24 April 2002
Powell Seeks Funding to Fight Terrorism, Violent Extremism
(Provides senators with foreign policy tour d'horizon) (9860)
The State Department is requesting about $5,000 million in fiscal year
2003 to fight terrorism and "the conditions that fuel violent
extremism," according to Secretary of State Colin Powell.
That figure is part of State's overall $16,100 million FY 2003
request, Powell told the Senate Appropriations Committee's Foreign
Operations Subcommittee in testimony April 24.
In addition, the proposed State Department budget includes:
-- $140 million for Afghanistan, for refugee repatriation, food aid,
demining, and governmental transition assistance;
-- $731 million for Andean counterdrug programs, plus a further $98
million for protection of a Colombian oil pipeline;
-- $1,400 million for USAID global health programs, including $640
million for bilateral and multilateral HIV/AIDS programs;
-- $320 million for the Peace Corps; and
-- $178 million to pay one-third of the current amount of $533 million
the United States owes multinational development nanks.
In addition, Powell mentioned, in his prepared statement, that the
State Department has pending a supplemental budget request of $1,600
million, which includes $322 million for internal operations and
$1,300 million for foreign operations.
Powell spoke favorably about the state of U.S.-Russian relations.
Noting that both countries have been working diligently to forge an
agreement to codify mutual commitments to reduce further their number
of offensive nuclear weapons, Powell said, "There is every possibility
that we will conclude such an agreement next month in Moscow."
Stressing the importance of political and economic stability in the
western hemisphere, Powell said such stability " "reduces the scale of
illegal immigration, drug trafficking, terrorism, and economic
turmoil" and "promotes the expansion of trade and investment."
Following are Powell's remarks, as prepared for delivery:
(Note: In the text, billion means 1,000 million.)
(begin text)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
As Prepared
April 24, 2002
SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN L. POWELL
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE ON
FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to appear
before you to testify in support of President Bush's budget request
for FY 2003.
Last May, Mr. Chairman, you may recall that in my opening remarks I
told you how important I consider interchanges such as this with the
Congress. Our breakfast together at the State Department yesterday
reinforced my appreciation for such exchanges.
I believe it is an important part of my responsibilities to work
closely with the Congress and with all the various committees. This
will be my eighth budget hearing this year, but I consider this kind
of interchange with the Congress as important as any other duty that I
have.
You may also remember that last year I told you that I believe I have
responsibilities as CEO of the State Department as well as those of
being principal foreign policy advisor to the President.
Wearing that hat, my CEO hat, I want to tell you that we have made
solid advances over the past year - advances in hiring, in bringing
state of the art information technology to the Department, and in
streamlining our overseas buildings process and in making our
buildings more secure for our people.
Morale is high at the Department and we owe this Congress a debt of
gratitude for what it has done to help us develop this momentum. We
are bringing the organization and conduct of America's foreign policy
into the 21st century, and I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and all
the members of this subcommittee, for giving us the support to begin
this process.
Since that heart-rending day in September when the terrorists struck
in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, we have seen why the conduct
of our foreign policy is so important.
We have had remarkable success over the past seven months in the war
on terrorism, especially in Afghanistan, and we are beginning to see
some success in the Philippines, in Yemen, and elsewhere. And behind
the courageous men and women of our armed forces, behind the stepped
up law enforcement efforts, and behind the increased scrutiny of and
action against terrorist financial networks, has been the quiet,
steady course of diplomacy.
As a result, we have reshaped a good part of South Asia -- a new
U.S.-Pakistan relationship, a reinvigorated U.S.-India relationship, a
new Interim Authority in Kabul, and the Taliban and the terrorists
dead, in jail, or on the run. We are also forming important new
relationships with the nations of Central Asia and helping friends and
allies fight the scourge of terrorism from the marble-floored banks of
Europe to the forested-gorges of Georgia.
In his second visit to the Department last year, President Bush told
us that despite the great tragedy of September 11, we could see
opportunities through our tears -- and at his direction, the
Department of State has been at flank speed ever since, making as much
as possible of those opportunities.
Over the past year, Mr. Chairman, I believe the broader tapestry of
our foreign policy has become clear: to encourage the spread of
democracy and market economies, to lift up countries that want to be
part of that expansion, and to bring more governments to the
understanding that the power of the individual is the power that
counts. And when evil appears to threaten this progress, America will
confront that evil and defeat it -- as we are doing in the war on
terrorism.
In weaving this tapestry, we have achieved several successes:
With regard to Russia, President Bush has defied some of our critics
and structured a very strong relationship. The meetings that he had
with President Putin and the dialogue that has taken place between
Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov and me and between Secretary of
Defense Rumsfeld and his counterpart, and at a variety of other
levels, have positioned the United States for a strengthened
relationship with the land of eleven time zones.
The way that Russia responded to the events of September 11 was
reflective of this positive relationship. Russia has been a key member
of the antiterrorist coalition. It has played a crucial role in our
success in Afghanistan, by providing intelligence, bolstering the
Northern Alliance, and assisting our entry into Central Asia. As a
result, we have seriously eroded the capabilities of a terrorist
network that posed a direct threat to both of our countries. The job
is not complete yet -- as our continuing operations in Afghanistan and
our just-beginning Train and Equip operations in Georgia clearly
demonstrate -- but we are making headway.
Similarly, the way we and the Russians agreed to disagree on the ABM
Treaty reflects the intense dialogue we have had over the last
thirteen months, a dialogue in which we told the Russians where we
were headed and we made clear to them that we were serious and that
nothing would deter us. And we asked them if there was a way that we
could do what we had to do together, or a way that they could accept
what we had to do in light of the threat to both of our countries from
ballistic missiles.
