Fostered and supported a corrupt die for National Security reasons. That fostered a culture of corruption guy for National Security ppurposes. That fostered a culture of corruption. It is one of the most rich countries in minerals and resources. There is a lot potential there for a positive relationship with the u. S. Think you, i yield back. Mr. Affleck, i think you have raised a central issue, the lack of security among the population. Right now we are relying upon congolese government to provide as security. In afghanistan, weve got a questionable partner in the karzai government. That has been difficult. We have a less than credible partner in the congolese government. In afghanistan, we have gone through these stabilization operations as an alternative way to provide security at the local level with the villages, communities, whereby we have been providing some arms and training to the local population there so that they can provide their own security. Obviously, the karzai government has been opposed to that. Are there any opportunities for any alternative strategies, given the nature of the in theese government any d drc, mr. Affleck . I will yield to an expert fellow panelist year, but one of the the basic issue, and one that will go a long way and that i alluded to earlier, climbing some influence to president are applying some influence to president kabila so that payment is made to his troops. If there was one stroke of automatically improve peoples lives, that would do it. That would take a wholesale step towards improving the Security Sector. The talk about the Security Sector as it is this kind of a mammoth thing. If you had paid soldiers who had an incentive to fight, he would not have had a major capital overrun and taken over by 1200 guys. That shows you the greed to which the federal government is unable to exert control, even the smallest amount of control in the east. That goes hand in glove with securities sector reform. Very brief. This working and training local communities for self protection was done in rwanda against the fdlr. I am not so sure about doing this in the congo. It is attractive to me, but i guess i would say it depends on the community. I would say the key here is to engage and embrace the congolese government at the most senior level, but not just the president ial level, which is why i keep talking about some kind of by national commission. Then you can start penetrating those ministries which have the responsibility, even bring governors over so that you can do at the provincial level. I guess i think that the real heavy lift here is more on the diplomatic side, and working very carefully with the congolese government, which is essentially isolated and does not have much contact with our officials i remember about the army that was not paid officials. I remember about an army that was not paid. That says an awful lot about the nature and character of society. I think we all agree that if you have a security solution, but does not sit with the situation on the ground, it will simply not work. I am very skeptical that the government in kinshasa will ever be a force for good. On the other hand, i agree with mr. Affleck and dr. Frazer, this is a country of great people. If we can enable them to take control of their own lives, i think weve and much more i am much for optimistic. I want to try to draw on what i saw in my year in iraq. The two of and what we do, would put the caboose before the engine and then we have the train wreck. We never figure out what comes first. The secure environment, or legitimate governments, or does the individual, military did education and training . Education and training . I agree that you have to start at the provincial and district level. Which is the right model to go with here . Mr. Affleck, you talked about 27 different militia types of groups. When we try to focus on couple, which does not kabul, which is not extent beyond the city limits. What has to come first for us to be on the track to success . It to get interNational Security assistance peace right and you have african nations, including uganda and rwanda and participate, that gives you some breathing space to move on. That is the essential thing that first. To happen first brok you have to deal with governments, but obviously creating greater security governments at which level . You cannot frankly do real governance of the provisional level with governors unless youre dealing with the capital, because of the nature of the congolese government. You start where you are, and you have monusco, with no real effectiveness, try to bring in units or create a new unit within it that has that capacity. If i were forced to make a choice, and i was dealing at the provincial level, the only force out there right now is monus whyco. Would try to bring units in the letter actually capable monusco. I would try to bring units that are actually capable. I think it is really getting in there and working without putting our forces at real risk that is going to be necessary. I have actually worked with the national government, and it is not as hopeless as it is being presented here. It obviously needs a lot of work, but you deal with to you are dealing with. I did not have the honor to serve in the armed forces. I did not have the opportunity to go to afghanistan and iraq, so i am speaking from second hand experience. The sense i get is that the United States government and armed forces successfully trained troops in afghanistan and iraq, both under circumstances where they were doing so under hostile circumstances. Some folks turned out to be hostile to the United States. There was a situation of violence. What that tells me is that it is doable. It is a doable thing. It was done. I am not suggesting we spend the kind of money i am pointing to it, in a much more difficult situation, this goal was achieved. I do not figure to be the United States that steps in and reforms the 100,000 plus drc military. I think it is a job for a multinational force. It may be a good job for nato. It is a step that will go the furthest, the quickest in changing the quality of life for people and eliminating the 27 armed groups that you talk about, i find it much more difficult operating in the field there is a force present that they are not equal to. All of a sudden, people are not going to want to take goma. Because there is a active state Security Force. I cannot speak to the exact model of how that would work because i am not qualified to, but i can speak to the fact that it is possible. