tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN May 13, 2016 3:00pm-5:01pm EDT
information which a warrant is required. what i don't understand is the idiosyncratic thinking. what i'm talking about is intelligence acquisition on the international level that happens over time in local police work. very briefly. i know we don't have much time. a local cop or detective goes and says i think something bad may happen. let me kick the tires in the neighborhood. let me ask you who heard what. strange people driving around. maybe lots of money passing hands. maybe this. maybe that. you can assemble that information. you don't need probable cause for that. that's not a warrant. you're talking to people. you're looking at things in the public domain. fundamentally, ladies and gentlemen, all we're talking about, nadine and i, is doing the same type thing in a different sphere for electronic surveillance and that's it. and why is it acceptable to go in the local bar and say, you know, have you seen anything strange happen. you heard people talking about robbing a warehouse. who were they? did you recognize them?
that's all kosher. but doing the same type of data development through surveillance -- electronic surveillance and you can kick the tire on specific people you identify is somehow prohibited by the fourth amendment. it cannot be. >> well, i disagree with most of the details that david laid out, but i'm going to try to go to the core of your question. your name was edward, right? which is why do so many conservatives depart from the text of the constitution and the original intent and so many liberals do likewise depending on what the particular issue is, rather than consistently trying to honor both the text and the original meaning or understanding of the constitution. and i have some comfort to offer you, which is that on a number of very important recent privacy cases in the united states
supreme court, before justice scalia died, when the court had nine contentious individuals who would often split 5-4 and being even more fragmented, we've had a number of recent decisions in which all nine of them came down very strongly in favor of privacy and strongly enforcing fourth amendment guarantees. the most recent example being a case called the riley case from 2014 involving cell phone searches. and strikingly all nine of them held that it was unconstitutional to extend to the digital world a judge-made exception to the fourth amendment that had been made for seizure, searches and seizures, pursuant to an arrest when basically the law had been that fourth amendment standards aside if somebody's arrested, you can seize everything that that
person has on his or her body. and the court said, no, we are not going to extend that exception to cell phones, given the wealth of private information that's available on those phones. and i thought it was really remarkable that all of them, from the most liberal to the most conservative, came down to really respecting the words and meaning of the fourth amendment. i'm going to read you just one line that they agreed on. we cannot deny that our decision will have an impact on the ability of law enforcement to combat crime. cell phones can provide valuable, incriminating information about dangerous k m crimin criminals. privacy comes at a cost, but privacy is protected by the fourth amendment. so, take comfort. >> and i just add one thing very briefly. the irony here is -- i don't disagree with this decision. and i understand what they were doing.
let me assure you that once government gets somebody in custody, local police most likely, it's a fool's errand to get a warrant. in fact, i dealt with a number of cases where we're actually fighting to suppress a warrant. getting a warrant is so easy peasy as many would say it's not funny. the notion that there's some great comfort to obtaining a warrant is just not true. the problem, again, arises not in the context of somebody's been taken into custody and, okay, so you're not going to automatically on your own go search for his or her cell phone. you're going to go get a warrant from a magistrate, fine. two hours, three hours tops. it's not knowing out of the millions of people out there which ones deserve closer scrutiny by law enforcement. that is at the heart of counterterrorism. okay? it is nothing to do with law enforcement scenarios.
law enforcement we can afford to be far more punctilious, go way beyond fourth amendment -- which by the way, again, very lenient. i'm all in favor of tougher standards for warrants and subjecting individuals who submit warrant applications, the little frisky, to personal liability to state and federal officials. all in favor of it. it's a good thing even if some bad criminals go. it ain't the same in the context of counterterrorism because the only way you can get at the people, unless you want to wait until they strike or you get lucky because you run into somebody before they pull out a gun and blow themselves, the only way to do it which one out of the millions -- hundreds of millions of people need to be looked at more closely. there's no other answer. now, i would ask nadine, i know we don't have time, i keep hearing, well, i'll balance it differently. how would you do that? how would you know who needs to
be investigated? you don't. you don't. unless you do that kind of surveillance. >> well, let me just point to a long history that has been called the golden age of surveillance. if you ask anybody now in law enforcement or counterintelligence are they better off now than they've been in the past. they would say yes, they have an infinite amount of information about us. and have been successful in foiling many counterterrorism plots, not to mention other law enforcement problems, through the use of the techniques that are completely consistent with the fourth amendment. indeed, right after 9/11 i remember former fbi director william webster was -- who was opposing the extended government surveillance power under the patriot act, even before we realized that the government would in secret extend that power even further beyond the
plain language of the provision, he said, look, you know, when i was fbi director, he was also cia director, we were able to foil and he listed the number of plots through using good investigative techniques. we did not need to jump over, paraphrasing him very closely, we did not need to jump all over people's privacy. in fact, the 9/11 -- the bipartisan 9/11 commission which looked in to what caused the terrible tragedy on 9/11, what steps could be used to prevent another such tragedy, that kind of analysis was not done before the patriot act and this expansive surveillance power was rammed through with almost no debate, almost no hearings. but after the fact they looked in to it, and guess what, that bipartisan commission did not say we need more surveillance power. no. they flagged a problem that i thought, david, you indicated
you might agree with, which is not that we can't gather the information but we don't have the capability, we're not investing sufficient human and other resources in to analyzing this huge mass of data that we already do have. so, yes, we can have effective protection against terrorism. nobody wants to on be vulnerable to terrorism, certainly not me. >> respect, this is not true of the 9/11 commission report, talked to great length about the so-called wall which is one specific manifestation of the restrictions, data sharing, that show rooted in privacy. nadine, i respect you greatly, but can you in 30 seconds say how you would find someone like mr. farouk. how would you find another mr. farouk, unless you look at the communication streams. not content. unless you look at my electronic footprints in the snow to see
what are the telltale signs bringing the best cognitive analytics possible and if you massage the data you can come up with enough parameters that show you a deviation above the baseline. it doesn't mean the person is a terrorism, but it's worth investigating. how would you do it? >> you would do it as the director of national intelligence has said with individualized suspicion. >> how would you know? >> and data experts have said that the data mining that you are advocating, david, is junk science, that it is not an effective way. >> how would you know about the suggesti suspicious, because a lot of the people lie low until they freaking attack, what individualized suspicion you going to have. will he go into a bar and start bragging that he's going to kill people. some will, some won't. how will you get the individualized suspicion in the modern world? how? >> well, i could stay here all day.