At the end of the day, we agreed to disagree and we notified Russia
that we were going to withdraw from the ABM Treaty. I notified FM
Ivanov -- we talked about our plans for two days. President Bush
called President Putin. Then the two presidents arranged the way we
would make our different announcements. And the world did not end. An
arms race did not break out. There is no crisis in Russia-U.S.
relations. In fact, our relations are very good. Both presidents
pledged to reduce further the number of their offensive nuclear
weapons and we have been hard at work on an agreement to codify these
mutual commitments. There is every possibility that we will conclude
such an agreement next month in Moscow. This is all part of the new
strategic framework with Russia.
We even managed to come to an agreement on how we are going to work
through NATO. This new decision-making relationship, which we are
referring to as the NATO-Russia Council, or "NATO at 20," will provide
a mechanism for consultations, cooperation, joint decisions and joint
action. It will offer Russia the opportunity to participate in shaping
cooperative projects in areas such as counterterrorism, civil
emergency preparedness, and joint training and exercises. Our aim is
to have this arrangement in place for the Reykjavik ministerial next
month. Moreover, NATO's Secretary General, Lord Robertson, announced
last week that President Putin will be invited to Italy for a
NATO-Russia Summit on May 28.
Mr. Chairman, as we head for the NATO Summit in Prague in November,
where we will consider a new round of NATO enlargement, I think we
will find the environment a great deal calmer than we might have
expected.
I believe the way we handled the war on terrorism, the ABM Treaty,
nuclear reductions, and NATO is reflective of the way we will be
working together with Russia in the future. Building on the progress
we have already made will require energy, good will, and creativity on
both sides as we seek to resolve some of the tough issues on our
agenda.
We have not forgotten about abuses of human rights in Chechnya or
Moscow's WMD- and missile-related cooperation with Iran. Neither have
we neglected to consider what the situation in Afghanistan has made
plain for all to see; that is, how do we achieve a more stable
security situation in Central Asia? We know that this is something we
cannot do without the Russians and something that increasingly they
realize can't be done without us, and without the full participation
of the countries in the region. We are working these issues as well.
In fact, the way we are approaching Central Asia is symbolic of the
way we are approaching the relationship as a whole and of the growing
trust between our two countries. We are tackling issues that used to
be problems between us and turning them into opportunities for more
cooperation. We have found in the last few weeks, for example, that we
could even deal with chickens.
And in Madrid, when the "Quartet" met two weeks ago - the EU, Russia,
the UN, and the U.S. -- my talks with Russian FM [Foreign Minister]
Ivanov were especially helpful in framing the message the Quartet
crafted with respect to the crisis in the Middle East. In Madrid also,
FM Ivanov and I agreed to meet early next month here in Washington to
continue our discussions on the new strategic framework. And President
Bush will visit Moscow and St. Petersburg later in May.
Such a collegial approach to our relationship does not mean that
differences have vanished or that tough negotiations are a thing of
the past. What it means is that we believe there are no insurmountable
obstacles to building on the improved relationship we have already
constructed.
It will take time. But we are on the road to a vastly changed
relationship with Russia. That can only be for the good -- for America
and the world.
With that in mind, Mr. Chairman, and in the spirit of closer
U.S.-Russia cooperation, and in light of Russia's continued compliance
with Jackson-Vanik legislation, the president hopes Congress will lift
the application of this legislation to Russia before the Moscow-St.
Petersburg Summit in late May.
Mr. Chairman, we have also made significant progress in our
relationship with China.
A candid, constructive, and cooperative relationship is what we are
building with China. Candid where we disagree; constructive where we
can see some daylight; and cooperative where we have common regional
or global interests.
These are the principles President Bush took with him to Beijing at
the end of February this year. After meeting with Prime Minister
Koizumi in Tokyo and with President Kim in Seoul, the president spent
a day-and-a-half in Beijing and met with President Jiang Zemin, as
well as Premier Zhu Rongji. These meetings solidified further what has
become a markedly improved relationship -- a relationship that will
see China's Vice President, Hu Jintao, visit Washington at the end of
this month through the beginning of next month, at the invitation of
Vice President Cheney.
In less than a year, we moved from what was a potentially volatile
situation in April of last year involving our EP-3 reconnaissance
aircraft which was forced to land on China's Hainan Island after a PLA
fighter aircraft collided with it, to a very successful meeting in
Shanghai in October between President Jiang Zemin and President Bush
and an APEC Conference, hosted by China, that was equally successful.
There are certain shared interests that we have with China and we have
emphasized those interests. They are regional and global interests,
such as China's accession to WTO, stability on the Korean Peninsula,
and combating the scourge of HIV/AIDS. On such issues we can talk and
we can work out ways to cooperate.
There are other interests where we decidedly do not see eye-to-eye,
such as arms sales to Taiwan, human rights, religious freedom, and
non-proliferation. On such issues we can have a dialogue and try to
make measurable progress.
But we do not want the interests where we differ to constrain us from
pursuing those where we share common goals. And that is the basis upon
which our relations are going rather smoothly at present. That, and
counterterrorism.
President Jiang Zemin was one of the first world leaders to call
President Bush and offer his sorrow and condolences for the tragic
events of September 11. And in the over seven months since that day,
China has helped in the war against terrorism. Beijing has also helped
in the reconstruction of Afghanistan and we hope will help even more
in the future.
Moreover, China has played a constructive role in helping us manage
the very dangerous situation in South Asia between India and Pakistan.
When I could call China's Foreign Minster Tang and have a good
discussion, making sure our policies were known and understood, it
made for a more reasoned approach to what was -- and as the snows melt
may continue to be -- a volatile situation. As a result, China has
supported the approach that the rest of the international community
has taken. Beijing has not tried to be a spoiler but instead tried to
help us alleviate tensions and convince the two parties to scale down
their dangerous confrontation, which, hopefully, is happening. We will
continue to work with Beijing as the situation evolves.
All of this cooperation came as a result of our careful efforts to
build the relationship over the months since the EP-3 incident. We
never walked away from our commitment to human rights,
non-proliferation, or religious freedom; and we never walked away from
the position that we don't think the Chinese political system is the
right one for the 21st century. And we continued to tell the Chinese
that if their economic development continues apace and the Chinese
people see the benefits of being part of a world that rests on the
rule of law, we can continue to work together constructively.
