Transcripts For CSPAN3 Hearing On Foreign Assistance And Vio

>> just watching as this subcommittee meeting coming together. the hearing featuring the lead singer of u2, bono, and also policy and foreign experts from the u.n. here. meeting today to talk about violent extremism. live coverage here on c-span3. we'll hear from state department and u.n. officials and among the witnesses, again, the lead singer of the band u2. >> all right, folks. take a seat. >> this is what it's like to be chopped liver. the subcommittee will come to order. hearing today is on the causes and consequences of violent extremism and the role of foreign assistance. i would like to welcome our distinguished panel of witnesses. demonstratety secretary of state tony blinken. bono, lead singer of u2 and co-founder of one and red. general james jones, former national security adviser, supreme allied commander in europe and president of the jones group international. and kelly complements, deputy united nations high commissioner for refugees. i'll make a short opening statement. let senator leahy do the same and then seven-minute round. so, number one, this was a good day for photographers. hope you got a good shot there. i just gotten back from my 30-something trip to the region. had the pleasure of being in turkey with bono and egypt. and each person here is tasked in their own way of trying to inform the congress and making policy decisions to deal with what i think is a crisis that you either pay now or you pay later. to the american people, we cannot ignore this. the goal is for people to stay at home and not come here. not go to europe. but stay in syria. you name the country. they don't have to leave. the reality is the average refugee has been displaced from their home for 17 years. in turkey, we met people in a camp, preschoolers that were 4 years old. most of them were born in the camp. i could not tell them when they would get to go home. if the war in syria ended tomorrow, it would be a nightmare to reconcile syria but that day i hope is coming and we'll have to deal with that problem. the idea of humanitarian assistance is absolutely necessary because some of these people are without food and water and shelter. it is in our national security interests, and i think general jones will tell us, to get ahead of this problem before it turns into the jihadist army of the future. but humanitarian aid has to be locked at in terms of reality. there's an op-ed piece today by bono in "the new york times." i would recommend you read it. but it talks about the dilemma of aid and developmental assistance. when you realize that most of these kids and their parents are not going back home any time soon, what kind of skill set should they possess to make them viable human beings in the country where they're going to live for a while? and if they ever do go back to their home, what do they bring back to their home? every day goes by a kid is not educated in one of these camps, and most of them are not in camps. they're actually in the cities of the country that they've been displaced to. in turkey, the government of turkey has been extraordinarily generous making payments, free health cacacacaca jordan, our friends in jordan, are completely overrun. in lebanon, there are more syrian refugee children in lebanese primary school than lebanese children. to think that will not affect us is naive. to think that there's no solutions -- well, that's just wrong. to think it's easy is just crazy. so here's the deal. i'm going to -- with the members of this committee to put together an emergency relief package and if you don't think this is an emergency, i welcome the contest. i welcome the debate. this account is 1% of the federal budget and because of world events it is tremendously under siege. and i don't want to take money away from pet far. i don't want to take money away from malaria. i don't want to take money away from the peace corps. i'm not going to take money away from embassy security. so what do we do? i think we have to recognize we have an emergency on our hand. then we have to come up with a long-term strategy and it has to be world driven, not united states driven. and the op-ed piece i referenced, bono suggested that now's the time to think big. i could not agree more. we know in the past that radicalized populations were turned around. germany and japan were very radicalized populations. the marshal plan did work. out of that effort now we have two stable democracies that are allies. the war is still going on and we don't have an occupation force. radical islam is spreading its wings autoover the mideast and throughout africa and the question for this committee, the country and the world is, how do you destroy radical islamic extremists and other radical ideologies? general jones will tell us about the limitations of military power. mr. blinken will tell us about the limitations of diplomacy. mr. bono will tell us about the possibilities of the private sector joining with the government. to give people hope that have none now. i'm pretty hawkish fellow but i have learned a long time ago about 30 trips ago you're not going to win this war by killing terrorists. the biggest threat to radical ideology is a small schoolhouse educating a poor, young girl. that will do more damage to the radical islamic extremist than any bomb to drop on their heads. we have schoolhouses here. we have domestic needs and $19 trillion in debt and counting. i am sorry the world is not more convenient. in terms of the needs back here at home. i do not ignore people in south carolina when i say, we need to spend some money over there. i tell people back home, either we invest over there or they're coming here. 9/11 is becoming a distant memory but not for me. the money this country spent just on the money side after the attacks of september 11th, 2001, is in north of a trillion dollars. the two wars of afghanistan and iraq is about a trillion and a half. we can argue about how we spent the money, should we have spent the money but we are where we are. i'm not here, tony, to argue with you about syrian policy. i'm here to find a way to go forward, to use what's commonly called soft power to supplement a military strategy. i would conclude with this. to our ngo community, you can do just as much good as any battalion of soldiers. because without your assistance on the ground trying to give people hope, nothing will ever change. to take the land from the enemy is one thing. to hold it is another. that's where we come in. for a fraction of what we spent in the past if we do it wisely through a worldwide effort i think we can turn this around before it's too late. if we do nothing, i know exactly when's going to happen. some of our friends are going to fall. and the people in these camps today are going to be our enemies. so you have two choices when it comes to these young people. get involved in their lives now or fight them later. i choose to get involved their lives now. and let them do the fighting later. because without their help, we'll never win this war. so i want to thank each member of the panel to come and share with us your vision of how to move forward. to this subcommittee, i think we have a great opportunity with a modest amount of money to make a huge difference. i intend to do that but i cannot do it without your buy-in, without your support and without your advice. times are tough at home. but when you go to one of the refugee camps and you visit the mideast, you know it could be worse. senator leahy. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the fact you're holding this hearing. i also appreciate the four witnesses. they each bring unique perspectives on the challenges. once introduced bono in an event and said that there are millions of people who never know your name, never be able to purchase your music or go to one of your shows. all they know is their life is better because of the work you've done. and you haven't stopped since that time. you've focused the world's attention on poverty in africa. the very tangible ways we can dramatically improve the lives of millions of people. i'm glad aly and your children are there to be there with you because i know they share strongly in your great commitment. general jones is one of the most distinguished public servants i know. i knew him from way back when i think he was a major there long before he became four star, commandant, long before he was our head of nato. he has this long and distinguished career. but i've also heard general jones say so many times as important as military force is, it's no substitute for diplomacy and development. and the general has been concerned about africa and where we are long, long before this hearing, and general, i admire you for that. and deputy high commissioner clements is no stranger to any of us here. she's worked on refugee issues at the state department, the united nations for i think over 25 years if i'm correct. seems that every time we've had an issue here you've been involved. i appreciate it. and then i could take a list of 40 issues and secretary blinken is involved in every one of the 40 with expertise on those issues. that's been helpful to those of us here in the senate but i know from president and others it's been helpful to them. we look at the horrific crimes committed by groups like isil and boko haram. now, we can as chairman, you said and others have, we can limit the territory control of these organizations through the use of force but we're not going to defeat terrible and pernicious ideas by bullets and bombs. and i think our foreign aid programs can't substite of government policies in north africa and promote stability and opportunity. they have to protect fundamental freed freedoms. if they don't, then they don't have a real counter to terrorist recruitment. and those policies and strategies in that area are often lacking. now, we have supported wide range of programs to address these issues. and these threats clearly economic and social development and so on. but spending -- just spending more money is not going to do it. with toef do better. we have to know the underlying causes. so that's why i want to hear from everybody here. i have an article written by admiral and general zini and we were talking about the general earlier. and a letter to the appropriations committee signed by 18 of our former colleagues, including former majority leaders frist and daschle. i ask for those to be part of the record. >> without objection. >> i'll do this on the floor and ask that bo in's op-ed of the "the new york times" be made part ort record. >> without objection. >> because they talk about diplomacy and how we need that to be used to combat terrorism so i mention these things because you have a republican and a democrat from different political backgrounds. and we have worked together on these issues for years and years. i was almost going to say way back when i had hair but you weren't born them. >> i'm catching up with you on the hair part. >> but the thing is, give us the ideas of what to do. we'll try to do it. >> thank you very much, senator leahy. general jones, when it comes to what to do, you're a military man and had a distinguished military career. can you tell us why you support this idea of economic assistance, foreign assistance in general from the military point of view? >> mr. chairman, thank you, and members of the committee, senator leahy, thank you very much for this invitation to testify today. i commend your leadership on a matter of great importance to our interests in the future of the human enterprise. i'm very honored to be here with our fellow witnesses who devoted much of their lives to the cause of human development, peace and stability. secretary blinken and i go back a long ways to his days in the foreign security committee and the national security council and i'd like to publicly recognize the tremendous work he's doing over at the state department. from personal observation, there's no more passionate, thoughtful and informed and effective advocate for development in the security nexus than bono. millions live better and more hopeful and peaceful lives because of his work and because of many efforts of this committee and i thank you for that and congratulate you, bono. you have my full statement, mr. chairman, and with your permission, i'll summarize briefly. during most of my military active duty service our national security was defined by the struggle against communism in the soviet military threat. security was expressed in the calculus of comparative troop strength, weapons cut and nuclear through weight. today's threats are diverse and complex than those we faced in the world of the 20th century. the include the likes of cancerous terrorists and criminal enterprise, failing states and conflict triggering massive refugee flows, grave natural resource threats and the ongoing battle for hearts and minds between the forces of ma americanty and those of hate and intolerance. these challenges are synergistic and extreme. yet so are the opportunities created by many positive trends in the march of human advancement. if our future is defined by the opportunity and not the threats it demands and i stress demands international security. one less reliant on reaction and far more focused on anticipation and even prevention. one that centers on disarming the root causes and major multipliers of conflict and instability and one that in the long run is much less costly than what we practice today. viewed through that lens, what comes in sharp focus in my view is that the