Arms Control, International Security, and U.S. Assistance to Europe: Review and Reforms for the State Department

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                  ARMS CONTROL, INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, AND5                   U.S. ASSISTANCE TO EUROPE: REVIEW AND6                   REFORMS FOR THE STATE DEPARTMENT78=======================================================================910                                HEARING1112                                OF THE1314                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE1516                               BEFORE THE1718                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AAFAIRS19                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES2021                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2223                             FIRST SESSION2425                               __________2627                             March 11, 20252829                               __________3031                            Serial No. 119-53233                               __________3435        Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs3637[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3839Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov, http://docs.house.gov,40                       or http://www.govinfo.gov4142                                __________4344                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4560-320 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 20254647-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------4849                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS5051                     BRIAN MAST, Florida, Chairman5253MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas             GREGORY MEEKS, New York, Ranking54CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey         Member55JOE WILSON, South Carolina           BRAD SHERMAN, California56SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania            GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia57DARRELL ISSA, California             WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts58TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee              AMI BERA, California59MARK GREEN, Tennessee                JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas60ANDY BARR, Kentucky                  DINA TITUS, Nevada61RONNY JACKSON, Texas                 TED LIEU, California62YOUNG KIM, California                SARA JACOBS, California63MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida        SHEILA CHERFILUS-McCORMICK,64BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan                  Florida65AUMUA AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN,       GREG STANTON, Arizona66    American Samoa                   JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida67WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio                JONATHAN JACKSON, Illinois68JIM BAIRD, Indiana                   SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California69THOMAS KEAN, JR, New Jersey          JIM COSTA, California70MICHAEL LAWLER, New York             GABE AMO, Rhode Island71CORY MILLS, Florida                  KWEISI MFUME, Maryland72KEITH SELF, Texas                    PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington73RYAN ZINKE, Montana                  GEORGE LATIMER, New York74JAMES MOYLAN, Guam                   JOHNNY OLSZEWSKI, Maryland75ANNA PAULINA LUNA, Florida           JULIE JOHNSON, Texas76JEFFERSON SHREVE, Indiana            SARAH McBRIDE, Delaware77SHERI BIGGS, South Carolina          BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois78MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington      MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania79RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania8081              James Langenderfer, Majority Staff Director82                 Sajit Gandhi, Minority Staff Director83                                 ------8485                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE8687                      KEITH SELF, Texas, Chairman8889MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas             WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts,90JOE WILSON, South Carolina               Ranking Member91MARK GREEN, Tennessee                DINA TITUS, Nevada92YOUNG KIM, California                JIM COSTA, California93WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio                GABE AMO, Rhode Island94ANNA PAULINA LUNA, Florida           JULIE JOHNSON, Texas95                                     SARAH McBRIDE, Delaware9697               MIKE CALLESEN, Subcommittee Staff Director9899                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S100101                              ----------102103                            REPRESENTATIVES104105                                                                   Page106Opening Statement of Subcommittee Chairman Keith Self............     1107Opening Statement of Subcommittee Ranking Member William Keating.     2108.................................................................109110                               WITNESSES111112Statement of Hon. Yleem Poblete, Ph.D., Former Assistant113  Secretary, Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and114  Compliance, U.S. Department of State...........................     4115  Prepared Statement.............................................     7116Statement of Daniel Kochis, Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute......    15117  Prepared Statement.............................................    17118Statement of Hon. James O'brien, Former Assistant Secretary,119  Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, U.S. Department of120  State..........................................................    25121  Prepared Statement.............................................    27122123                                APPENDIX124125Hearing Notice...................................................    44126Hearing Minutes..................................................    46127Hearing Attendance...............................................    47128129                        Material for the Record130131Arms Control Policy at the Department of State, submitted by132  Keating........................................................    48133134                        Questions for the Record135136Questions submitted to Mr. Daniel Kochis, from Rep. Wilson.......    49137Questions submitted to James O'Brien, from Rep. McBride..........    51138Questions submitted to James O'Brien, from Rep. Wilson...........    55139Questions submitted to Yleem Poblete, from Rep. Wilson...........    58140141 ARMS CONTROL, INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, AND U.S. ASSISTANCE TO EUROPE:142              REVIEW AND REFORMS FOR THE STATE DEPARTMENT143144                              ----------145146                        Tuesday, March 11, 2025147148                  House of Representatives,149                             Subcommittee on Europe150                              Committee on Foreign Affairs,151                                                   Washington, D.C.152153    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in154room 2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Keith Self155(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.156    Mr. Self. The Subcommittee on Europe will come to order.157The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the subcommittee's158areas of jurisdiction for State Department reauthorization,159which includes the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, the160Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability, and the161Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation. I now162recognize myself for an opening statement.163164            OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN KEITH SELF165166    I want to begin by welcoming both members and witnesses to167the Subcommittee on Europe's first hearing on State Department168reauthorization. Under the leadership of Chairman Mast each169subcommittee has been assigned different bureaus from across170the State Department in order to conduct oversight, explore171potential reforms, and to ultimate authorize the bureaus into172law.173    It has been a while since reauthorization was accomplished174and I look forward to working with