[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

DOES THE U.S. HAVE A POLICY TOWARD LATIN
AMERICA? ASSESSING THE IMPACT TO U.S.
INTERESTS AND ALLIES

=======================================================================

Minus 20 pts for each extra line of title deg.HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON
THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

__________

FEBRUARY 15, 2011

__________

Serial No. 112-23

__________

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/

______

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
64-549 WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ELTON GALLEGLY, California ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California BRAD SHERMAN, California
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
RON PAUL, Texas GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
MIKE PENCE, Indiana RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
CONNIE MACK, Florida GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas DENNIS CARDOZA, California
TED POE, Texas BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
DAVID RIVERA, Florida FREDERICA WILSON, Florida
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania KAREN BASS, California
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York
RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
VACANT
Yleem D.S. Poblete, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Democratic Staff Director
------

Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere

CONNIE MACK, Florida, Chairman
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
DAVID RIVERA, Florida ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey Samoa
ELTON GALLEGLY, California DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey

C O N T E N T S

----------
Page

WITNESS

The Honorable Arturo Valenzuela, Assistant Secretary of State,
Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State. 11

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

The Honorable Arturo Valenzuela: Prepared statement.............. 14

APPENDIX

Hearing notice................................................... 50
Hearing minutes.................................................. 51
The Honorable Connie Mack, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western
Hemisphere:
Prepared statement............................................. 53
Questions for the record submitted to the Honorable Arturo
Valenzuela................................................... 55