president obama will host leaders from norway, sweden, finland, denmark, and iceland as part of a nordic leaders summit. tonight the president is hosting a state dinner with coverage of the arrivals at the white house starting live at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. this sunday night on "q & a" a historian and his book "spain in our hearts" on the american involvement in the spanish civil war in the late 1930s. >> the coup attempt happened in spain when all over the country right-wing army officers tried to seize power and in parts of the country succeeded in seizing power in 1936. it sent a shock wave of alarm throughout the world. because here was a major country in europe, the right-wing military quickly backed by hitler and mussolini, who sent arms, airplanes, pilots, tanks,
tank drivers and mussolini eventually sent 80,000 ground troops. here was the spanish right making a grab for power, and people all over the world felt it ought to be resisted, if not here, where. otherwise, we're next. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c. fan's "q & a." next counterterrorism efforts in sub-saharan africa. officials from the state department, u.s. agency for international development, the united nations development program and national democratic institute testified before the senate foreign relations committee. >> call the senate foreign relations committee to order. we thank our witnesses for being here. and i look forward to your testimony. as much of the world concentrates on the isis threat and instability in the middle east, the committee takes this opportunity to consider efforts by the united states and other partners to counter extremism in the sub-saharan africa area.
long-term development has been the norm across much of africa, including here -- i tell you what. ben, even with large letters, i can't see anymore. including here in our committee with the recent signing of the power africa legislation which we're all very proud of. and appreciate the way the administration has led on that effort also. that we hope will help bring investment to the -- to a key sector for economic growth and opportunity. whereas in the middle east, we have been reacting to abhorrent state and terrorist violence and the uprooting of millions of people, in africa we've had the opportunity of years of influence through diplomacy and development and partnerships to improve outcomes. however, violent extremism is not a new phenomenon in africa. three subregions have exploded with terrorist elements, some decades old. al shabaab and its predecessors have long troubled somalia and its neighbors in east africa.
including attacks on american embassies in 1998. al qaeda and the islamic maghreb have evolved since 9/11 into a vicious regional threat across the sahel and beyond. and they have fought the algerian government since 1991. boca haram, which was -- which has declared allegiance to isis will stop at nothing to carry out its grotesque attacks against civilians and communities across nigeria and the lake chad basin. all three of these conflicts have drawn international intervention and resources because the terrorists elements involved are seen as aspiring to the kind of international terrorism perpetrated by al qaeda and isis. and some are beginning to show increased sophistication and attacks. beyond these three conflict and terrorist-ridden regions are several complex crises that breed on instability, brought on my many factors. the most egregious of which
appears to be the complete lack of government responsibility for its citizens through corruption and greed rather than any lack of resources. this includes mos s most recent south sudan and the central african republic and, of course, the decades-long atrocities in the democratic republic of congo, all three of which have cost billions of dollars to mitigate through massive peacekeeping operations. while the world seeks ways to address the direct threat of emergent terrorist groups interaction mode, we have had a chance, and still do, to improve the prospects for many countries in africa by leveraging long-term relationships and development. i'm also concerned that there are efforts to gain traction and destabilizing other countries we consider relatively stable now. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. the lessons that they have drawn from their direct engagement in these regions and i hope to
better understand what the underlying factors are that contribute to the terrorist threat in the region and what u.s. efforts have been made to build a better response across the whole of government and with partners in the international community. with that, i'll turn to our distinguished ranking member, ben cardin. >> well, chairman corker, thank you very much for convening this hearing on terrorism instability in subsahara africa. i agree with your assessments. the amount of violence in this region escalating is of major concern, and requires the attention of this committee. of the united states senate and the american people. i also agree with you that there are multiple reasons for the instability and crisis in this region, but that there's a common theme of poor governance. and that's an issue that provides a vacuum, and that vacuum is usually filled with instability and recruitment of
extremists. so, i very much agree with you, this is an area of growing concern in regards to the amount of violence that is taking place and one that requires us to put a focus on the governance structures in the countries of sub-sahara africa. it's true, it's from west africa to the lake chad basin to east africa, and west africa the circumstances in mali. we find the marginalization of ethnic groups that have become home for at least five active terrorist groups, breeding ground for terrorist recruitment. the u.n. mission in mali is the most deadliest peacekeeping mission that we have anywhere. that is -- should be a sign that things need to change in regards to mali. we have the parties coming forward to -- for a peace
agreement, well, we need to see immediate attention to that and see whether, in fact, that peace agreement can be implemented. in the lake chad basin, in nigeria is of particular concern. boca haram is linked, which is pledged its allegiance to isis. we'll see, in fact, how that alliance, in fact, takes place or not, but we do know it is extremely deadly. the number of deaths have escalated dramatically. 15,000 since 2009. 2.4 million displaced people. 5.6 million in need of food. and those numbers are shocking in their size, but i think the world became engaged in this when 200 schoolgirls were kidnapped, and yet their fate today is still not known. in east africa, in somalia, we have to pay careful attention.