As we improved our relationship with China, Mr. Chairman, we also
reinvigorated our bilateral alliances with Japan, The Republic of
Korea, and Australia. Nowhere has this been more visible than in the
war on terrorism -- where cooperation has been solid and helpful.
Prime Minister Koizumi immediately offered Japan's strong support,
within the confines of its constitution. And he is working to enhance
Japan's capability to contribute to such global and regional actions
in the future. President Bush's dialogue with the Prime Minister has
been warm, engaging, and productive. Always the linchpin of our
security strategy in East Asia, the U.S.-Japan Security Alliance is
now as strong a bond between our two countries as it has been in the
half-century of its existence. Our shared interests, values, and
concerns, plus the dictates of regional security, make it imperative
that we sustain this renewed vigor in our key Pacific alliance. And we
will.
With respect to the Peninsula, our alliance with the Republic of Korea
(ROK) has also been strengthened by Korea's strong response to the war
on terrorism and by our careful analysis of and consultations on where
we needed to take the dialogue with the North. President Bush has made
it very clear that we are dissatisfied with the actions of North
Korea; in particular that the North continues to develop and sell
missiles that could carry weapons of mass destruction. But we have
also made clear that both we and the ROK are ready to resume dialogue
with Pyongyang, on this or any other matter, at any time the North
Koreans decide to come back to the table.
In that regard, we welcome the results of ROK Special Advisor Lim
Dong-won's recent talks with North Korean leaders in Pyongyang, which
included agreements on resuming dialogue and cooperation between the
two Koreas. We are also pleased to note that North Korea signaled its
willingness to resume dialogue with the United States. We would
welcome such a resumption of talks; however, we have not yet received
a direct response from the North Koreans.
Further south, the Australians have been exceptional in their efforts
to support the war on terrorism. Heavily committed in East Timor
already, Australia nonetheless offered its help immediately and we
have been grateful for that help, including the great Australian
soldiers who have helped us on the ground in Afghanistan. The people
of Australia are indeed some of America's truest friends.
So, Mr. Chairman, as I look across the Pacific to East Asia I see a
much-improved security scene and I believe that President Bush
deserves the credit for this success.
Another foreign policy success is the improvement we have achieved in
our relations with Europe. In waging war together on terrorism, our
cooperation has grown stronger. NATO invoked Article 5 for the first
time ever on September 12. Since then, the European Union has moved
swiftly to round up terrorists, close down terrorist financing
networks, and improve law enforcement and aviation security
cooperation.
Moreover, President Bush has made clear that even as we fight the war
on terrorism, we will not be deterred from achieving the goal we share
with Europeans of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. We continue to
work toward this goal with our Allies and Partners in Europe.
In the Balkans, we are pursuing this goal by working with our European
allies and partners to advance three inter-related objectives:
promoting integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions, with the EU and
NATO increasingly serving as the prime movers for engagement and
reform; hastening the day that peace is self-sustaining and that we
and our allies can withdraw our military forces; and ensuring that the
region is not a safe haven or way station for global terrorism. The EU
member nations are already supplying the majority of financial
resources and military forces. Our success in preventing civil war in
Macedonia while avoiding another long-term commitment of NATO forces
was based on the type of close cooperation among NATO, the EU, and the
U.S. that will remain essential to our future success. We need to
finish the job in the Balkans -- and we will. We went in together with
the Europeans, and we will come out together.
I also believe we have been successful in bringing the Europeans to a
calmer level of concern with respect to what was being labeled by many
in Europe "unbridled U.S. unilateralism". Notwithstanding the recent
reaction in parts of Europe to President Bush's State of the Union
Address, to U.S. actions on steel imports, and to undocumented and
even at times egregiously wrong press reports about imminent U.S.
military action against Iraq, I still believe this to be true.
There was significant concern among the Europeans earlier last year
that because we took some unilateral positions of principle for us
that somehow the U.S. was going off on its own without a care for the
rest of the world. Early in the Administration, this was particularly
true with respect to the Kyoto Protocol. So we set out immediately to
correct this misperception. Beginning with President Bush's speech in
Warsaw, his participation in the G-8 meetings and the European Union
summit, our extensive consultations with respect to the new strategic
framework with Russia, and culminating in the brilliant way in which
the president pulled together the coalition against terrorism, I
believe that we demonstrated to the world that we can be decisively
cooperative when it serves our interests and the interests of the
world.
But we have also demonstrated that when it is a matter of principle,
we will stand on that principle. In his first year in office President
Bush has shown the international community who he is and what his
Administration is all about. That is an important accomplishment --
and one that is appreciated now everywhere I go. People know where
America is coming from and do not have to doubt our resolve or our
purpose. They may not always agree with us, but they have no doubt
about our policy or our position. We want to ensure that this policy
clarity and this firmness of purpose continue to characterize our
foreign policy.
Let me just note that this sort of principled approach characterizes
our determined effort to reduce the threat from weapons of mass
destruction -- an effort well underway before the tragic events of
September 11 added even greater urgency. As President Bush said at VMI
last week, "the civilized world faces a grave threat from weapons of
mass destruction." We and the Russians will reduce our own deployed
nuclear weapons substantially. In the meantime, we are using a
comprehensive approach, along with our friends and allies, to tackle
WMD elsewhere, an approach that includes export controls,
non-proliferation, arms control, missile defenses, and
counter-proliferation.
There are terrorists in the world who would like nothing better than
to get their hands on and use nuclear, chemical, biological, or
radiological weapons. So there is a definite link between terrorism
and WMD. Not to recognize that link would be foolhardy to the extreme.
In fact, terrorism, Mr. Chairman, is another example of this
Administration's principled approach. Anyone who adopts for political
purposes the intentional killing of innocent men, women, and children
as they try to go about their everyday lives is going to be opposed by
America. That is that. There should be no doubt about this commitment
or in the understanding of this commitment. All people of every faith
and every nation should stand unalterably opposed to such killing.