DOES THE U.S. HAVE A POLICY TOWARD LATIN AMERICA? ASSESSING THE IMPACT
TO U.S. INTERESTS AND ALLIES

----------

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011

House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:24 p.m., in
room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Connie Mack
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Mack. The subcommittee will come to order. I first want
to thank everyone, especially our witness, Assistant Secretary
Valenzuela, for joining us for the first of many hearings from
the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee. After recognizing myself
and the ranking member, Mr. Engel, for 7 minutes each for our
opening statement, I will recognize the members of the
subcommittee for 5 minutes each for their opening statements.
We will then proceed directly to hearing testimony from our
distinguished witness. The full text of the written testimony
will be inserted into the record, without objection, members
may have 5 days to submit statements and questions for the
record.
After we hear from our witness, individual members will be
recognized for 5 minutes each to question our witness. First,
if I could take a moment, I want to thank all of you for being
here today and especially thank my good friend, Mr. Engel, who
I look forward to working with in a bipartisan way as much as
we can. We share a lot of the same goals and interests in the
Western Hemisphere. We may disagree occasionally on how we get
there, but we have a great working relationship and I look
forward to that continuing and I look forward to working with
you.
I now recognize myself for 7 minutes. President Santos of
Colombia, a long-time ally of the United States, recently
referred to a quote by Henry Kissinger, saying, ``To be an
enemy of the United States is bad, but to be a friend is
fatal.'' Given that there is neither a strategic nor reliable
policy coming from the administration toward the region, I can
understand the frustration of President Santos and our allies
in the region. It is my goal to show the entire Western
Hemisphere that it is better to be a friend of the United
States than to be an enemy. We will focus on various countries,
key threats, and opportunities from within our hemisphere
throughout my tenure as chair. Many of which will be addressed
at future hearings.
Today, however, I want to get to the bottom of key issues,
where U.S. policies have failed both U.S. citizens and
important U.S. allies in the region. Regarding the Free Trade
Agreements, the administration's lack of action is killing U.S.
jobs. The failure to move forward on our promises is hurting
important allies in the region. I want to know the exact
benchmarks for the Panama and Colombia Free Trade Agreements
and when the President will send them for a vote.
Colombia was signed on November 22, 2006 and then
renegotiated to include more stringent environmental and labor
standards. It was signed again on May 10, 2007. Panama was
signed on June 28, 2007, and South Korea on June 30, 2007, with
a renegotiated version signed last December. I want to warn the
administration that they should send these agreements up in the
order that they were signed to ensure the swift passage of each
of the agreements.
Regarding Honduras, the Assistant Secretary and the
Secretary, for that matter, are very familiar with my position.
Honduras has been a great ally of the United States. The
Hondurans managed to escape the target placed on their country
by Chavez when the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress legally
removed Zelaya from power. And the U.S. administration has been
punishing them ever since. I want to know when the visas that
were revoked over the past 1\1/2\ years will be approved for
reapplication and at which board meeting this year the MCC will
provide Hondurans with their next compact.
The fact that Nicaragua, a nation ruled by a corrupt
dictator that invaded Costa Rica is still receiving MCC funds
while Honduras was cut off is a disgrace. Current U.S. policies
are weakening Honduran governance and democracy, negatively
impacting the Central America region and harming U.S.
interests.
Regarding Venezuela, Hugo Chavez is in violation of U.S.
sanctions on Iran, actively supporting terrorist organizations,
working directly counter to democracy and freedom in Venezuela
and the region, and aggressively opposing U.S. interests. We
need to stand with the Venezuelan people who are fighting daily
for their freedom and make it clear to Chavez that like other
dictators around the world, that he does not get a free ride.
One place to start is the Keystone XL pipeline. Exports of
Venezuelan heavy crude to the United States are Chavez's main
source of income. Without them, he may have to learn to be more
responsive to the needs of Venezuelans. The State Department
must approve the Presidential Permit for the pipeline as soon
as possible to cut our reliance on Venezuela oil. Regarding
Cuba, it is in the U.S. interest to maintain a hard line
against dictators who are committed to violating human rights.
Last month, the administration further loosened travel and
remittance restrictions on Cuba allowing more money to flow to
that country. Shortly thereafter, Cuban officials announced
they are seeking a 20-year sentence for a USAID contractor,
Alan Gross. Case in point, rewarding dictators only hurts U.S.
interests. Additionally, by sending the wrong message on Cuba,
we could soon see a relationship between Venezuela and Iran
that is starkly similar to one pursued by Russia and Cuba.
I believe we are much closer to this reality than the
administration is willing to admit. Before providing the
Castros with any reward, we need to see real democratic reform.
These include free and fair elections, the release of all
political prisoners and a free and independent press that is
allowed to operate without fear of oppression or violence.
Additionally, regarding Mexico, while the administration has
made trips to Mexico and we have funded the Merida Initiative
over the past 3 years, it isn't enough. I will be concentrating
the time and energy of this subcommittee on determining where a
proactive approach from the U.S. can be most effective in
fighting the deadly path of the drug trade. To start, we need
to double border patrol agents from 20,000 to 40,000 while
fully funding needed border protection equipment. This should
include additional unmanned aerial vehicles and the completion
of the security fence in urban hard-to-enforce areas of the
border.
We also need to utilize the full resources of the U.S.
intelligence community aligned to the mission, while
coordinating closely with Mexico to ensure swift justice on
both sides of the border. A central piece of the strategy
includes a focus on governance reform, economic development,
community stabilization, and ensuring access to essential
services. We must stop the drug trafficking organizations and
illegal armed groups that threaten the security of Mexico, the
United States, and beyond.
In conclusion, policies of shaking hands with our enemies
while ignoring our friends is making us neither a force to be
reckoned with nor a friend of value. You can rely on me to
engage the administration on a very regular basis to ensure we
develop a strategic relationship toward Latin America. This is
the only way to ensure freedom, security and prosperity for the
United States and our allies. I now would like to recognize the
ranking member, Mr. Engel for his opening statement.
Mr. Engel. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, it is going
to take some getting used to because for the last 2 years, our
roles were reversed with myself as chairman and Mr. Mack as
ranking member. But during those 2 years, we worked very
closely together and I believe share a very similar vision of
what needs to be done in the Western Hemisphere. And I look
forward to working with Mr. Mack in his role as chairman and I
am glad that we are working together again.
Mr. Mack cares deeply about the Western Hemisphere and I
wish him well as he assumes the gavel and I was particularly
impressed that he gave himself 7 minutes and there are only
about 9 seconds left over when you finished your remarks. So
that was pretty good, Connie. As the leaders of our country
look around the world and analyze the challenges our Nation
faces, they often point to the never ending array of crises in
the Middle East, Asia, or elsewhere. While those areas receive
the most attention from the world's media, they are certainly
no more important to the United States' national interest than
what happens in Latin America. This is the Subcommittee on the
Western Hemisphere. We are in the Western Hemisphere and
obviously the Latin American and Caribbean countries are also
in the Western Hemisphere, so the United States is
geographically close to Latin America and the Caribbean,
millions of recent immigrants are from this region, most of our
imported energy is from Canada and other countries in the
hemisphere. In fact, from illicit narcotics to cultural
influences, to so many other areas, the Western Hemisphere
remains crucial to the United States.
That is why I am glad that next month President Obama will
travel to Brazil, Chile and El Salvador. These visits will help
demonstrate that the administration sees our region as vitally
important to the United States. His very first stop, Brazil,
is, in so many ways, like the United States. It is a very
large, very diverse democracy. I have long been of the belief
that U.S. and Brazilian interests converge on a wide array of
issues. And frankly, I was disappointed with some of the
choices of the Lula government which led to a cooling of our
relations.
However, there are already signs that under the new
government of Dilma Rousseff, U.S.-Brazilian relations are on
the mend. I hope that continues. It is very encouraging. Chile
will be the second stop on President Obama's regional
excursion. 2010 was quite a year for Chile. They experienced a
terrible earthquake from which Chile is still rebuilding and
lived through a mine cave-in from which the miners emerged
almost miraculously after more than 2 months under ground. Our
relationship with Chile is already quite close and mature and
the President's visit can only further solidify these strong
bonds.
Finally, President Obama will stop in El Salvador, a key
country in Central America. In the 1980s, El Salvador was the
site of a terrible civil war, but today that fight has long
ended and the Salvadoran people live in a democracy. However,
significant challenges still face El Salvador. Drug
trafficking, criminal gangs, high unemployment and a soaring
murder rate make life in El Salvador difficult. President Funes
is charting a center left course and in the face of pressure,
wants to continue historically close ties with the United
States. I was at his inauguration and I am glad the President,
our President, will be there to support him.
I wanted to also comment on Honduras, which Mr. Mack
commented on. I feel very strongly, as he does, that Honduras
and the United States need to work closely together. And I feel
very strongly that the OAS owe it to stop putting Honduras on a
list where it doesn't accord it correct recognition while at
the same time other governments in the region which are much
more questionable are welcome to the OAS as full fledged
members.
So not only am I ranking member of this subcommittee, but I
also represent large populations of people whose heritage is in
Latin America and the Caribbean in my New York congressional
district. Spring Valley in Rockland County is home to many
Haitians and Haitian Americans. They were and are profoundly
affected by the cataclysmic earthquake which struck Haiti. I
have been proud to support them as they seek to support their
loved ones. It is critical that our subcommittee stays focused
on rebuilding Haiti in the weeks and months ahead.
We also need to follow the issues in Cuba. I have long been
critical of the Castro regime and the fact that they do not
have--permit political pluralism whatsoever in Cuba. I think
that we need to continue the pressure on Cuba to make sure it
democratizes and that the democracy which we have seen the
Egyptian people clamor for can also happen to the Cuban people.
Every day, stories fill our newspapers and TV about the horrors
which drug criminals are inflicting upon Mexico and Central
America. While every circumstance stands on its own, we have
seen this before and we know that a country which stands up to
the traffickers can emerge even stronger.
After more than a decade of murders, kidnappings and war,
our ally, Colombia, finally has gotten the upper hand against
the FARC, while the acreage under cocoa cultivation has dropped
substantially. President Santos, we attended his inauguration
as well. And we were proud to work with him as well as former
President Uribe. President Santos is working today to help
Colombia's dispossessed, its Afro-Colombian population and
others facing challenges. And he and Colombia deserve the
strong support of the United States.
I must say, however, how disappointed I am that the
majority allowed the Andean Trade Preferences to expire on
Saturday. ATPDEA is critical to our friends in Colombia and we
shouldn't delay it any further. We should extend it. As we work
with Colombia, we must work with Mexico and the countries of
Central America to strengthen security forces and enhance
justice systems. These countries are facing a difficult
challenge and they deserve our backing.
At the same time, there is more we can do here at home to
help our neighbors fight narco crime. We should tighten up at
the borders, slow gun trafficking and do more to reduce demand
for illegal drugs. Four years ago when I just started as
chairman of this subcommittee, one thing quickly became clear
to me, we had multiple programs to help fight narco trafficking
but they were not integrated. When I raised this with the State
Department, it was never clear who was in charge or how the
efforts were integrated. I inserted language and the House
passed Merida legislation to create a security coordinator to
oversee and make sure our efforts meshed.
One year ago, Chairman Mack and I met with Secretary of
State Clinton and urged her to create the security coordinator
for the Western Hemisphere which I had proposed. I am looking
forward to Secretary Valenzuela's testimony today and hope that
he might discuss this important issue. Again, I would like to
wish my good friend, Connie Mack, the best of luck as he begins
his term as chairman. I offer him all of my support and I look
forward to continuing our close collaboration in this
subcommittee. Thank you. And, Mr. Chairman, you did a better
job than me because I am 28 seconds over.
Mr. Mack. As we all know, that is pretty good for you. Just
kidding. Thank you. Now, I would like to recognize the vice
chair of the subcommittee, the member from Texas, Mr. McCaul
for 5 minutes.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I am honored to
serve as a vice chair of this subcommittee. I guess you can say
I am your right-hand man on this issue. Secretary, thank you
for being here today. And being from Texas, Mexico and Latin
America are very important to my constituents and to me. And
the issues I think have been covered very well by the chair and
ranking member. It is clearly the Free Trade Agreements that I
think I am interested in hearing the administration's position
in terms of pushing that forward, the threat, the concern of
Venezuela and Hugo Chavez, their connection to Iran continues
to be of grave concern. I think the chair mentioned Cuba. We
have an American who has been in prison, I think, for over a
year--well over a year, Alan Gross. And I know the charges were
just recently brought and I would be very interested in what
the administration is doing to address that, what I consider to
be a human rights violation. And then finally, the border is,
certainly anyone from a border state, it is one of the biggest
issues back home. Over 30,000 people have died at the hands of
the drug cartels since President Calderon's war began and we
overlook that fact. We talk a lot about Iraq and Afghanistan,
but more people have died than Americans in those 2 wars. So
the Merida Initiative is very important. The ranking member
when he was chairman I think did an outstanding job pushing
that very important initiative through. I met with President
Calderon many years ago and he was pushing us to adopt the
Merida Initiative as a showing of support, as solidarity with
him. And I am pleased that we got that through. However, the
funding has been bottlenecked at the State Department. I think
$1.3 billion was appropriated and yet a very small amount of
that has actually made it through to Mexico. So these are all
very, very important issues that I look forward to hearing the
testimony here today. And with that, I yield back.
Mr. Mack. Thank you. Now I would like to recognize Mr. F. I
can say that because my last name is McGillicutty and it is not
always easy to pronounce.
Mr. Faleomavaega. That is alright, Mr. Chairman. If I can
pronounce Valenzuela, I should also be able to pronounce
Faleomavaega.
Mr. Mack. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Faleomavaega. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to
thank you not only for obtaining the chairmanship for this very
important subcommittee, but also thanking our ranking member,
Mr. Engel, who has previously served as chairman of the
subcommittee. I do want to associate myself with the statements
made by you, Mr. Chairman, our ranking member, expressing some
very serious concerns as to the issues confronting the Western
Hemisphere. I want to thank Secretary Valenzuela for coming
before our subcommittee. And having a chance to review his
statement, I thought it was very comprehensive and certainly an
indication also of the commitment of the Obama administration
toward this important region of the world.
The only thing I want to share with Secretary Valenzuela in
reviewing your statement, sir, there is not one thing
mentioning about the millions, or shall I say, the plight, the
sufferings of the millions and millions of indigenous people
who live throughout Latin America, including Canada. The
indigenous of Canada and the people living in this important
region, there is not one mention of your statement concerning
the needs, economic, social, you call it whatever. But the
indigenous people living in these regions.
Mr. Secretary, I say we definitely need to pay more
attention. I sincerely hope the Obama administration will focus
on the needs of these people. One particular area that I do
want to bring to the attention of Secretary Valenzuela, is
Chile. Now, I know that the world has given rise in not only
recognizing but also in congratulating the leaders of the
people of Chile, what happened with the 33 miners who suffered
tremendously and their being able to be saved from this
catastrophe that occurred last month I believe as it was in
Chile.
But, Mr. Secretary, I wanted to share with you--I sent a
letter to your office about the plight of the people of Easter
Island. There is a crisis brewing there on Easter Island, or as
the native people call it, Rapa Nui. There is presence of the
military of Chile there forcing the people away from their
ancestral land rights, to their lands and tremendous,
tremendous problems. I have sent a letter even to the
Ambassador of Chile, Mr. Arturo. I have not had even the
courtesy of a call or a response from the Chilean Embassy. I
hope somebody from the Chilean Embassy is here in this hearing.