premier strategic threat to global security and to our own is not any single country or any single ideology or any single weapon. it's human need. the unsatisfied demands for life basics including food, energy, water, dignity and a better future for masses living on the edge. and as i understand it, the purpose of this hearing is to examine the causes and consequences of island extremism. for many, extremist leaders the attraction to violent islam is born of fanaticism and the selfish lust for love. overs find a belonging. for multitudes, fear, cohersier and what's abundantly clear is they leverage on want and desperation. they to seek to exploit human misery in the pursuit of scale. as scale, at scale and with increasing access to sfirs kated weaponry, violent extremism is as great a threat of global stability and prosperity as any state power. i have long felt that the united states and developed nations have a deep moral obligation and self interest to end the plague of isis, boko haram and their ilk. unquestionably, defeating this threat has a military element associated with it but defeating radicalism requires a far broader tool kit and that's where we and the like minded allies and foreign assistance play the most crucial role. u.s. foreign assistance produced great achievements over the last century to alleviate poverty, advance health and respond to natural disasters and human emergencies. the return on investment in global influence and national security is e nor house is. the key now is investing resources more wisely to leverage the spectrum of u.s. and allied capabilities to defeat violent extremism and the conditions that give it oxygen in the most vulnerable populations and places on earth. the it seems to me to real align the strategy to face today's threats, same way we calibrated to combat the dark isms of the last century such as the 1947 national security act and the 1986 goldwater nichols legislation. we need global development and a counter extremism campaign as sophisticated and passionate and resourced as any fight we have taken on in our history, designed and resourced as if the future depends on it because it does. i would submit such a new framework guided by four principles. one, the battle plan must recognize that stability and the 21st cent vi a complex ecosystem. and integrated symphony of security, development and good governance rooted in the rule of law. our foreign engagement and sy ace tans programs to cultivate the three 0 efficients in concert. two, must integrate the public and the private sector, no amount of foreign assistance can substitute for the power of economic growth and employment which is fueled by private sector investment. three, it must recognize that the threats posed by lack of education, food, energy and water insecurity to stability. lack of access to these resources is a major driver of poverty, conflict and extremism. that means core to everything we do, diplomacy, policies, practices and innovations must be promoting wise stewardship of the natural systems for human well being. four, the campaign must engage the whole of the u.s. interagency and the alliances to deliver security development and governance assistance that changes people's lives. in essence, these are the pillars of a refugee and state failure prevention strategy. they are the arsenal that will cause the lasting defeat of radicalism, maintain u.s. influence in a needy world and assure the triumph of our interests, principles and values. shaping a world of peace and prosperity requires american leadership at the best. with it, we can, we must and i believe we will rise to the extreme challenges and opportunities in the still young and hopeful century. with your approval, mr. chairman, i would like to submit three documents for consideration. one sa article from the atlantic counsel's task ahead publication. the second is a relevant ngo nicinitiative on the topic and third is a recent speech i gave on water security. please accept my deepest appreciation for the committee and to my fellow witnesses for your devotion to american leadership in the cause of global security development and stability. it is the mission of our time and it is a cause for the ages. thank you, sir. >> thank you, general. i'll recognize senator on the last trip and thank you for coming, senator purdue. mr. blinken. >> mr. chairman, as a want to be a musician, i could only dream of one day opening for bono so thank you and thank you to the ranking member for making that dream come true. it's not the verizon center but i'll take it. and thank you, more clearly, for having us here today. i'd welcome any questions you or the panel have on the administration's response to what is a global refugee crisis. a little over a year ago i traveled to paris shortly after the "charlie hebdo" attacks. we convened leaders from across the city working to bring people closer together in the wake of that attack. one of them was an extraordinary woman. a french moroccan woman. her son was a member of the first paratroop regimen of the first french army. and there he was murdered alongside three brothers in arms, three children and a rabbi by a radicalized 23-year-old of france. soon after that, his mother traveled and talked to those who knew her sons murderer. first as a shy boy who loved soccer or football. later as someone who racked up 15 charges for petty crimes and spent a year in jail for assault where he was radicalized. when she returned home, she started the youth association for peace. working in france at risk communities to promote dialogue and help families steer their children away from radicalization violence. the path that resulted in her son's death. while her story shows the capacity to find greater understanding even in the midst of unimaginable tragedy, her son's death reminds us of the complexity of the origin of violent extremism and hardens the resolve to defeat it. the united states mobilized countries around the world to disrupt and defeat terrorist groups starting with daesh and al qaeda and boko haram, al shabab, alqp and others. we're making significant progress as detailed in the written statement submitted for the record but even as we advance the efforts to defeat daesh on the front lines, we must work to prevent the spread of violent extremism in the first place. especially, young people, to engage in violence and terrorist activities. since president obama hosted the white house summit on counting violent extremism, the department of state stepped up to play a lead role in what is a growing international movement through our dip plo mattic engageme engagement. we have notified congress of our intent. to try to lead this effort. the bureau will promote a more strategic approach alongside ongoing counter terrorism partnerships and engagement. in fy-'17, the president's budget requests that we build upon and expand our current cve efforts. we seek $186.7 million towards countering violent extremism, including cve as a portion of the overall partnership fund. the request also includes $21.5 million for the new global engagement center to try to counter daesh's narrative and invested in programs to make communities for resilient against extremism to enable us to extend programs to the private sector and key countries to address the drivers of violent extremism. and these resources would allow us to implement effectively the first-ever joint strategy on preventing and countering violent extremism govered by five priorities. to engage and amplify locally credit voices to expose extremism. second, to increase support for innovative, regional country-based and thematic research on the drivers of violent extremism and on effective resources. third, to work more closely with our partners around the world to actually adopt more effective policies to prevent the spread of extremism. fourth, to strengthen efforts and partnerships to address some of the distinct underlying political, social and economic factors that put communities at risk in the first place and general jones alluded to some of those. fifth and finally, to strengthen the capabilities of our partners to prevent radicalization to violence, especially in prisons and to help ensure former fighters reintegrated in society wherever possible. at the heart of the strategy is that commitment to the principles that have underwritten an unprecedented 'ra of greater peace and prosperity. good governance and pluralism, human rights and human dignity. when it comes to refugee resettlement and the refugee crisis more generally, our first priority is to safeguard the american people. but at the same time, we must and we will continue to provide refugee to the vulnerable, a bedrock of our country for centuries. over several months we have heard divisive and hateful rhetoric in all corners of the world, including the united states. and demonized those fleeing persecution, violence and terrorism. our ultimate success in the fight against violent extremism will be determined by the ability to hold fast to the very values the terrorists suppose, our capacity for reason, for wisdom and for compassion. i return to paris just a month ago and i met again with the same group i saw just after the attacks. latifa wasn't there, she was in washington where secretary kerry announced her as one of the 2016 international women of courage award winners. mr. chairman, members of this committee, many of you in this room have been vital leaders in counter extremism including through the foreign assistance appropriations. your leadership is helping to ensure that in their very acts of terror violent extremists are precipitating what they hope to destroy. a world a little bit more closely bound together in defense of dignity, justice and peace. thank you very much. >> mr. bono. >> right. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, ranking member leahy. thank you members of the subcommittee. my name is bono. i'm the co-founder of the one campaign and i'm just going to jump right into it and told not filibuster. and as you know, the irish invented the filibuster. so i'm going to read that because it's faster. eve just returned from africa and the middle east where i was lucky to join a codell led by senator graham there. i visited kenya, jordan and then with the team turkey and egypt. this visit revealed one fact and two fictions. the fact is that aid can no longer be seen as charity a. nice thing to do when we can afford it. if there's one thing i would like you to take away from this testimony it is that aid in 2016 is not charity. it is national security. and when it's structured properly with a hard focus on fighting corruption and improving glover nance to qualify for that aid, it could be the best bull work we have against the violent extremism gaining traction. the two fictions, the expredecision revealed to me, were, number one, that this refugee problem is temporary. the typical crisis that creates refugees lasts 25 years. on our trip, senator graham and i heard the term permanent temporary solution thrown around but without the irony of that phrase requires. the second fiction is that it's simply a middle eastern problem. refugees are flowing from all over the world, especially africa, actually. of the top ten countries that are hosting refugees today, five of them are african. in europe, the problem has moved from practical to existential. in 1989, the world that divided europe came down. a remarkable moment to live through. who could imagine in 2016 another set of walls being built up? this time, made of mesh and razor wire but walls nevertheless. members of the subcommittee, let me soberly suggest to you that the integration of europe, the very idea of european unity, is at risk here. europe is america's most important ally since the second world war. are we not your most important ally in the fight against violent extremism? this should really matter to you. i know it does. put simply, as we europeans have learned, if the middle east catches fire, the flames jump any border controls and if africa fails europe cannot succeed. it's not rocket science. it's math. here are the numbers. by 2050, the african population will have doubled to 2.5 billion. twice that of china. 40% of the world's youth will be african. which personally excites me because i have a sense of who they are and want to be. of the one campaign 7 million members, 3 million of them are african. we have a sense of their potential as an engine of growth. that can roar. but we also fear that if the young people of africa are mislead and marginalized their anger could be channelled not to hope but to hate and choices stark we fast track friendship or invite new enemies. i know that you in this room believe deeply that freedom is more powerful than fear, hope is more contagious than hate and i know you'll agree with me when i say that sometimes hope needs a bit of help. well, this is one of those times. you see, to defeat bad ideas, you need better ideas. but the good news is we have them. u.n.h.c.o.r. have great ideas of humanitarian support better and provide jobs and hope. they witness now the mood of a camp changes if there's a classroom built for kids. they see the despair in the faces of skilled workers not allowed access to the labor market. but soberly i have to say to you the international community is having a lot of meetings and issued a record number of press releases and what it is not doing is cutting checks. as of last month, as you kind of are about to hear, the u.n. humanitarian response plans for 2016 had only received 9% of the funding they require. 