we know that. and in all of these regions there's a common denominator of look of good governance. this year in somalia, it's set to be a critical one for the consolidation of the somali state. a constitutional referendum and completion of the federal system are supposed to occur. absent the establishment of a fully functioning, transparent, inclusive government it will be difficult, if not impossible, to eliminate the threat posed by al shabaab. while the threats have been clearly identified, what is not is evident is whether the united states is consistently applying a comprehensive approach to countering violent extreme in africa, one which adequately addressed key drivers of radicalization such as political and economic marginalization, corruption, poor governance and whether steps have been taken to build the type of capacity in the african countries that counter the violent extreme activities. i hope today's hearing will help us all better understand the package of programs and
activities we are bringing to bear to combat terrorism and violent extremism in africa and what, if any, efforts the administration is making to fully integrate principles of democracy, anti-corruption and good governance into our approach. security assistance alone will not win the battle. mr. chairman, let me quote from deputy secretary of state tony blinken who recently said in regards to the counter violent extremism is and he quotes a fight over time that will be won in the classrooms in the house of worship in oshl media in community centers at sites of cultural heritage on the sports fields and within the homes of the people in every corner of the planet, end quote. given how significantly underfunded democracy in governance programs in africa have been over the past several years, i don't see how we can be reaching that threat where it is. but there are two steps we can take right away to do so. first is a point i've been making to the administration for nearly a year. it is critical that we increase
investment in democracy and government such as are commensurate with our security assistance funding. in fy-'15 the last year which figures are available, we allocated approximately $1 billion for security assistance and only $170 million for democracy in governance. i hope that you have -- i hope as you discuss allocations for fy-'16 with the appropriators you will indicate you will meet the $312 million democracy in governance in africa called in the omnibus report language, and i hope we have a chance to talk about that. secondly the united states must signal to our partners that our support does not come at the expense for respect of democracy and human rights. i fear we have sent the wrong signal to the government of ethiopia about our priorities in this area by failing to support human rights and democracy activities in that country. to cite just one example, it is critical that we take the prime minister up on his offer from last july to work with us on
improving democracy in ethiopia. in addition we should be ensuring that our security assistance includes support for military and civilian institutions that support accountability for counterterrorism partner countries with weak democracy and human rights records. so, mr. chairman, i hope during the course of this hearing we'll hear from our administration officials exactly what is our coordinated strategy. yes, we want to fight extreme him. we want to do that. we have to have the mirlttary security assistance. but if you don't have in place the type of government that secures the population, there will be instability and a void in which extremists will capitalize on. >> thank you very much for the comments. i want to introduce our witnesses. if you would speak in the order that you are introduced, i would appreciate it. first is linynda greenfield.
the second is linda etim. assistant administrator for africa at usaid. thank you for being here. our third witness is justin siberell. no? come on. need a little help here. siberell, acting coord natuinaor counterterrorism. if you could summarize your comments for five minutes that would be great. without objection your written testimony will be entered into the record. so, thank you. >> mr. chairman, ranking member cardin, and distinguished members of the committee, let me thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. i have a very brief oral statement. and i provided more comprehensive written statement for the record. africa is home to the world's youngest and fastest growing population. it presents significant
opportunities for transformation and growth as well as many challenges. the overall trends in sub-saharan africa point to accelerated -- sorry, democrattization and economic opportunity. although africa remains the world's least developed continent, average real per capita income increased steadily over t last decade and a half. however, in spite of these positive trends, instability and conflict persist in parts of africa. this instability has a direct bearing on u.s. national interests and those of our closest ally. terrorists, narcotic traffickers, and a range of transnational criminal organizations exploit state fragility and conflict. conflict destabilizes states and borders, it stifles economic growth, and it robs young africans of the opportunity for education and a better life.
while attacks in brussels and paris and even in san bernardino offer tragic reminders that terrorism can happen anywhere, africa has critical vulner abilities and capacity gaps that must be addressed. therefore, we are working with our african partners to increase their abilities to prevent and respond to such threats and to address the conditions that perpetrate the cycles of instability and conflict across the continent. addressing instability in africa requires a comprehensive and a balanced approach, as you have stated. we can not focus solely on the security aspects of the solution. military, intelligence and law enforcement tools are vital to defend the range of threats, but they cannot replace robust diplomacy and the hard work required to strengthen democratic institutions. to stimulate economic growth, trade and investment, promote development and broad-based
economic opportunity. the state department, usaid and the department of defense, known as the three "ds," and several other agencies, offer unique expertise and capabilities, and it is essential that each organization has the tools to contribute to our common objectives of building immediate and long-term stability in africa. as you stated, senator cardin, civility begins with building strong and stable democratic processes. addressing individual and collective grievances created by lack of governmental accountability, corruption, denial of basic human rights and feelings of political inclusion is not just the right thing for governments and civic leaders to do, it is a security imperative. stability in africa ultimately requires leaders with the will and the capacity to respond to the needs and aspirations of their people. we continue to stay focused on
supporting free, fair and transparent elections that are inclusive and representative. we've seen major electoral successes during the past several years, but there have been some setbacks as well. however, democratic governance is not only about elections. national and local governments must deliver essential services for their people. civil society and a free press must be empowered. independent judiciaries must enforce the rule of law, and professional security forces must respect human rights. president obama -- president obama has also highlighted that the most urgent task facing africa today, and for decades ahead, is to create opportunity for the next generation. young people constitute a majority of africa's population and stand to gain or lose tremendously based on the continent's social, political and economic trajectory. they also represent the next generation of african leaders.