Not even a courtesy call to just say, hey, we got your note,
let us talk about it. Not even a message from the Ambassador of
Chile to the United States concerning the problems that we are
faced with on Easter Island.
Senator Akaka and I have also written to President Pinera
expressing our serious concerns about the presence of the
military of Chile on this little island, 2,300 miles away from
Chile. Seventeen million Chileans, as opposed to 2,500 Rapa
Nuis or Easter Islanders, living on this isolated island. And I
must say, Mr. Secretary, they are not treated very decently as
far as I am concerned as some sense of decency on how these
people should be treated.
And I sincerely hope your office will get back to me on
this so that we can follow up on this. And I will elaborate on
it a little later during the course of the hearing. But I will
want to say that I am putting out a little olive branch to the
leaders of Chile to let us work together in taking care of
addressing the serious needs of the people of Easter Island. I
know it is not as important as Egypt or all these other regions
of the world, but I think the world has caught the attention of
these people being able to build these statutes, stone statues,
weighing millions of thousands of tons and their culture. And I
am disappointed in the way the Chilean Government has treated
these people. And I am going to be asking the Secretary some
more questions on this. Mr. Chairman, thank you. My time is
about to be up and thank you for the time.
Mr. Mack. I thank the gentleman. Next is Congresswoman Jean
Schmidt from Ohio, who is new to the committee. And we welcome
you to the committee and I know you have done a lot of
travelling and are passionate about the Western Hemisphere. So
we appreciate you being here and you are recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. Schmidt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
Ranking Member Engel for holding this very important and timely
meeting. And I do want to express my thanks because before I
became a member of this committee, you afforded me an
opportunity to travel into the area and back home in
Cincinnati. In the second district, we have a lot of economic
interests in the Western Hemisphere. I would also like to thank
the Assistant Secretary for being here to address our
subcommittee today. Many key issues will be addressed, but I
really want to focus on one and that is Colombia. Colombia has
been a strategic ally in Latin America for well over a decade.
Since the establishment of Plan Colombia in 1999, the United
States and Colombia worked closely to combat drug trafficking
and terrorism in the region. Efforts by successive Colombian
governments have resulted in a dramatically improved economy
and security situation. Under President Uribe, rates in
Colombia for murder, inflation, unemployment and poverty fell
dramatically, while economic growth, exports and investments
flourished. President Juan Manuel Santos, who I was afforded
the opportunity to see sworn in, has built upon the success of
President Uribe and the economic and security situation in
Colombia continues to improve.
In addition to the improved economic and security
situation, President Santos has vigorously pursued dramatic and
social reforms. Under his administration, the Victims and Lands
Restitution Act was passed. This Act assists victims of
guerilla and paramilitary violence and coercion and provides an
indemnity to victims of state security forces. President Santos
is also working to address and protect labor rights and
activists. He has pledged to review homicide cases against
labor activists. He is in the process of establishing an
independent labor ministry and he is committed to additional
government resources to protect journalists, labor leaders and
human rights defenders. Despite these efforts, opponents of the
Colombian Free Trade Agreement argue that labor unionists in
Colombia continue to face violence and intimidation and that
the Colombian Government has failed to adequately protect the
rights of workers to unionize and collectively bargain. And the
Obama administration unfortunately appears to be bowing to this
pressure and has thus far refused to send the Colombian Trade
Agreement to Congress.
In my view, this is a slap in the face to the Colombian
people. The Obama administration claims it wants to double
export efforts within 5 year, yet it refuses to seriously
consider a Free Trade Agreement with arguably our strongest
ally in the region. I believe this policy undermines our
credibility in the region and it will ultimately result in a
diminished ability of the United States to exert influence in
our own hemisphere. And I would like to add that the economic
interests in my district and Colombia are very, very strong.
Three of my major corporations have very, very strong ties
with Colombia. So this Trade Agreement is important to the
United States, as well as to the citizens of Colombia. I would
sincerely appreciate if the Assistant Secretary addressed these
concerns in your testimony, sir, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. Mack. Thank you very much. Mr. Payne is recognized for
5 minutes for an opening statement.
Mr. Payne. Thank you. Thank you very much. And let me say
that it is a pleasure to be a member of this subcommittee again
and I look forward to working with you in your new leadership
position. I know that you have the interests and the will, and
so we look forward to having a good working relationship. Let
me just say that I think that Latin America, as I have said for
20-some years I have been in Congress, it seems that we have
lacked what I think is a very aggressive policy.
During the 1960s, under the Kennedy administration probably
is where the most attention was given to Latin America and we
had programs that really kind of tied us together. Since then,
we have seen a lack of affirmative programming in my opinion,
and as a result, I think we have seen that many countries have
elected leaders that have different opinions than what we have.
I think that it is primarily because we have lacked the
attention that we should have given to our neighbors to the
south.
Having said that, of course, we do have important interests
in Latin America. I think that our State Department could also
do a better job, as my friend mentioned, about the indigenous
people and people of African descent where there are many,
many, in Latin America. For example, 2011 will mark the
international year for people of African descent, and I wonder
whether it would be a wise thing for our Embassies and
countries in Latin America to have an evening of the
international year of people of African descent.
I think that would show many people who are depressed in
their country that the U.S. have an interest in them as well as
our relationships with the leadership of the country. I
understand that funding for State Department's race, ethnicity
and social inclusion unit, which administers the Brazil and
Colombian joint action plans on racial equality and other
initiatives that strengthen minority inclusion in democracies
throughout the region, the funding is going to dry up.
And once again, I think that it would be an opportunity for
us to show that we do have an interest where we have seen
changes and many of the countries, Brazil in particular,
Colombia has made some steps in the right direction as it
relates to minorities. But we still have the problem of whether
Colombia, as we say, they are a great ally. However, 2,800
union leaders have been killed in Colombia over the past 20
years or so. Very few of the cases have been solved. So
although we embrace the government, we still have to be
concerned about workers' rights and the rights of indigenous
people. As a matter of fact, Colombia has the largest number of
displaced people, second largest number in the world because of
the various activities.
So although I hear our pleas for the Colombia Free Trade
Agreement and I do think Colombia has made some steps in the
right direction, I think that more can be done and hopefully
the new administration and Colombia will make strides to
improve the relationships. I think that Brazil is doing an
outstanding job. They have shown how they have become
independent of foreign oil. I wish we could study what they
have done and perhaps we could be less dependent on the lease
oil, which could kind of stop the transfer of our finances, but
secondly, not have us dependent on despots and dictators in the
Middle East as we see it is a fragile area, what happened in
Egypt and Tunisia and Algeria starting to perk up, we need to
be concerned that we don't allow the same things to happen in
our neighbors to the south. It is very important to us, and I
certainly look forward to working with the administration in
the future. Thank you very much. I yield back my last second.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Payne. And it is great to have you
on the committee, and I look forward to working with you as
well. Mr. Rivera from Miami, new to the committee, new Member
in Congress. Welcome. And you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary,
for attending today's hearing. I am deeply concerned with our
current administration's policy and attitude toward Latin
America over the past few years. It seems that our foreign
policy in the region has been aimed at improving relations with
our enemies instead of supporting our friends and allies in
Latin America. For example, the recent decision by the Obama
administration to make changes to regulations relating to
travel to Cuba is nothing short of a unilateral concession to a
dictatorship that continues to oppress its people. I know the
administration believes these actions are an important step in
reaching the widely shared goal of a Cuba that respects the
basic rights of all its citizens, but I couldn't disagree more.
This loosening of regulations is a concession that does nothing
to solve the fundamental problems on the island.
Instead of seeking change from the Cuban dictatorship with
regard to human rights and free and open democratic elections,
before entering into any kind of compromise, this policy sends
a message that the Cuban dictatorship does not have to reform
before being rewarded by the United States. This policy will
not lead to a better quality of life for the Cuban people or
help grant them the freedoms that they so desperately need and
want. It only serves to enrich the Cuban dictatorship. In
addition, there have been reports from Cuban state-controlled
media that Cuban prosecutors are seeking a 20-year jail term
for American contractor Alan Gross.
Gross, an American citizen, has been imprisoned by the
Castro dictatorship without access to legal representation or a
proper trial since December 2009 when he was on the island
providing humanitarian assistance to Jewish groups. While this
administration continues to ease sanctions on Cuba, the Castro
dictatorship responds by seeking unjustifiably harsh penalties
against an American citizen. The situation with Alan Gross
demonstrates the futility of making unilateral concessions to
the Castro dictatorship and shows that the Castro regime has no
respect for civil liberties, human rights or due process of
law.
I believe the administration needs to immediately rescind
its recent decision lifting sanctions on the Castro
dictatorship in response to this unwarranted action against an
American citizen. Furthermore, our best ally in Latin America
has been Colombia. Colombia's efforts in fighting the drug
trade and terrorist organizations should be an example to the
world. Colombia also has the potential of being one of
America's best economic engines. In his 2011 State of the Union
speech, President Obama cited the need for deals that keep
faith with American workers and promote American jobs. The
Colombia Free Trade Agreement would help him reach these goals.
The agreement would slash Colombian tariffs for U.S. goods,
increase American exports to Colombia by approximately $1.1
billion and increase U.S. GDP by $2.5 billion.
As many have stated, delaying the Colombia Free Trade
Agreement is destroying jobs in America. This agreement has
received strong bipartisan support from leaders in both
parties. We must come together, pass this agreement and show
our neighbors in the region that democracy leads to prosperity.
Finally, Venezuela is another example of this administration
ignoring major threats in the region. Iran continues to have a
close relationship with Hugo Chavez. Iran is an official
Sponsor of State Terrorism as designated by our own Government.
Should this not be a concern for the administration? In our own
backyard, we have two of our prime enemies working together on
ways to cause harm to our Nation and our allies such as perhaps
a terror attack in this hemisphere.
Already, two have been stopped: One of the U.S. Embassy in
Santiago. And another to the President of Panama. The U.S.
Embassy in Caracas was also closed this month due to a threat
from Al Qaeda. Cuba works with Chavez and Chavez works closely
with Iran. I look forward to hearing your testimony on how the
administration plans on tackling these growing issues of
concern to our national security. I yield back the balance of
my time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. And thank you, Mr.
Valenzuela, for sitting through and letting us tell you some of
the issues that we have. We look forward to your testimony. I
think my staff prepared a nice introduction, but I think we all
know who you are and your background. We are pleased that you
are here today. We look forward to your testimony and your
answer to questions. But most importantly, the committee looks
forward to working with you and the administration on finding
common ground and where we have disagreements we look forward
to having a dialogue about those disagreements with seeing if
we can't find some solutions. So with that, you are recognized
for 5 minutes for your testimony.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ARTURO VALENZUELA, ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF STATE, BUREAU OF WESTERN HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. Valenzuela. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
I wanted to thank you for this opportunity to testify before
you today and for the level of interest that this committee has
shown now for some time to the issues of the Western Hemisphere
and U.S. policy therein. I also want to congratulate you on
your assignment as chairman of this committee, Mr. Chairman.
In addition, I would like to note that I have submitted a
longer statement to be entered into the Congressional Record. I
will take this opportunity to highlight the main points of my
main remarks and then I will be happy to answer your questions.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to tell you that this
administration is deeply engaged in the Americas. I note that
the title of this hearing asks a rather provocative policy
toward Latin America. Rather than leave the committee in
suspense, allow me to begin with the answer yes, we do. And
since our earliest days in office, the Obama administration has
been working very hard to safeguard democratic values, promote
economic opportunity, strengthen regional security and advance
U.S. interests. We strongly believe that the United States has
important national interests at stake in the Western Hemisphere
and that the best way to advance these interests is through a
proactive engagement with all of the countries of the Americas.
That is why Secretary Clinton has traveled to the region more
frequently than any other Secretary of State in modern American
history, and that is why President Obama chose to use the State
of the Union address to announce his forthcoming trip to
Brazil, Chile and El Salvador.
We believe that the United States has a vital stake in the
success of Latin America and Central America and the countries
of the Americas and that a U.S. policy that contributes to that
success will benefit all the people of the Americas, including
the citizens of the United States.
We also know that Latin America's future depends on the
consolidation of vibrant democratic institutions that are
responsive to their citizens and capable of expanding the
boundaries of freedom, creating greater social prosperity,
unlocking the economic potential of markets and deepening the
rule of law. Today we are very optimistic about the state of
the hemisphere.
In my 51 trips to 23 hemispheric countries as Assistant
Secretary, I have witnessed the convergence of two powerful
positive trends, the consolidation of successful market
democracies that are making big strides in meeting their
people's needs and the growing global integration of Latin
America. The greatest regional challenges, including
inequality, the impunity of power, lack of rights, ineffective
institutions, lack of opportunity are receding in most
countries in the Americas and nations of the hemisphere are
realizing their stake in global issues, like food security,
climate change, transnational crime and economic
competitiveness. We recognize that achieving our goals will
require building stronger institutions of democratic
governance, their respect for human rights.
In 2011, several Latin American and Caribbean countries
will hold Presidential elections. We are always welcoming of
elections that are credible expressions of the popular will and
we encourage all countries to facilitate domestic and
international observation and to establish mechanisms capable
of mitigating disputes that may arise through the electoral
process.
Given a new spirit of international partnership is
especially important at a time when we face a constrained
budget environment. Now more than ever, our budget choices must
be strategic and we must align limited funding resources to the
areas where our resources can make a critical difference. The
President's 2012 foreign assistance request for the Western
Hemisphere includes funding for critical citizen safety
programs to support the hemisphere's ability to combat drug
trafficking and transnational crime. These threats to the rule
of law in Latin America also threaten U.S. national security
and strengthening the region's capacity to combat them is in
our national interest. To achieve these goals, we support full
funding from Congress for the Merida Initiative, with Mexico
and Central American Regional Security Initiative and the
Caribbean Basin and Security Initiative.
In Colombia, full funding is key to firmly securing the
country's democratic and security gains of recent years. We
appreciate the efforts of Congressman Engel and Congressman
Mack to help us concentrate our efforts more effectively in the
security assistance and look forward to ways in which we might
be able to roll out the idea of having a better coordination of
this process.
Mr. Chairman, I am sure that you have questions about
specific aspects of our policies, especially as it relates to
our bilateral relations. During the question period, I will be
more than happy to address the strong partnership for us with
respect to Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Peru and the
Caribbean, as well as to discuss our bilateral relationships
that have been more challenging. And you have alluded to some
of those. In conclusion, let me say that the Obama
administration's Latin America policy is informed, engaged,
dynamic and collaborative and optimistic about what the future
will hold for the countries of the Americas. And I thank you
for your attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Valenzuela follows:]