9%. and grants are handed out annually which is kind of on a hand to mouth basis with no predictability which makes it impossible for these agencies to plan which is madness. it's absolute madness. another idea tha i heard that might be of serious interest to this committee is to prioritize the support of the countries who are not yet in crisis. now, i know this sounds counter intuitive but the people i met, especially the military, told us it is critical that these countries not only survive but that they thrive. imagine if the chaos that ripped through syria were to engulf egypt or god forbid nigeria. these are gigantic countries. this is not melo drama. we now know that people when running from war risk the most treacherous your nils. tying their children to chest and on the mediterranean sea. all for the promise of a better life. when you think of an exodus on that big of a scale you realize that we have some -- we better have some big ideas to meet the challenge and we do and i'm really encouraged to sit here and hear them come from a bipartisan committee. these countries need aid but it's not just aid. commerce is urgent here. new trade agreements are critical. loans from the world bank are essential. dr. jim kim and the world bank innovative here and so is gail smith. you should be proud of these people. anti-corruption campaigners in our own office around the corner and one campaign will tell you that the reforms necessary to qualify for the loans can be as important as the loans themselves. the africa development bank right out in front of this stuff. the president understands that corruption kills more people than aids, tb and malaria combined so tackling corruption has to be part of this package. in fact, he was also one of the first lead earls to call for a modern marshal plan as a partnership for progress. so, what -- what might that mean? well, the marshal plan, as america snows, was the first time the world witnessed development as security on a grand scale. the marshal plan was an idea big enough to meet the moment in history. it was an idea as big as the sacrifice americans made in the fight for freedom. an idea that showed america could not only win the war but that peace as lindsey graham keeps reminding us. an idea big enough to change the world. an idea like the idea of america itself. you see, the peaceful europe that i gratefully grew up in was born of the marshal plan. history's greatest example of national generosity. as national security which is what i'm talking about today. and i'm not alone. trade and development as security. that's what jim jones is talking about today and he's not alone. senator graham not alone when he spoke to "the washington post" yesterday. it's the same time. finance minister of germany, not known for his wild pronouncements, has invoked this. king abdullah of jordan, the same. actually, king abdullah is worth thinking about because he's a leader who's also a military man. it's not coincidence that he's a military man because i think, i'm sure military meters, at least the great ones, know the cost of failure will ultimately be borne by them. by the men and women they lead into battle and have to face as they come home. this is a new century. these are new threats. this is politically very hard. i hope i understand the challenges. i hope i understand the pressures you face as leaders but in truth i probably don't. but i'll tell you what i do understand. i understand that america is not ready to give up on its greatness. and i'm not either. that's what got america to the moon. that's the spirit that brought mankind back to earth when you signed up to fight the largest health disaster in the history of the world. hiv/aids. there were members on this subcommittee who refused to accept aids was a problem that couldn't be solved. we have nearly 9 million people who owe their lives to the u.s. fax pair. if you're a u.s. taxpayer, you're an aids activist. think about that. i'm here today to testify to the united states senate that i have seen the impossible made possible right here in these halls. and we need that leadership again. in this moment of great jeopardy. it is who you are. it is your essence and your calling. and when you serve history, you serve the people of america. and when you write history, we all live it. thank you very much. >> mr. chairman, ranking member -- mr. chairman, ranking member, members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the high commissioner and the u.n. refugee agency, i'm pleased to appear before you to speak on the global refugee crisis, especially to bat cleanup for four heroes. on a personal note, it is also a particular thrill to testify today with bono whose advocacy on behalf of the world's poorest, pushed leaders to act and whose early music helped to shape my high school years. mr. chairman, you have my full statement for the record so i'll summarize, as well. as this subcommittee is well aware, world attention to refugees has perhaps never been greater. yet force displacement is nothing new and steadily growing and of 60 million uprooted people, some 20 million cross add international border and are therefore refugees while the remaining 40 million people are primarily those who are displaced within their own borders internally displaced persons. if the uprooted formed a single country, it would be the world's 24th largest. last year, more than 42,000 people fled their homes every single day. and at the same time, the number of refugees who were able to return home was at its lowest level in three decades. new conflicts emerged and the existing ones drag on with no solutions in sight. the human and financial resources of un rch are stretched like never before. it's also important to note and in fact clarify that while refugee ramps are a favored visual image for the media, most refugees are not in camps. rather 73% of refugees globally and 90% of syrians do not live in camps. they live in towns and villages. mr. chairman, the humanitarian system at large is faced with a critical humanitarian and financial dilemma. the funds available for humanitarian aid are not keeping up. unhcr continues to make difficult decisions. 35% of needs being met last year. beyond the funding charges, we are witnessing today an unprecedented attack on the ability of uprooted individuals and families to find protection from harm. in some cases particularly in industrialized countries this attack takes the form of policy that is prevent or discourage asy lum seekers from protection. in other cases we see closure of borders making it nearly impossible for persons fleeing persecution and violence to find safety in neighbors countries. i was in serbia last month when the macedonia and other borders closed. essentially ending the western balkans route north leaving thousands trapped in countries unclear of their futures. not since the period proceeding world war ii have we witnessed such popular rejection of the notion of protecting refugees. within this climate, it is all the more essential to ensure access to quality asylum and protection while taking steps the ensure their own security, countries should not slam their borders shut to those themselves victims of violence, persecution and often terrorism. and who have no other means of finding safety. as recent events shown, such efforts have the consequence of supporting the business of smugglers. in contrast, efforts to identify quickly those persons who are in need of international protection to address their needs are not only in line with international law, but also, with the finest of humanitarian traditions. this approach recognizes that effective counterterrorism measures and the protection of human rights are complimentary and mutually reinforcing goals. we look to the united states to uphold its longstanding leadership role in international refugee protection. consistent with the ideals on which this country was founded by continuing its example of welcoming those who are amongst the most persecuted and most vulnerable in the world today. but amongst these challenges there is hope. this week in washington we'll support efforts by the world bank and other part nerls to increase development assistance and resources for countries that are hosting large numbers of refugees. and in many cases, are geographically on the front lines of our collective security. last week, a gathering of donors and agencies agreed through the will on the park principles to a series of steps to support countries hosting large numbers of refugees, including the development of financing instruments. another effort is the u.n. high level panel on humanitarian financing the agree on implementible actions of called the grand bargain to improve the way humanitarian aid is mobilized and delivered including hopefully multi-year plans. at the same time, unhcr is working to find new avenues for refugees for temporary and permanent legal protection. we call on governments to explore ways for refugees to move legally and access employment. as i conclude my statement today, i leave you with three main messages. first, the traditional responses to force displacement including humanitarian aid and resett resettlement need to be reinforced and complimented with alternatives pursued now. and in the absence of the political solutions we need robust, humanitarian and development responses, particularly in refugee hosting countries buckling under the strain. second, the current attacks on the refugee protection system. fueled in part by an unjustified link of refugees and terrorists often fail to recognize that refugeesre the victims and not the perpetrators of violence and extremism. national security goals are in no way at odds with refugee protection and unhcr stands readyprotection-sensitive border management policies. and finally, u.s. leadership. it's critical to maintaining global refugee protection. americans care deeply about refugees and the u.s. government translates this compassion into strong diplomatic, moral, and financial engagement that enables the humanitarian community to care for millions of uprooted people in need. mr. chairman and members of the subcommittee, i will end with a thought from whone of the many passionate unhcr team members working on the front lines of humanitarian response on the islands of greece. she was commenting on a refugee who perished fleeing to europe. she said, "she escaped bombs, she carried mountens yet she died at europe's feet. let us carry her along the way." thank you for holding this hearing and. your ongoing interest in tackling these fundamental issues and we stand ready to assist in any way possible. thank you. >> thank you all very, very much. general jones, i just returned from turkey. turkey is no onger taking refugees from syria. are you aware of that? >> yes, sir. >> mr. blanken, has jordan taken refugees from syria? >> as a practical matter, very, very few. >> what about lebanon? >> also -- it slowed down. they put requirements on admissions as a practical matter make it difficult for people to get in. >> i want the committee to know, people in syria are trapped. there's no place to joan. general jones, what's going to happen inside of syria with this dynamic militarily? people trapped with no place to go? >> i don't have the crystal ball on that but i would say nothing good is going to happen. i think the -- you know, the humanitarian catastrophe that the syrian situation portends is one of the great unanswered questions in terms of a solution of our time. we -- we, collectively, with the united states providing the leadership, i think, have to do a lot more to solve this problem. >> is it fair to say, mr. blanken, that jordan really can't take anymore refugees and survive? >> the burden on jordan, the burden on lebanon, the burden on turkey as you saw firsthand, mr. chairman, is extraordinary and if you equate it, for example, to the united states, if you look at lebanon, somewhere between a quarter and a third of the population is now a syrian ret refugee, as if we took 50 million, 6 0 million people in the space of a few short years. the burden on their systems, on their infrastructure, on their economies is as you've seen dramatic so the challenge i think for us is to device ways to help them in effect help refugees because the two problems that we have are that we are in effect pursues humanitarian emergency solutions to the refugee crisis on the one hand and development on the other. these two things need to come together because as you said, and as others have said, these countries are going to be facing these challenges for a long time. we have to find ways to create what amounts to a win/win solution. that is the host communities have to benefit along with the refugees. that's where we need to put our focus. >> bono, from your point of view, the whole marshal concept is to deal with that reality. people are in jordan, they're in lebanon, they're in turkey. many of them going to be there a long time. the whole approach is to leverage better outcoming and not help people with food, shelter, water and clothing but also deal with the reality you want to make these human beings assets where possible. what did you learn on this trip? what was the takeaway for you? >> singer should understand microphones. i think the egypt piece really disturbed me because i just saw the scale of this country and it's vast, it's extraordinary, very sophisticated country, and you could feel trouble brewing and mechanisms that were put into place to -- to clamp down on islamists and jihadis were now clamping down on just anyone who criticized