colleagues on both sides of175the aisle as we move through this important process. It is176essential that Congress takes up its responsibility to177authorize a State Department that is fully able to execute the178mission of making the United States a safer, stronger, and more179prosperous country.180    As this is our first hearing on this subject I am going to181provide a brief introduction to the State Department bureaus182this subcommittee will be overseeing in the 119th Congress.183    The Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability, also184known as ADS, is responsible for diplomatic efforts to increase185stability, reduce the risk of unintentional escalation, and186prevent conflict. This includes promoting the stability and187control of emerging military technologies, including AI and188quantum computing, and upholding bans on chemical and189biological weapons. ADS also leads negotiations on nuclear arms190control and represents the United States' multilateral forums191addressing WMD challenges. Originally created as the Bureau of192Verification and Compliance in 1999, the bureau's position of193assistant secretary of State is authorized in statute and only194that one position.195    Next, we have the Bureau of International Security and196Nonproliferation, or INS--ISN, excuse me, which is the mission197of preventing the spread of WMD delivery systems and advanced198conventional weapons capability. Additionally, ISN works to199protect U.S. critical and emerging technology and promotes the200peaceful uses of nuclear energy, science, and technology. The201bureau was formed in 2005 by then Secretary of State202Condoleezza Rice through an agency reorganization effort that203combined the Bureau of Nonproliferation and the Bureau of Arms204Control. The Bureau of International Security and205Nonproliferation is currently not authorized in statute by206Congress.207    The Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, or EUR for208short, is responsible for developing and implementing U.S.209foreign policy in Europe and Eurasia. The bureau promotes U.S.210interests in the region on issues such as international211security, NATO, cooperation with the European Union and other212regional organizations, support for democracy, human rights,213civil society, economic prosperity, nonproliferation, and214counterterrorism. One of the key missions of the bureau is the215planning, coordination, and delivery of assistance to the216region. As Members of Congress it is our duty to ensure that217every tax dollar spent abroad is achieving U.S. strategic218objectives. Like ISN, the Bureau for European and Eurasian219Affairs is not authorized in statute.220    Finally, I want to note that this subcommittee also has221jurisdiction over the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy222as well as the Export Import Bank, but these will not be the223subject of today's hearing.224    Out of the three bureaus we are discussing today, only one225is explicitly authorized; and that only partially, without226clear and concise instruction from Congress to a State227Department reauthorization. The legislative branch of228Government invites the Executive to have broad powers to shape229the structures, personnel, and mission of agencies. It is my230belief that a stronger State Department requires clear231legislative guidance from the Congress.232    As the committee moves through this reauthorization process233the experience and insights from our witnesses today will help234guide us in working to build a more efficient and effective235State Department. I look forward to hearing your testimony and236recommendations.237    The chair now recognizes the ranking member, the gentleman238from Massachusetts, Mr. Keating, for any statement he may have.239240      OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER WILLIAM KEATING241242    Mr. Keating. Thank you, Chairman Self, and thank you for243our witnesses being here today.244    The arms control, the nonproliferation, the U.S. foreign245assistance to Europe has been at the heart of U.S.-led world246order since the end of the Second World War beginning with247President Truman in 1948. The Marshall Plan brought more than248$13 billion in investments to European economies, provided the249U.S. with significant influence in Europe, and solidified the250Transatlantic Alliance that we all benefit from today.251    Also borne out of the triumph of the Second World War, a252modern day arms control and nonproliferation regimen that has253enabled the United States and its adversaries such as the then254Soviet Union to work together and reduce the risk posed by255nuclear weapons. I remember a time where every American feared256for their lives during the cold war and literally when I had a257neighbor a couple of streets over who built a bomb shelter in258his yard. The Bureau of International Security and259Nonproliferation as well as the Bureau of Arms Control,260Deterrence, and Stability are critical to ensuring Americans261never again live with this fear.262    But we didn't come here today to discuss history; we came263here today to talk about the future, the future of arms264control, international security, and foreign assistance to265Europe. The Trump Administration said it is pursuing a foreign266assistance agenda to make America stronger, safer, and more267prosperous. Ostensibly this includes covering the malign268influence of Russia and China. Foreign assistance to Europe269does that.270    In Europe countries like Moldova, Georgia, Kosovo, and271Armenia are seeking greater U.S. economic cooperation and272assistance and boostering democratic efforts in those areas. In273Ukraine the United States has rebuilt Ukraine's energy grid274following the Russian attacks allowing Ukraine to repel them on275the battlefield. Sadly, some of those efforts cut with the cuts276to USAID. Yet, while the Trump Administration claims to be277putting America first, it is actually ceding territory and278influence literally in Ukraine and figuratively throughout the279European Continent to Russia and increasingly to China.280    If the Trump Administration was serious about pursuing its281stated goals of making America stronger, safer, and more282prosperous, restoring all congressionally appropriated foreign283assistance funding to our allies in Europe would be the first284step in that direction. On arms control and nonproliferation285the ISN and ADS bureaus employ subject matter experts with286specialized backgrounds who both verify compliance of our arms287control efforts and engage with multilateral institutions to288ensure the United States is shaping global norms on these289topics and not Russia, not China, not Iran, not North Korea.290    Yet the Trump Administration has initiated a reduction in291force at the State Department which could target the critical292work of the ISN and ADS bureaus and the numerous career civil293servants whose expertise is not replaceable.294    On each of these issues: arms control, nonproliferation,295and U.S. assistance to Europe the Trump Administration must do296something it has failed to do thus far. It has to show up. To297counter Russian and Chinese malign influence the Trump298Administration must show up and provide necessary funding for299countries like Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine who are striving to300maintain and expand their democracies.301    If the Trump Administration is serious about arms control302and nonproliferation efforts the administration must show up to303multilateral institutions and our bilateral partners and engage304proactively. Unfortunately, its effort to fire hundreds of305civil and foreign service officers with deep expertise in these306issues runs counter to these goals. If the Trump Administration307wants to pursue such drastic changes in U.S. policy, it must308show up to Congress.309    While I appreciate our witnesses' presence here today, the310lack of administrative engagement with this committee and the311ceding of Article 1 power by this committee and this Republican312majority not only undermines the role of the legislative313branch, but it harms U.S. national security at this critical314time in history.315    I will end with this: In 1994 the Budapest Agreement316Ukraine agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for a317security guarantee from the United States, Russia, and Britain.318Russia obviously abandoned that promise long ago. Over the last319few weeks Donald Trump has also broken our promise and won't320even acknowledge Russia's aggression. Of course agreements