Mr. Mack. Thank you very much. This is the first hearing of
the subcommittee. And we really want to kind of get at the idea
of do we have a policy, and as you say in your opening
statement, yes, then help us understand it because there is a
lot of contradiction out there, and I think the main problem I
am having is we appear to be supporting our enemies and kind of
turning our back on our allies. I don't know how, and maybe you
can answer this question, how can we deny Honduras a compact
with the MCC but then allow the money to keep flowing to
Nicaragua? I don't know--it is a pretty stark difference.
Honduras has been an ally and a friend. Nicaragua is invading
other countries. And so I think there is a disparity there that
needs some explaining. I would also suggest that again in Cuba,
we relax travel and remittance restrictions, and then Cuba
turns around and is talking about a 20-year sentence on a
USAID, Alan Gross.
So it seems like our foreign policy is not headed in the
right direction in Latin America. If we want to show the people
of Latin America that we support them and that there is value
in being a friend to America, then the Free Trade Agreements
must be sent to the Congress immediately for passage. If we
want to show that there is value in being a friend to the
United States and an ally, then the MCC compact with Honduras
needs to move forward immediately. We cannot continue to have
this kind of mixed messages to the folks of Latin America. So
if you would like to respond to any of that.
Mr. Valenzuela. Sure, Mr. Chairman. Thanks very much for
that. Look, I think that the fundamental starting premise is
that it is in our fundamental interest to have successful
governments and successful societies in the Western Hemisphere.
And that is what we are striving for. And what we see now is a
situation as I alluded to in my testimony where we have
overcome many of the difficulties of the past.
It wasn't that long ago that most of the countries in the
region were under authoritarian regimes. Only three avoided
those during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, authoritarianism. We
had civil conflicts in Central America. Today, in fact, as my
testimony suggested, the countries of the Americas are
weathering well to financial crisis today. They are growing,
they are improving their societies.
There are some significant challenges and we agree about
that. And there are some countries that oppose specific
challenges. I am happy to address that more specifically as we
move forward with this hearing today. But I just want to let
you know that when--when you look at things like statistics
that have come out on public opinion in Latin America with
regard to the standing of the United States in the region, the
latest polls by Latinobarometro that just came out suggested
that two-thirds of the population in Latin America strongly
supports U.S. policy in the region. The standing of President
Obama is extremely high in the region. That is an increase of
10 to 20 points.
So in country after country, we are seeing that our
engagement, and I described it very thoroughly, the Secretary
going to all of the countries, trying to address fundamental
issues that are of concern to the peoples of the Americas, such
as issues of public security, such as issues of
competitiveness, such as issues of climate change, such as
issues of how do you strengthen democratic institutions and
that sort of thing. This engagement is paying off, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Can you maybe respond to the--how we deny
Honduras the MCC compact and then we allow the one in
Nicaragua----
Mr. Valenzuela. The compact in Nicaragua is a 5-year
compact that is ending right now. In the case of Honduras, what
was at issue was whether there was going to be a renewal of the
compact. And that goes to a board and the board determined that
Honduras did not meet standards particularly on indicators of
corruption. We discussed this with President Lobo and with the
Government of Honduras. We are committed to continue to work
with Honduras on this. We are going to provide resources. We
hope that we might be able to move forward toward a new compact
with Honduras in the future. And I doubt very much whether
there is going to be any kind of a renewal of a compact with
Nicaragua.
Mr. Mack. And the corruption that you referred to, that
happened under Zelaya's watch?
Mr. Valenzuela. The corruption comes from an earlier
period. I think that is right. Let me agree with you,
Congressman, that Honduras ought to be brought back into the
Organization of the American States. We are very impressed with
the efforts that this government is making to move forward, to
reconcile Honduras after the crisis of last year. And he is
doing a superb job and I visited with him several times. We are
really committed to working with Honduras and moving forward.
We think that they have achieved an extraordinary amount of
success and we are strongly supportive of this--their efforts.
Mr. Mack. And the last concern there is in Honduras for the
time being is that there is a lot of visas that have not been--
I guess that are still being revoked. Is there a movement in
State Department to see that those that wish to get a visa that
have been--those that have been revoked, that they will be
reauthorized?
Mr. Valenzuela. Visas are not still being revoked, but we
are looking into how the visas that were taken away will be
restored.
Mr. Mack. Thank you. Mr. Engel, you are recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I begin, let me
agree with the chairman. I really was disappointed in Honduras
that the MCC compact was not renewed and I think it is
especially egregious because a large reason why it was not
renewed was because of the corruption that happened in the
previous regime.
So it doesn't seem fair to penalize Pepe Lobo, who I think
is doing a very good job in terms of trying to get his country
back to normal. So I want to add my voice to what the chairman
just said. I mentioned that ATPDEA--I have long been a
supporter of ATPDEA. I see the Ambassador from Colombia and the
Ambassador from Ecuador are here. Tell me what is going on with
that?
And I know that we failed to renew it, the majority did. I
know we are going to renew it. It has been my feeling that
these things should be renewed for longer periods of time than
they have in the past. What can you tell us about the renewal
of ATPDEA?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, Congressman, I couldn't agree with
you more that this is a really significant priority for the
administration and it is certainly a very critical priority in
our relationship with both Colombia and Ecuador. And I think it
is essential to try to find a way for the Congress to move
forward and to renew these preferences as soon as possible. And
as you suggested for a longer period of time, it would be
better because it provides a significant amount of instability.
Investors, exporters and so on cannot plan if they are subject
to this kind of suspension along the lines that has been
occurring recently.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. In my opening remarks, I mentioned
the Western Hemisphere security coordinator and how now
Chairman Mack and myself met with Secretary Clinton last year.
I am calling for this. I am wondering if you could tell us what
the progress has been on it. It didn't make sense to me when I
called the State Department for whatever, nothing seemed to be
coordinated as well as it should. And we all agreed, including
the Secretary, that this would be a step in the right
direction. So please tell me about the progress.
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes, thank you for the question and we
really appreciate--I appreciate--both you and Congressman Mack
had with the Secretary at the time. And we have been concerned
that with our efforts in Merida with regard to Mexico as well
as for the Central American Regional Security Initiatives
(CARSI) as well as for the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative,
these three critical initiatives on security issues for Mexico
and Central America and the Caribbean, that we have this
properly coordinated. And in that sense, what we have done is
we have identified a coordinator, the deputy Assistant
Secretary and the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the
Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs who has probably more
experience in this sort of thing than maybe anybody else that I
know of in the State Department.
In fact, she was there when I went into the State
Department as a political appointee in 1994 and has
extraordinary standing within the State Department. So we are
working--and we like to work with your committee so we can
properly announce this and review all of the issues that we are
doing--all of the matters that we are focusing on with regard
to security.
Mr. Engel. I would like to announce it because one of the
frustrations that all of us have had on both sides of the
aisle, regardless of who the administration is, it has been in
this administration, it has been with President Bush, we have
seen the frustration that Congress moves in one panel and the
administration seems to move in another place and this is a
very good example of the administration listening to both of us
and wanting to work in conjunction with us.
So I look forward to that. And I know I speak for Mr. Mack,
we would like to have a meeting with the coordinator as soon as
possible so that we can tell the coordinator what our views are
and work together on these issues. So I am happy to hear that.
Let me ask you one last question. And that is--well, I have
been very unhappy with many of the South American countries
recognizing unilaterally the State of Palestine. I think it is
unhelpful, frankly, in Middle East peace. I think such
unilateral efforts undermine the Middle East peace process. The
Middle East peace between Palestinians and Israelis can only
happen, in my opinion, if both parties sit together in face to
face negotiations and I think this unilateral recognition of
Palestine is a disincentive for the Palestinians to come to the
negotiating table because they feel that if they just sit back
and do nothing, all this recognition will fall in their lap.
So what are we doing in these countries to relay our
displeasure with these decisions in South America and what are
we doing to prevent other countries in the hemisphere to do the
same?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, thank you for the question.
Mr. Mack. Be quick, because his time is almost up.
Mr. Valenzuela. Let me just simply say that we agree
completely with your approach and your analysis on this. This
is not helpful. It is up to the parties to negotiate this and
we shouldn't be encouraging anybody to recognize Palestine, and
we have made that very clear, Congressman, to all the countries
at the highest levels. We have spoken to Foreign Ministers, we
have spoken to Presidents, and we have gone across the region.
So we have made a real effort in that regard.
Mr. Mack. Thank you.
Mr. McCaul is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. I appreciate
your testimony.
Five years ago, the Colombia Free Trade Agreement was
negotiated. Four years ago, the Free Trade Agreement with
Panama was negotiated. Now we are in 2011. I remember meeting
with President Uribe, a staunch ally, supporter of the United
States. President Bush negotiated in good faith with him to get
the Free Trade Agreement, and it just seems to me continuing to
hold up this agreement is a real slap in the face to an ally of
ours.
What is the administration's position on these two Free
Trade Agreements, and when is the President going to submit
these to the Congress?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, look, thank you for the question, Mr.
Congressman. We agree completely with the fact that we have to
move forward on both of these.
And let me just say in some ways I am in a fairly special
position, because I was at the White House in 1999 and 2000
when we started working on Plan Colombia, and it became the
single most important thing that I was involved in as the
Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the National
Security Council. It was a long slog, and at first it didn't
come out. And it turns out, I think, to have been one of the
most successful policies of the United States in recent time in
the Western Hemisphere and had the added, and I think extremely
important, aspect of being a bipartisan foreign policy.
And in that sense I would like to go back to Congressman
Mack's suggestion. The more we can look at trying to do our
foreign policy in the Americas, it is a bipartisan foreign
policy, the better our interests are served.
With regard to Colombia, I think that the Colombians have
made extraordinary progress. I think that this current
administration, the subsequent administration, has moved even
further with regard to addressing many of the questions that
had been raised by others.
And so I think that we would agree with you that it is time
to move forward on the Colombia and the Panama Free Trade
Agreements. I can't tell you exactly how that is going to
happen today, but that is certainly our commitment.
Mr. McCaul. Because, you know, we talk a lot about jobs and
the economy, and these two Free Trade Agreements, in my
judgment, will create jobs in the United States. It will be a
good, positive thing for our economy and good for our relations
with our allies in this hemisphere. So I hope the
administration will move quickly on that issue.
You mentioned Plan Colombia, and I agree that was a very
successful operation, and I applaud you for your efforts from
the very beginning. As we look at Mexico, I have often
advocated that maybe we need to do something similar in Mexico.
Whatever we are doing right now, whatever President Calderon is
doing is not working. The situation seems to be getting worse,
and I would hate to see our friend just south of our border go
into a state of collapse. So I was interested in your thoughts
on that.
On the Merida Initiative, why, I mean, it has been years
now since we appropriated that funding, and yet it has been
bottlenecked up, and we can't seem to push it through the State
Department. What is the problem?
Mr. Valenzuela. Congressman, we are very comfortable with
the fact that much of the Merida funding is now flowing very
well. In fact, some of the original funding that focused much
more on the hard side, on the security side, is now being
complemented much more by some of the other things that need to