Such principled approaches, as our positions on the Kyoto Protocol or
on missile defense do not equate to no cooperation. Quite the
contrary. We know that cooperation is often essential to get things
done. On our efforts to lift countries out of poverty, for example,
and to create conditions in which trade and investment flourish, we
need to cooperate.
Last month, we had a good meeting in Monterrey, Mexico, on financing
development. This summer in Johannesburg, we will participate in the
World Summit on Sustainable Development. There we will have an
opportunity to address such issues as good governance; protection of
our oceans, fisheries, and forests; and how best to narrow the gap
between the rich countries and the poor countries of the world.
And in June, the U.S. will participate in the World Food Summit
conference in Rome. At the conference, we intend to renew our
commitment to cutting world hunger in half by 2015. Progress toward
this goal since the Summit in 1996 has been positive only in China. In
much of the rest of the world, hunger has actually increased. We must
do better.
And Mr. Chairman, I know that you and the subcommittee members are
familiar with President Bush's new Millennium Challenge Account, which
he announced in Washington on March 14.
With this initiative, the president has made combating poverty a
foreign policy priority. At the same time, however, he has recognized
that economic development assistance can be successful only if it is
linked to sound policies in the developing countries. In sound policy
environments, aid attracts private investment by two to one; that is,
every dollar of aid attracts two dollars of private capital. In
countries where poor public policy dominates, aid can actually harm
the very citizens it was meant to help.
The funds we authorize and appropriate for this account will be
distributed to countries that demonstrate a strong commitment toward:
(1) good governance; (2) the health and education of their people; and
(3) sound economic policies that foster enterprise and
entrepreneurship.
We envision that resources will begin to be available in FY 2004,
ramping up to $5 billion in FY 2006. Then, $5 billion every year
thereafter. These resources will be separate from the current budget
trajectory of our other aid dollars, which we expect to continue on
their own path.
With these resources applied in this careful way, we expect to
fertilize the ultimate success of more and more countries making a
determined and transparent effort to join the globalized world.
Mr. Chairman, also among our foreign policy successes over the last
year is our new and more effective approach to Africa -- the impact of
which was most dramatically demonstrated in the WTO deliberations in
Doha last November that led to the launching of a new trade round. The
United States found its positions in those deliberations being
strongly supported by the developing countries, most notably those
from Africa. The Congress laid the foundation for our success with the
African Growth and Opportunity Act -- an historic piece of legislation
with respect to the struggling economies in Africa.
In the first year of implementation of this Act, we have seen
substantial increases in trade with several countries -- South Africa
by 6 percent, Kenya by 17 percent, and Lesotho by 51 percent for 2001
over 2000. Likewise, we are very pleased with the excellent success of
the first U.S.-Sub-Saharan Africa Trade and Economic Cooperation
Forum, which was held last October.
A large part of our approach to Africa and to other developing regions
and countries as well, will be directly in line with what we have
prescribed for the Millennium Challenge Account, i.e., a renewed and
strengthened concern with progress toward good governance as a
prerequisite for economic development assistance. Moreover, where
conditions are favorable, our economic development assistance in
Africa will emphasize the vigorous promotion of agriculture.
Agriculture is the backbone of Africa's economies and must be
revitalized to reduce hunger and to lift the rural majority out of
poverty.
In addition, we will emphasize fighting corruption and President
Bush's new initiative on basic education. Moreover, we want to
emphasize methods that directly empower individuals -- methods such as
micro-lending, a superb vehicle for increasing the economic
participation and security of the working poor. The people of Africa
in particular know that in many cases their governments do not deliver
the health care, transportation and communication networks, education
and training, and financial investment needed to create 21st century
economies. They know that this must change if there is to be hope of
economic success -- of job creation, private investment, stable
currencies, and economic growth.
We also know and more and more of Africa's people are coming to know
that none of this economic success is possible if we do not meet the
challenge of HIV/AIDS. That is why I am pleased to report that pledges
to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria now exceed
$1.7 billion and continue to grow. The Fund is meeting at Columbia
University in New York this week and is expected soon to announce
grants to partnerships in affected countries.
We want this Global Fund to complement national, bilateral, and other
international efforts to fight these dreaded diseases. Strong
congressional support will ensure that the United States remains the
leader in this global humanitarian and national security effort.
In our own hemisphere, Mr. Chairman, we have met with considerable
success. Highlights have been the President's warm relationship with
Mexico's President Fox, the Summit of the Americas in Quebec, and the
signing of the Inter-American Democratic Charter in Lima, Peru. Now
our focus is to create a Free Trade Area of the Americas -- including,
as President Bush has described, not only our current negotiations
with Chile but also a new effort to explore the concept of a free
trade agreement with Central America.
To be sure, there are some dark clouds moving in over Latin America,
and one of the darkest looms over Colombia where a combination of
narco-terrorism and festering insurgency threatens to derail the
progress the Colombians have made in solidifying their democracy.
Our Andean Regional Initiative is aimed at fighting the illicit drugs
problem while promoting economic development, human rights, and
democratic institutions in Colombia and its Andean neighbors. Intense
U.S. support and engagement has been the critical element in our
counterdrug successes in Bolivia and Peru and will continue to be
critical as we help our regional partners strengthen their societies
to confront and eradicate this threat to their own democracies and to
America's national security interests.
But, Mr. Chairman, our counterdrug and development efforts in Colombia
are not enough. It has become increasingly clear that our goal with
respect to Colombia must be to help that democratic nation preserve
and strengthen its democracy while ensuring greater respect for basic
human rights. An end to the present conflict -- peace -- is essential
to our accomplishing that goal. We must work with the Colombians to
create the conditions where peace is possible.