human rights people, christian ngos, numbers of people disappearing going up. and you could see, it's almost a mechanism going on its own momentum. and that worried me and i -- it was just way above my pay grade to figure out how you would turn people back. but i noticed that president sisi was very, very concerned about the economy as he should be because it's on the slide. and i thought, well, you know, is there a way that we can make, you know, trade agreements and things like that conditional on reform and human rights and things like that that would help him turn his country back from a precipice that we need him to do. >> excuse me. one thing we're not talking about is writing a check and walking away. >> to. >> we're talking about if you do "a" you cab gn get a better dea trade-wise and "a" will counter extremism. if you do "b" you can get loans at a lower rate. that's the whole concept. i want the panel to see if you agree with this that we're not just throwing money at a problem, we're trying to get better outcomes using some resources. is that the whole theory of the case here? >> yeah, i think it is. it's leverage. and i really think, you know, you can't underestimate the trade piece, can't underestimate the concessional loans piece and the effect of tackling corruption because as people have to reform to get those concessi concessional loans they'll do the painful work. it's only the stick and carrot we have. >> mrs. clements, what percentage of refugee assistance comes from the american taxpayer in terms of worldwide assistance? >> about 35% of our budget was supported last year by the united states government. >> you're asking us for more. are you going to ask other people for more? >> we are absolutely doing that. not only governments, obviously there are traditional ones that have been very generous. unfortunately, thanks to the europe crisis i'm afraid, we rose $300 million from private sector supporters but that helps to fund critical life-saving protection and assistance requirements for our agency and the many partners that we support and saves a woel lhole f lives in the pros. >> for the committee's information, i'm sure the members know this, this year we're going to be 30% below the fy '16 number for international disaster assistance. we got problems here at home, but these numbers are real. what would it mean to you if we enact these cuts? >> it would be quite, nearly impossible for us to meet immediate needs. it's very difficult for us now. we were half funded last year. 50%. the united states does a tremendous amount to support. $1.3 billion last year. we need a lot more support because we got about $7 billion in requirements in 2016, alone. >> what if we restored the money with the condition that other people have to match what we do? >> it's hard to place conditions, mr. chairman, on support in saving lives so we could caution against that on humanitarian life-saving assistance. obviously pushing governments and others to give more absolutely needs to be on the table. >> okay. senator leahy? >> thank you. mr. chairman. and i referenced bono earlier, your op-ped piece, and i read it and reread it, and the needs, emergency needs of syria and other refugees, countries in the middle east, north africa, i think a country like jordan which is so heavily saturated with refugees and you wonder what this does in the long term effect on any country. there's no question we need money but we can't seem to pass emergency funding in this country to deal with the zika virus which is spreading through our own country. or do some of the things we need here. i say this not because i'm opposed to foreign aid, you know my record very well in that regard. these countries you talked to in europe, do they act as though they're willing to spend more money? i listened to what miss clements said and i know -- >> yes. in short, senator. europe hasn't mobilized at the level it needs to, but i think that's about to change. i mean, what i was trying to do, and i don't know if i can do it just by reading, is to dramatize the situation. i'm talking about an existential threat to europe the likes of which we haven't seen since the beginning of the '40s. and really and truly we're seeing in hungary and poland the mooi movement to the right, hyperlocalization in response to globalization, i guess. we're talking -- the uk is voting on leaving europe. this is unthinkable stuff. and you should be very nervous in america about it. and we see the leadership of chancellor merkel. i think she's an extraordinary leader on this crisis, and, but you see, she faces criticism in her own party. what the german people have shown the way here -- actually they've become the very heart of europe. that's brilliant. i think she deserves a peace prize or something like that. she's -- she's done extraordinary things. she's the -- there is gathering momentum. i spoke with david cameron about -- about gathering around stopping the refugee crisis. he's finding it very difficult politically to take in more refugees. i think that's a mistake for the uk. i think all countries need to take in more refugees. my pink friends back here will back me up on that. is that right? and -- >> and i would hope there's a realization in those countries that millions, maybe tens of millions of these refugees, no matter what happens, are never going to go back home and that's going to have -- i mean, i think we have to do more than just money. we got to have the ability to work with these countries to help them absorb the refugees that are there and make a life worth living. we can't have just -- none of us have suggested refugee camps, they're going to be absorbed in there so you're going to have to invest in economies, you're going to invest in the institutions, educational, medical, everything else. >> but you don't want this to spread. that's really what i -- that's why i think we're all gathered here is there's -- it's so complex to try and solve syria's problems. we just need to get them financed. but i'm asking this committee, what will we be asking you to finance if this spreads? if this chaos that's going along the region, and, you know, particularly which i understand a bit about because i spent a lot of time in africa, you see this phenomenon of three ex-freedex freed teems. extreme ideology, extreme poverty and extreme climts. it's a parched earth. it's a geological phenomenon. it goes all the way to afghanistan if you want to look at it as a geological phenomenon. those three extremes make one unholy trinity of an enemy and our foreign policy needs to face in that direction. i know john kerry is. i know senator kerry is, but it's even bigger than you think. so whilst we sit here and talk about, you know, getting cuts and where are we going to pay for it and god knows i'm in awe of you lawmakers, worked with dick durbin, worked with so many of you on, you know, on making the impossible possible. i don't know how you do it. but if you don't do it now, it's going to cost a lot more later. i do know that. >> but you're also going to have to deal with the people that are there. we have -- you talked about egypt. i'd like to ask secretary blinken, do you think the leadership, president al sisi and leadership are going to allow dissent, are they going to release political prisoners? i mean, some, nobody even knows where they are. is that going to change? i mean, we could -- we already have a lot of money in the pipeline for them. we could add more money, but are they going to change in any way? >> it's a huge challenge, mr. ranking member. first, face acute security problems, real security problems including in sinai in terrorism, they're real, we need to be helping them. on the other hand, what we know very well is in the absence of creating space in their society for people to express their views to associate freely and to come together, they are going to sew the seeds of long-term instability. and even if it works in the short run, it's not likely to who work in the long run so they have a profound self-interest in coming to the realization that creating space and opening up is actually the best path to dealing in a sustainable way with the challenges that they face. so we're works on that with them. we're deeply engaged in trying to move them in that direction, but i have to tell you, we're deeply concerned with the direction that we've seen egypt take if closing down that space, putting people in jail for expressing their views, civil society being cracked down upon including many of the partners that we have in trying to implement some of the programs in egypt. >> raise more questions. i'm agreeing with all you're saying, i just, i am worried how -- so many times repression when the country is led to greater extremism which creates even more problems. so thank you for being here. thank you, mr. chairman. we'll work together on this. >> i heard you had to go, so we're going to -- >> is that okay? thank you very much, mr. chairman. yes, i'm going to an intelligence committee hearing exactly on vie lenolent extremi exactly in the area we're talking anlt. i want to thank you for organizing this hearing, all the men and women at this table who devoted their lives to making the world a better place. it's particularly important, mr. chairman, you also held this in the month of april. it was in april 2014 that 200 girls in nigeria going to school were kidnapped by boko haram. those girls have never been found. many of them are probably dead and some probably wished they were dead. and when i look at what we're talks about here, i am looking at the impact of really women and children, particularly children. according to you, commissioner clements, globally women and children continue to comprise 80% of the uprooted. with more than half being children. uprooted. what an incredible, incredible world. and we see what's happening to children around the world. not only in the region being discussed today, but i believe children are on the move and they will constitute a tremendous threat in the future unless we show them humanity, compassion, and a way forward. right now, a little girl is shot in her head or a teenage girl because she wanted to go to school and read. she wins the nobel prize for it but she continues to talk about one book, one teacher, one kid. girls are being recruited in sexual slavery in the most despicable things. boys are being recruited as child soldiers and into gangs. they're moving not only in africa, but they're moving in central america. the gangs, the murder rates, et cetera. so unless we focus on the children, i believe we are going to ride the wind in the future. you've said, mr. blinken, that the perception of discrimination will turn somebody against you. we all remember who helped us or who helped our mother and father. we also remember who didn't help us and didn't help our mother and father. so let me tell you where i'm getting because it is central america and so how are we going to really focus on this? because i would say right now the children of the world feel that they're hated. that they're rejected. that they're pushed aside. their mother and father is either being deported or they see the agony of their father who bribed his way to get to europe or the desperation of the mother trying to find bread for them. what are they going to think about? oh, kumbaya? isn't the west great? don't we want to go for democratic principles and constitutional reform? we are sewing the seeds of hate in the seeds of desperation. so, mr. blinken, i'm saying to you, and then also to the high commissioner, what can we do to help? my own ngos in baltimore, say we have to advance the money before we get reimbursed. money often goes to the u.n., above the u.n., but it often is trickled down so, one, not only are we talking about new money here today, we're talking about money being used smartly. so, number one, are we really going to focus on the children? number two, are we going to get money out to the ngos who are truly the ones there where the money in donor countries where they are? >> thank you, senator. and i very much share your concern. we're at risk of creating a lost generation of children. we know what that means. at the very least, they will not have the skills and knowledge they need to become productive members of society, the society they become refugees in or if they're able to return home. even worse -- that's the best-case scenario. even worse, we know that absent those skills, absent having an education, they are much likely to become prey to crime, to violence, to early marriage, to sexual exploitation and, indeed, to extremism and terrorism. so what can we do about it? just focusing on the syria crisis which is generating so much of the attention, although as you rightly point out, this is a global crisis and as kelly pointed out, it's truly global in nature. first, what can we do inside of syria, itself, to take away the drivers pushing people out? of course the number one driver is violence. there, of course, ending the civil war is job number one. secretary kerry is working on that eight days a week. as we know, it's incredibly difficult. working on the cessation of hostility, sustaining that, working on getting more humanitarian assistance in, that takes awhey some of the drivers. once people get to turkey, lebanon, jordan -- >> don't do that. i know all the concentric circles and so on. that's the problem. we end up going in circles. that's the big picture. right now, let's go to what i asked. right now, there are these children either tries to get across the water with