be done as well, particularly, for example, the standing up of
effective police institutions and strengthening the judicial
system particularly at the local level, where a lot of these
challenges are taking place.
So the commitment and the congressional response to it was
substantial, as you suggested. I think that we are moving
forward on this, and we are making progress.
Mr. McCaul. The number--$1.3 billion appropriated, and the
number I saw was something like $350 million has actually made
it out through State to Mexico. Is that accurate?
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes. I don't have the figures right in
front of me. I will get them to you, but I think it is
substantially more than that has been able to flow now.
Mr. McCaul. If you could give me that information, I would
appreciate that.
Mr. Valenzuela. I will do that.
Mr. McCaul. Lastly, I think, something that was very well,
eloquently stated by Congressman Rivera. You know, we have an
American in jail in Cuba since 2009, and this is one of the
biggest human rights violations going on, in my judgment, and
yet we do--we tend to give this dictator more and more
concessions.
What is this administration doing to secure Alan Gross'
freedom?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, we would agree with you, Congressman.
It is an outrage that they kept him for a year without charging
him. Now they have turned around and charged him, and the
charges are going to be 20 years, and we are continuing to
demand his immediate release.
Mr. McCaul. Well, I think we need to do everything in our
power to free him, but thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Mack. Next, Mr. Faleomavaega--how did I do--is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Faleomavaega. You did excellent, Mr. Chairman. I thank
you very much.
Mr. Secretary, I know I haven't traveled throughout Latin
America as often as you have, and I am curious, does the State
Department currently have statistics or data or information
concerning the political, educational and social problems
addressing the problems of the indigenous peoples of these
countries living in Central and South America?
Mr. Valenzuela. Congressman, I am very pleased that you
have raised this issue, because, in fact, this is one of the
most important efforts that we have been focused on more
recently is to try to address some of the--in partnership with
countries in the Americas--some of the lingering social issues
that are so important.
And what we are doing is we are working together with
countries to try to improve their own treatment of their own
populations to get better protections.
Mr. Faleomavaega. Well, let us address this specifically,
indigenous peoples in their own populations. I mean, I am
addressing this issue directly.
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes.
Mr. Faleomavaega. Indigenous Indians living in these
countries in Latin America. Does the State Department have
relevant information and data?
You know, it is like taking a census. If you are not
counted, you don't exist, and it seems that over the years, in
the times that I have traveled throughout Latin America, I have
seen the scourge and the sufferings of the indigenous peoples.
And I think there seems to be a little sense of just pretending
like the problem doesn't exist.
I visited the Indians of the Amazons, I have visited the
people of the Incas. Yes, they participated in some extent. But
correct me if I am wrong. Are they not the worst economically,
educationally and socially throughout Latin America?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, absolutely, you are correct on that.
The indigenous populations are the ones that are at the bottom
of the rung, that have suffered historically with human rights
abuses, and they have gotten trapped in civil conflicts and
that kind of thing.
There are large indigenous populations in some countries,
as you well know, Bolivia, Peru, Guatemala. The administration
is committed to working with these countries to try to come up
with more effective programs to provide for not only support,
but greater respect and respect for the rights of indigenous
peoples. And, yes, it is an important emphasis.
You know what? We are also looking at issues of Afro-
descendants in this Year of the Afro-descendants.
Mr. Faleomavaega. Yes, Mr. Payne has addressed that. You
know what is ironic about this--and I don't know if the
chairman and our ranking member are aware of this--the George
Washington of Mexico was a pure Indian from the Yucatan
Peninsula. His name is Benito Juarez. And the irony of all of
this, and, interestingly enough, people don't realize, but he
was a pure Indian. He was the one that provided and set the
independence of Mexico from its rulers. I guess the fellow's
name was Napoleon or something. Anyway, it was during that
period of time.
I notice also with interest that the first elected Inca
Indian, indigenous Indian, was Alejandro Toledo of Peru. The
first elected native indigenous leader elected as leader of
Bolivia is Evo Morales.
Now, despite this development politically, I am still
interested in wanting to find out if we have seriously
addressed the issues affecting the needs and the blight of
these native peoples, and I wanted to know if the Obama
administration is committed in this effort?
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes, we are committed to this effort. And
as you suggest, the fact that in many of these countries you
now have indigenous leaders that are being elected President,
it shows also how much has, in fact, been overcome. The
democracy is not just for a few.
Mr. Faleomavaega. I apologize. I only have 50 seconds left.
Mr. Valenzuela. Sure.
Mr. Faleomavaega. I would like to give you copies of the
letters that I sent to your office, to Secretary Clinton, to
President Pinera, concerning the plight of the Easter
Islanders. There are only 2,500 of them, and I would like to
appeal to the good people of Chile, 17 million good Chilean
people, sending a military against these natives who live on
Easter Island, it just blows my mind how it would be a national
security problem for the Government of Chile just to address
seriously the needs of these native people.
The reason why I am really concerned about this, Mr.
Secretary, is that there are only 2,500 of them. It is not
against the 17 million Chileans that I am talking about. And I
am sure there are good people of Chile, but please pay
attention to the problems that I am describing.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Valenzuela. We will answer your letters.
Mr. Mack. Thank you.
The gentleman from Florida Mr. Rivera is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, my questions will start off with respect to
the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, otherwise
known as Helms-Burton, suspension of Title III of Helms-Burton
allowing U.S. citizens the ability to seek legal redress of
grievances and access to U.S. courts to remedy claims against
the Castro dictatorship in particular. The justification for
suspending that provision for U.S. citizens is the promotion of
democracy as determined by this government.
How has the suspension of Title III of the Cuban Liberty
and Democratic Solidarity Act by this administration promoted
democracy in Cuba?
Mr. Valenzuela. On that, the specifics of Title III, I will
have to get back to you, Congressman. I can't answer that
question right now.
Mr. Rivera. You are familiar with the Helms-Burton Act.
Mr. Valenzuela. I am familiar with Helms-Burton and what
Title IV and Title III are, but I am not sure--if your question
is what is the ramifications of that, I would not be able to
fully answer that right now.
Mr. Rivera. No, no, no. I don't want to know the
ramifications. The administration has to claim the
justification for suspending Helms-Burton as the promotion of
democracy. How has suspending Title III promoted democracy in
Cuba?
Mr. Valenzuela. As I said, I will have to get back to you
on that.
Mr. Rivera. Alright. Let us go on to lifting of some other
sanctions, and let us talk about the recent lifting of the
recent sanctions.
Mr. Valenzuela. Sure.
Mr. Rivera. Can you provide any other example where
unilateral concessions, unilateral concessions, have been met
with democratic reforms by a totalitarian dictatorship?
Mr. Valenzuela. Look, let me explain to you, and we
probably have a fundamental difference of opinion, these are
not concessions to the Cuban Government. These people-to-people
programs are programs that we believe are important in
advancing our fundamental interests with regard to Cuba, and
that is to promote a climate in Cuba that will allow the Cuban
people, in fact, to make their own----
Mr. Rivera. Let me rephrase the question. Can you cite any
concession by the dictatorship for democratic reform that has
ever been made in the 52 years of its existence?
Mr. Valenzuela. As far as I know, there have not been
similar kinds of legislation regarding other countries. But I
can tell you this----
Mr. Rivera. I am only talking about Cuba right now. Let me
make sure the question is clear. Can you cite any concession
toward democratic reform that has ever been made by the Castro
dictatorship in the----
Mr. Valenzuela. Can I cite whether there is concession?
Mr. Rivera. One more time. Can you cite any concession for
democratic reform that has ever been made by the Castro
dictatorship?
Mr. Valenzuela. I can't think of any, no.
Mr. Rivera. Okay. Then let us go to the specifics of what
happens with these concessions.
Mr. Valenzuela. Alright.
Mr. Rivera. Travel and trade. In terms of the final
disposition of trade and travel-related finances, meaning the
money that is generated from this activity, where do these
funds end up?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, I think that where you are going,
Congressman, is that some of the money may, I suspect, in your
view, support the regime, but it is our view that the
overwhelming interest----
Mr. Rivera. I am not judging. I just want to know where the
money ends up. I want to see if it supports the regime or
doesn't support the regime. Where does the money end up?
Mr. Valenzuela. In the hands of the people that are going
to be benefiting from this, the Cuban people.
Mr. Rivera. And when they spend it, where does it end up?
When they spend it in a diplomatic store, when they spend the
money in Cuba, where does it end up, when it leaves their
hands?
Mr. Valenzuela. It goes into buying goods. They buy goods
in state commissaries. In that sense it does go into the state
commissaries. But as we see right now, Congressman, there is an
enormous opportunity with the increasing trend toward
privatization in Cuba.
Mr. Rivera. Let me ask you about that, because you say
state commissaries. Are there any private banks where this
money goes into? Is there a private-sector entity to make
investments, or does money, when it is spent in Cuba, end up
anywhere else but in the hands of the state in its final
disposition?
Mr. Valenzuela. The objective of the reforms is for the
money to essentially benefit the Cuban people. If there is an
ancillary support for government institutions, that is minimal
compared with what our objective is in trying to empower the
Cuban people through an increase in----
Mr. Rivera. Money ending up in the hands of the Cuban
Government is minimal, okay.
Do you believe Alan Gross is a hostage?
Mr. Valenzuela. I think that he was unduly detained,
incorrectly detained. He was held for a year, as I said
earlier, and that was unconscionable. And now he has been
changed with 20 years, and we demand his immediate release.
Mr. Rivera. Can you tell me if you believe he is a hostage?
Mr. Valenzuela. I don't think he is a hostage, no.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you.
Mr. Mack. The gentleman's time is expired.
Mr. Sires is recognized for 5 minutes for questions.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
Valenzuela, for being here today.
I just want to associate myself with some of the comments
that were made by the chairman, the ranking member and my
friend from Florida.
You might not call them concessions, but this is how we see
it. You know, I was born in Cuba. I came here when I was 11
years old. I was probably the only Member of Congress that
lived there for 11 years, and I know what it is. So you may not
call it concessions, but we do.
You know, we work very hard here to set some of the
policies that we have here, and then it goes to the State
Department, and concessions are made. So I am not going to
belabor the point, but I think Mr. Rivera did a good job on
what he did.
But I want to talk a little bit about Colombia. Who set the
trip to Colombia? I assume the State Department, right? Excuse
me, the trip to South America by the President.
Mr. Valenzuela. No, it is determined by the White House.
Mr. Sires. Is there a reason why he is not stopping in
Colombia? I mean, I have been in this Congress now 4 years, and
I keep hearing what a great supporter Colombia is, what a
friend it is, what a great job they are doing. Yet the
President is willing to fly right over Colombia and land
someplace else. I mean, to me, I would have gone to Colombia
before I go to Brazil.
And the other thing that bothered me was that when the
President of Colombia was sworn in, I was there. I was there
with a couple of other Congresspeople. I didn't see too many
high-ranking Department members there from the Department of
State, I have to tell you. It was a little embarrassing that
this--for 4 years I keep hearing what a great ally Colombia is,
and yet when you look around, if it wasn't for the delegation
that went, there would have been very little support, it seems.
So, you know, I don't know why the President just seems to
fly over Colombia. Can you----
Mr. Valenzuela. Look, let me say this. We are extremely
pleased that the President is going to the region. It is an
indication of the commitment that the administration has to the
Americas. Obviously there are quite a few countries. Some have
to be chosen. It made sense to go to Brazil, the largest
country in the region, in South America, and it made sense to
go to a country in South America, and it made sense then to go
to a country in Central America.
Now, there are a whole host, Congressman, of criteria that
I am sure were used by the White House as they looked at this.
One example for concern was, you know, are there elections
taking place, and would the President going to a particular
country, for example, get involved in the internal elections?
And so that probably excluded some countries.