mean321nothing if not enforced and Trump's actions undercut the322credibility of our country.323    Moments ago, after this hearing started, Ukraine and324President Zelenskyy agreed to a 30-day cease-fire. I hope that325cease-fire is backed up with security guarantees as well, or326again they will mean nothing.327    Now Ukraine has likely come to regret their decision to328give up those weapons. President Zelenskyy is now asking allies329for strong security guarantees such as those guaranteed by a330nuclear umbrella to deter Russia in its horrific aggression and331war crimes. Abandoning our allies in Europe will undermine our332allies' belief that the United States is a strong dependable333ally. This only emboldens China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran.334    If we want to remain a global leader in arms control,335nonproliferation, and transatlantic relationships, the United336States must show up and we must lead. I look forward to your337witnesses' testimony and I yield the balance of my time.338    Mr. Self. Other members of the committee are reminded that339opening statements may be submitted for the record.340    We are pleased to have a distinguished panel of witnesses341before us today on this very important topic. We have Hon.342Yleem Poblete, Ph.D., Dr. Poblete, Former Assistant Secretary,343Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance, U.S.344State Department; Mr. Daniel Kochis, Senior Fellow, Hudson345Institute; and Ambassador James O'Brien, Former Assistant346Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, Department347of State.348    This chair recognizes the importance of the issues before349us and is grateful to have your presence here to speak with us.350Your full statements will be made part of the record and I will351ask each of you to keep your spoken remarks to 5 minutes in352order to allow time for our members to have questions.353    I now recognize Dr. Poblete for her opening statement.354355                   STATEMENT OF YLEEM POBLETE356357    Ms. Poblete. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member358Keating, distinguished members of the committee and thank you359for the opportunity to testify today.360    I provide specific detailed recommendations, a plethora of361them, in my prepared remarks on potential reforms for the arms362control and international security family at the Department of363State, otherwise known as the T family, but I would like to364address some overarching issues.365    First, for American leadership to endure and facilitate and366contribute to security and peace we must be strong militarily,367economically, and diplomatically. This means perhaps doing more368with less. It is something that we were required to do when we369were--when I was a staffer on this committee and it is370something that can and will be done.371    That also begins by placing the security and well-being of372the American people and our Nation first and aligning all of373our efforts toward that goal. But this does not mean America374alone. The U.S. under President Trump supports alliances.375Alliances denote that there is an alignment of interest. It376denotes that there is an equal stake and equal contributions377toward the shared goals of the alliance members.378    For decades multilateralism has been viewed as an end unto379itself without rigorous or careful examination of the mandate,380functions, and relevance of multinational organizations in381addressing the current political and threat environment. Such a382view is integral to any effort to transform our policies and383government to advance U.S. security and interests and leave the384U.S. well-positioned for current and future challenges.385    To Ranking Member Keating's point about the U.S. showing386up: The U.S. definitely shows up in more ways that just foreign387aid. In my areas of jurisdiction and when I was at the State388Department we show up via Aegis Ashore sites in Europe, via389U.S. Navy ships with Aegis ballistic capabilities and systems.390We show up with Patriot systems in the European theater as well391as other support. This all through the U.S.-European phased392adaptive approach to the defense of the European theater.393    I too firmly believe that the work of the T family where394diplomacy, intelligence, and defense converge is an essential395tool in the U.S. arsenal of national security instruments of396power. It embodies peace through strength including via397verification and compliance, strategic dialogs, deterrence,398missile defense, policy, and assistance for nonproliferation399efforts.400    I have shared a few of the observations included my401prepared remarks, some unpleasant, but we are all seeking to402improve our capabilities. As Assistant Secretary for403Verification and Compliance I had the opportunity to indeed404work with some brilliant, dedicated, forward-thinking405professionals and faithful public servants and patriots in this406space, but also observed others pining for and operating in a407distant past or seized by nativism, losing focus of U.S.408interests, priorities, and objectives.409    The Eurocentrism/Euro dominance stemming from cold war410dynamics, arms treaties, and agreements has led to the411usurpation of some T family responsibilities including those412statutorily required, the utilization by the intelligence413community of findings and assessments by international414organizations instead of providing U.S. intelligence,415manipulation of clearance processes to usurp statutory roles416and authorities of decisionmakers and advance personal agendas.417    Examples include scope content determinations relating that418the compliance report, specifically with respect to Iran,419personnel in the Office of the Legal Advisor reversing420previously clear determinations and approved language on such421matters as violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions, and422assistant secretary-level clearances changed before they reach423the secretary's desk.424    Some of the recommendations: To succeed in reforming,425realigning, streamlining, and optimizing there must be clear426guidance and leadership on agenda priorities and scope. This427applies to undersecretaries, bureaus' offices up the chain of428command to the secretary. And it should also guide the429authorization process. We need clear lines of demarcation,430transparency and honesty in reporting. Stop over-classification431to hide information from the Congress or the American people,432particularly when data is in the public domain. Return to433unclassified reports with classified TS/SCI Annexes as mandated434by statute. No versions of intermediate classification.435Dramatically increase the scope of a compliance report in terms436of the subject matter covered and information used to inform437the judgments and documents.438    Optimization: T has to be fully integrated. No439marginalization or subordination to regional bureaus. The T440should reflect the current landscape in scope and message as441potentially the Undersecretary for Global Security and442Strategic Domains. This includes outer space, undersea, AI, and443cyber.444    Eliminate congressional and public affairs offices and445personnel within bureaus as all these requests should go446through the departments' respective bureaus and offices to447ensure maximum coordination and message cohesion.448    Bring matters pertaining to the Antarctic Treaty; Arctic449Affairs; Artemis Accords, given based on the Outer Space450Treaty; Space Traffic Management, already handled by the ADS451Bureau, the ESC office of that bureau, to a revamped and452renamed ADS Bureau.453    Funds and assistance programs should be consolidated into454one dedicated office, not an additional office, but one office455dedicated to such funding and oversight with--similar to456regional bureaus. Other eliminations, consolidations, and457reductions including in structure, personnel, and functions are458included in my prepared testimony.459    In sum, we are being called to do what is right and460necessary, not what is easy or popular. I look forward to your461questions and to working together to make the Department of462State foreign policy and programs more efficient and in the463hope of ushering in a new era of American leadership and464greatness while advancing security and peace for the U.S., the465American people, and worldwide.466    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.467    (Prepared statement of Ms. Poblete follows:)468    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]469470    Mr. Self. Thank you, Dr. Poblete.471    I now recognize Mr. Kochis as his opening--for his opening472statement. Thank you.473474                   STATEMENT OF DANIEL KOCHIS475476    Mr. Kochis. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Self,477Ranking Member Keating, and distinguished members of the478subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before479you today on this important topic.480    My name is Daniel Kochis. I am a senior fellow in the481Center on Europe and Eurasia at the Hudson Institute and I am482grateful for the opportunity to offer my testimony this483afternoon. Please note that the views I express in this484testimony are my own and should not be necessarily construed as485those representing the Hudson Institute.486    The last comprehensive foreign relations authorization487bill--reauthorization bill was enacted into law over 20 years488ago. At that moment Vladimir Putin had only been in office for4892 years. It would be three more before he gave voice to his490belief that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest491geopolitical catastrophe of the century. The invasion of492Georgia and Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea and Moscow's493systematic shadow war against the U.S. and its allies waited in494the future.495    In 2002 Russia was in fact the fourth largest recipient of496U.S. foreign aid, receiving nearly one-quarter of U.S. dollars497disbursed that Fiscal Year in the Europe and Eurasia region.498    The U.S. still reeling from the 9/11 attacks had499successfully convinced allies to deploy alongside us to500Afghanistan. The push to focus NATO on out-of-area operations501was underway, a decision that in retrospect has proven foolish502and from which Europe continues to recover.503    In 2002 we retained a unipolar moment. The year following504the Chinese navy counted 128 vessels, 100 less than the United505States. Today China is the world's largest navy with 370 ships506and submarines. The world was still 11 years away from the507launch of the Belt and Road Initiative, China's plan for508massive infrastructure investment in order to link Beijing509economically and politically to key global regions including510prominently in Eastern Europe.511    Today the world is a very different place. As Congress512undertakes this reauthorization effort the watchword I believe513should be at the forefront of your minds is competition,514principally against our great power adversaries: China and515Russia. Reorienting State Department resources for the current516era of great power competition is a necessary task which will517help steer U.S. policy toward accomplishing the most important518outcomes. Prying one great power adversary from the other is in519my view simply not possible. The shared Sino-Russian goal of520insulating their illegitimate regimes and forcibly bring the521end to the Western-led global order and by extension decreasing522U.S. power and influence has bonded Beijing and Moscow in a way523which U.S. diplomacy will the unable to overcome.524    Therefore, we simply need to compete. This being a525competition the U.S. cannot afford to lose, we must leverage526every tool in our arsenal to maximize our advantages. One of527those more potent tools we have is foreign aid. When thinking528through this assistance the driving factor should always be the529question does this advance U.S. national interests? There are530clear examples during the past few years of U.S. foreign aid531dollars funding projects which do not advance this interest532clearly. These, while glaring, are nonetheless minor components533in the overall foreign aid program.534    In the 20th Century Nicholas Spykman wrote, ``Who controls535the rimland, controls--rules Eurasia; who rules Eurasia536controls the destinies of the world.( Today this rimland, which537includes the majority of continental Europe, is hotly538contested. It is more important than ever that the U.S. remain539active in the region with the State Department focusing its540efforts on three key areas: Those were U.S. support is crucial,541those where the U.S. has as strong comparative advantage, and542finally geographic areas or point of interest where they are on543the cusp of magnified significance.544    The Balkans, for example, fulfill components of all three545of these focus areas. It is once again on the cusp of returning546to top geopolitical relevance, U.S. support remains crucial,547and there are components of needed support particularly in the548energy sphere where the U.S. has significant comparative549advantages.550    As the committee thinks through the framework of State551Department priorities, staffing, and oversight, I would also552suggest a greater focus on the Arctic, one--the region which is553clearly on the cusp of heightened significance in the decades554ahead.555    Finally, I would note the imperative to focus our efforts556on those nations where our adversaries are targeting their557intention, places like Moldova and Ukraine. Residing in the558unenviable gray zone these countries find themselves in559critical need of our support. Continued U.S. prosperity and560security lie in no small part upon ensuring stability in561Europe. As such, it is advantageous to remain engaged in this562theater.563    Foreign aid, if utilized prudently in service of a national564interest, can help bolster positive outcomes in the region,565block our adversaries from gaining undue influence, and provide566an excellent return on investment for U.S. policymakers.567    Thank you. With that, I look forward to answering your568questions and shedding any light I can on this subject matter569at hand this afternoon.570    (Prepared statement of Mr. Kochis follows:)571    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]572573    Mr. Self. Thank you, Mr. Kochis.574    I now recognize Ambassador O'Brien for his opening575statement.576577                   STATEMENT OF JAMES O'BRIEN578579    Mr. O'Brien. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ranking member. I580spent half my career in the private sector and half at the581State Department. And what I have noticed are a couple things:582One is that EUR is the gateway to most global issues. Any583caucus or group that addresses a global issue runs through our584relationships with our transatlantic partners. The P-3 at the585United Nations, NATO itself, all the significant organizations586including the informal ones like the G7 and others. So we have587to get that right. That is why EUR ends up doing silly588measurements, like much more than half the paper that goes to589the Secretary of State, because it is that relationship that is590the bedrock of all other functions in the State Department.591    The second thing is the State Department is always in a592State of transition. Every year a third of FSOs change over.593Politicals like us kind of come and go every couple of years.594Experts get hired. And even the civil service is facing an595enormous transition as Baby Boomers hit retirement age. So the596impact of that is that it is pretty easy to get your priorities597in place in the State Department without a lot of barking like598an angry dog about how the workforce is wrong. And I think what599it takes is clear leadership, a set of criteria, and an600approach that makes sense to the American people and that601workers can follow. And I feel, frankly, Mr. Chairman, we don't602have that now.603    Four points: One of them is--just goes to what is the role604of this process? So Secretary Rubio and Mr. Musk seem to have605settled their disagreement by agreeing that now 83 percent of606AID contracts can get canceled. And as always, the powerful607have settled their dispute on the backs of people without608voices. So these American farmers waiting on $2.6 billion of609payments by AID. And those have been disrupted. I don't know if610they will be paid.611    There are tens of millions of people depending on health612care and food that was delivered through AID projects and now613that they are not getting that they are either going to die or614they are going to migrate. This is the most effective border615security program we have got and we just took it to zero.616    Now the most significant element of this though is that617each of these projects came up of course to this committee and618three other committees for approval before the money went out619the door. And the Secretary of State has now said that this620committee was wrong on four out of five dollars in the foreign621assistance account. That is a pretty poor batting average. And622I think what we