little life -- maybe a life vest on. they're in a raft. do they have a lifeline? what are you focusing to get the aid out while we're working on big-picture solutions? >> the reason i mentioned circles -- when you get to the countries of asylum, turkey, lebanon, jordan, we know what is making people take that risky journey, put their lives in the hands of smugglers, on the high seas, jep disz their lives. it's an absence of access to school and education for the kids and it's a lack of access to employment, to jobs for the parents. so a big focus of our effort is working with those three countries in particular to try and open up both access to school s and access to jobs. working closely with unhcr, unicef with that. it's a question of resources, partly a question of the compacts we're talking about. for example, on the jobs front, it's awful hard if you're a politician in one of these countries so say, i'm going to give a job to a refugee even though you, my fellow citizen, don't have one. we' the europeans are looking at creating greater access to their markets for products produced in special enterprise zones where refugees are employed. we're pushing these countries to give jobs to people in specific sectors where they're not competing with the local citizens. on the education front, we've been doubling and tripling our efforts in a number of way. one, we've been building schools, been building classrooms so there's capacity to actually educate these kids alongside the locals. we've been working to support double and triple shifts for teachers so they can educate syrian refugee kids in the evening, even as they education local children during the day. and we're working on things in the informal education sphere so that while people are not yet in a formal program, they can still be learning and get a credit. our government is working with all of those governments to get accreditation for inforl learning and doing this in partnership with unhcr, with unicef, and other organizations. >> my time's up. >> maybe very briefly on -- >> may miss clements also answer part? >> absolutely. >> very briefly, senator, on your question related to the issues related to education in particular, maybe just to note, because we talked in the last round of questions significantly about money, it isn't just about money. it's about policy changes we actually need from governments to make it possible for refugees to work, make it possible for freedom of movement, and make it possible for kids to be in school. whether or not those are national systems or even the ability for ngos and international organizations to provide reinforced assistance for education, you put your finger on it in terms of that being the key from our perspective. on the issues related to central america, thank you very much for raising it, it's a great concern to us, too. we see a looming refugee crisis on the horizon very much so with regard to unaccompanied children, with regard to women on the run. these are issues that are of great concern and in terms of our ability to be able to support, we think we need a regional approach in terms of sharing responsibility. we need to increase reception capacity, we need to increase direct assistance to people very much in need. we also need the cooperation of those governments to help us do that. thank you. >> thank you. >> senator bosen? >> thank you, mr. chairman. general jones, in your testimony, you talk about the importance of public/private partnerships to advance our foreign policy priorities. this is certainly an issue that many of us have also extensively raised. not just for -- the logistic and technical expertise the private sector brings. i think the u.s. government has gotten better at creating these partnerships. i often hear from businesses, marley small businesses, it can be incredibly difficult to partner with the government. have you heard similar concerns, are there any particular recommendations you could offer which would accelerate and streamline the partnership process? >> thank you, senator. i think the american private sector is still the private sector that's one of the most admired around the world, and one of the ones that has really, frankly, almost since the marshall plan has had to develop itself on its own and i think the time is here for increased public and private sector partnership. as an instrument of our foreign policy almost. i still do a fair amount of traveling around the world and i'm asked in developing countries, where are you? we have the chinese here, but where are the american companies? many time the answer is we can't operate here because -- because of corruption and so on and so forth. but i really believe that there are three pillars to our 21st century engagement. one is certainly security. and i think organizations like nato could do a lot more than they're doing. although i give them credit for their presence in afghanistan. the -- 25 years ago this year, i participated in operation provide comfort in northern iraq which was a refugee operation. a humanitarian operation rescuing almost a million kurds from a human stampede caused by saddam hussein. and from that came the region that we now call kurdistan, but it was security. it was followed by economic development and also, thanks to the international organization's rule of law. those three things, it seems to me, are important. on the refugee problem, if you think the middle east is interesting now and a challenge, you have the entire african c continent that is ready to explode one way or the other. there will be 16 national elections in africa this year. most polls show that young africans are not looking to stay in africa. they want to go somewhere else because they don't believe they have any future. so that should motivate our european friends to join with us in this partnership. lastly, i'd just like to make a point that on threats that there is an established, growing nexus between organized crime and terrorism. organized crime and terrorism have figured out ways to cooperate together. you have extreme rise in illegal drugs, illegal traffic and illegal cigarettes. trafficking people. trafficking arms. and there's an unholy alliance there hat provides the funding for much of the terrorist challenges that we face today. i do think, to answer your question, i do think a closer working relationship on the foreign policy level between the public and the private sector can show the power of the american economic engine and stimulate recovery and avoid future conflict in many of these countries. >> you mentioned just now the presence of china in africa. bono mentioned it, i think earlier, as he was speaking. talk to us a little bit about that. talk to us about -- you had a good article in the atlantic council's task ahead. talk to us a little bit about their motives. talk to us if that's good for governance, all those kinds of things. >> yes, sir. the chinese, up until 1990, the united states was the number one trading nation on the aftrican continent and we surrendered that, around the closing years in the last century. to china. china makes it very easy. in many countries. they show up with not only a lot of money, but they show up with their own workforce. it's actually had an effect that i think is in africa is beginning to dawn on some of these countries that when the chinese actually engage in big projects, they do them but they do them with their own colonies of workers. fr for example, in algeria, they tied up a prison ship to work on projects in algeria. the american way, the international way -- the european and american way -- and american companies do this regularly in africa, don't get much credit for it. at least the united states doesn't. the countries do. in addition to working in the region, they do things that are helpful. electrifying villages, builds roads, providing schools. and there's many, many examples of individual american companies on the continent of africa doing great things. sometimes with ngos, sometimes not. but mostly apart from our government. and what i'd like to see is i'd like to see a closer -- i'd like to see the united states get credit for that. these are american companies doing good things. but in order to do that, i think we need, you know, the secretary of commerce who's doing -- has done great work, i admire her greatly, but we need more of that connection around the national security council table to figure out how do we do that? how do we project that? we did the marshall plan once. it would be very hard to do today. something like that has to happen and it has to happen not only on a national scale but an international scale. as i said, if the europeans aren't concerned, solve the syrian refugee problem, there's another one, another tsunami of refugees coming right behind it if we don't prevent it. >> thank you. bono, i want to thank you. you know, one of the great problems that we have is that there's lots of people throughout the world but there's not much constituency for them. you know, lots of people verbalize this and that, but as far as the constituency, we have that problem in our country and we're, you know, we're tremendously benevolent and are certainly doing our share, but i'm always impressed with your young people that come from arkansas or wherever i visit with them. they're knowledgeable, they're passionate just like you are and it really does make a difference. and so that's a big deal. so, thank you very much. >> yeah. thank you. the -- i'm stunned as well, and people say that america is ready to sort of close in on itself, but america becomes america when it looks outward. you know, when you're a continent behaving like an island, you're not america. it's not who you are. i think waking up across the nation, actually, in these very cantankerous times politically, there is people actually think, well, this is one thing we can agree on, and that's why i'm proud of the one campaign. in fact, one of the reasons i got interested in this refugee crisis is because all the great work that's been done by a lot of people on this committee, a lot of people in america, in the fight against extreme poverty over the last ten years could be undone. we worked together, senator durbin, we worked on debt cancelation, with senator leahy, we worked -- with lindsey graham. i mean, i've got to know -- david purdue, there's senator purdue. we were traveling around. i'm thinking, who's the republican, who's the democrat? and of course they're talking on other subjects, very easy to find that. but on this stuff, this is like the one thing you all agree on. and it brings out the best in you. i'm sure of that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you, all, very much for being here today and for testifying. i certainly agree with all of the comments about the importance of aid. it is about our security and the impact of what's happening in europe affecting us in the united states because we do have trans-atlantic alliance that has been absolutely critical to world order. we had a hearing this morning in the foreign relations committee on isis and international terrorism. and one of the conclusions that i drew listening to the testimony and our witnesses generally agreed with this is that we've been good in the united states when it comes to military efforts. so we were successful in afghanistan in throwing out the taliban snisinitially. we were successful in iraq and our military efforts. we've been working to try and take back territory from isil that has been successful. but we have been -- and we've been successful in efforts to support refugees and camps and to make sure that aid gets there. but we've been less successful when it comes to governance, what many people call nation building. economic and social implications and the ability to improve governance in countries that are failing. i would like to ask if you all agree with that and the extent to which you see the need to address that as being critical to countering violent extremism and, therefore, how do we do better with what we've been doing in the past? because so far we haven't been as successful if those areas as i think we need to be if we're going to address the concerns that we're all talking about today in terms of countering violent extremism. and i don't know, i see you blinking -- you nods, mr. blinken. would you like to respond to that first? you can blink, too. >> i'm the nods, he's the blink. >> no, i think you're right on the mark, senator. this -- the challenge of actually moving from -- the case of say, iraq, or syria, from liberating territory to then stabilizing it, but then not just stabilizing it, helping people rebuild. then not just rebuilding, actually finding a sustain able political accommodation. that's where the challenge really comes in. i think you have to look at each country in its particulars, but unless we're ability to get at some of these underlying issues even when we succeed, as we always do militarily, it won't be sustainable, so that is very much part of the challenge. what we're trying to focus on, for example, in kbedealing with programs to counter violence extremism, working with national governments, with local governments, with community leaders, with municipalities, bringing, for example, mayors together to talk about how they're dealing with the challenge in their own communities. we're taking these programs, we're also trying to apply metrics and evaluation to them to figure out what actually works and what doesn't and when it doesn't work to change it. let me give you one quick example. we just stood up the