And in the case of Colombia, the President will be
attending the Summit of the Americas, you know--that is the
expectation at least--that is going to take place in Colombia
next year. So there is travel by the President that we would
hope will take place next year.
I can't speak for the White House.
Mr. Sires. You hope that it goes to Colombia next year.
Mr. Valenzuela. I hope it goes to Colombia next year.
Mr. Sires. Yes, so do we. So you might want to relate to
the President that, you know, we would hope that he would
consider stopping in Colombia. After all, they are our best
friend, our best supporter. We always sing their praises, and
yet we ignore them.
Mr. Valenzuela. The Ambassador of Colombia is right here.
Mr. Sires. He knows me because I have been to Colombia many
times, and he knows exactly what I am talking about.
Mr. Valenzuela. Right.
Mr. Sires. In terms of Venezuela and the situation in
Venezuela with Iran, I met a group of people at a dinner, and
they told me that Iran has the largest, in terms of personnel,
Embassy in Venezuela in the world. Is that accurate in terms of
the amount of people working at this Iranian Embassy?
Mr. Valenzuela. I could not say. I don't know whether that
is accurate. I could find out for you.
Mr. Sires. But there are flights twice a week, is it, into
Venezuela from Iran, back and forth? And from what I gather,
the people have come to my office, it just seems that Iranians
are bringing boxes, bringing all sorts of merchandise, never
really checked, and it just goes right through.
So I can't--I mean, I am assuming the worst. Obviously this
guy Chavez is a nut, you know, in so many words. And so I was
just wondering if you have heard anything differently in terms
of the amount of people that are working at this Embassy,
because obviously that adds a great mischief.
Mr. Valenzuela. I don't know what the size of their Embassy
is in Caracas, and I could try to find out and get back to you
on that.
Obviously, Congressman, we are concerned about the
relationship between Venezuela and Iran. Iran is, you know--has
been designated as an exporter of terror. They are in violation
of U.N. Security Council resolutions on issues of
nonproliferation. And so we have let both the Venezuelan
Government and PDVSA know that they are probably in violation
of CISADA commitments that don't permit entities to
commercialize with Iran.
Mr. Sires. Thank you very much.
Mr. Valenzuela. You are welcome.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you.
Mr. Payne, you are recognized for 5 minutes for questions.
Mr. Payne. Thank you very much.
There is an international agreement that--and this kind of
has a question about human rights--I am sure that you are aware
that El Salvador, the smallest country in South America, is
being sued by two corporations via the Central American Free
Trade Agreement, you know, CAFTA. Citizens, communities leaders
and churches have uniformly said ``no'' to corporations that
will jeopardize their water supply, ecosystems and environment.
One of these companies, Pacific Rim Mining, is actually a
Canadian-based company, went on to register itself in Nevada,
was denied, sued in Canada. Now they are suing as a U.S.
affiliate.
Is the State Department aware of issues like this, and do
we tend to try--of course, we can't dictate what a country
should do internally, but do we side, take an advocacy position
to the government, at least, suggesting that they should take
the will of the people in consideration?
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes. Thanks, Congressman, for the question.
And the answer is yes, that we often work with corporations,
and we work with governments, particularly when it comes to
extractive industries, to make sure that the practices that
extractive industries use are not only respectful of human
rights and environmental issues, but also the rights of
indigenous populations that might be affected significantly by
this kind of activity.
So it is something that we do take very seriously and that
we try to work with companies. Many are now much more committed
than in the past to corporate social responsibility understood
in a broad sense.
Mr. Payne. There is a particular issue in Peru, just the
reverse. This was a company, U.S.-based company, Doe Run Peru,
called DRP, which is in New York, so I know about the company.
And they had--the government said they had to clean up in an
environmental issue. They have invested $315 million in their
clean-up. The government was supposed to do the other half. The
government has refused to do it.
So this company cannot operate, and I wonder if you could
have your--and I will give you some direct information. We have
already sent a note to the Secretary, but I would appreciate it
if you could follow up on it, because it appears that we have
to have these countries know that we are serious about American
companies getting a fair shake.
Secondly, we have got to let American companies know that
they don't have a right to pollute and make it difficult for
people in those countries, because in many instances, as you
know, they are vulnerable people. So I will get that to you
before you leave.
And as you know, as I mentioned before, labor unions have
had a very difficult time in Colombia; 2,800 union activists
have been killed since 1986. Now we hear about the fact that we
ought to have this Free Trade Agreement, and I think we should,
but has the State Department raised the issue? And the problem
is that there is no prosecution. You know, the murders go
unsolved. Have we had any concern with that?
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes, absolutely we have had concern, and I
am pleased to say that we are moving ahead in a very
constructive fashion with the Colombian Government to address
these issues. I, myself, took part directly in the high-level
dialogue that we have established with the Santos
administration on a whole range of issues.
When we deal with Colombia, what is encouraging now is that
we are not just talking about security concerns, we are talking
about broader issues that have to do with other elements,
whether they are social issues and things like that, or how we
can work together in Central America and other parts of the
hemisphere. So we have a very broad dialogue, and I chaired,
myself, co-chaired with the Vice President of Colombia, I
chaired our side in this dialogue on human rights and labor
rights. And, as you know, the Vice President is a former labor
leader and has taken this very, very seriously.
So I think that we have seen tremendous progress in this
regard, even though there are some issues that are out there.
Mr. Payne. Thank you. My time has expired, but I wonder if
you could look into the funding on the State's Race, Ethnicity,
and Social Inclusion Unit, which expires, and administers to
Brazil and Colombia joint action plans on racial equality. If
you could get back to us on whether the State Department will
continue that very noble program.
Mr. Valenzuela. Let me just say that we value that program
enormously, and we thought it to be extraordinarily important,
and what we want to try to do is expand it. In fact, we have a
discussion with the Colombians on Afro-Colombian issues and
looking at Central America to maybe look at the Atlantic coast.
Mr. Payne. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Payne.
Now I am very pleased to recognize the ranking member of
the full committee Mr. Berman for 5 minutes.
Mr. Berman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I won't take
that long. I wanted to thank you for yielding me this time.
Secretary Valenzuela, I want to thank you for all the good
you have been doing in your position.
The President announced in the State of the Union that he
is going to travel to Brazil, Chile and El Salvador in the
second half of March, and I want to just particularly express
my appreciation that El Salvador is included in the President's
upcoming trip.
It seems strange to say it, I mean, El Salvador has been
through incredibly difficult times, but it truly--I guess it
says something about the region, but it has actually emerged as
an anchor of stability in Central America. And I think
President Funes deserves our support and the recognition for
the role that he is playing by the trip there.
And I was wondering if you could just use this opportunity
to explain a little bit. I mean, people could understand Brazil
and Chile, obviously, but why El Salvador?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, thanks very much for the question,
and thanks very much for coming to this hearing and for your
interest in Latin America.
I was in El Salvador just last week for 2 days, and there
is a lot of excitement in El Salvador about the President's
visit.
And as you say, we are particularly delighted to be engaged
with a country that has come so far from the tremendous
difficulties that we saw in the past.
It is the Central America wars, and today it is a country
that strikes me has democratic processes, where there is a
greater dialogue across the political divide in the past. There
is still a degree of polarization, but there are elements on
both sides that are making an effort to try to overcome that
and also to try to get the country moving ahead.
They have great challenges, and the problem with public
security and citizen security continues to be a really
significant problem. But they are kind of an anchor, as you
suggest, in the northern tier there in Central America, and
thereby they are also absolutely critical for our Central
America strategy on security issues and, more broadly, on
engagement with Central America.
So the choice of El Salvador, I think, was a very
solicitous one, I think, on the part of the White House in that
regard. And we agree with you that President Funes is doing a
very good job of trying to work through a situation to build a
consensus to make sure that the country can move forward.
I might end my comment by saying that I was down there in
particular because we have also started a program with four
countries in the world, the Philippines, Ghana, Tanzania, and
the White House also picked El Salvador on what is called the
Partnership for Growth, and that--what we are working with El
Salvador is to seek how we can work more effectively to
identify constraints to growth. And this is very much on the
economic side, because, you know, the proof of the pudding as
we move forward is the ability of these societies to generate
viable economic systems that produce jobs and that make for
better lives for their people.
Mr. Berman. Thank you.
Mr. Mack. Thank you very much.
If you don't mind, I think have another round of questions
for you.
Mr. Valenzuela. I would be happy.
Mr. Mack. Wonderful.
As stated in section 7 of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996,
the Secretary of State may issue an advisory opinion explaining
whether an action is in violation of the sanctions. Recent
reports show that Venezuela is sending shipments of gasoline to
Iran that are in clear violation of sanctions against Iran.
So my question to you very specifically, is Venezuela
violating the sanctions against Iran?
Mr. Valenzuela. Let me say that we are looking at that
issue; that we have raised this with both, as I said earlier in
my testimony, with the state oil firm, with PDVSA, as well as
the Venezuelan Government, because we are trying to determine
whether or not there is, in fact, a violation of those
sanctions.
Mr. Mack. Then I would follow up with that, should we
anticipate an advisory opinion regarding Venezuela's
violations? Is that something that the committee should expect?
Mr. Valenzuela. I can't tell you right now, but we are
certainly looking into this.
Mr. Mack. I want to go back. There are a lot of questions
about the Free Trade Agreements and the trade preferences. And
all along we have been hearing that there are--you know, there
are certain benchmarks, or they are--almost like we are holding
out, the United States is holding out for something.
Can you tell me exactly what it is that we are waiting for
that the administration is waiting for to send those agreements
to the Congress?
Mr. Valenzuela. I can't tell you exactly. What we are doing
is we are continuing to have a dialogue with the Colombians, as
I suggested to you earlier, which includes addressing many of
the lingering issues that some folks do have of concern and
that we still have a concern on some of these matters. But let
me make absolutely clear that our position is that we really
need to move forward with the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.
Mr. Mack. And the frustration is we keep hearing that, but
nobody knows what it is that you are waiting for. In other
words, when you say that there are things that you are talking
about, what are those things? You should put those out on the
table.
Could you tell us exactly what it is--it is hard to have
dialogue about an issue if you are unable to articulate the
problems that you are trying to address. So can you tell us
what the problems are with those Trade Agreements that are
keeping them from coming to the Congress?
Mr. Valenzuela. As I say, you know, we are committed to
moving these forward. And in the dialogue that we have had with
the Colombians, we continue to explore some of the areas that
are of concern to some Members and to others in this country
specifically on issues of labor rights and the issue of the
killing of labor leaders. But let me----
Mr. Mack. Let me--real quick.
Mr. Valenzuela. I don't have a specific metric,
Congressman. So that is about----
Mr. Mack. Now, some of those were questions that came up
early on that have been addressed. And it just feels like, you
know, that we are jerking them around a little bit because no
one is able to really answer the question what are the other
benchmarks. And may I suggest that if there are one or two
Members of Congress that continue to put up these--or stopping
the State Department or the President from sending these Trade
Agreementqs, then they should put those out on the table
publicly. But the majority of the Members--it is my
understanding that the majority of Members are ready, willing
and able to pass these Trade Agreements.
The harm that is being done in Latin America is huge
because we are not able to move these things. So, you know, if
you wouldn't mind, if there are some specific issues that the
State Department has or the administration has, if you would
bring them forward so we can try to get those answered, because
it just feels like we are waiting them out.
Mr. Valenzuela. Okay. I will get back to you on that, but