need to do is find some way in which the623administration can make clear what it intends to spend money on624so that this committee can reach agreement and then the625President can agree that he will take care to follow the626authorization law once it is enacted as opposed to asserting a627unilateral prerogative to impound the money.628    As you go through that I hope you ask three questions: One629of them is how does any restructuring advance the President's630objectives? Just to take one example, on arms control every631major agreement has been led by the U.S. and much of that632expertise sits in ADS. So if we just start firing people we633won't be able to accomplish the kind of reductions the634President says he wants in nuclear weapons.635    Second major question: Can we get others to spend more636money? We talk a lot about burden sharing in the military637capacity. There are others. In Ukraine the United States638spent--of the AID about 350 million Ukrainian agriculture. This639contributed to tens of billions of dollars that Ukraine spent640on its own military. It also led, that 350 million, to $2.2641billion in private sector investment by American companies. AID642also spent the money to help Ukraine get this grain out.643    If we want access to Ukrainian critical minerals, those644things are going to have to transit Poland, for the most part,645and maybe Romania, two countries we are kind of alienating646right now. So I don't understand how what we are doing allows647us to get others to contribute more.648    Third major question: Are we mortgaging the future? Our649kids are going to get rich or get poor based on developments in650artificial intelligence, biomedical sciences, and energy651efficiency. The Chinese are trying to write the global652standards in those areas. If we stand with our European653partners, along with Japan, Korea, and some others, we would be654more populous, more wealthy, and more experienced at writing655the global standards that our companies will sell into. If we656try to do this on our own, sending others off to do it on their657own, we fight China at a disadvantage. That is mortgaging the658future.659    Another area is the defense industry. The supplemental660appropriation for Ukraine spent more than $30 billion in U.S.661companies. Now the Europeans are about to spend tens, maybe662hundreds of billions, two-thirds of which they would spend with663U.S. companies, but they are going to direct it to their own664companies. Those are jobs that will not be in your districts665even if American companies get European contracts, mortgaging666the future.667    So I hope you can put those questions--and I hope the668administration shows up to provide clear answers because with669that it is easy to address the structural issues. Thank you,670Mr. Chairman.671    (Prepared statement of Mr. O'Brien follows:)672    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]673674    Mr. Self. Thank you, Ambassador O'Brien.675    I now recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.676    Dr. Poblete, does the current structure of the T family677reflect the current threat environment? Are we looking at the678future to adapt to any authority structure and programs that we679need to change to address emerging threats?680    Ms. Poblete. Small components of the T family are dedicated681to emerging security challenges, but its current construct is682primarily focused on nuclear arms control and agreements and683structures that no longer exist or are just a modicum of what684was needed at the time.685    In sum, yes, it does advance U.S. interests. It does align686with your America First priorities. But in order to adapt it687needs to become leaner and only the best people need to be688there. We need to eliminate redundancy. We need to--as I689specified in my oral remarks and my prepared remarks, we need690to avoid duplication. And that leads to waste of time, energy,691and resources. So we need to have clear lines of demarcation.692    In our conversation prior to this hearing you asked if it693would be possible to merge the International Security and694Nonproliferation Bureau, ISN, with ADS, statutorily695Verification and Compliance. My first instinct was we are able696to--and I provide specifics--we are able to distill both697bureaus down to perhaps five or six offices. We are able to698consolidate functions that are overlapping among the offices in699these bureaus.700    But I do caution going back to statutory mandate and the701history of the genesis of the Verification and Compliance702Bureau and T of the merging of negotiations, assistance, funds703with verification and compliance. When I worked on the704committee with the former chairman Ross Slatenen, Ranking705Member Keating was very supportive of modifying the Atomic706Energy Act and the pattern and the method in which we approve707one to three agreements, nuclear cooperation agreements. I708propose that that is valuable for ISN, but verification and709compliance must be integrated into the verification and710compliance of nuclear cooperation agreements as well and ensure711that there is accountability if there is cheating even on those712civilian nuclear cooperation agreements because they inform713also all our efforts with respect to deterrence, defense,714collaboration, partnerships and the like.715    Mr. Self. Okay. Thank you.716    Dr. O'Brien, USAID, what does that stand for?717    Mr. O'Brien. Agency for International Development.718    Mr. Self. Ah, thought so. Agency for International719Development. You gave us two examples of USAID providing money720for Americans.721    Mr. O'Brien. Yes.722    Mr. Self. I think that is one of the things that this723committee will try to get to, although USAID is not in our724portfolio. But I needed to address that. So, Mr.----725    Mr. O'Brien. I am sorry, I don't understand this tension,726Mr. Chairman.727    Mr. Self. The tension is it is for international728development. You----729    Mr. O'Brien. Right. By Americans. In this case. I mean,730people need food. We can buy the food on the market. We can buy731it from Americans.732    Mr. Self. No, it is international development. We need to733correct the USAID. I think Senator--now Secretary of State734Rubio intends to do that.735    Now, Mr. Kochis, I have less than a minute. The Balkans are736vital to this committee. I think they are a potential flash737point. And you mentioned energy and the Russian influence of738course in Serbia. Can you elaborate on your view of how we739become an energy partner? And you have got 30 seconds.740    Mr. Kochis. Well, I completely agree. I think not just741Russian, but also Chinese investment in energy in the Balkans742has expanded quite significantly I think in two ways: One of743course is U.S. natural gas, trying to help those nations in744that region buildup their interconnections. And I think the745other is nuclear. So helping to leverage our expertise in the746nuclear sphere I think will improve the energy picture there747also some of the air quality issues and the sort of life issues748that they have in the region which are impacted by the use of--749heavy use of coal.750    Mr. Self. Thank you. I yield.751    I now recognize Ranking Member Keating for 5 minutes.752    Mr. Keating. Thank you. You know I think in Ukraine that--753myself I understand Putin's rhetoric and I believe--some belief754that what he envisions is a reconstitution of the old Soviet755Union. But I think his real concern in Ukraine has been right756next door to him will be a country rich with young, educated,757technologically expert young people that will become758entrepreneurs. I think he is worried that the bread basket of759the world is right next door, and that economic influence.760    I know he is concerned about the potential for Ukraine's761own military industrial development itself. And to have that762prospering country and a democracy right next door while the763Russian economy continues to go in the tank and he has driven764it further with his illegal war in Ukraine serves as a contrast765that would create a great domestic political problem for766himself, let along cutting out the oligarchs that are a part of767his network of self-wealth that many people say makes him the768wealthiest person in the world. It is a mafia-like crime769syndicate, as has been discussed. So it is that comparison.770    Ambassador O'Brien, I traveled with you to Ukraine. When I771was there I met with the U.S.