they must be empowered to contribute to their country's future so that they are not enticed by extremist ideologies. president obama has warned about the vulnerabilities, and i quote, the vulnerabilities of people entirely trapped in impov impoverished communities where there's no order or path for advancement, where there are no educational opportunities, where there are no ways to support families and no escapes from justice and the humiliation of corruption that feeds instability and disorder and makes these communities rife for extremist recruitment, unquote. we know that groups like boca haram, al shabaab, al qaeda, and associated groups often ensnare their foot soldiers by simply offering cash or promises of financial reward for themselves and for their families. it's vital that governments, sometimes in partnership with the private sector, use every
available resource to offer educational and vocational opportunities that provide alternatives to these lethal traps. we also recognize that strengthening the security and justice institutions of our african partners, it's vital for long-term stability on the continent. so, as a consequence, we're partnering with african countries, with organizations, with people to develop capable, professional security services, improve security sector governance, and enhance regional coordination for more effective responses. once again, i thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much. go ahead. >> good morning, chairman corker, good morning ranking member cardin and all the members of the committee. and i also thank you for this opportunity to discuss usaid's work on this very important topic. throughout africa u.s. national interests and our efforts to end extreme poverty and to promote
democratic societies and to increase economic opportunities for people are increasingly threatened by the instability and the spread of violent extre extremism. we believe and as this committee has already stated that development program can be a powerful tool to prevent conflict and instability. conflict and instability impede development. they slow investment. they prevent children from attending schools as we've seen in northern nigeria, they place additional burdens on already fragile health care systems as we've seen in ebola response case and they undermine political systems. we also know that the activities are designed to reduce activities for extremists who exploit social justice and economic equality and the lack of political integration and we need to make sure that these activities help to advance development programming throughout the countries. today i'll try to discuss how our programs which are based on strategic thinking and evidence-based, results oriented approaches seek to prevent
violent extremism in africa but i'll also touch on governance programs which seek to -- when we look at the drivers experience has taught us when responding to military conduct that erupt in fragile states that large scale and often far too long term humanitarian responses are very costly. for that reason whenever usaid designs a program or country strategy we use our knowledge of the local context to reduce the drivers of fragility. these assessments consider the push factors that drive support for violent extremism such as social fragmentation, a sense of injustice, perceptions of marinalization and we try to look at the pull factors which attract those vulnerable to violent extreme. it helps to prohaute good
governance and human law as well as sustainable, inclusive development. we don't have one single answer as to what causes violent extremism. a decade of analysis has shown there's a strong correlation between state fragility, feelings of injustice and marginalization as being drivers of violent extremism. we issued a policy, this policy recognized development's unique role in mitigating the drivers of extremism and advancing u.s. national security. usaid activities, therefore, are designed to mitigate these drivers by increasing resil yedgesy at all levels. at the individual level we target marginalized communities particularly youth through employment, outreach programs, vocational training skills and community development activities. at the local level we focus on social cohesion activities, peace committees to build stronger, more resilient communities. at the national level we have an
important role to play in strengthening government institutions and their ability to deliver basic services but also to encourage inclusion and better transparency. youth are a key demographic in our programming and while there's no one profile of what at-risk youth look like, unemployed youth who have migrated to urban and slum areas who are university graduates who have no expectations can be at the greatest risk. therefore the programming focuses on this important graphic. in kenya, for example, 75% of the population is under 30 years ago of age. through our generation kenya ram we offer targeted training to at-risk youth populations, closing the gap between young people who are out of work and employers who are short of employees with skills. generation kenya plans to place more than 50,000 young people in stable careers by 2020. going forward, usaid will expand it to hot spots working hand in
hand with communities and the private sector to ensure its success. in niger our peace through development project produces and delivers original radio content which is aimed at countering extremist narratives through accurate reporting and peace messages, it reaches over 1.7 million people and 40 in the most at-risk communities. we've also directly through this program engaged nearly 100,000 people through civic education, moderate voice promotion and youth empowerment themed events. these programs we believe increase citizens' engagement with the government and decrease inve incentives for young people to take place in illevel or extremism activities. in conclusion instability is often the product of generations of neglect and corruption and its resolution, therefore, will be the product of generations of concerted focus, legitimate engagement and met expectations. because trends in extremism are fluid we know that we must constantly reassess our priorities and progress and policies to ensure that our work
is actually based on the realities of today through program assessments, implementations and evaluations we're learning what works and what does not work. we're improving best practices and helping individuals and communities to address these drivers of instability and violent extremism on their -- on their own. through the work of our missions in the field and through usaid-supported activities and resource centers. our commitment is evidence of the number of individuals dedicated to this problem set, but we know that we can't do it alone. sustained engagement with strong partners in the u.s. government through the departments of state and defense, through the work that your committee is doing here, and with donor governments as well as with our partners in the religious communities, local government, civil society organizations, all of these different groups on the ground who will be key to combatting extremism today and they'll be key also to securing peace and stability for years to come. i thank you, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you so much. >> mr. chairman, ranking member cardin, and distinguished
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. as outlined in our statement for the record, a number of terrorist groups remain active in sub-saharan africa, including al shabaab, al qaeda in the islamic maghreb, and boca haram also known as islamic state west africa province. regional military forces with united states and international assistance have made progress against all of these terrorist groups. terrorist safe havens in snolia and northern mali and the lake chad basin have been degraded significantly. however, in the face of this pressure, the groups have shifted to more asymmetric attacks. we've seen it in west africa recently. over the recent months aqim carried out a series of attacks against international hotels and tourists sites in mali, burkina faso killing scores of people
including an american citizen. similar in east africa we've seen shababb become increasingly aggressive in high profile targets in somalia and kenya. we're also concerned that isil's presence may grow in the continent. as we've seen elsewhere in the world, isil seeks to co-opt existing terrorist groups as well as local insurgencies and conflicts to expand its networks and advance its agenda. we are watching the dynamics closely. we are working with partners to contain and drive back isil-affiliated groups wherever they may emerge. united states is committed to building and sustaining partnerships across africa to counterterrorism and promote stability. partnerships are at the core of our approach. and this is reflected in our inner agency efforts as well through the partnership in east africa and the trans-sahara counterterrorism partnership. mr. chairman, the united states