let me reiterate that we feel the same way that you do, that we
have to move forward on it.
Mr. Mack. Well, I have heard the President say that he
supports it. I have heard the Secretary of State say that she
supports it. I have talked to my colleagues; they support it.
So it is frustrating when everyone you talk to says, we are for
them. And then when we ask, well, what is held up, we don't
seem to get any real answers. So it just seems to me that,
again, I think that goes to the whole purpose of this hearing,
do we have a foreign policy, because it appears that if we do,
it contradicts itself. And this is one way that we can show our
friends and allies that we support them.
So I would encourage you to get those questions answered,
and let us move forward with those Free Trade Agreements.
Mr. Engel is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, Mr. Secretary, let me personally thank you
for the wonderful job that you have done. You and I have talked
a great deal, and I do appreciate everything you are doing for
our country.
I want to touch on a bunch of points in the 5 minutes I
have. Many members here have mentioned Venezuela. I am very
concerned as well, as you know, with their relations with Iran,
Iran being the greatest exporter of terrorism. We constantly,
or periodically, get reports of Iranian or Hezbollah agents
traveling through Venezuela. Have you heard any of those
reports lately? Is there any validity to that?
And also, Venezuela, just a couple of months ago, formally
rejected distinguished career diplomat Larry Palmer to be the
next U.S. Ambassador. What is the current status of efforts to
exchange ambassadors with Venezuela? I happen to think that
they have some nerve rejecting him, quite frankly, and so I
want to know about the status of that.
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, thank you for your kind words, Mr.
Chairman--see, I am used to calling you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Engel. You can keep doing it.
Mr. Valenzuela. I can keep doing that with your permission?
Mr. Mack. That is fine.
Mr. Valenzuela. With regard to Venezuela, yes, as I said
earlier in my testimony, we are concerned about the links with
Iran precisely because of Iran's violations of so many of these
international dispositions, particularly the U.N. Security
Council resolutions, and it is something that we continue to
monitor very closely. And I suspect that we are going to look
at some other additional determinations on this.
With regard to the naming of the Ambassador, yes, we
strongly supported a superb career ambassador, and we were
disappointed, very disappointed, that the Venezuelan Government
withdrew the agreement for his designation as Ambassador to
Caracas.
Mr. Engel. Talk to me about the Government of Haiti. The
government of Preval has finally accepted the OAS
recommendations of the top two candidates, and we now have Baby
Doc Duvalier coming there and possibly Aristide coming there.
Tell he me how confident we are that there will be a peaceful
transition of power. And in terms of the relief effort, where
does it stand? It seems to be still a lot of people homeless
and sleeping in, you know, makeshift tents. And what is the
status of our help to the Haitian people?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, look, we were pleased that the CEP
finally came out with a determination of the first round of the
election that tracked the observer mission of the Organization
of American States, and we look forward to the second round of
the election that is coming up on March 23, I believe. And I
think this moves the process forward.
I think it is important for this electoral process to take
place. The legitimacy of institutions is very important in
Haiti, and so the legitimate electoral process is critical. And
I think we are moving in that direction, so that is, I think,
helpful. We continue, we must continue, to support them.
Secondly, with regard to the aid and relief effort. If I
might take advantage of just one of your minutes to simply
compliment the work that MINUSTAH does, the United Nations
effort, and particularly some of the countries from the Western
Hemisphere that have worked so much with regard to MINUSTAH.
And I think that they provide security there.
As you know, this is a mission that is headed up by a
Guatemalan diplomat, but with strong support on the security
side from Brazil, countries like Uruguay, Chile and others. And
this is a notable example, I think, of hemispheric solidarity.
And then thirdly, with regard to the specifics, I think we
are moving ahead. It was frustrating at the beginning to get
the relief. The immensity of the catastrophe is something that
is really beyond words, and so the task of having to sort of--
you know, that the international community faced with Haiti was
also enormous. But I think that we are seeing now more rubble
removed, more progress in terms of trying to be able to rebuild
the society.
Mr. Engel. I am going to ask the chairman's indulgence
because I want to ask you--and perhaps we can talk about it
later if you don't have time to answer--what the heck is
happening with Argentina with all the stuff happening? I know
that they are unhappy that the President is not visiting there.
I wonder if you can comment on that.
But my question is really this: Brazil has recent interest
in the U.S. offer to sell fighter aircraft, the F-18, the Super
Hornet, as a part of a Foreign Ministry sales transaction
between our two countries. I am glad that they are seriously
considering it. There are ongoing concerns, however, about the
level of U.S. commitment to support the terms of this sale in
the area of technology transfer. These are concerns that are
raised.
So to what extent do you believe that such a sale promotes
the cooperation in interoperability and shared security
interests with the U.S.? And what is the administration doing
to assure Brazil of our commitment to the terms of this sale
and the sharing of associated technologies? And will this be
raised by Secretary Clinton in her upcoming consultation with
her counterpart Mr. Patriota?
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes. Well, look, let me make clear that we
have made clear through various different entreaties with the
Brazilians that we do support the Super Hornet, and that we
think it is a far superior aircraft. And we are pleased that,
you know, the new President has given some wiggle room to the
competition and try to see whether there is a possibility that
we might engage.
For further details, I would refer you to our friends at
DOD and others on that, but it is something that we are
definitely pushing.
Mr. Engel. Thank you.
Mr. Mack. Thank you.
The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I want to go back to the case of Alan Gross,
because I think it goes to the larger issue of treatment of
American citizens generally in Cuba and our Government's
response to it.
Are you familiar with the upcoming date of February 24 and
its significance in U.S.-Cuba relations?
Mr. Valenzuela. Remind me.
Mr. Rivera. February 24, 1996, to be specific?
Mr. Valenzuela. Oh, yes. Are you referring to the--right.
Mr. Rivera. I am referring to the date in which four
Americans----
Mr. Valenzuela. The shoot-down.
Mr. Rivera [continuing]. Were murdered over international
waters by the Cuban dictatorship, four Americans murdered on
February 24, 15th anniversary coming up. I suspect your
Department will be issuing a statement, or the White House will
be issuing a statement, once again condemning that inhumane and
brutal act.
With respect to Alan Gross, I am wondering, you don't
consider him to be a hostage. Do you consider his incarceration
lawful?
Mr. Valenzuela. I think it is unlawful.
Mr. Rivera. So how would you describe him, as a detainee,
unlawful combatant, prisoner? How would you describe Alan
Gross?
Mr. Valenzuela. I haven't thought about it semantically. He
is a detainee, I guess.
Mr. Rivera. Has the Castro dictatorship made any effort--I
know they have discussed publicly links between Alan Gross and
other issues such as the Cuban Five. Have they privately, or in
any discussions, any negotiations, made any effort to link the
Alan Gross case with any other issue whatsoever?
Mr. Valenzuela. No, they have not, not to my knowledge.
Mr. Rivera. Every discussion that has come up regarding
Alan Gross has never made reference to any other issue related
to U.S.-Cuba relations?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, we have had our conversations with
them on things like the migration talks, and we have raised the
issue of Alan Gross. They have complained about--they have a
long litany of complaints against the United States, but there
has never been, on our part or any part, any specific linkage.
Mr. Rivera. Such as, in that litany?
Mr. Valenzuela. Such as?
Mr. Rivera. Has the Cuban Five ever been raised?
Mr. Valenzuela. No, not that I am aware of. I haven't been
in all conversations with the Cubans.
Mr. Rivera. Have any sanctions against the government been
raised?
Mr. Valenzuela. No, we have not discussed sanctions with
the Government of Cuba.
Mr. Rivera. So when you say they have raised a litany of
issues, what was an example of the litany?
Mr. Valenzuela. Concerns over the embargo.
Mr. Rivera. Sanctions.
Mr. Valenzuela. Embargo is sanctions.
Mr. Rivera. Okay. So they have discussed the lifting of
sanctions in connection with discussions about Alan Gross.
Recently I know Alan Gross' wife was able to visit Mr. Gross.
At the same time, I believe, one of the wives of the Cuban Five
spies was able to visit. Was that a coincidence?
Mr. Valenzuela. There were two wives were able to visit, or
one--I can't remember--and this was--that particular discussion
with them was not coincidental. You are right, Congressman.
Mr. Rivera. It was not coincidental.
And in that case, let me refer you to Webster's dictionary
and the definition of ``hostage'': A person held by one party
as a pledge pending the fulfillment of an agreement, or a
person taken by force to secure the taker's demand.
Now, you have told me that there was no coincidence in the
visitation. You have told me they have raised the issue of
sanctions in discussion with Alan Gross. So I will ask you
again, based on this definition of ``hostage,'' do you believe
Alan Gross is a hostage?
Mr. Valenzuela. Actually I am going to backtrack on my
comment, Congressman. There was an effort made earlier to have
those visitations, and that did not go through. So the timing
on that was not directly linked to Gross because we had made--
there was an effort earlier to try to look at the visitations.
And if you want to call it ``hostage,'' I am happy to agree
with you if you want to call it a ``hostage.'' I think he is a
detainee.
Mr. Rivera. Well, if you agree with me that he is a
hostage, perhaps a detainee, you said earlier in response to my
colleague's questions on efforts to release this hostage that
we continue to insist he be released.
Mr. Valenzuela. Exactly.
Mr. Rivera. Is that the extent of the administration's
efforts to release an American hostage named Alan Gross in
Cuba?
Mr. Valenzuela. We continue to insist that they release
him. That is right.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mack. Thank you.
And the gentleman Mr. Faleomavaega is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Faleomavaega. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I deeply
appreciate your patience and wanting to give me another
opportunity again to ask Secretary Valenzuela a couple of
questions.
Mr. Secretary, I realize in fairness to you, because it is
difficult for me to raise these questions with you concerning
Easter Island, or Rapa Nui, because apparently you may have
never received my letter, and maybe the paper shuffling that
goes on with the bureaucracy, so you are not aware of the
concerns and the problems that I have raised concerning this
problem.
I appreciate the definition by my good friend Mr. Rivera
what a hostage is, because this is exactly what is happening in
Easter Island with the presence of some 100 police, military
police, members of the Chilean military forces now in prisons
there.
Again, this little island, Mr. Secretary, is well renowned,
and pretty much despite its small size, it is known throughout
the world for these native people who built these statues
called aku-aku, or moai, human statues weighing tens of tons
culturally. And I say this because there is a kinship and
relationship between the people of Easter Island and me.
Now, whether it be the needs of Mr. Gross or the 2,500
people, they are human beings, and in the advent of the recent
military dictatorship of Mr. Pinochet and Chile, I will say
that Chile has come a long way not only in obtaining democratic
reforms, but the elections that have taken place. And I know
that I am also aware that Chile is one of our outstanding
trading partners. And I have to give credit to the leaders and
the good people of Chile that they have become one of the
shining stars of Latin America economically and even
politically.
But I will say, Mr. Secretary, that I just am at a loss,
maybe because these people are so small. They are members of
the Province of Valparaiso that makes up Chile. They bear no
economic difference politically--I mean, militarily and
economically. These are just people that just want to lay
claims to their ancestral homeland or their lands.
And I must say that the Chilean Government has been very
unfair, and I say measures of brutality, because people have
been wounded seriously by these rubber bullets, have been shot
at, in the course of the past couple of weeks. And I don't know
if your office has been aware or our Embassy in Chile has been
made aware of the problems arising out of Easter Island, but I
will deeply appreciate your assistance in seeing that these
issues are addressed.
I wanted to ask you, on the question of the historical
relationship between Chile and these people, seriously question
how they came about taking control of this island that is
apparently 2,300 miles away from Chile, no cultural
relationship whatsoever between the people of Easter Island and
those of Chile.
I know we have talked about economic exclusive zones, and
this is really nice, and talking about fishing rights and all
of this, but no questions, despite the appeals made by the
Easter Island Parliament, the leaders, in trying to provide
some kind of consultations with the Chilean Government. It has
been just really don't care. I don't appreciate that, and I
wanted to know if your office will look into this.
And before I finish, I just wanted to request from the