global engagement center which is our effort to -- >> i want to ask you about that. >> so maybe just to jump into that. one of the critical pieces of the effort against daesh is to counter the narrative that's attracting young people to its cause. and we were not satisfied with the effort that we had -- that we had going. we brought in a team of experts, technology experts, from silicon valley and other places, a so-called sprint team in the jargon of silicon valley. they spent a month with us and looked at what we were doing and made recommendations and as a result of the recommendations, we reformed what we were doing and that led to the global engagement center. in a nutshell, what we're doing less now is direct messaging in the voice of united states because we found that wasn't so effective. we weren't the best messenger in this space. what we are doing, instead, is trying to identify, elevate, and build the capacity of local, credible voices. second, instead of playing this whack-a-mole game where they'd put something up on social media, we'd immediately try to counter it. we've worked on doing it much more thematically, so, for example, very successfully, we found the testimonies of defectors from isil or from daesh and put those together in a way that's incredible effective. what it says to people, what you think you're signing up for is not the reality and they have much more credibility saying than saying it ourselves. it was based on trial and error but based on figuring out what works, what doesn't work and we're determined to do that across the board. >> can i add something to that which is a little bizarre, just coming from -- from soeobservin this culture and how elusive maleness is. we forget how elusive it is in a world where materialism decides your -- if you have no access to material things, you exaggerate your manliness. i think we have to think about men and think about that. and it's funny, you're going -- don't laugh, but i think comedy should be deployed because if you look at national socialism and daesh and isil, this is the same thing. we've seen this before. we've seen this before. very vain, they've got all the signs up there. really, it's a show business. and the first people that -- that adolf hitler threw out of germany were the datists and surrealists. you speak violence, you speak their language but you laugh at them when they're goose stepping down the street and it takes away their power. so i'm suggesting that the senate send in amy schumer and chris rock and sacha baron cohen. thank you. >> actually that's not the first time i've heard experts on how do we counter violent extremism talk about that. >> i'm actually serious. not a bad thing. >> no, and it is one of the things i know we're looking at but it also speaks to the importance of empowering women around the world and focusing on human rights for women and children and making sure that they -- we have the same focus on what's happening with them in particularly countries that where we're seeing vie lengolen extremism the most are countries where women have not historically been empowered and it makes it even more -- a critical need for foreign policy. thank you, mr. chairman. >> wanted to -- >> senator shaheen, if i could just add a little bit to that. generally the practice that we followed over there, many, many years, has been one of reacting to bad things. i would -- i would suggest that in the years ahead being proactive has a skill set all to itself in terms of what you could do. first of all, for example, on the security measure, if you -- you can't do everything everywhere, but let's -- let's suggest a failing state in africa the size of nigeria, for example, and what that would cause. or a failing state like the congo or pick any other large country. so the question is, if you're worried about it now, isn't it cheaper and more effective to engage now proactively to fix what needs to be fixed? whether it's security, whether it's -- and by security i don't mean -- i don't mean american forces or nato forces going in to fight a war. i mean to go in and help people learn how to defend themselves and in some cases you can stitch together entire regions of several countries that would benefit from that kind of training. and while you're doing that, you can encourage the private sector to go in and start showing people how the lives are better in a capitalist system, a free market system, that education, distance learning, all of these things. so the problem is that we tend to do one very well and in the case of afghanistan and iraq, there was no real plan to nation build, and i think that's the missing link. if you're going to do one, be prepared to do, you know, the other things that have to be there, but it's much cheaper to be proactive than to be reactive. that i'm very sure. >> wroyou know, i totally agree with that. i think we haven't yet, however, aligned the priorities in our spending in a way that supports that. look at how much we spend for humanitarian aid, for usaid, for diplomatic efforts and compare that to what we're spending on the military side and, you know, there's a huge disparity and so we've got to begin to realign our priorities so that we're focusing more on prevention than we are on reacting to the situation. >> we have the benefit of unified -- unified geographic commanders in most of the major regions of the world and i think that with a little bit of tweaking in the right direction, that is not just security but economic development, rule of law, that i think you have forward bases already in regions, and i think that would be a good way to engage proactively to prevent future conflicts. >> thank you. thank you -- >> senator dans? >> thank you, mr. chairman. this is a great panel today. thank withdryou for being here. americans are the most generous people in the world when it comes to humanitarian aid and contribute toiing to relief eff that span the globe. weighing how best to contribute government resources for the needs are overwhelming. how do we counterterrorism -- how do we provide humanitarian relief, how can we be most effective on bhehalf of the american taxpayer? general jones, thank you for your service to our country. as a son of a marine, myself, i got raised right. thanks for what you've done for our nation. i want to begin with a question for you, general. this past weekend in the philippines, at least 18 filipino soldiers were killed fighting with an isis linked organization in the southern part of the country. clearly indicative the threat they pose not only to the middle east but asia pacific and the entire world. the u.s. special forces use strict operations doctrine by embedding with local forces and builds strong partnerships as they battle these terrorist organizations on a special task force with the philippines following 9/11. we're starting to see the u.s. take this approach in operation inherent resolve. my question for you, somebody who has a lot of experience, do you feel this tactic is an effective way to counter violent extremism? >> the critical ingredient, i think, that you need to have is that wherever we engage that the people of that country and the government of that particular country have to want what we're offering. what worries me is that if i understand it correctly, there's ane effort at appeasement of ths vie lent extremism groups and personally i'm opposed to that because that just gives them an accurate point from which they will expand their base of operations. so i'm a little bit removed. i defer to secretary blinken about our current policies but as a matter of principle, i don't favor appeasing extremi extremists. i think you have to root them out, and a lot of it depends on the will and the capacity of the people. i think we can help them do these things but i don't think we can do it for them. >> secretary blinken, notwithstanding national disasters and unforeseeable contingencies, the goal of foreign aid is to assist countries and get them to attain humanitarian conditions in which aid is no longer required. as you look at your longer term goals, as you look at the investment we make in aid, what are measurable benchmarks that might indicate if a country is effectively utilizing u.s. assistance to improve governa e governance, combat terrorism, and what, if any country, you can maybe pull out that can be viewed as a model of success? sorry. >> briefly on the previous question, i agree with general jones on the point he made and we're trying to work with, by and through partners to build their capacity but with them along the way. you're exactly right that ultimately success for the foreign assistance business is to get out of that business. we want countries to actually get on their own feet to be able to be effective and to provide for their own citizens and, indeed, ideally we'd like to channel as much as possible to the private sector. and have it work that way. but in the near term, as we look at these programs, what we are trying to do is develop clear measures and metrics of effectiveness. and just to give you one example, in the violent extremism space, trying to counter that, on the one hand, it's a little tough to measure how many people didn't become radicalized in a way that's unknowable. but what we are trying to do is, first of all, have some consistency across the programs, second, we're making sure that we have third parties come in and evaluate what we're doing to see if the goals of the particular programs are actually being met. and in particular, we're trying to look at when we provide assistance or we transfer knowledge to a recipient, how are they actually uses that? and is it making a difference? >> senator blinken, if you look at the landscape, which country, if you had to kind of stack rank -- i realize perfection is never going to be attainable, but certainly there's better outcomes than others. what country stands out perhaps as a model that says this has been a model of success? >> i think you have to look at different particular areas. obviously there are countries in the past beneficiaries of our assistance in one form or another that are now leading countries around the world. few you go no further than south korea, for example. >> that's a good example. >> but in the present -- in the present day, i think it varies very much program to program, seconder er sector to sector. it would be hard to rank order i think countries across the board. we've seen, for example, jordan use some of the assistance we provided effectively to start to make important macroeconomic changes. that's the kind of thing we're looking for. we've seen other countries that have not made those important changes. >> in the time of -- bono, a question, talk about the syrian humanitarian crisis earlier and this potential lost jen pragsge of children as refugee camps turn into long durations, perhaps even much of a lifetime. from your perspective, what would you say is the most effective way if you were to tell this committee where we can invest american taxpayer dollars to ensure that we don't lose a generation of these syrian children? >> in short, listen to miss kelly clements. i think they're doing a spectacular job. i'm glad to hear you think about that and i -- because, you know, i've witnessed, i've talked to those families. you get to know them. you go in, of course, they're refugees, you come out, you got to know them. syrians, i will tell you, though, are particularly industrious. i would never underestimate them. they're definitely worth the investment. i was lucky, fortunate to be a friend of steve jobs. there's a syrian. he was a son of a syrian migrant, and, you know, he had that industriousness. and as a funny story, in the camp, there was the dutch people were giving 600 bicycles out to the camp and within, i think within minutes, they had set up a bicycle repair shop to deal with the bikes and when the bikes arrived, they had the delivery service for pizza before they had the pizza place. so these are the best people in the world. they're extraordinary people. and they'd be so moved to hear you talk about them today. >> thank you. >> thanks, mr. chairman. >> thank you, chairman graham, and thank you for the chance to have this hearing and to work with you on this important issue. to general jones, great to see you again. i think our last conversation was in rwanda and i'm pleased to see you continuing to pursue the same line of analysis that deputy secretary blinken, thank you for your decades of service to our nation at the highest levels, and bono, great to be with you again, and deputy commissioner clements and thank you for your pointed and constructive proposals. one of my own hardest days as a senator was at a refugee camp in jordan, seeing both the enormous challenges and the real potential of a refugee camp filled with thousands of syrians of all ages and backgrounds and a mentor, to me, tony lake, who now runs unicef, who was a professor of mine in college, has for some time been arguing, as i believe many of you do, that we need to realign our imagination, reconsider the funding that we provide for humanitarian relief in an emergency situation and the investments we make in development and recognize that millions of refugees are likely to be outside their countries of origin for a very long period of time. and if we change direction and make investments in a wiser and more targeted way, in partnership with the private sector, in partnership with allies around the world, we can make a significant difference. not just in combatting violent extremism, although that is an