is providing significant support for regional military operations. through our diplomacy the department of state continues to encourage regional leadership and cooperation to sustain the efforts. military efforts alone are insufficient, however. as we deal with the evolving threat environment the success of our counter terrorism efforts in africa increasing depends on capable and responsible -- and responsive civilian partners. police, prosecutors, judges, prison officials, and community leaders who can help address terrorist challenges within a sustainable and rule of law framework that respects human rights. in this regard, the department of state is training and mentoring law enforcement units for more than 15 african countries. we are building their capacity to prevent and respond to terrorist incidents, conduct terrorism-related investigations, and improve land, border and aviation security. we are also providing significant assistance for african prosecutors and courts to effectively and expeditiously
handle terrorism cases. we are working to enhance the capacity of prisons in africa to effectively handle terrorist inmates in accordance with human rights standards. we greatly appreciate the funding provided by the congress in fiscal year 2016 for the department's counterterrorism partnerships fund. it will enable us to expand our assistance for law enforcement and justice sectorests in key african countries. the at the same time we are increasing our focus on preventing the spread of violent extremism in the first place. we are expanding engagement with african partners to better understand the drivers of violent extremism in order to design effective fonti ivive re. this includes greater trust and partnership between communities and law enforcement. the president's fiscal year 2017 budget request includes increased resources for countering violent extremism
programs including $59 million as part of our overall request under the counterterrorism partnership funds. it would enable us to expand programs in africa to engage communities and youth susceptible to violent extreme recruitment. there's no single solution to promote stability in africa. the challenges are significant. but we believe we have committed partners in africa who are making progress. we believe we'll be most effective in the long run with a comprehensive approach that promotes regional cooperation, the rule of law and good governance. i continue to look for ways to enhance this approach and we appreciate the strong support of congress for these efforts. thank you. >> thank you all. let me just start by setting context here. if you look at the regions that we're discussing today, and you look at the numbers of deaths, displacements, the scale of what's happening in these three regions and other places throughout africa really over the course of time is as large
as the scale of terrorist activities in the middle east. is that correct? >> i would say so. particularly if we look at the case of boca haram. the number of people who have been killed and affected by boca haram are as large, if not larger, as the number of people who have been killed by isil in the past year. so, there is a devastating impact and it's reflected in the numbers of people killed and impacted by terrorism in africa. >> and no disagreement from the other witnesses? >> no. >> let me ask you this, obviously there's tremendous focus on the middle east. we've had a lot of hearings here and most of us, on the other hand, have traveled throughout africa and the sahel and seen the tremendous threat, if you will, to stability there. why do you think the world focus
is more so on areas like the middle east and less so on areas like the regions we're talking about right now in africa? >> well, i'll offer my thoughts, mr. chairman. i think with the case of isil, i mean, they emanate from al qaeda in iraq and so there's been a focus in particular on that conflict ongoing. that has, of course, devastated those societies as well and continues to. that, of course, builds off of the historic origins of al qaeda from the middle east and that region. so, i think from a terrorism perspective the focus generally has been on that region as the core area where these groups have emanated from. but it does not, as assistant secretary thomas-greenfield just noted, when you look at actual violence, the groups in africa
are committing extreme amounts of violence. boca haram in particular is a group that has targeted civilians deliberately. and their deaths on an annual basis, we will report these in the annual country reports on terrorism, boca haram is consistently in the top ranks of terrorist groups in terms of committing violence and destabilizing an entire region. so, the challenges and the threats are as great in the african continent, but i would agree with you that the focus generally speaking tends to remain on the middle east and those countries. >> but for what reason? >> well, i can -- i mean, i think that their -- for isil, it is appropriate to focus on the core area where that group has emanated from, and that is -- and that is the main effort in particular against isil. against its presence in iraq and syria. and in many ways when we look at the spread of isil, preventing
that will depend on defeating the group in its core homeland. and so, therefore, the focus in that regard on that core area is appropriate. >> any other comments? >> i would just say that much of the terrorism that we saw in the past on the continent of africa tended to be focused on africa, so there was not the comparable threat to the homeland from terrorists in africa as we see in the middle east. but i think we've all come to the conclusion that terrorism anywhere affects us everywhere, and we have to address it not just in the middle east but in africa as well. >> so, the core central beginnings, if you will, of this threat emanated from the middle east. and so, you know, hitting areas where especially they're establishing a caliphate has been important. and then secondly the groups in
africa have not been seen as a threat to western entities. would that be a fair assessment of the focus? >> i would say initially. but i think we're seeing more and more that this does have an impact on us. when we look at the attacks in mali and burkina faso, americans were victims. >> and i would just add that these groups evolved out of the particular context in africa but have been co-opted or joined up with transnational terrorist groups. so, al shabaab which begin out of the islamic courts group in somalia, later affiliated with al qaeda and, of course, did -- was part of al qaeda's global agenda, and that's been a significant concern of the u.s. security community because of the foreign fighter element that had traveled to somalia including american citizens. so, that's been a focus. and the concern is that al
shabaab representing an al qaeda affiliate does also advance the -- attempt to advance the al qaeda agenda. similar with boca haram recently there's been an affiliation with islamic state. so, that gives us great concern to look at the group to determine whether or not they will, because of that affiliation, begin to change their focus toward more targeting of international interests, western interests, or even externally. >> i'm going to save the rest of my time for interjections. ranking member cardin? >> well, thank you. and i thank all of our panelists for their incredible work in a very challenged -- challenging assignment. and as i said in my opening statement, as mr. chairman said in the opening statement, there's no simple solution to the violence that's taking place, the terrorism that's taking place, and clearly we need a security response including direct support against terrorism. i strongly support that. but as you each pointed out, the
recruitment of terrorists is because there's a void. and there are individuals who feel that they have no other choice and that they are primed for recruitment. so, my concern is, are we giving countries a free pass who are our partners in our counterterrorism campaigns on human rights and poor governance? i say that. i give you many examples. in ethiopia they had a parliamentary election not a single opposition leader, person, was elected. we've seen the security forces there who have killed hundreds of protesters. in chad we have dozen military officers who had been arrested because they wouldn't vote for the president. in somalia we have a report in yesterday's "washington post" that they're using children for spies. we've had extra judicial
