue to work with
the Colombian Government really without an end date but
continue to work with them to implement fully those provisions
and to continue to improve the record on trade unions.
Mr. Engel. I don't know if when I was out of the room if we
talked a lot about Mexico. What is the status of Merida? Are
the funds still flowing? We still know there is lots of help
that the Mexicans need, and I think in terms of our
relationships with countries, all the countries to our south,
none is more important than our relationship with Mexico.
Obviously we share a large border. They have been a good ally,
and what happens down there affects us up here and vice versa.
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman, we are very happy that the pace
of implementation has accelerated pretty dramatically in
Mexico. The Secretary committed that last calendar year we
would implement $500 million in assistance, and we hit that
goal, made it just over that so that we are over $900 million
implemented already in the Merida Initiative. But we are
continuing. That number continues to increase, and to continue
to work with the Mexicans. And now the shift is also to work
with Mexican states. Because Mexican police are over 400,000 in
state and local jurisdictions and only 40,000 at the Federal
level. So there is clearly a lot more we still have to do, but
there is huge progress that has been made.
Mr. Engel. Okay, I see my time is up. So I want to thank
you again, and thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Engel. And thank you very much for
your time, for your responsiveness to our questions. We
appreciate it so much and we look forward to the next time we
can have you back in front of the committee and continue the
dialogue, so thank you very much.
The committee hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:28 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Prepared statement and material submitted for the record by the
Honorable Connie Mack, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere
[GRAPHIC(S)] [NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