To that end, we are seeking the necessary authorities to provide
enhanced intelligence sharing, additional training, and more equipment
-- all geared toward a security mission that is broader than the
current counterdrug focus. We are not talking about U.S. troops
participating in combat operations; we are talking about helping the
Colombians secure their state and their democracy. We are talking
about helping the Colombians fight terrorism.
President Bush framed the issue in his meeting with President Pastrana
last week. The president made his number one priority very clear: "My
biggest job now," he said, "is to defend our security and to help our
friends defend their security against terror."
We have made it clear and will continue to make it clear that the
Government of Colombia must also fully commit to this task. No amount
of additional U.S. assistance will be sufficient to turn the tide
unless Colombia dedicates more of its own resources to this task and
commits decisively to a policy of establishing state authority and
effective security for its people.
I also want to emphasize that we work with the Colombians to ensure
respect for human rights. There is no trade-off between our work with
Colombians on human rights and elimination of the terrorist threat.
Nor are we seeking to change the caps on the number of U.S. military
and civilian personnel we can have in Colombia at any given time. Both
of these concerns are still very much a part of the pattern of our
efforts with this struggling democracy.
Mr. Chairman, a dark cloud seemed recently to pass over Venezuela as
well -- a cloud that had been building for some time as President
Chavez became less and less responsive to growing opposition to his
policies, leading to increasing polarization of Venezuelan society. We
hope that the most recent tumble of events in that country foretell a
president much more cognizant of the demands of democracy. As
President Bush said last week, "if there's lessons to be learned, it's
important that [Chavez] learn them." The president also said that it
is "very important for Chavez to embrace those institutions which are
fundamental to democracy."
The Organization of American States (OAS) agreed on April 18 to help
Venezuela regain its democratic footing. We believe there is also a
constructive role for our own Congress -- to urge the Venezuelan
government to welcome OAS engagement and to encourage the opposition
to join the national dialogue.
Elsewhere in Latin America, Mr. Chairman, we have begun new
initiatives.
President Bush's Third Border Initiative (TBI) seeks to broaden our
engagement with our Caribbean neighbors based on recommendations by
the region's leaders on the areas most critical to their economic and
social development. The TBI is centered on economic capacity-building
and on leveraging public/private partnerships to help meet the
region's pressing needs.
In addition to its economic provisions, the Third Border Initiative
includes $20 million for HIV/AIDS education and prevention efforts.
This represents a two-fold increase in U.S. HIV/AIDS assistance to the
region in just two years.
As you are aware, Mr. Chairman, our ties to the Caribbean region are
as much cultural and human as they are economic and political. The
countries of the Caribbean attract millions of American visitors every
year and the region is our sixth largest export market. Large numbers
of Caribbean immigrants have found their way to America, including, I
am proud to say, my Jamaican forbearers. Here people from the region
have found freedom and opportunity and have added something wonderful
to the great American cultural mix. But our primary goal must be to
help ensure that the peoples of the Caribbean find new opportunities
for work, prosperity and a better life at home.
At the end of the day, it is difficult to exaggerate what we have at
stake in our own hemisphere. Political and economic stability in our
own neighborhood reduces the scale of illegal immigration, drug
trafficking, terrorism, and economic turmoil. It also promotes the
expansion of trade and investment. Today, we sell more to Latin
America and the Caribbean than to the European Union. Our trade within
NAFTA is greater than that with the EU and Japan combined. We sell
more to MERCOSUR than to China. And Latin America and the Caribbean is
our fastest growing export market. Clearly, the president is right to
focus attention on this hemisphere and we will be working hard in the
days ahead to make that focus productive, both economically and
politically.
In that regard, we have a very positive vision for a future Cuba -- a
Cuba that is free, with a strong democratic government that is
characterized by support for individual civil, political, and economic
rights. A Cuba in which people are free to choose their own leaders
and to pursue their own dreams. And a Cuba that is a good neighbor to
all in the Caribbean and in the hemisphere at large. That such a Cuba
can exist we have never doubted -- just look at the contributions
Cuban-Americans have made in our own country and you understand
immediately what such people are capable of.
Mr. Chairman, set against the past year's foreign policy successes is
not just the conflict in Colombia in our own hemisphere, but several
challenges elsewhere. In this regard, there is no question that the
situation between Israel and the Palestinians is at the top of our
list.
I have just returned from the Middle East. I met with key leaders in
Morocco, Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon, as well as with Crown
Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia -- and of course I met with Prime
Minister Sharon and Chairman Arafat.
I went to the Middle East because the president asked me to travel to
a region in turmoil. Recent events have taken an enormous toll in
lives lost, families shattered, economic activity frozen and mounting
humanitarian distress.
An additional cause of tension is the ongoing threat posed by attacks
by Hezbollah and others across the United Nations' recognized Blue
Line. It was for that reason I traveled to Beirut and Damascus to
underscore the president's strong message to all parties to exercise
restraint.
In my consultations with our international partners during the ten
days of my travel, and with our Arab friends and Israelis and
Palestinians, I listened carefully and I probed hard. I found broad
support for a comprehensive strategy as a way forward.
The Madrid Quartet meeting, which I mentioned earlier, resulted in a
strong declaration endorsing this comprehensive approach. In that
declaration the United States, the United Nations, the European Union
and the Russian Federation were united in this endorsement.
There are three critical elements in this comprehensive strategy:
first, security and freedom from terror and violence for Israelis and
Palestinians; second, serious and accelerated negotiations to revive
hope and lead to a political settlement; and third, economic
humanitarian assistance to address the increasingly desperate
conditions faced by the Palestinian people.
Confronting and ending terrorism are indispensable steps on the road
to peace. In my meetings with Chairman Arafat I made it clear that he
and the Palestinian Authority could no longer equivocate. They must
decide as the rest of the world has decided that terrorism must end.
Chairman Arafat must take that message to his people. He must follow
through with instructions to his security forces. He must act to
arrest and prosecute terrorists, disrupt terrorist financing,
dismantle terrorist infrastructure and stop incitement.