killings by the military in nigeria, in kenya. and yet i don't see a response by the america -- u.s. in regard to these activities. am i wrong? are we giving them a free pass? should we be giving them a free pass? >> thank you for that question, senator. in every single one of the cases you mentioned, we condemned human rights abuses. we regularly condemn those abuses by security forces and by governments. and we make clear to these governments that this is a core value for the united states. at the same time, we are committed to firmly working with our partners to address efforts to defeat terrorism. we can't draw a line and say we're not going to work with you on terrorism because of human rights violations, but we reinforce with these governments
on a regular basis that they must respect human rights and civil liberties and the rule of law. >> how do you do that? how do you reinforce that they must? >> we start with a diplomatic discussion. so, in the case of ethiopia, we had intense discussions with that government over the past year. and you may know that as a result of those discussions, we are having a human rights dialogue, being led by our assistant secretary for human rights with the ethiopians. it's a challenge. we don't always get our messages through to them. but they are hearing that these are concerns. and in many cases, they are upset that we are expressing concerns about human rights -- >> could you share with me and this committee the specific methods you've used to transmit your concerns on human rights violations and the lack of
democratic progress. i'd be interested. i see the strong voice of the united states on counterterrorism issues, which i expect to see and want to continue to see. i have not seen the same not se of effort and energy in regards to concerns on the poor governance and violations of human rights. well, first of all we start with our embassies. with our ambassadors engaging with governments and embassies. >> that's quiet, usually. >> sometimes it's quiet, and sometimes our ambassadors don't get meetings because they're not quiet. they're very, very public in their expression of concerns. it also occurrence through meetings that you have on a regular basis with heads of state. at the at the top of the agenda. they push back, they say we don't respect them as partners, because we're raising human
rights concerns. we don't understand the situation in their countries, and my response has always been please understand this is a core value for us. we also work with their militaries in terms of providing human rights training. we fund those directly. we do leahy vetting on a number of countries, in fact all the countries we are involved in doing any military training with. there's been some countries where we've had to make the hard decision not to work with their military and their security services because they have committed human rights -- >> like 13 to 15, the security assistance budgets for africa from gone up from half a billion to billion. the democracy and governance has fallen since that time. i would think democracy and governance is a clear indication of our commitment on good governance and human rights.
there is certainly a shortage of funds. i would like to see a larger pie for the -- for our global efforts in all these areas. as i understand it, a large amount of the decisions as to how those funds are allocated are based upon who is the most effective in advocating for need. have we been ineffective in advocating for democracy and governance? >> i would like to say no, because it is the top of my agenda. >> why has there been an decline. >> i have to say if i was not an appropriator -- >> some of this is soft allocations by congress. yeah. >> a lot of this is a complicitous operation with the people at the state department and appropriators. >> from the africa bureau's standpoint, senator, you're speaking to the choir. i don't have enough resources on democracy and governance, and i think usaid will agree with me
on that. we could use more resources in that area. we know that putting money toward democracy and governance, putting money toward good elections, putting money toward building the capacity of civil society contributes to making cunning more stable and respect for human rights. >> i would just urge you to do this in a way that is visible to those of us who support crier efforts. quite frankly, we don't see that. we're sending our own messages as loudly as we can, including at this hearing, that we want to see greater funds for democracy and governance, but if we don't get the feedback from what is happening in the missions in the department makes our job much more difficult. it looks like that cunninger getting a free pass as long as
they are on our coalition team, what they do within their own country is of also importance to our foreign policy mission, which is you're telling me is just the opposite. so showing that, not just by a quiet diplomatic contact, but by how we are making that point, would certainly i think help us in accomplishing our mutual desire for good governance. >> thank you. senator isaacson. >> can anybody tell me what happened to jo kef coney? >> he is still out there. there's been a very strong and proactive effort against the lra. we've been working with the au and with the youugandans and hi other partners. and wet got his number two, who is currently being tried in the hague, he'sing elusive, the job
is not over until that is done. >> and one time we committed 100 special troops and forces to c.a.r. to go after coney. are they deployed? >> i think they were. i did meet with the team when i was in uganda the last time, and they are still working there. >> although not recognized as an institutional terrorist, there's probably no worst terrorist in terms of children and women than joseph coney. i'm glad we're still committed, as hard as that appears to be. does the african union address the issue of terrorism on the continent? do they have a game plan? >> we are working very closely with the african union on terrorism on the continent. it's high on the aend that. in the case of nigeria, they have been very much a part of the creation of the multinational joint task force in chad, and we have provided them some funding and some
assistance in their effort there. it is the mission in somalia, amazon is an au mission and it's the largest au mission on the continent of africa with troop contributing countries from the region. so it is high on their aend that. we are partnering with them along with our european colleagues to make sure that they have the capacity and the funding to address what has been a very challenging and difficult threat for them as well as us on the continent. >> i know we use human rights issues and labor issues in the approval and participation of a goal with the united states and african countries. i was in the au when we chastised lack of humanity for the laborers, and used that that ade a predicate for them staying in the agreement. are we leverages as much as we
should in africa? >> we are. swaziland is still not a part of agoa. we regularly send letters of warnings to countries if you want they are not on the right side of human rights and caring for their people, and agoa is very important to them. it's huge leverage. in many cases it has worked to get governments to turn policies around. if they have not, we kicked them out of agoa. >> i know with dough on labor and human rights issues. do we do it on them fighting terrorism as well? >> we do, but we do understand that they have a challenge. they have a capacity challenge, but there are also all the other challenges that i mentioned and senator corden mentioned in his statement, lack of governance, corruption, that have limited the capacity of governments to fight terrorism, but i think they all have come to understand
that if they don't fight terrorism, they're not going to be around to do anything else. so they have come to that very strong realization that they have to partner with their neighbors, as well as with the international community to ensure that terrorists donnell take over their countries. >> china invests a lot of money for its own benefit, extracts a lot of rare earth minerals, rare materials, and builds roads and highways. do we enengage with the china eases on the issue of terrorism to try to get them in some way help us or help the government to fight it? >> we do. i was in china about four weeks ago for our annual consultation with the chinese, and that was on our agenda. usaid was there recently as well on consultations to look at how we can better coordinate with the chinese on what they are doing in africa, both economically as well as politically.