-Ukrainian--American-Ukrainian772Chamber of Commerce. And I was just struck by the businesses,773the U.S. businesses that are there, how they made it through774this war, continued and how they wanted to grow beyond this.775They realized all the things I just said about Ukraine being776the powerhouse really of Europe down the road and how that not777only helps our own business interests here at home, but also778strengthens our security here at home. So investing in779international development is indeed investing in our own780priorities here in the United States.781    Can you talk a little bit more about how the U.S. interests782make America safer, more prosperous? And also this idea that783people have; and I understand if this is all they know, that,784oh, we are giving money to other countries when we could use785the money back here at home. It is my belief that investing786over there is--has a multiplying effect in terms of investing787at home. Could you talk about that?788    Ms. Poblete. You answer first and then----789    Mr. Keating. No, no. No, Ambassador, because it is about790the----791    Mr. O'Brien. Okay.792    Mr. Keating [continuing]. because we traveled there and I793met with those people.794    Mr. O'Brien. Yes, I was in Ukraine eight times during the795war. I don't have an exact multiply--multiple for how much U.S.796assistance comes back to help us, but I know for example that797we had a large program to improve the environment for small and798medium businesses with a real focus on American companies. They799were already beginning to invest substantially in the Ukrainian800defense industrial base and they were beginning to invest in EU801countries where inputs would come from Ukraine and then be802exported elsewhere in the world. Those are direct benefits to803our economy.804    They also help us again--as Mr. Kochis and I both805emphasized, the real struggle ahead is with China which hasn't806featured much in the last 5 weeks. And I think we are a lot807better off if we have that as our focus and we build our base808in just the way you all do when you run. You get your base809together. And our base sits with our European partners, Japan,810Korea, and some others. With that we are a billion to a811billion-and-a-half people.812    For Ukraine to inject another 35 million young, well-813educated people with enormous resources into our base helps us814with the real struggle that is ahead, and that is part of what815is at stake here.816    Mr. Keating. I really appreciate the comments of our817witnesses, too, highlighting other areas where this would be818important, too, like the Balkans, like the Arctic. These are819areas where it is critical. And we are in competition with820China in those. And it is this investment in Ukraine that is821going to strengthen that. Our moving away from that does just822the opposite.823    So whether it is the Balkans, whether it is up north,824whether it is these areas of influence, whether it is--our825overall strategy with China has been one of deterrence. That is826our strategy. This is weakened as well. So when you look at827this front line and you look at that investment, I don't know828how you can't help but understand. And it is up to us as829representatives of the people to better communicate to people830in our districts and across our country that this is indeed the831America First policy. I yield back.832    Mr. Self. I now recognize the representative from Ohio, Mr.833Davidson, for 5 minutes.834    Mr. Davidson. I thank the gentleman and I thank your835witnesses. I appreciate you being here today to answer836questions.837    Mr. O'Brien, you spent some time with the Biden838Administration. What does the phrase--are you familiar with the839phrase as much as it takes, as long as it takes?840    Mr. O'Brien. Yes.841    Mr. Davidson. So you are familiar with it. What does that842phrase mean? As much as it takes. We are clear on that. Just843keep cutting the checks. As long as it takes to do what?844    Mr. O'Brien. Yes.845    Mr. Davidson. They never really defined the mission. What846is the mission as you see it?847    Mr. O'Brien. Well, no, I think we did, and I think it goes848to some of the difficulties I have with the decisions that849    [inaudible.]850    Mr. Davidson. No, you didn't. And the reality is between--851--852    Mr. O'Brien. I don't think you are right there.853    Mr. Davidson. Well, let me elaborate since it is my time.854Victoria Nuland said that it was regime change in Russia855including war crime tribunals for Vladimir Putin?856    Mr. O'Brien. When did she say that?857    Mr. Davidson. I don't have the date. I will be glad to858supply it for you.859    Mr. O'Brien.860    [Inaudible.]861    Mr. Davidson. This is my job to question you.862    Mr. O'Brien. Yes. Okay.863    Mr. Davidson. So what was it exactly that you believed that864the administration committed to do in Ukraine?865    Mr. O'Brien. Yes. So one----866    Mr. Davidson. Besides spend money.867    Mr. O'Brien. Okay. Sorry. My turn. What we were working868toward during my time as Assistant Secretary was to build a869viable cease-fire. Much of that work was spent with the870Ukrainians so they were prepared to do that. The Russians were871unwilling to make a cease-fire on any terms that would be872sustainable.873    Mr. Davidson. Okay. So the874    [inaudible]----875    Mr. O'Brien.876    [Inaudible.]877    Mr. Davidson. You wanted to secure peace. And that is good878because then you should be euphoric that President Trump has879come in and said the United States is America is very happy to880help you secure peace. But----881    Mr. O'Brien. I agree882    [inaudible.]883    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. there is not a lot of happiness884in the world from the Biden Administration. It is, oh, how dare885you not keep cutting the checks. And that generally is the886theme within the State Department as they will share just887enough information to get Congress to shut up and cut the888checks. Right?889    Mr. O'Brien. I think----890    Mr. Davidson. I am not having a discussion with you,891please. I don't plan to----892    Mr. O'Brien. Okay.893    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. talk to you again.894    Mr. O'Brien. That was never my attitude.895    Mr. Davidson.896    [Inaudible] mic off. I am not talking to you anymore.897    Mr. O'Brien. Yes.898    Ms. Davidson. All right. So this is the reality of what has899been going on for a long time. People come to Congress and say900just cut the checks. And frankly, what you see out of the901European Union, we couldn't get them to cut the checks for a902long time. Some of the smaller countries did contribute. A lot903of countries contributed a little more, but your big countries904like Germany continued to not meet their obligations under905NATO. They gave statements about meeting their obligations, but906they didn't meet their obligations to NATO. And now that Donald907Trump has said, all right. Fine. You will find out. You are not908ready for peace? Go ahead. Suddenly the Europeans have found909the resolve to spend money.910    I just want to share a quote from Irving Kristol, a911godfather of the neo-conservative movement. He said in 1983--912well before the end of the cold war he said, quote, ``If we913have learned anything from the NATO experience of the last 30914years(--that was in 1983--``it is the rediscovery of an old915truth: dependency corrupts, and absolute dependency corrupts916absolutely.