Prime Minister Sharon stated his intention to complete Israel's
withdrawal from the areas that it had occupied. He provided me with a
time-line for the withdrawal. I stressed to the prime minister the
urgency of completing withdrawal and was assured of real results in
the specified days. I recognized the particular circumstances at the
Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and the Presidential compound in
Ramallah, and I emphasized the importance of their urgent non-violent
resolution.
Improvement in the security situation, if it is achieved, must be
linked to the second point: determined pursuit of a political
solution. There can be no peace without security, but there can also
be no security without peace. Only a negotiated settlement can resolve
the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. We must find a way to
bring together traditional elements such as United Nations Security
Council Resolutions 242 and 338, with new initiatives, such as my
Louisville speech last November, UN Resolution 1397, and the Arab
League's endorsement a month ago of the initiative of Saudi Crown
Prince Abdullah.
A number of the leaders with whom I spoke during my travel have
expressed interest in convening a conference on the Middle East in the
near future, a conference with international backing. As they have
suggested, its purpose would be to restore hope, reaffirm the urgency
of a comprehensive settlement, and resume direct negotiations in order
to achieve that comprehensive settlement.
At the same time we explore this initiative and other ideas to address
the political issues, the international community must address the
dire humanitarian problems as well as the long-term economic needs of
the Palestinian people. During my visit to Jerusalem, I was pleased to
announce that the United States would contribute an additional 30
million dollars in support of the United Nations Relief and Works
Agency and its programs in providing health, education, relief and
social services to Palestinian refugees. This is beyond the $80
million we already provide annually. We are augmenting this with
emergency assistance to deal with the special conditions in Jenin
refugee camp -- tents and equipment to purify water and prevent the
spread of disease.
International donors will meet in Norway later this month to increase
assistance to the Palestinian people at this time of exceptional need.
Also, international humanitarian and aid agencies must have the
freedom and access that they need to do their jobs.
So this is the comprehensive approach I believe we must pursue. I left
Assistant Secretary of State Bill Burns in the region to follow up on
my visit. As circumstances warrant, the president is prepared to send
DCI Tenet in the near future, to work with the parties to resume
security cooperation between the parties. Mr. Tenet has experience in
this from last year -- experience in these kinds of organizations and
activities -- that I think will once again benefit both parties.
Moreover, I plan to return to the region to move ahead on all aspects
of our comprehensive approach.
Mr. Chairman, For the Palestinian people and leaders of the
Palestinian Authority, the question is whether violence and terrorism
can be renounced forever and whether their sights can be set squarely
on peace through negotiations.
For the people and leaders of Israel, the question is whether the time
has come for a strong, vibrant State of Israel to look beyond the
destructive impact of settlements and occupation, both of which must
end, consistent with the clear positions taken by President Bush in
his April 4th speech. Israelis should look ahead to the promise held
out by the region and the world of a comprehensive, lasting peace.
For the Arab peoples and their leaders, the question is whether the
promise and vision of Crown Prince Abdullah's initiative can be
transformed into a living reality. It is important that artificial
barriers between states fall away, and distorted and racist images
disappear from the media and from public discourse.
For the people and leaders of the international community, the
question is how we can help both sides solve the deep problems they
face.
These are the challenges that we all face. President Bush has directed
his administration to do what is necessary to stop the violence,
encourage efforts toward peace, and restore the economic foundations
of the region. Our fervent hope is that Israelis, Palestinians, our
Arab friends, and the international community will also rise to this
challenge.
Mr. Chairman, with regard to other challenges in this region, Iraq
comes next on our list. That country remains a significant threat to
the region's stability. We are working at the UN and elsewhere to
strengthen international controls on Iraq. In the last year, we
successfully stopped the free fall of sanctions and began to rebuild
United Nations Security Council consensus on Iraq. The UNSC
unanimously adopted resolution 1382 in November, committing itself to
implement the central element of "smart sanctions" by the end of next
month -- and I believe we are going to make it.
This central element, or Goods Review List (GRL), identifies materials
UNSC members must approve for export to Iraq and ensures continued
supervision and control over dual-use goods. Its implementation will
effectively lift economic sanctions on purely civilian trade and focus
controls on arms, especially WMD. This will further strengthen support
for UN controls by showing the international community that Saddam
Hussein, not the UN and not the U.S., is responsible for the
humanitarian plight of the Iraqi people. We have achieved agreement
with the Russians on the substance of the GRL and are now finalizing
processes for implementing the list and working on a UNSC Resolution
for adopting it.
At the end of the day, we have not ruled out other options with
respect to Iraq. We still believe strongly in regime change in Iraq
and we look forward to the day when a democratic, representative
government at peace with its neighbors leads Iraq to rejoin the family
of nations.
With regard to other challenges, we have a long-standing list of
grievances with Iran, from concerns about proliferation, to that
country's continued sponsorship of terrorism, to Iranian meddling in
Afghanistan in a way unhelpful to the Interim Authority in Kabul. Of
late, we have been very clear in communicating to Teheran that its
support for terrorism must stop and that what is needed in Afghanistan
is help, not meddling.
If Iran renounced terrorism, if it supported the Interim Authority, I
am convinced that we would be able to talk to Iran, that we would be
able to have a reasonable conversation with Iranian leaders. With
respect to the situation in Afghanistan, for example, I believe we can
demonstrate to them that it is not in their interest to destabilize
the government that they helped to create in Bonn. The other issues
will be more difficult; but I do believe constructive talks with Iran
on Afghanistan are possible.
Mr. Chairman, let me now turn to Afghanistan and the war on terrorism.
In January, I was in Tokyo to join the European Union, Saudi Arabia,
and Japan in hosting the Afghan Donor Conference. The conference
helped to ensure that a wide range of countries will help the Afghans
rebuild their country. The United States pledged almost $297 million
at the conference, and others pitched in accordingly. The total
pledged at this point is around $4.5 billion with more than $1.8
billion for the first year.