>> my experience a is that terrorism flourishes when there's no education, ponch and disease and lack of hope. africa is probably the post are child for those on -- and if we can't do like the electrify africa and the food security bill, the more we can uplift the the african people, the better fight we could have against terrorism. would that be a better assessment? >> i'll turn to my colleague at usaid, but i absolutely agree with you. >> i'll agree, but i will also say that we have data that shows this is actually the case. with ten years of research over all the they countries have worked in has shown very clear evidence that when we see governments actually ability to deliver services such as energy, access to electricity, health care, education services, there is a corresponding decrease in
the amount of feelings of marginalization, feelings of inclusion, and we have also seen that those countries are usually not the same ones correlated with conflict and instability. it's been clear that there's a clear correlation where there's the absent of delivery of services and where people do feel marginalized and don't have access to opportunity, that those countries are at risk of conflict. the links between violent extremism, that's the next step. already when you're engaged in conflict, then your sympathy to going that next level is not as star of a stretch. and so we know that these are things that actually matter. we know that development is actually a very important tool in the space. >> well, just based on my observation, it appears that where we've made minimum challenge compacts and helped build the infrastructure, there's less of a presence in terrorism where it is in the countries we didn't. i think this is -- i'm a bit
supporter of million dollar grants and thank you for your service, to all of you. thank you. i have about a minute and a half reserved. i'm going to ask a quick question. all of us i think are proud of the work we have done together on electrify africa, on food aid reform, on clean water, and we have other efforts that are under way. really proud of that work. i appreciate you mentioning the benefit that is to people mass numbers of people, millions of people. on the other hand, to bring up a topic that i think senator cardin alluded to and you did a moment ago. when we work with government that we know are abusing their own citizens, they are corrupt, they are absolutely subjecting their citizens to terrible atrocity themselves, those governments, when we work with them to counter terrorism how
does that work against u.s. interests? relative to -- relative to causing many extremists there to really harbor ill will toward the u.s. itself, but seeing us associated with governments that they believe are corrupt and not treating their citizens appropriately. >> i think we have to work with governments to fight terrorism, but we also have to continue to work with these governments to address human rights deficiencies in their countries. i think they want you continue to be engaged, want our voices to be heard. they know when we're engaging with these governments that we're also raise seg concerns about human rights. we have gotten some people released from jail and we've
gotten some governments to moderate their actions against their citizens. it's not a perfect solution, but i truly believe that we -- our engagements with them help on the issues of human rights. we believe the military in burundi has been less active and violent against citizens because of our engagement, because of the human rights training they got from our people, working closely with them. it's been less assassin expected. >> in addition to add to what was noted earlier, that all of our civilian-delivered assistance is subject to requirements for vetting until the leahy law.
>> and protection of human rights and civil rights of the people. we have worked to embody that concept in what is known as the rebot memorandum, which is a document that the united states helped to develop, and this forms the basis of assistance that we deliver increasingly across the count nenlt in cooperation with the that we fund from the state department to work with governments to establish strong c.t. legislation, but also it protects the human rights of the people. this is a major challenge, and you have partners who are willing and capability, but neat
a lot more assistance to become fully capable to fight challenges, but they have weak government structures. so as they consult military and secured let operations to -- to detain terrorisms and to prevent terrorist as tacks. they do so in a way that it enables thor people tore -- it's a long-term effort, but we're very much engaged in that work current li. while nigeria's people most need help with daunting governance and corruption issues, the united states is planning to sell the government attacked aircraft known as the a-29 super
tocano to nigeria. the nigerian has a long history of human rights abuses under the current administration. just last month, amnesty international accused an army of killing hundreds of member of the shia minority sect in december. unfortunately that's happening in other countries in east africa as well. so what is your perspective on that? given the fact that the people are increasingly seeing u.s. aid move over to more military aid for those who they believe internally are the ones who are greater risk to the security of their families.
on the issue of assisten in fighting boko haram they have huge capacity issues. as you may know last year we turned them down on a request for cobras, because we were concerned about their ability to use those and not have them have an impact on the communities. >> let me ask the question another way. if there is no success in convincing the people of nigeria that the government is not corrupt we have to do both or we
will fail. it would be long term, but you have to say the nigerian people want us to assist them on the security side as well. they know that their government doesn't have the capacity alone. >> internally how do you think it will affect the views of the people inside of nigeria, as we increase military aid to the very people they fear are using it to harm them, harm the shia
inside the country, for example, the government forces themselves. how do you think that will affect how they perceive how the united states is playing inside of nigeria, and what could be the consequences of that, if that persists? >> the polls show that we are extremely popular in nigeria, and the nigerian people are victims of boko haram, and they know that there has to be some kind of security and military solution to addressing boko haram. and they want us there to help their military. i think they think if we're there to help, their military will be less abusive to their people. that is a point that we've made to the nigerians. we are training two battalions of nigerian soldiering right now. they have human rights training as part of that training, and all of them have been leahy vet the. so we are working with the government to moderate and top
human rights abuses by the military. i think the niger people also want to see us help their military address the security threat that they're facing. >> well, i think they're just on a thin edge here. we have to be very careful especially if the government does not control adequately its own military internally the harm that it does to the overall morale inside of the country. so i just think it's important to us to keep an eye on that. and in congo, there is significant political tension, because the president is trying to prolong his stay beyond the constitutional two-term limit. his security agents are harassing opposition politicians in a very serious way. mass protests of kabila's attempts to remain in office
appears imminent. what is ultimately the likelihood that such protests could spark further instability in drc, particularly if the security forces continue to track down in response to the democratic instincts that people have, as has been the case in the past. i sent a letter to secretary kerry in february subjecting that the u.s. could community way to president kabila to step aside at the end of his second term in december and if he failed to do that and made appropriate preparations for elections we should implement sanctions if he does not do that. in response to my her, you seem to suggest that kabila's actions in the next few months would determine whether or not state would op to instigate sanctions. it seems the political environment is deteriorated in
congo and kabila has not indicated an interesting in -- has the time arrived for sanctions to be imposed on the government of congo? thank you for that question. yes, we are looking very, very actively at sanctions, as they relate to those involved in violent. we have conveyed that to kabila and his people form the secretary met with him a few weeks ago, and our special envoy has proactively engaged in the region. we hope many that we can get them to do the right thing. the constitution is very clear. his term ends in december, and they must have an election.