( The culture of entitlement and dependence on917American money has corrupted many of our allies and it is nice918to see it changing.919    When we look at our own approach though we have had a hard920time saying what is in it for America? Why should America serve921as the de facto European defense force and then continue to be922treated with contempt for it? Victoria Nuland had her own923problems, but when we look at the acting Ambassador there, we924should have some other concerns.925    So, Ms. Poblete, you are familiar with some of the926challenges from your time in the Leg. Branch. Does it resonate927with you that we are kept in the dark in a lot of things just928so we cut the checks?929    Ms. Poblete. Absolutely. And unfortunately it became--it930was crystallized during my time at the Department of State just931to what great lengths some individuals go to to hide932information from the Congress.933    But to your point, Congressman Davidson, and the discussion934of foreign aid, foreign aid needs to have clearly defined goals935and objectives. With respect to Ukraine that never really936occurred. When Senator Rand Paul sought a GAO report to937ascertain how the funding had been used, who were the end938users, was it used for the intended purposes that the Congress939had appropriated and authorized it for, he was called an agent940of Putin.941    Mr. Davidson. Yes, that is----942    Ms. Poblete. He was called----943    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. the standard attack because if944you don't----945    Ms. Poblete. Exactly.946    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. just cut the checks, you are an947enemy of the State, the deep State maybe. And that is where we948look at Bridget Brink. She has actually worked to get rid of949the prosecutor that was going to look in Ukraine--into Hunter950Biden, who was going to look into things that we should have an951interest in, that we should have accountability. Because what952is lacking when you are kept in the dark is accountability and953that is exactly what the Biden Administration worked to avoid954on every front.955    Ms. Poblete. And if I may, sir, if I could share with all956the members of this committee----957    Mr. Self. The gentleman's time is up.958    I now recognize the representative from Rhode Island, Mr.959Amo.960    Mr. Amo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Focusing on some things961that matter, let's talk about President Trump and his direction962to Elon Musk to use DOGE to take a chain saw to our government.963This has resulted in thousands of Federal employees being964fired. These sweeping layoffs have been willful and malicious.965Adding to the chaos and confusion laid-off workers have had966their terminations rescinded once Elon realized the dangerous967consequences of his actions. So it is clear that DOGE has no968idea how our government works, yet that hasn't stopped them969from forging ahead on their rampage. I underscore rampage.970    Every agency has been directed to submit a report on plans971to further reduce their workforce by this Thursday. Thankfully972the State Department hasn't had the mass layoffs of other973agencies like USAID, apparently a point of contention between974Elon and Secretary Rubio. However, there is a list of about 700975civil servants who could be fired circulating at the agency.976And in the last 2 months alone another 700 employees have977resigned, nearly as many as typically resign in an entire year.978So make no mistake, these proposed layoffs and forced979resignations of dedicated public servants threaten our national980security.981    That brings me to two subjects of today's hearing: The982Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation and the983Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability, aka, the984experts who work to prevent nuclear war and international arms985trafficking. And I hope that everybody agrees that we would be986better off by having long-serving, experienced civil servants987working at these bureaus. They leverage their institutional988knowledge to keep us safe.989    Look, after all, we are talking about nuclear arms control990agreements, monitoring chemical weapons, protecting critical991American innovation, and coordinating global cooperation to992prevent terrorists from accessing sensitive technology. This993doesn't sound like entry-level work to me. It sounds like it994requires a deep understanding of these technologies and our995international agreements built on years of experience.996    Ambassador O'Brien, briefly can you tell me a bit how997firing or forcing the resignation of staff with these bureaus998would harm our national security and our ability to prevent bad999actors from accessing nuclear weapons and other advanced1000technologies?1001    Mr. O'Brien. Sure. I think there are a couple of things. So1002one is the chairman asked about new technologies. So certainly1003in the ISN Bureau--I worked with them a lot on restricting1004access of bad actors to new technologies--the set of expertise1005that is available there on supply chains and the financing of1006trade in what items that can lead to dangerous weapons is1007second to none and enables us to keep ourselves secure. And I1008saw again and again how we were able to restrict Russian,1009Iranian, and North Korean access to these items because of the1010expertise in that bureau.1011    A recent thing that we were just able to sort of push over1012the line in my last couple of months there was the arrival of1013this shadow fleet, a group of unregulated tankers that export1014Venezuelan, Iranian, and Russian oil, competing unfairly with1015American producers and avoiding sanctions. We were finally able1016largely because of the expertise of people in that bureau and1017in the UR to identify the kind of key nodes where those ships1018intersect with the global commerce and were able to get the key1019states that have ability to access them either in ports in1020straits to shut it done.1021    More broadly here it brings other countries along. So ISN1022in particular, but also ADS work with all of the other1023countries that have an interest in the more sophisticated parts1024of the supply chains for weapons, but also implementation of1025any kind of effective cease-fire arrangement. All that1026expertise sits there.1027    Now, is it all as up to date as we would want? Again, there1028is enormous turnover in these places and I think somebody needs1029to really dig in and see who works there now. ADS hired during1030the time I was assistant secretary a number of very experienced1031people in working on issues like AI, crypto, other ways in1032which bad actors try to come at our security. And I think if1033somebody takes the time to dig in you may find that you don't1034need sort of broad structural changes, but you can actually1035just give clear direction. And that is what we are lacking1036right now.1037    Mr. Amo. Yes, thank you, Ambassador. Quickly before my time1038expires, President Trump isn't just weakening our national1039security by firing Federal employees. He is detonating our1040relationships around the world. By freezing foreign assistance1041we are--our credibility with countries is being jeopardized. I1042look at countries like Armenia that has been moving closely to1043strengthening ties with the United States.1044    So as I wrap up here, the message that we are sending is1045one that is detrimental to our commitment to countries like1046Armenia who need us to be committed in this relationship as we1047move further. I yield back.1048    Mr. Self. I now recognize the representative from1049California, Ms. Kim.1050    Ms. Kim. Thank you, Chairman Self and Ranking Member1051Keating for holding today's hearing.1052    I want to thank the witnesses for joining us today. Good to1053see you.1054    Good to see, Dr. Poblete. It has been a while. Increasing1055stability, preventing conflict, and preserving and advancing1056effective arm control and disarmament measures are the core of1057ADS' mission. And we have repeatedly seen Russia reject U.S.1058proposals for talks concerning an arms control framework after1059the expiration of START. Additionally, I am deeply concerned1060about the PRC's accelerated nuclear weapons programs amidst its1061escalating rhetoric.1062    So can you talk to us about what ways can ADS be better1063positioned to work bilaterally and multilaterally to pursue1064effective nuclear risk reduction dialog?1065    Ms. Poblete. Thank you. It is great to see you. The1066Congressman has left, but if I could start by making a couple1067of points: No. 1, with respect to DOGE, how many members of1068this committee would not have loved to have had a tool similar1069to that uncovering, but the ultimate decisionmakers are the1070Secretary of State confirmed by the Senate, comes from the1071Congress. So it is just a tool. It is not conducting a rampage.1072    President Trump himself has recognized the value of experts1073in the ISN and ADC Bureau, not specifically but talking about1074how there are many good people. We want to retain the best of1075the best. But that does not mean that these two bureaus require1076over 300 individuals to keep the very best, the most1077knowledgeable experts to engage in negotiations of arms1078control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements and1079treaties.1080    Ms. Kim. So not to be redundant, but is there a certain1081line of technical or scientific expertise that would be--that1082would prove beneficial if added to ADS?1083    Ms. Poblete. We have the current technical, military,1084intel, and scientific expertise. Ironically--and that is part1085of my recommendations. Ironically, these bureaus are1086overwhelmed by policy experts, by messaging