essential goal of our conversation here today, but also in continuing to build up human kind and to relieve suffering. bono, you talked about how the american people are generous and our investment in the marshall plan laid the foundation for a western europe that's united and stable and free and your reference to pepfar, through the work of senior senators on this committee has made possible, relief that touched the lives of 9 million. i'll mention the ebola crisis in west africa, one where volunteers from around the world joined with the united states in turning around the trajectory of the tragic disease. so i am encouraged and challenged by your terrific op-ped today in "the new york times," by what i've heard from all of you about the sahel and the la vont and ways we ought to be works together to craft a disciplined and thoughtful plan. general, in your written testimony you have the best call to arms as i heard. "we need a global development campaign plat has is as sophisticated, serious, as any fight in our history designed and resourced as if the future depends on it because it does." >> that's right. >> where the time remaining, i'd be grateful if each of you would simply speak to, so if congress were to embark on a large-scale plan for foreign assistance, that combined all of these elements, real investment in human development, alongside humanitarian relief, partnership with our allies in a sustained way that would prevent fragile states from becoming failed states, what would it look like? what conditions would you put on our aid? how would you decide which countries would come in that ark of attention and care and which would be out of it? and how would we tell the american people how long this would last and what our goals are? general, i'd be interested in what role u.n. peace keeping plays in the stabilization and bono, i'd, of course, be interested in what role you think communications and mass culture plays and deputy secretary blinken, how far you think we already are down the road toward developing and delivering this and then, of course, deputy commissioner, how you see the plight and role of refugees as being at the center of this. so think big and tell us how you would structure it, if you would, please, gentlemen. >> thank you, senator. the -- i'll try to be very brief. i just am of the opinion that we are -- in order to deal with the challenges and the threats that face us and mankind, really, that we have to approach it a little bit differently. when i was national security adviser, we tried to work on the more holistic approach toward responding to international threats. things like cyber security, energy security, water security, food security, and of course the conventional definition of security that we leaned on for so many years in the 20th century. in the world that we face today, people have choices an people know a lot more and people in the disadvantaged developing countries have access to information that shows them that they don't have to live like this and the battle is on between extremist ideologies who say the reason you're not doing better is because of these guys and generally they point to us. i'm very optimistic if we can put together a strategic concept for how each administration deals with these kinds of problems more holistically to include the private sector and the public sector working together, to advance the idea that america doesn't have to do this alone. what we -- what we can do, i think better than anybody, is certainly provide assets and resources but also provide an organizing principle around which other countries would follow. and the north atlantic treaty organization is a good example, i think, of an international organization of 28 countries that has a fantastic history but what is its future? and if we can't -- if we can't lead that organization into the 21st century by being proactive, strategic in our thinking which saves money in the long term, then i think we have a difficult time. so leadership -- u.s. leadership, i think, and organizing principles to do these things, to bring international public and private sectors together. to help countries that are on the fringe of going one way or the other in terms of democracy, and whose people know exactly what they're missing and will got hesitate to move by tens of thousands across the mediterranean from after rix ri europe if they don't see hope for the culture. so it's agriculture, it's food, it's water, it's physical security but it has to be -- and it's using organizations like the u.n., obviously, ngos. we have to find the table where everybody can sit together and plan this. it's not as expensive as it looks. what's expensive is when you have to go through another iraq or afghanistan or libya without a complete tool kit that says, okay, you defeated -- we got security, now what? >> thank you. >> the now what is what's been missing. >> thank you, general. mr. chairman, may other members of the panel respond or -- >> sure. >> i'm beyond my time. >> secretary blinken, briefly if you might, what countries are in, what countries are out? >> first i'd very much describe what general jones said. second, in terms of the countries that are in, the countries that are out, we have to do an assessment which countries are most at risk, which countries matter in terms of our own safety, and which ones are willing to be partners and make the changes necessary? conditions you mentioned. we want to make sure that, in fact, what we're trying to do is really leverage our assistance in different ways. first, leverage it so that the countries in question that receive it actually make the changes that we think are the right ones to make in terms of having sustainable outcomes in the areas general jones just talked about. second, leverage our assistance get other countries to put in as well and woucone of the things e trying to do, for example, on the refugee crisis, president obama convened a summit meeting on the margins of the u.n. general assembly. one of the goals of the summit meeting is to increase the assistance provided around the world by 30% to the global refugee crisis so to take part in the summit, to be at the table is to do more so we can do that, too. third, i think even as we're thinking about assistance and designing such a program, we also just have to be looking at innovative solution that are not inknow solution that we are -- and the way we invest in them. second, we provide loans to middle income countries that don't qualify for tm but could use them effectively. the products get preferential treatment. and the people may be refugees. ideas of those kind need to be the thinking we need to have. >> terrific ideas. you've done an amazing job of leveraging world interest in your leadership to provide millions to hiv/aids. how would we do the same in this challenge? >> i am humbled to have you ask that question, senator, and to hear you debating with senator graham is one of the great thrills of my life. and some extraordinary place, far end of the globe and hear your passion on these subjects. i liked that three-tiered approach that i thought tony brought up there. i can speak better about the sahara, because i know it better than -- but africa is really rich. i mean, not just in its resources, its people. it's extraordinary. and i think it would would be an amazing partner for us going forward. i just think for trade, for commerce. remember, the marshall plan did really great for the u.s. think about it. at the time people saying, we can't afford it. we can't afford it. the '50s and '60s were born out of these new customers. can you believe a rock star talking about that? it's true. so i think the biggest problem in the way of that growth, any african will tell you, is reform, and finding corruption. you make it easier. on debt cancellation. i think it's a fantastic thing to arrive in the region, difficult regions. you can revise them to reform you want to be in this club? it's a great club. that's the way i'm seeing it. just to say, i think we need an america that is strong like the general describes but also an america that's smart. you're strong and smart when you talk like this. and i'm amazed. wow, people really get this thing and they're talking about, you know, asking the american people to go further. that hurts you politically. that's real leadership. isn't that when you do the right thing and it costs you? >> thank you. >> it's really easy to come after these three gentlemen because the concepts are inspirational but also very concrete. just a couple of things to add. we talk about this arc of crisis from southwest asia, middle east through the horn of africa and the late chad basin. in terms of that being a stretch of where people are being disrooted that would probably be where to focus in terms of a so-called marshall plan redux. second, don't forget the political. it's tremendously important. we're talking about humanitarian development, failed states, governance issues, so on. obviously, all of that is important. syria, iraq, and somalia are responsible for almost half the uprooted people we were talking about earlier. and marrying the approaches in a real concrete way. we've had a moment now that we haven't had in decades. >> thank you to senator leahy and senator graham and the entire panel for what you've done, to raise our eyes and have this opportunity for millions around the world. >> senator marco? >> i appreciate all your testimony very much. general jones and bono, it's great to connect with you all again. senator coons led a delegation. we were able to meet in rwanda. it's a compliment to be here in d.c. and discussing the challenges. mercy corps is headquartered in my home state of oregon. i connected with them about what they would recommend in terms of violent extremism. they said single sector programming and multisector create systems in which youth can thrive. second, target the most vulnerable youth. be vigilant about ensuring you don't simply reach privileged youth in urban centers. third, shape the future through rigorous analysis of the political socioeconomic factors that drive you to support violence. fourth, increase investments in two-track governance programs, meaningful reforms in corruption, and exclusive governance structures. i wanted to mention those and see if you all would find those things to fit with your own experience or if you would like to take issue with them. anyone? yes, thank you. one thing to mention is the issue of integration. nothing can be more powerful in terms of averting radicalization and preventing violent extremism, is having hosts and refugees side by side and friends, neighbors, et cetera. in terms of the u.s. be a leader, we see the same thing north, in canada. welcoming people into the community is the first and strongest step. >> anyone else? >> senator, the points that mercy core makes are on the money and consistent with the way we're looking at the problem. in particular, exactly as they said, we have to have these interconnections. that's exactly what we're trying to do. in trying to bring bri together what we're doing on counterterrorism, with what we're doing on counter iing violent extremism. if you're training a law enforcement organization to deal with terrorism but you're also helping to understand what the drivers are of terrorism, it may be able to be more effective at getting to the problem before it starts. bringing these things together is vitally important. they're right about targeting the most vulnerable. indeed, we're trying to think about our system programs, the work we're doing focused on the communities most susceptible to creating or having people become radicalized. and then exactly right as well, that we need to be elevating their voices. not so much ours, but their voices. the people that have the most credibility are people who are speaking to their own. >> thank you. i was particularly struck by the analysis. we need to test different strategies and see what's working. what's working in one part of the world may be very different than what's working elsewhere. bono i join my colleagues and thank you so much for the work of the one campaign. my daughter is enjoying interning with your organization and is moved by the mission, as so many americans are. you mentioned a number of things i want to particularly stress. first, aid is not charity. it's national security. so often i've asked my colleagues if we had another dollar, do we do more for security in the world through these types of programs than we do through procuring another wepen, if you will. i think the balance is too much on the weapon on their side and not enough on this side. that ties in with the notion, the way you put it, it's more cost effective to invest in civility today than to address crises later. would you like to just expand on what you had said earlier? >> sure. just on the military piece, the extraordinary thing about general jones is ten years ago, he was talking about the reimagining of the military. i went to the atlantic. is that what it's called? the big military gather'ing. yeah, atlantic council. and there were all these phds standing up. they were all generals. i was like, wow, so cerebral and so approximate. hilisophical sbchlt you realize the military is ahead of the politicians on this one. they really understand what has to be done. and i'm amazed by that. in an asymmetrical conflict, you can't use the old strategies. there are new weapons needed. sometimes those weapons are education. fighting disease. and it's really cheap. and i remember with the aids stuff that we did -- i remember telling president bush, paint those antiviral drugs red, white and blue, because they're the best advisement for america you're ever going to see. he was laughing. except now when he arrives in africa, everyone is applauding the dude. and america polls very well. it's amazing. on the long-term versus the short term, humanitarian aid and long-term developed, they are coming together now. so i'm learning from kelly. she's learning from people smarter than me. i think rwanda is an example of a country that came out of conflict, that took our investment in aid and actually has done quite an incredible job. i know it's frustrating for some of us that the president went for a third time, the security of his country was -- he was doing it for the security of his country, but aside from that, he is doing a spectacular job and is an example of how to do this righ right. >> one thing that struck me was the government not talking as tribal entities but as rwandans. it's a fragile thing but one of the things he expressed is that campaigns will cause people immediately to directly or indirectly reach out to their tribal roots and the memories are so painful. appreciate the emphasis on corruption. anti-corruption summit in london and that the u.s. will back an ambitious set of proposals. i would love to hear more about that, but i am out of time. >> senator durbin? >> at the risk of your reputation, i respect you very much. >> reporter: keep it to yourself. >> all right. history tells us world war ii was a learning experience to the united states. we were not open to refugees. we turned them away, and after the war, we tried to change that policy and point in a new direction. now we're faced with the refugee crisis of our time. bono, i can remember the first time we ever sat down to talk. it was about hiv/aids and my first reaction, the reaction of most to this issue, and this crisis, was fear. what does this mean? am i going to die? how many people are going to die? is there any way to stop it? the reaction to this crisis, the same reaction, fear. it's not new to face new challenges with the first reaction, fear. i hope we certainly have grown out of it when it comes to hiv/aids. we're much more knowledgeable, thoughtful and know what we can achieve. the question is, will we get back on right track when it comes to refugees? we have to get back to the reality of a lot of deserving people. i was on an island and saw them coming in on these leaky, rubber plastic boats with little babies with water wings on them. and i thought how desperate these people must be to risk their lives and the lives of their children, to bring only what they can carry. the question comes down to this -- it's more of a general question. the genuine concern in europe and the other places is about the uncertainty of when this is going to end. is there going to be an end to this flow of refugees? is there a finite number we have to contemplate in terms of absorbing into germany, absorbing into sweden, how many? the uncertainty that have is certainly understandable. as you have said this is not confined to the middle east. an ambassador from italy told us syrians ravenged third in the number -- in the country, sending us refugees into italy. two first are coming out of africa. my question to you is this. if this humanitarian crisis is not abnormal but the new normal in our world because people are living longer, public health, surviving. we see, as you ticked it off, the extreme ideology, extreme poverty, extreme climate k we engage our friends of the world of like mind to make investments to allow these people to stay in place rather than to strike out in desperation, to find some refuge, some opportunity? >> it's a giant challenge but kind of a very american one. i think if you get your best and bright eest focused on it, as i listening to you today, you can see that we're going to get is somewhere. in the private sector, mark zuckerberg is trying to bring access to the internet to those who can't afford it. larry paige at google. your tech people. they're determined. incredible parts of your society. bill gates. we could do anything in the one campaign without bill and melinda gates. warren buffett. it's the whole country showing the way, not just the public sectors, the private sector. it's going to do it. you can do t strangely enough, you've done studies on bringing the internet to developing countries and it's transform active. that's just one thing. so, elect, innovations in solar, incredible president to bring power to africa. and these are transform active. the only thing i worry about -- and i'm guilty of this. i'm great at raising the alarm. and there's a serious crisis and we really need to attend to it. but i don't want to drag down the vision from this away from what it could be. it could be your greatest chapter, and in 50 years time -- i will tell you this. in 50 years time if the united states walks away from the continent of africa, it will be seen as the worst foreign policy mistake of the start of the 21st century. and why would you? they want your entrepreneurs, coming to you. your smarts. and president xi, one thing about him, he's very big on tackling corruption both in china and in africa. if he starts to attatackle corruption in africa, it would be transform active. i'm not sure he's watching c-span at the minute. but i would love to have that conversation. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much for this hearing. >> thank you all very much. just to wrap it up, a couple of observations. we're trying to be proactive. the whole goal of this hearing is to focus on the problem is going to get worse if somebody doesn't deal with it now. losing jordan would be -- i don't think that's going to happen. but we've got to get a grip on this refugee crisis. it's just not providing food, shelter and clothing but a way to integrate them into the countries over there so they don't come here. it is designed to undercut a radical extremism, which is a hopeful light versus a glorious death. ten years ago when you first tackled the aids crisis, no one could ever imagine in the wildest dreams how successful it had been. we still have a ways to go. i can tell you, mother to child aids transmission has been reduced to 75%. there are five countries inside the 20 yard line that can be self sufficient when it comes to dealing with their aids problem, south africa leading the charge. i don't want soldiers to go over there. they have to go. i can't find a way for general jones to provide security without some of us being there to help in that endeavor. i cannot find a way in my own mind to deal with encountering violent extremism without some kind of international plan which we'll be apart to change the economies of these reasons to give people hope. the more education a child has, the better off we'll do. after 37 visits to iraq and afghanistan, i can assure the american people that they're not buying what these crazy people are selling. they don't want to go down that road. they don't want to turn their daughters over to isil. they being the mothers and fathers. i can promise you, you are safer here, when we're helping people over there. and this whole concept of coming up with a marshall plan for the 21st century, call it what you like, is long overdue. we spent a lot of money. the most important thing we've done is spend 6,000 plus lives and thousands of people have had their lives disrupted, legs blown off, traumatic brain injury. i can go on and on and on. i would like to make the next ten years more successful. the only way i know to do that is to have something outside the military solution that compliments security once you achieve t once you achieve security, you will lose it if you do not do the things we talked about. >> at the risk of damaging your career back home, i agree with you. all for the people here, people that we've known for a long, long time. >> you made an enormous difference today. you will look back on this hearing, i hope, and say that's when it began to change. senator graham and i, we have to bring members of both parties together to vote for this bill the way the public is, why are we giving 25% of our budget for -- of course, it's a fraction. it's a fraction of one percent. and the return, pay for it now or many, many, many times later on. you've given us a lot of ammunition to work with both republicans and democrats, i think. >> thank you. >> yes, sir. testimony by today's witnesses and u.s. a.i.d. be included in the record. any questions for the record be submitted until friday april 15th. hearing is adjourned. if the turkish people can can really embrace the refugees the way we're reading and hearing about them, they deserve to be saluted. there's other stuff in the area of human rights. and the stuff i don't understand in some areas, syrian refugees have been turned back. that should not take away from the turkish people leading the world in their embrace of refugees. thank you. i've got to go. ryan murphy, everybody. head of security. >> i'm just doing senator murphy's bidding. [ indistinct chattering ] >> 18-month period when the nerves come back. maybe i'll get a reprieve but nobody in the band seems to mind. very hurtful. >> that's what happens when you have good partners. >> do you hear these guys when they speak? they're unbelievable. >> see what you do when you're right, though? you were terrific this morning. >> i'm a writer. i'm not really a speaker. >> your writing was masterful this morning. >> you can read well, which is hard to do. >> i like when they have the pictures. i like pictures. >> it's hard for me to read a speech. i'm not very good at that. not my skill set. anyway, i've got to run. take care. well done. see you on the road. see you soon. >> do you mind signing sean, don't give up? >> we got to first base. we'll take care of the rest. >> tom? >> sean. just don't give up. hospitalized for a year, has seizures every day. he was a star athlete. >> oh, this is the same guy? >> no, this is his brother. two boys. they were poisoned a year ago. you've met their mother. >> how do you get poisoned like that? >> pesticide applied in the house. >> while they were still there? >> whilst they were there, asleep at night and went into a coma and were hospitalized for a year. >> where was this? >> virgin islands. >> wow! >> yeah. and their mother met bono a year ago. it was about the one good night she's had all year. >> wow! god bless you. thank you. >> very good to see you all. >> bye-bye. >> did i do okay? >> you did well. excellent. you're around the corner. >> keep right. you can find this hearing in the video library at c-span.org. safety of waz washington, d.c. metro system with testimony from officials from the washington metropolitan area transit authority, the federal transit administration and the head of the national transportation safety board. live coverage wednesday, starting at 2:00 eastern here on c-span 3. and then thursday, a house hearing looking at the security of the u.s. electric grid and how the nation is prepared for a cyber attack or failure of the system live thursday starting at 10:00 am eastern also here on c-span 3. he had a couple of and a steam shovel and owe your entire fortune to the government. sally denton talks about her book, the profiteers, taking a critical look at the bechtel corporation. >> if not bechtel, who? who else is the united states government going to get to build these projects. it seems they should have some access to information about the contracts, money, workers' safety, political relationships. >> on c-span's q & a at 8:00 eastern. madame secretary, we proudly give 72 of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states. the panel talked about pros and cons and how such a test would be validated and scored, given a wide variety of subjects offered at a university. good morning, everybody. hi. thanks so much for coming. my name is kevin kerry. i direct the education policy program here at new america. we appreciate you all coming here on a rainy spring morning in washington, d.c. the subject of our event today is assessment in higher education. a seemingly boring topic that i think is becoming central to a lot of the discussions you have about american higher education. i say that because i have found that assessment of higher education learning is a naughty place you end up. it's not the thing that people talk about often first when they talk about college. our national conversation is very much focused on price and cast

Related Keywords

Arkansas , United States , Turkey , China , Syria , Russia , Washington , District Of Columbia , Serbia , Nigeria , Netherlands , Egypt , South Carolina , Virgin Islands , Ireland , South Korea , Poland , Greece , South Africa , New York , Canada , Japan , Philippines , Macedonia , Germany , Algeria , Afghanistan , Congo , Rwanda , Oregon , Lebanon , Jordan , London , City Of , United Kingdom , Kenya , Iraq , Hungary , Sweden , Mediterranean Sea , Oceans General , Oceans , Somalia , Paris , Rhôalpes , France , Italy , Americans , Filipino , America , Chinese , Turkish , Rwandans , Syrians , French , Soviet , Dutch , German , Syrian , Lebanese , Irish , American , Charlie Hebdo , Tony Blinken , Dick Durbin , Al Shabab , Warren Buffett , Ryan Murphy , Sally Denton , Kevin Kerry , David Cameron , Christian Ngos , Gail Smith , James Jones , Asia Pacific , Al Sisi , King Abdullah , David Purdue , John Kerry , Jim Jones , Al Qaeda , Lindsey Graham , Amy Schumer , Jim Kim , Kelly Clements , Sacha Baron Cohen , Goldwater Nichols , Adolf Hitler ,