Good to have you. I want to associate myself with the remarks about the chairman and Ranking Member regarding state department budget. I do believe a cut of this magnitude diminished our influence overseas and our capacity to accomplish our goals. I make it all for creative reforms where the goal is a better operating Department Rather than hitting an arbitrary budget number provided to the state department by omb and others. There is a big difference between those two things. I want to talk about russia and legislation that is taken up regarding russian sanctions. You previously stated the Intelligence Agency has concluded there was russian interference in our elections. Is that the case . I am not here to debate whether it was a decisive intervention but they interfered and you would agree they are attempting to interfere in the elections of many major allies, the netherlands or france. It certainly appears that way. Would you also agree that russia would prefer a weaker nato to a stronger nato . In all likelihood they would. My question is do you agree with senator graham and senator mccain that the majority of us on this committee on a bipartisan basis, it is important to take additional actions and sanction russia to let them know that you cannot interfere in our elections and just get away with it, the United States is not going to walk away from that kind of attack on our democracy. Isnt that important . It certainly is important and one of the challenges is how to structure these sanctions to achieve the desired result. In the case of the current sanctions that are in place, in response to russias invasion of ukraines taking of crimea blues russia understands what has to be done to achieve sanctions relief on current sanctions. The issue and outrageous response they should receive for their cyber meddling around elections, we can put sanctions in place, what do we want from the russians in order for them to earn sanctions . Not suggesting we shouldnt do it, from a diplomats perspective some of the challenges. I do think i have read the amendment to the iran sanctions bill which is where the russian sanctions are being considered and there are a few problem areas within those that i would hope would allow the diplomatic efforts to attempt to make some progress. If we cannot make progress and i have told others in the senate i had conversations with them i may very well be calling you and saying the time has come now to do this, to motivate some movement on their part. I understand and support having that kind of ability. The question is given where we are, we dont know yet whether these efforts we have in place are going to bear fruit ultimately it will take a little time but as i said earlier i think it is important that we address the situation in relationship we have today, in the interest of the United States, the interest of stability in the world and we could deteriorate it further or try to stabilize and improve it. Right now this is an effort that is in progress. I understand, mister secretary. All of us would like to see the russians take actions that indicate to us that they want to be constructive International Player but as you know the first challenge when you tackle a problem is to get the other side to admit that they have engaged in this kind of activity and have they indicated to you in any of these conversations they admitted they interfered in our elections in your conversations . Their position and explanation of it is pretty public and i have heard nothing different. Now we are in a position where they havent even admitted, you have Vladimir Putin talking about private citizens in russia played hankypanky, we know that is not true. It was a concerted effort. We see it in the United States and our nato allies. To be talking about providing access to the compound on the Eastern Shore of maryland, my state or others, instead of leaning forward and saying here is what we are going to do unless number one you admit what you did and number 2 you are going to provide verifiable assurances it wont happen again it seems to me we have got to lean in on that issue. Let me ask you a budget related question with respect to the verification of the iran agreement, we will be discussing legislation related to that agreement because april 18th the Administration Certified to congress that iran was in compliance of the current agreement. That is correct. You would agree it is in our National Security interests to make sure we have in place the ability to verify compliance . Yes it is but i would also tell you under that agreement it is lobar. I beg to differ but the i a ea which monitors that agreement should have the resources to do it, do you agree . Certainly. Part of your budget calls for 27 reduction to the contributions to International Organizations, those mandatory contributions go to fund the iaea which is indicated that they need those resources to verify uranian compliance with the nuclear agreement. Can you tell us today the United States will ensure we provide our share of funds necessary to make sure they can verify compliance . Cuts to the International Organizations budget which you mentioned touches on a number of organizations. How we would distribute those is under continued discussion with the bureaus and those agencies so that we have as best and understanding as to how that would affect them but it is our intention that the iaea have all the resources it needs to carry out its responsibilities on the compliance side. That is an important purpose. Thank you, secretary tillerson, for your service and a chance to be with you again today. I am struck at the list the chairman put up, the detailed and thorough presentation he put up about the unsettled and