But the heavy lifting with respect to Afghanistan is only just
beginning. We have helped the Afghans remove the oppressive Taliban
regime from their country. We have destroyed the al-Qaida network in
Afghanistan, with American, British, and other troops fighting the
remnants as we speak. We have made possible the delivery of
humanitarian aid, including massive amounts of food. We have avoided
the wholesale starvation that many predicted. Moreover, we have helped
the people of Afghanistan establish a multi-ethnic Interim Authority
in Kabul, led by Chairman Karzai. One of its ultimate goals is to
oversee an agreed process, now begun with district selections of
representatives who will help determine the composition of the Loya
Jirgas that will lead to a broad-based Afghan government -- one that
represents all the people of the country, people of every background
and region, women as well as men. In June the Emergency Loya Jirga
will complete the process of creating a transitional administration,
the next step toward our ultimate goal of a fully democratic
Afghanistan.
Many of our key allies and partners are contributing to the
International Security Assistance Force in Kabul to help ensure a
secure environment for Mr. Karzai to build a new Afghanistan. We want
to do everything possible to prevent the rise of any alternative power
to the Interim Authority and Transitional Administration, until a
permanent government can be established and begin to take care of this
challenge on its own.
A budget for the Interim Authority has been established and funded.
The Authority is beginning to meet payrolls. Police and other Afghan
officials are being paid. Schools are opened. Reconstruction has
begun, to include the beginning of a new national police and military.
Roads are being opened. The UN, for example, recently declared that
the roads from Islamabad to Kabul, Kabul's main external lifeline, and
the road from Kabul to Kandahar, were open to unaccompanied
UN-employee traffic. In other words, UN employees were free, and it
was considered safe for them, to travel unaccompanied on those roads.
Refugees are returning in record numbers. And indeed, the former King
of Afghanistan returned for the first time in 30 years last week.
Much remains to be done and admittedly a lot of what remains will be
difficult to accomplish. But we believe that at long last Afghanistan
is on a positive track.
Mr. Chairman, I know that you are aware of the nature of the challenge
we confront in Afghanistan. You understand what is needed to
reconstruct this country and that foremost of all what is needed is a
long-term commitment by the international community. If we can ensure
such a commitment, and if we can achieve proper accountability in the
use of the donor funds, then I believe there is a good chance of
making significant progress in bringing a new future to Afghanistan --
and ending the days of warlordism and political chaos that bred the
Taliban and made a fertile ground for terrorists.
And as reconstruction begins in Afghanistan, the war against terrorism
continues. As President Bush said in his State of the Union Address,
"What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that, far from ending
there, our war against terror is only beginning." The administration
is working together in new ways never before envisioned. And that's
what this effort is going to require. FBI, CIA, INS, Treasury, State,
the Attorney General and Justice Department, and others, are all
coming together. This campaign is transnational, cross-border, even
global in a way we have never contemplated.
We are operating in several areas right now. For example, in Yemen we
are working with President Ali Abdallah Salih to uproot the al-Qaida
network there. In the Philippines, we are working with President
Arroyo to assist that country in combating its terrorists, the Abu
Sayyaf -- who as you know hold two American citizens as hostages.
We are also deploying a small force to Georgia to assist President
Shevardnadze in getting a handle on a tough area in his country -- an
area that has spawned and harbored terrorists in the past. These
troops will help train and equip Georgian forces in counterterrorism
techniques and methods.
With respect to any new major use of military force in the war on
terrorism, we have not made any recommendation to the president and
the president has made no decision as yet with respect to such use of
force. But there are many other actions that are taking place --
actions of a law enforcement, political, diplomatic, financial, and
intelligence-sharing nature.
Mr. Chairman, as I said earlier a sizable portion of the President's
budget request is dedicated to these counterterrorism efforts, as you
will see as I turn to the specific priorities of our budget request
for Foreign Operations.
The President's FY 2003 request for Foreign Operations is a little
over $16.1 billion. These dollars will support the continuing war on
terrorism, the work we are doing in Colombia and the Andean region at
large, our efforts to combat HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases,
essential development programs in Africa, the important work of the
Peace Corps and the scaling up of that work, and our plan to clear
arrearages at the Multilateral Development Banks, including the Global
Environment Facility.
War on Terrorism
To fight terrorism as well as alleviate the conditions that fuel
violent extremism, we are requesting an estimated $5 billion. In
addition to the initiatives outlined in our budget request for the
State Department and Related Agencies, this funding includes:
-- Foreign assistance -- $3.6 billion for economic and security
assistance, military equipment, and training for front-line states and
our other partners in the war on terrorism. This includes --
-- $3.4 billion from Foreign Operations accounts such as the Economic
Support Fund, International Military Education and Training, Foreign
Military Financing, and Freedom Support Act.
-- $88 million for programs in Russia and other states of the former
Soviet Union to reduce the availability to terrorists of weapons of
mass destruction. Ongoing programs engage former weapons scientists in
peaceful research and help prevent the spread of the materials
expertise required to build such weapons.
-- $50 million to support the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) in activities designed to counter nuclear terrorism and
implement strengthened safeguards; and $15 million to allow us to
respond quickly and effectively to unanticipated or unusually
difficult non-proliferation projects or opportunities.
-- $69 million for counterterrorism engagement programs, training, and
equipment to help other countries fight global terror, thereby
strengthening our own national security.
-- $4 million for the Treasury Department's Office of Technical
Assistance to provide training and other necessary expertise to
foreign finance offices to halt terrorist financing.
And Mr. Chairman, in the FY 2003 budget request there is approximately
$140 million available for Afghanistan, including repatriation of
refugees, food aid, demining, and transition assistance. I know that
President Bush, the Congress, and the American people recognize that
rebuilding that war-torn country will require additional resources and
that our support must be and will be a multi-year effort. Moreover, as
I said earlier, we do not plan to support reconstruction alone and we
will seek to ensure that other international donors continue to do
their fair share.