State Department whatever information or data that the
administration has or the State Department has concerning the
economic, social and educational standings of the indigenous
Indians or indigenous peoples living in these countries
throughout Latin America. And I say in the millions, the number
of people, but I am just hazarding a guess here, and I would
deeply appreciate if you could submit that and be made part of
the record. If it is alright, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that this be done.
Mr. Mack. Without objection.
Mr. Faleomavaega. And send it also to my office. I would
deeply appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time is up.
Mr. Mack. Thank you very much.
A few more questions, if you don't mind.
I want to talk a little bit about--go back to Hugo Chavez a
little bit and Venezuela. Isn't it a fact that Hugo Chavez
supports terrorists in Venezuela?
Mr. Valenzuela. There has been some concern, Congressman,
of the support that Hugo Chavez has given to elements of the
FARC.
Mr. Mack. Some concern, or is this----
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, no, real concern. This is one of the
reasons why he was, you know, put on a--it is short of being on
the terrorist list, which is why I know that you are concerned
about, but it was designated in such a way because they are
not--they are not complying, and they are not cooperating on
issues having to do with terrorism. So it is a yes.
Mr. Mack. So, yes, he is supporting terrorists?
Mr. Valenzuela. Although if I might--if I might add a
point, that we see a declining support for the FARC
specifically in the last few months, particularly since
President Santos in Colombia has reached out to Venezuela.
Let me say that, you know, I am not sure that that is going
to work out. You know, I am skeptical about that. But there has
been a definite reduction in support for the FARC.
Mr. Mack. Which is a terrorist organization.
Mr. Valenzuela. It is a terrorist organization, yes.
Mr. Mack. Okay. Isn't it a fact that Chavez supports other
rogue regimes by selling gasoline to Iran and engaging with
Syria and Libya?
Mr. Valenzuela. Yes. I mentioned to you that we brought
this to their attention to see whether, in fact, they are
violating our own legislation in that regard.
Mr. Mack. But the evidence is there. He is supporting, he
is selling gasoline to Iran?
Mr. Valenzuela. He is violating the international
sanctions, it appears.
Mr. Mack. And isn't it a fact that Hugo Chavez disavows
freedom, undermining the press and discrediting political
opposition figures in his country?
Mr. Valenzuela. We have expressed our concerns over the way
he has gone after the press and the way he has harassed
opposition figures. And as I said recently publicly, we were
concerned about the way in which the National Assembly
delegated executive authority to the President, contravening, I
think, the sovereignty of the new National Assembly that was
elected later.
Mr. Mack. So it is also a fact, then, that Chavez
manipulates legislative and judicial institutions in Venezuela,
giving himself decree powers, threatening judges?
Mr. Valenzuela. Exactly. And that is of concern.
Mr. Mack. And when you say ``concern,'' you are not saying
concern like concerned whether or not it is happening. It is
happening----
Mr. Valenzuela. It is happening. Yeah, it is happening.
When I say about concern, I mean we are concerned about it.
Yeah.
Mr. Mack. It brings me to two things. Well, we would agree
that in the case of the OAS, that Venezuela is considered to be
a member in good standing?
Mr. Valenzuela. It is a member in good standing, yes.
Mr. Mack. So why do we continue to fund the OAS?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, I think we will need to work with
other countries to more effectively, Congressman, raise within
the OAS and other for a situations where there may be a
violation of democratic institutions and democratic rights.
Mr. Mack. But if we know all of these things are facts
about Hugo Chavez, why do we continue to support an
organization that is in violation of its own charter?
Mr. Valenzuela. I think it is in our interest, Congressman,
to continue to work with the OAS, to try to make sure that the
OAS, in fact, meets the obligations that it needs to do. For us
to simply walk away from the OAS thinking that because they are
not doing this would be to abdicate our own responsibilities
and leadership.
Mr. Mack. But wouldn't it show more leadership that if we
showed our friends like Panama and Colombia that we support
them and that we are going to move the Free Trade Agreements
than it is to continue to fund an organization that is in
violation of its own charter?
Mr. Valenzuela. I don't think they are mutually exclusive,
Congressman, with all due respect. I think that we need to work
to support Colombia free trade, Panama free trade, and at the
same time to strengthen our Organization of American States, to
make it a more effective institution.
Mr. Mack. Just so you know, I am planning on introducing
legislation to withhold funds from the OAS until at such time
the OAS can ensure that it actually is fighting for freedom and
democracy in Latin America instead of supporting states like
Venezuela and Hugo Chavez, who we agree supports terrorists,
supports rogue regimes, disavows freedoms, manipulates
legislative and judicial institutions, and has torn apart the
domestic fiber of Venezuela. At the same time, I think it is--
--
Mr. Valenzuela. Could I interrupt you?
Mr. Mack. Let me just real quick. You are going to also see
that I plan on continuing to push that the State Department put
Venezuela, put Hugo Chavez on the State Sponsor of Terrorism
list. And this gets to the crux of the entire hearing today.
The question is, do we have a foreign policy? And it appears
that our foreign policy, instead of standing up for America's
interests and what is good for America and our allies, we seem
to continue to engage in organizations and with countries that
are in direct conflict to what it is that America's interests
are.
Mr. Valenzuela. Let me respond by first underscoring the
fact that despite some frustration over the inability of the
OAS to move forward to strengthen the democratic charter--
remember, this is an organization of member states, so there
has to be some kind of consensus to do this. This is something
that is not just done out of the Secretariat of the OAS.
Mr. Mack. Doesn't it have to be a unanimous vote?
Mr. Valenzuela. It depends on what for. But, no.
It doesn't have to be a unanimous vote if you want to raise
concerns about that.
But let me make a point that the Inter-American Human
Rights Commission, which is part of the OAS, has a strong
history of defense of democratic values, and they have come out
with some very clear statements that are critical of Venezuela
recently, and very bold statements. And they have done so by
also criticizing press freedoms in Venezuela. And the Secretary
General of the OAS also recently made some clear comments about
his concerns over the delegation of authority that we talked
about earlier. So the picture is not quite as black and white
as you suggest, in my view.
Mr. Mack. Well, we have a difference of opinion because I
think it is pretty crystal clear.
The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just continuing on the issue of the treatment of American
citizens and how the U.S. Government responds to that treatment
by the Cuban dictatorship, are you familiar with the case
relating to the 1996 rescue, shoot-down of a Cuban spy who had
infiltrated the Brothers to the Rescue Organization and, right
before those four Americans were murdered, had returned to
Cuba? Are you familiar with that case?
Mr. Valenzuela. I am not familiar with the case.
Mr. Rivera. So you are not familiar with the case of the
spy who had infiltrated this organization and also married an
American citizen named Ana Margarita Martinez?
Mr. Valenzuela. I am not familiar with that case.
Mr. Rivera. Well, I know Ana Margarita Martinez was a U.S.
citizen who a Cuban spy married who was part of the Brothers to
the Rescue shoot-down plot, who also received a judgment by a
U.S. court against the Cuban Government for that action against
her, and recently has tried to collect on that judgment and has
been blocked by this administration collecting on that
judgment. Why is the U.S. Government trying to block a U.S.
citizen from collecting a judgment against a foreign
government?
Mr. Valenzuela. Well, I will have to look into that since I
don't know this particular case.
Mr. Rivera. If I send you some written questions, would you
indulge me and respond to those questions?
Mr. Valenzuela. I will respond to your questions.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you very much.
Going back to one of your previous comments regarding the
impact of convertible currency going to the regime, you
describe it as minimal compared to what the administration is
trying to achieve. We have seen estimates of billions of
dollars, U.S. dollars, going to Cuba in terms of travel,
particularly travel; business between the United States and
Cuba; money that funds the military, military enterprises;
money that funds the instruments of repression in Cuba, as you
would recognize, I am sure. There are no labor rights or no
collective bargaining rights in Cuba. There is no private
sector. There is no entrepreneurial class. There is no economic
activity that could be considered within normal circumstances,
by normal standards, by any other country in the world.
Based on that and the purposes of that money, do you stand
by the statement that that money going to the regime really has
a minimal impact?
Mr. Valenzuela. I agree with your analysis that it is a
totalitarian state, that the state controls everything, that
the people don't have independent economic lives. And that is
precisely why the policy needs--we need to find a policy that
is effective in reaching out to the Cuban people, because the
Cuban people are desirous and want to be able to engage with
people elsewhere.
Mr. Rivera. Let me follow up with that. The problem is I
have got 2 minutes left on my time, and I really want to follow
up on that statement.
For decades now, people have been traveling to Cuba,
families have been traveling to Cuba. We have been trading with
Cuba. We are one of Cuba's largest trading partners since 2000,
when the restrictions were lifted on trading with medical and
agricultural products in particular. The entire world trades
with Cuba. The entire world travels to Cuba. You just said to
me that that type of policy, that type of engagement, promotes
democracy. What democracy has been promoted in the decades and
decades that that policy has been pursued with respect to Cuba?
Mr. Valenzuela. I think that the kind of engagement you
might be referring to is people going on tourist vacations and
just simply using that opportunity. What this policy does, it
does not----
Mr. Rivera. There is no tourism in going to Cuba from the
United States. I am talking about the policy of the United
States engaging Cuba, families traveling, trade with Cuba,
cultural, academic exchanges that have been there for decades.
What reforms have resulted?
Mr. Valenzuela. I think that those efforts have been
minimal and that this is a substantial way to--it takes time to
work, Congressman. I think it takes a while for that to work.
Mr. Rivera. Okay. I appreciate that remark very much,
particularly having read some of your books in graduate school.
When I meet privately with you, I am going to remind you of
that remark of how much it takes for engagement to work.
Mr. Valenzuela. Let me sign one of them for you.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you very much.
With regard to the Colombia FTA and the unresolved issues,
that is also something that I would ask if you could try to get
us members more specifics on that, and particularly because I
think there are many members that are working on that issue,
and they shouldn't be wasting their time, if they are.
If there is someone who knows--you said you didn't have the
specific metrics, and you said you couldn't say exactly what
those unresolved issues are. I am wondering if there is someone
else who has the specific metrics or can say exactly what the
issues are, because I am one of the freshmen out of many that
has been assigned a task of whipping other freshmen, discussing
this issue, with the prospect of bringing that Free Trade
Agreement to fruition. Is there someone else that can give us
that information?
Mr. Valenzuela. Let us continue to talk about it, because I
really would like to be able to be responsive to you on this.
Mr. Rivera. We will do that, and that was my next question.
If you and I could get together perhaps privately, I would love
to meet with you. I think it could be the beginning of a
beautiful friendship, as Humphrey Bogart said.
Just one more moment, with your indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
When I was in graduate school, I really did read several of
your books. My professor, who I believe you know, Dr. Eduardo--
--
Mr. Valenzuela. I know him very well.
Mr. Rivera. You know him very well. He spoke always very
highly of you. And there are many elements in your writings
that I would love to engage in a colloquy with you,
particularly as they are relevant to U.S.-Cuba relations.
Mr. Valenzuela. Excellent. Thanks very much.
Mr. Mack. Thank you.
I thank the gentleman from Florida.
I also thank you, Mr. Valenzuela. We appreciate your time
and your patience and your determination to stay and answer
questions. And I look forward to continuing the dialogue. As
you can see on both sides of the aisle, there are a lot of
concerns about if and what our foreign policy is in Latin
America. And I think we laid out a lot of questions to you, and
hopefully we can expect that you would get back to the
committee on a lot of those answers.
And if I could just leave you with this, that I think you
have a United States Congress who is begging for you, State
Department and the President to send the Free Trade Agreements
to the Congress so we can pass them, show our support not only
for American workers, but also for our friends in last America.
And with that, the subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:29 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

A P P E N D I X

----------

Material Submitted for the Hearing RecordNotice deg.

Minutes deg.

Mack statement deg.
__________

Mack QFRs deg._

__________
[Note: Responses to the above questions were not received prior to
printing.]