dangerous and difficult world in which we currently operate and the gap with your written presentation and spoken presentation. I see here russian aggression and conflict in ukraine relatively prominent and i did not see that in your written testimony or spoken testimony and im concerned about that happen. In the context of a narrow win, we know russia from the very highest levels intentionally interfered in our last president ial election and in my view that is only going to stop when we stop it. We may have a different approach to how to engage Vladimir Putin in russia and i have a concern about the message we are sending are vital allies. I am haunted by a question asked of me by an Eastern European diplomat in the security form not long after the inauguration when he said how can we count on you to defend our democracy when we dont see you defending your own democracy . In your confirmation hearing you acknowledge russias ongoing efforts to divide europe from the United States and to divide nato and the eu and we discussed how you would lead the resources of the state department to counter russian propaganda through tools like Radio Free Europe and how you would invest in strengthening our vital allies in the region whether nato or as his been mentioned country like georgia and ukraine that are not nato members. If i understand right, your fy 18 request for europe and eurasia is cut in half from fy 16 x 400 50 million. What is the strategy behind decreasing support for our partners and allies in the region in the face of a clear and growing russian threat to their democracy and ours . Let me position the situation with russia for you so you understand what i am hearing. From allies, partners, large and small. This is without exception, i have yet to have a bilateral one on one poolside with a single counterpart in any country, in europe, the middle east, even southeast asia, that has not said to me please address your relationship with russia, it has to be improved. They believe worsening this relationship will ultimately worsen their situation. So we have been, people have been imploring me to engage and try to improve the situation. That was our approach anyway, but the feedback i am getting is please engage and see if you can improve the situation. With respect to the tools available to us, we do maintain particular emphasis on the countries that we see in europe that are most at risk of russian interference in Eastern Europe. We would like to do more in the baltics and the balkans. If we had more we would do more but we have not walked away from those and we want to continue to perfect more sophisticated approaches as to how to push messages into Russian Society through social media, broadcast, all the tools available to us and we are going to continue to maintain that effort to ensure we are in the conversation among young people and others inside russia, but i understand other countries are concerned about russia. They should be. I hear about it when i talk to them about how they feel a direct threat whether they are in the baltics or the balkans or georgia or other parts of the world as well. They expressed that to me but when we talk about what should be done, they want us to solve it through engagement. They dont want it to get worse because if it gets worse they fear it will be worse for them. I appreciate hearing that perspective. We had many of the same conversations with a different end point. Southeast asia, Eastern Europe, the North Atlantic Alliance i hear grave concerns the signals we are sending our signals of retreat and disengagement. Partly this is from countries as mentioned by the chairman, like jordan, the critically depends on us for support as they bear the burden and cost within a great number of refugees. In other places it is where china is being ascended or aggressive, South China Sea or the face of north korea or Eastern Europe as you mentioned. In terms of an overall budget that is trying to defend American Interest and advance American Values i dont see how it makes sense in an increasingly contested world to unilaterally withdraw support from vital allies who have shown us and our values and our size and a contest of ideas with russia, china and others. Let me mention two other things before i run out of time. We have people to People Programs like fulbright scholarships that have had a big positive impact, read africa is a very young continent, very large continent, china is omnipresent, the Young African leaders initiatives is a relatively modest in Scope Program that has had a big impact. I thought it was not the choice i would have made to cut all the educational and Cultural Exchange programs in half and this would be one of them. I hope you will reconsider that because i think these are powerful programs that connect us to parts of the world where we benefit from a positive relationship and from as you said that next generation of leadership. Hour africa is something that we on a bipartisan basis authorize, a way for us to bring deployment of privatesector capital and american expertise to subsaharan africa. The Budget Proposal allocates an 84 cut from the fy see an active levels to this. There are another few programs i could talk about that i think reduce the visibility and scope and reach of our investment through diplomacy and development, those are two i wanted to elevate in our conversation today. Let me close by quoting an editorial that made an important point. The senator said in this editorial to view foreignpolicy is transactional is more dangerous than its proponents realize, depriving the oppressed of a beacon of hope could lose as the world we built and thrived in. This is by senator mccain on may 8th. I ask unanimous consent