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yelled back. Yield back. Think you to all four witnesses for coming today. Mr. Affleck, you mentioned in your testimony that the coup congolese Congolese Army eci has a great impression of that presence of u. S. Forces. Do you feel like the perception of the u. S. By the people themselves, the co congolese a positive one . Yes, i do. You have a big country, there a number of different competing opinions about it. I would say that primarily i was asked to shoot a film for the un. I wanted to a bunch of refugee camps. This was during the fighting, the earlier fighting debt. Fighting. The was a lot of instability, a lot of fighting. I was Walking Around with a camera, with my big un badge. I was experiencing a lot of hostility, real resentment to the point that i thought maybe it was not wise for me to be in here. So i took off the u. N. Badge. And and people ask me, where are you from. I said, i am america. American. All of a sudden, among the people who were really suffering, i was welcome. This is anecdotal. It could be the only place that happened. I did not use this as an opportunity to beat up the u. N. Despite its failings, it does important work. But it did show me that americans were respected. Your efforts to call on the u. S. And a distraction for special envoy, have those calls been received u. S. For special envoy, have those calls been received . I have been given the impression that this is under reviewed. It is governmentspeak that i just learned. I will yield the remainder of my time to my colleague, miss sanchez. I want to talk to mr. Carafano. I would like to relate to something that mr. Affleck said. He said that we had done a good job with training in iraq and afghanistan. Maybe i am the only one on this committee, but i would have to say that this is a disaster for us. In most cases, the work we have done. When we recruit and afghanistan i wouldyearold,s come not hire them here, let alone someone coming from a country where 63 is really old. Then we have all those of phantom army people that we have in afghanistan. Wheat trade supposedly over 350,000, but when we take account to see who is there, maybe 20 are hanging out there. This is a force that we the americans are paying for. The police stations are being paid for by us. When i look a situation like the congo, where they cannot even pay the 40 a month, i think there is a real problem. Doctor, tell me the truth is. Do you think that youre actually going to go in there or somebody is going to go in there and train these guys are some African Group is going to go in there and train these guys were talking about a battalion what do you think . Usually i am the most optimistic person. On this issue i perceived disaster. Theyre both good and bad lessons from iraq and afghanistan. Afghanistan is a very good example where at the end of the day were getting it wrong because we go on too quick a path and we focus on the metric of just getting numbers by certain dates. We were throwing a lot of people out there that do not have the requisite skills and training and capacity to do the kind of things you expect them to do. Detroit yourself a little triangle and you say, what is the security situation with my goal here, and how much my willing to spend . , the third point of that frankly is a, what is the realistic capability i deplore the ground that is going to accomplish michael . It is all the question i can deploy on the ground that is my goal . Accomplish michael i think it is about this balance of having clear, realistic goals for the amount of resources youre willing to commit with. You brought up isr and border security. These are things that are extremely expensive to field. Isr is great. The question is, what kind of isr do you want . Isr you want is people on the ground you can trust with a cellphone were calling and telling you what is going on in the countryside. It is about as realistic planning. That is a great thing about africom. If it does the training exercises and it does the Capacity Building that they know how to do, theyre going to provide theyre going to help africans provide realistic solutions. Heritage was the First Foundation to make a credible argument for establishing africom. We want to facilitate solutions within those countries so United States does not get drawn in. If we let africom do its job, we can create sustainable solutions. I really believe that. Can i add one thing . I think conjuring up afghanistan may have been a mistake because it is associated with intense political feelings that folks may have. My point simply was it that we have done it in the past. We have failed in some ways, yes. But we have done it. It is doable in places that are much more difficult and operating if it is doable in places that are much more difficult to operate in, it can be done there. Thank you, mr. Affleck. There may be some on this committee who think that we have got the job done in iraq and afghanistan. We do not have that job done. It is going to be very expensive for us, and it continues to be very expensive for us. It is a lot of money. Thank you, mr. Chairman. A couple of issues where there seem to be slight differences among the three folks. I would like to get elucidation from you all on why you think the way you are thinking. It is mainly defense and training issues. It gets to the difference here between mr. Affleck, the training of the second battalion until after there is a commitment from the congolese government to reform, versus dr. Frazers comments and mr. Carafanos comments about focusing on the training. Maybe it is the