experts. So if we1087were to reduce the personnel and reduce the scope to those who1088have the hands-on expertise overseen by policy and expert1089negotiators, that would go a long way to be more efficient and1090more successful in our arms control, nonproliferation, and1091disarmament negations.1092    Ms. Kim. Thank you. And you also mention in your testimony1093that the--about the Eurocentrism and Euro dominance stemming1094from cold war dynamics, arms treaties, and agreements has1095undermined some T family responsibilities relating to1096verification and compliance. So what can be done to ensure this1097trend does not continue?1098    Ms. Poblete. Again, the T family and the undersecretary1099needs to be treated equally to her P counterpart, for example.1100And statute must be the overarching guide, which means1101according to the congressional Report--not just a statute, but1102congressional intent made it clear that no regional bureau was1103to supersede determinations made by the Verification and1104Compliance Bureau when it came to those functions.1105    And further, with respect to the reference to sanctions and1106Treasury, that intelligence is actually gathered primarily by1107the Department of Treasury. And all bureaus at the Department1108of State are engaged in those determinations to impose1109sanctions.1110    But with respect to the Euro dominance and Eurocentrism, if1111we want to counter China as we did in the 4th administration1112and as we want to do again now, yes, a lot goes through Europe1113just because historically that is the case, but we cannot1114overly focus on just Europe. To counter China we must empower1115every regional bureau and every bureau of the Department of1116State using all elements of U.S. power, not just those going1117through Europe.1118    Ms. Kim. Chairman, I have a few more questions, but I am1119running out of time. Do I have----1120    Mr. Self. We will have a second round.1121    Ms. Kim. Thank you.1122    Mr. Self. I now recognize the representative from Nevada,1123Madam Titus.1124    Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well like some of my1125colleagues, I am appalled by Trump's actions to freeze all of1126U.S. foreign policy--foreign aid, rather, abandoning the USAID1127working professionals around the country and their families,1128and dismantling the Federal workforce generally.1129    These steps have led to unnecessary deaths for those people1130who count on programs that we have been involved with and1131health care, the financial hardship and uncertainty for our1132foreign service officers, and diminished U.S. credibility. I1133have just met with some representatives from Europe earlier1134today and they are kind of appalled. They don't really know how1135to react to having someone who has been their friend now not1136only be a friend, but possibly be an enemy.1137    I am particularly concerned about the rolling back of1138democracy programs that existed with USAID. We were there to1139support countries where there were new democracies that were1140building and establish democracies that were backsliding. We1141built vibrant civil service--I mean civil society communities,1142we backed up the free press, we not only were supporting our1143own values, but we were backing up China and Russia. And if we1144are not there, they are going to step in to fill the void.1145    The Republicans love to do a list of the things that USAID1146does that they hate, so I would like to do a list of some of1147the pro-democracy programs that have been eliminated or frozen.1148    Program to support Belarus Democratic leaders in exile,1149advancing Belarus democracy. Program funding election1150monitoring in Kosovo, advancing digital democracy in Serbia,1151promoting the development of independent professional media in1152Moldova, fostering more responsive governance in Armenia,1153boosting civil society engagement in Georgia, supporting1154political pluralism in Bosnia-Herzegovina. These are the kind1155of programs that are our soft power that we not only further1156the values that we have, but it also helps our national1157security. And if we don't believe that, the minute these were1158frozen you saw Bruno Rodriguez praising this, Medvedev saying,1159oh, this is great, applause around the world for us being gone1160so they could step in. So that is what I would like for us to1161address.1162    I would ask you, Mr. O'Brien, looking at the Western1163Balkans, there have been a lot of programs there that have been1164terminated, and not just those that were focused on democracy1165like I mentioned, but some things like promoting energy1166security, combatting corruption, strengthening critical1167infrastructure. Could you talk a little bit about how Russia1168will see it as an advantage if we are not there with those1169programs?1170    Mr. O'Brien. Yes, it already does. So Russia supplies a1171critical amount of gas, less and less to Serbia and onto Bosnia1172and elsewhere. The Serbs have announced they would like to get1173to zero, but for that to happen they need American natural gas1174to become available. That will come either through a pipeline1175that runs from basically Greece through North Macedonia, or it1176would come through a pipeline that runs through Croatia and1177across Bosnia.1178    Now that pipeline is stuck because of corruption which is1179tied to two local leaders, one of whom actively presents1180himself as the local affiliate of the administration and is1181actively trying to get out from under sanctions because of his1182corruption.1183    So we are now eliminating the programs that will clear the1184way for America to become a reliable energy supplier and free1185these countries from Russian influence. I have trouble seeing1186that as an America First agenda.1187    Ms. Titus. I completely agree. Well how about Moldova,1188things that are happening in Moldova? Would you address that?1189    Mr. O'Brien. Yes. So, Moldova, like a lot of countries from1190Central Asia all the way across to the Black Sea--these1191countries want much less Russia. They see this as their chance1192to get out from under. And in Moldova there is a small enclave1193that Russia used to run guns and money laundering operations1194out around the world. That has become incredibly weakened as a1195result of the last few years of sanctions. Russia now--facing1196elections this fall in Moldova Russia has gone on a massive1197spree of disinformation which also affects Romania because of1198the language, vote buying, and efforts to influence the1199Moldovan elections by using energy, which they used to supply.1200    So we were building networks to get into Ukraine and also1201providing the ability for Moldova to generate its own power,1202but also run power in from Europe. Much of that is gone now.1203And we are going to leave Moldova at the behest of Russia,1204which will reinState its gun-running, thug-running operation1205again.1206    Ms. Titus. Again, not in our best interest. Thank you. I1207yield back.1208    Mr. Self. I now recognize the representative from Delaware,1209Mr. McBride.1210    Ms. McBride. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ranking Member1211Keating, also wonderful----1212    Mr. Keating. Mr. Chairman?1213    Ms. McBride. I am sorry----1214    Mr. Keating. Could you repeat your introduction again,1215please?1216    Mr. Self. Yes, it is a--we have set the standard on the1217floor of the House and I am simply----1218    Mr. Keating. What is that standard, Mr. Chairman?1219    Mr. Self. The standard----1220    Ms. Keating. Will you repeat what you just said----1221    Mr. Self. I----1222    Mr. Keating [continuing]. when you introduced a duly1223elected representative from the United States of America,1224please?1225    Mr. Self. I will. The Representative from Delaware, Mr.1226McBride.1227    Mr. Keating. Mr. Chairman, you are out of order. Mr.1228Chairman, have you no decency? I mean I have come to know you a1229little bit, but this is not decent.1230    Mr. Self. We will continue this hearing----1231    Mr. Keating. You will not continue it with me unless you1232introduce a duly elected representative the right way.1233    Mr. Self. This hearing is adjourned.1234    [Whereupon, at 3:15 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]12351236                                APPENDIX12371238                              ----------12391240               Material Submitted for the Hearing Record12411242[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]12431244                                 [all]