that it be submitted to the record. I am concerned in a world that is increasingly and theres a clear contest between authoritarian capitalism and real capitalism, democracy that is a capitalist society that we need to step up our game. To do it without sustaining or increasing our investments in diplomacy and development is ill considered and i hope we Work Together to advance human rights, advanced diplomacy and advanced development through this budget. Thank you. Secretary tillerson, thank you for your service to our country, thank you for coming before this committee today. Two months ago, i let a bicameral congressional delegation to china and japan, just after oppression, she was in florida. Heading over to china that sunday. We were underscoring the concerns about our threat the threat of north korea knowing the us, quote, era of strategic patience is over as was articulated by mike pence and john mccain the week after we were there. Despite International Efforts to pressure pyongyang to continue to conduct missile tests, nearly a dozen already this year, some of these tests have failed, i am concerned north korea is learning from these failures. An old saying when you attend college you learn a lot more from the test you fail from the test you ace. Meanwhile south korea has delayed part of that. My question is how the latest develop and impact the state departments engagement with south korea, japan to protect against north korean aggression. The new south korean government is put in place, they have not named dollar cabinet positions yet, but been in conversations with the representatives who have come to washington and maintaining a close dialogue with japanese counterpart so our intention, South Koreans are committed to the strong Trilateral Partnership that we have that confronts north korea first and foremost, then ultimately at some point at the appropriate point engage with others but the Pressure Campaign underway for a few weeks which involves requirement the china in particular participate in a meaningful way is beginning to have some affect, it is difficult to judge precisely because we do not have great transparency and visibility in the regime in north korea but this is a campaign that has a forward map how we continue to implement and increase pressure on the North Koreans until we receive a clear signal, to engage with a different mindset about the way forward. You could interpret the level of missile testing, quite disturbing to us, whether that is a sign they are trying to give us that it is not working or whether it is a sign that it is working is difficult to tell but we are monitoring all of those tests carefully in terms of the nature of the test and we have good alignment between ourselves and china regarding the objective it denuclearization, a good understanding between us of what actions if north korea went too far cause us to be completely aligned. We have further highlevel dialogue with chinese coming up this week, secretary matus and myself, we want to work this at the diplomatic level but also the mill to the level that is important that we manage this quite carefully with full and open channels of communication with the chinese. I want to commend you and the administration in the leadership i lived in china for six years for proctor and gamble. And signing the deal in 1994 we see what happened since then. I was struck by as you mentioned the change in the engagement approach to the chinese, we met with premier as they stated changing their engagement strategy with north korea and i want to thank you for your leadership in that regard. An important issue. From the leadership in japan, our relationship with japan has never been better in some time and the media doesnt report these this kind of news but i saw it first hand and i thank you for your leadership in this important area. Last week there was pressure that russian trade in north korea increased by 70 in the first two months of this year is can you provide Additional Details in this development, what impact on our north korea strategy . We need russias cooperation and participation, we have spoken directly to them, i spoke to latimer boudin on the need for them to join us in china, and the Pressure Campaign on north korea. We do see and monitor russian movements, Petroleum Products opening a new transport system between vladivostok and north korea which is troubling. Continuing the dialogue with them making some progress, if you notice in the Security Council resolution that was passed with unanimous approval, the russians supported the resolution which imposed more sanctions on individuals, in years past we would never have hoped they would vote for it. They mightve abstained. I think the russians too understand the threat north korea poses to them. If theres a problem regionally they will feel the effects of that. They are beginning to recalculate their posture towards north korea. Speaking of russians threat i will go to the other side of the world. A few weeks ago in norway we were at hammer fest, norway, i was with chairman michalski, senator cornyn and senator i camp, i toward one of the most efficient liquefied natural gas facilities, onsite Carbon Capture capability. Many European Countries are from russia, struck by the fact that there are 13 European Countries in russia for 75 of annual lng imports. The only one in europe combines with exports that can be important to use its Energy Policy to intimidate europe. Which state department doing and what can we do as part of a whole government approach to help europe become less dependent on russia for their energy needs. To clarify europe receive 70 of its natural gas supply by way of pipeline to europe, and the historic pipelines have