At the Virginia Military Institute last week, President Bush made very
clear what he wants to do for Afghanistan. The president told his
audience of eager cadets that one of their own, General George C.
Marshall, had helped ensure that a war-ravaged Europe and Japan would
successfully recover following WWII. Now, today, Europe and Japan are
helping America in rebuilding Afghanistan. The president said that "by
helping to build an Afghanistan that is free from evil and is a better
place in which to live, we are working in the best traditions of
George Marshall." And so we are.
It will be a long, hard road. We know it. But like General Marshall we
also know that we must do it. And the international community knows
that it must help.
Andean Counterdrug Initiative
We are requesting $731 million in FY 2003 for the multi-year
counterdrug initiative in Colombia and other Andean countries that are
the source of the cocaine sold on America's streets. ACI assistance to
Andean governments will support drug eradication, interdiction,
economic development, and development of government institutions. In
addition, the Colombians will be able to stand up a second counterdrug
brigade. Assisting efforts to destroy local coca crops and processing
labs there increases the effectiveness of U.S. law enforcement here.
In addition to this counterdrug effort, Mr. Chairman, we are
requesting $98 million in FMF to help the Colombian government protect
the vital Cano Limon-Covenas oil pipeline from the same foreign
terrorist organizations involved in illicit drugs -- the FARC and the
ELN. Their attacks on the pipeline shut it down 240 days in 2001,
costing Colombia revenue and disrupting its economy, and causing
serious environmental damage. This money will help train and equip the
Colombian armed forces to protect the pipeline. These funds begin to
apply the policy change I referred to earlier; that is, the shift from
a strictly counterdrug effort to a more broadly based effort targeted
at helping Colombia fight the terrorists in its midst as well as the
drugs.
Global Health and HIV/AIDS
In FY 2003, we are requesting $1.4 billion for USAID global health
programs. Of this amount, we are requesting $540 million for bilateral
HIV/AIDS prevention, care, and treatment activities, and $100 million
for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, to which
I referred earlier. All of this funding will increase the already
significant U.S. contribution to combating the AIDS pandemic and
maintain our position as the single largest bilateral donor. I should
add that the overall U.S. Government request for international
HIV/AIDS programs exceeds $1 billion, including $200 million for the
Global Fund.
The Peace Corps
All of you heard the President's remarks in his State of the Union
address with respect to the USA Freedom Corps and his objective to
renew the promise of the Peace Corps and to double the number of
volunteers in the Corps in the next five years. We have put $320
million for the Peace Corps in the FY 2003 budget request. This is an
increase of over $42 million over our FY 2002 level. This increase
will allow us to begin the scaling up that the president has directed.
We intend that the Peace Corps will open programs in eight countries,
including the reestablishment of currently suspended posts, and place
over 1,200 additional volunteers worldwide. By the end of FY 2003 the
Peace Corps will have more than 8,000 volunteers on the ground.
MDB Arrears
The FY 2003 request includes an initiative to pay one-third of the
amount the United States owes the Multilateral Development Banks
(MDBs) for our scheduled annual commitments. With U.S. arrears
currently now totaling $533 million, the request would provide $178
million to pay one-third of our total arrears during the fiscal year.
The banks lend to and invest in developing economies, promoting
economic growth and poverty reduction and providing environmental
benefits. We need to support them.
Mr. Chairman, in addition to what I have given you with respect to the
president's budget request for FY 2003, I want to give you the main
priorities for our supplemental request for FY 2002.
But first let me tell you how grateful we are at the Department for
the efforts of this subcommittee and the House subcommittee to get us
the $1.5 billion in crucial Emergency Response Fund foreign operations
funding to address the immediate post-September 11 needs. That was
just the start, though.
We are asking for $1.6 billion supplemental funding for FY 2002. This
amount includes $322 million for the Department. These dollars will
address emergent building and operating requirements that have arisen
as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks, including reopening
our mission in Kabul, Afghanistan; reestablishing an official presence
in Dushanbe, Tajikistan; and increasing security and personnel
protection at home and abroad.
That leaves about $1.3 billion for foreign operations. These funds --
added to the request we have made for FY 2003 for the Front Line
States (FLS) -- are primarily to:
-- Deter and prevent acts of international terrorism;
-- Provide vitally needed military equipment, training and economic
assistance to our friends and allies;
-- Expand respect for human rights and judicial reform in the FLS;
-- Provide a significant and immediate impact on displaced persons in
the FLS;
-- Support civilian reintegration of former combatants and reestablish
law enforcement and criminal justice systems;
-- Provide economic and democracy assistance, including help with
political development, health care, irrigation and water management,
media development, community building and infrastructure improvements,
and economic and civil society reform.
In addition, we have requested legislative authority in two areas.
First, authority that will facilitate the provision of Cooperative
Threat Reduction and Title V Freedom Support Act assistance. This
assistance has been critically important in the dismantlement and
non-proliferation of WMD material and expertise in the New Independent
States. Second, as I referred to earlier, we are requesting expanded
authorities to allow support for the Government of Colombia's unified
campaign against drugs, terrorism, and other threats to its national
security.
In sum, Mr. Chairman, these supplemental dollars for foreign
operations in FY 2002 will be directed at draining the swamp in which
terrorists thrive and at insuring the long-term success of Operation
Enduring Freedom.
Mr. Chairman, as I told this committee last year, the conduct of the
nation's foreign policy suffered significantly from a lack of
resources over the past decade. I have set both my CEO hat and my
foreign policy hat to correct that situation. But I cannot do it
without your help and the help of your colleagues in the Senate and
across the Capitol in the House.
I ask for your important support in full committee and in the House as
a whole, both for the $8.1 billion we are requesting for the
Department and related agencies and for the $16.1 billion we are
requesting for foreign operations. In addition, I ask for your help
with the supplemental request for FY 2002. With your help, and the
help of the whole Congress, we will continue the progress we have
already begun.
Thank you, and I will be pleased to take your questions.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