mission you think ought to be delayed current the other is the commitment to security reform. Perhaps a good start by commenting, do you think we ought to move forward without a commitment to reform . Mr. Affleck, why is it important to you to have that reform first before moving forward . Dr. Frazer . I think we should move 4 right away. Forward right away. The amount of time that it takes us to actually do a training mission, the lead time that is necessary, interagency work is necessary, it can be a very long time after the decision is made before we are actually doing that training mission. I do not think we should delay. I do not think it is a matter of policy, that we should use this issue, traded italian that can protect civilian lives we should not hold that up. Creating a battalion that can protect civilian lives, we should not pull that up. I respect and appreciate your position. But it is a small distinction. Part of our position revolts around the notion of making sure were dealing with the partners in good faith. It goes to the issue raised by many congressmen and women here today about, how do we know that were working with the partners . The idea is to try to take steps down the road, rather than saying, were going to come in and do this and the status quo can go on. Isbassador frazers point well taken. It is time sensitive think to take people up there to protest civilians. I see that as the micro issue. Second issue, the envoy issue. Previous testimony said the demonstration encourages the u. S. Security general to appoint a highlevel special envoy. Should be a u. N. Envoy, or should be an envoy with the United States government . Is that perhaps government . Is that a better fit into roby and boarded the heritage foundation. Fit . I work for the heritage foundation. You have to bring something to the table. We need to get our strategy together so we are bringing something to the table. I think that might be helpful role if indeed were bringing the essence of a coherent way to address this. We get excited when it is in the news, and then mr. Affleck goes back to hollywood and we ignore it again. If you can disclaim heritage i have seen them work. Senator danforth, worked extremely well. The u. N. Has its envoy but is on its brother. If were going to have a high level, it should be a president ial u. S. Envoy and they should be able to go into the oval office until the president what they are doing and the president gives the guidance about what they should do. Then it can be quite constructive. Heritage Foundation Never offered me membership. It is bidding i am on the far left of the panel. Fink i am on the far left of the panel. Fitting i am on the far left of the panel. Quite think there is a role for both. I believe it should be a high level envoy. I concur with this idea that envoys are only as effective as their ability or their perceived ability of the very least to access the president of United States. If youre able to do that, i think will find that person can make a huge difference and to warm things up and move policy. A would advocate both. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We all have to go home somewhere. As a matter of whether we keep thinking about the things were working on. Mr. Johnson . Thank you, mr. Chairman. The history of the condo, the Belgian Congo and all of its up toions from the 1700s the mid20thcentury, characterized by colonialization, european colonialization, extracting the raw materials, minerals, taking them elsewhere to be developed, leaving the nation impoverished. Then during the 50s and 60s, we have insurgencies that seized power from the colonialists. Mobutu comes to power. Renames the country zaire, grows corruption. His Swiss Bank Accounts were fatter than many industrialists. 4 billion. He comes to power, he is corrupt, but he is an anti communist, so he is american postal buddy. When the soviet union falls americas buddy. When the soviet union falls, he sees us to be useful. Meanwhile, kabila seizes power. Is a childul, soldier, commander of a group of child soldiers participating in that movement to get rid of him. He is assassinated within hours of the close of the Clinton Administration back in 2001. His son, 30 years old, former child commander of a child army, emerges as the president and he remains in power up to this time. His daddy was supported by the rwandan, angolans, zimbabweania. When he got to power, he told them all, i will be the one who controls the Natural Resources of this country. After he is assassinated what attributes do you attribute to the sun as far as his leadership abilities . Joseph kabila, who was recently elected in 2011, which many characterized as a rigged election what do we know about the current president , and why do we support leaders in africa to exploit their citizens and the poverty that in sues makes them more susceptible ensues makes them more susceptible to extremist elements, like alqaeda . You will receive 100 virgins when you do the suicide attack, and whatnot. How can we get ourselves out of this, america . Somebody talk to me, please. I think you are right. This is part of a generation of African Leaders that are not going to move their countries forward. This is an issue of economic freedom. Y have the opportunity,rtunit were going to keep coming back here. From my perspective, mr. Affleck is sitting on the far right, but i am okay with that. [applause] to ask the question about the character of Joseph Kabila i first met him in 2001. He came to me with secretary powell, and they sat in the secretarys Office Soldier to soldier. Joseph kabila laid out a vision of what he wanted for his government. That was a vision of democratic governance, peace with its neighbors, and Economic Development for his population. I would say the the entire International Community for the very reasons of the history you just laid out brought into this position, which is a long and complicated and dirty history we have all participated in. The point is that Joseph Kabila , is often underestimated. He is shy in nature. He is visionary.