we have conveyed that to him. we have working closely with other partners, with the eu, french and others to make sure we're on the same sheet of music. >> the election is scheduled for the end of this year, it's only may. there's plen of time. right now they're talking about the end of 2017 as the earliest. that would be a clear violation of the constitution. i hope we make it clear that we will not accept that. >> thank you, senator sheen. >> thank to you all of you for being here today and for your ongoing work. can you talk about the importance of women's empowerment and contributing to development in africa, and what we're doing, what you would identify as the best examples of successful programs? >> so i love that question. i think that we increasingly
especially in this talking about conflict of instability need to talk about the role of women and peace and security. in fact, that is an actual u.s. government policy, which is entitled u.s. women peace and security strategy, which talks about the fact that women are critical agents of not only as victims, but also as agents of change, when we're talking about instability and conflict, but also violent extremism. our programming runs the gamut in areas where there are vulnerable communities or we see they don't have a lot of access to legal resource, economic opportunities, and they often are coerced or used as instruments of terror or violence or certainty from gender-based violence, we seek to figure out ways of empowering local women community in allows
them trach, work think empowerment, access to educat n education, which is another critical limit. when women and girls have access, child marine rates have fallen and their susceptibility to feelings of acceptance with violent extremist groups also decreases. we think it's very important to target women and girls in these environments, because we have also seen that not only are they ability to make a critical dimples in their own lives, but they're also critical agents of change in the rest of their communities. can you also talk about how the efforts to recruit people to terrorism isil, to boko haram, how the dimples that we're seeing between the ability to recruit men and women? i know there's been an increasing effort to use women
as suicide bombers, but can you talk alternates bit about what we see about the -- who's easier to re? recruit? >> i think mo most of the groups, the emphasis continues to be on recruiting young men, but boko haram, notoriously they have used girls in suicide bombing operations, which is absolutely despicable. some of those are obviously coerced into that activity. i would build on something my colleague just noted in the role of women, in particular identifying the seeds of radicalization. women play a critical role in most communities in being close to the people and having an ublt to understand whether or not there are influences coming into the community that could lead to a process of radicalization. so this is one of the areas that
we would like to develop in our cve programming. we have a program that has been under way in nigeria through u.s. institute of peace in which they were developing a network of influential women, women who already have a role in the society to bring them together into a network and train those women on observing and understanding whether there may be signs of radicalization. these programs will be very important as we come done down and address the drivers to radicalization of the drivers. one of the things we have heard is their ability to recruit people to the caliphate. are we seeing that same kind of interest in africa in terms of the messaging to try and recruit? >> the numbers coming out of africa that we are aware of in terms of foreign terrorist fighters, those have actually
been inspired to travel, or to attempt to travel to syria and iraq are much lower than for other parts of the world, whether it's north africa, the maghreb states, and into southeast asia, the numbers are higher. that said, there is evidence of some african recruitment among africans into isil and isil's propaganda is very shrewd in identifying and using recruits who have come from particular regions and appealing to those individuals to join the caliphate or come to iraq and syria. of course, isil has been attempting to infiltrate into other areas of the count nevin in particular in somalia, and there is evidence of a struggle and basically a conflict internally westbound al shabaab and elements that had sought to adhere or to affiliate with isil. they haven't seems to have the success there, but it does identify this is an ongoing
concern we have to watch closely. >> is the cost of getting to syria, to iraq part of the challenge with recruitment? or statistic other -- is it the messaging that's the issue? >> i think there are probably a lot of factors. that would be one. one of the things that has made this conflict in iraq and syria such a threat to all of us is the relative accessibility posit conflict to people in europe or in north africa. to fly to turkey, for example, you can get into syria quite easily. i think it's harder for people in subsaharan africa to make those connections and get up -- it costs more, so it is more different logistically to do that. >> of the estimated 60 million refugees in the world today, i understand that about 15 million are in subsaharan africa.
can you also talk about that? and also talk about the extent to which climate change is playing a role in the my graze that we're seeing in subsaharan africa? >> sure. i think we see that the horn of africa and the sahal, not surprisingly are huge areas where we're seeing the largest numbers of refugee movement, and internally displaced persons as well. even though people aren't necessarily leaving their borders, they're definitely moving out. when we see the up tick in instability in somalia, for instance, we are even seeing people willing to get on boats across to yemen, which we know hasn't been secure at all. a lot of that is people know they're not secure or safe. when we do our surveys, we have seen time after time that when people don't feel secure and safe, they will move across borders. they also move across borders not only when they don't feel secure and safe, but they don't
feel there's any opportunity for them to exist on their own in the country of origin. so we have seen situation where even when insecure is paramount, such as in the democratic republic of congo where we see large refugee movements, who obvious causes people to move is when markets start closing down or there's not an ability to make a living. so you've got a dynamic populations in these countries that in a sad way are used to coping and dealing with instability in very creative ways, but the concurrent pressures of instability and the lack of opportunity are what the are pushing them to move further afield. >> so climate change is a big contributor? >> and climate change, sorry, is a big contributor on both. we have seen the el nino effect right now, drought in ethiopia, kenya and somalia is definitely a big factor. in 2011, we know that the famine was partially caused by drought,
mostly caused by al shabaab cutting off access to food, what us a big reason people had to cross borders and we saw the largest migrating of somalis. it's put pressured on countries like kenya, south sudan, even sudan and ethiopia. we're seeing pressures are increasing local precious. in the sahal, we have see similar things, the inability to have accessible land has people moving to urban centers, and we're seeing increased radicalization there as well. >> senator rubio. >> thank you very much. let me just begin. this is a question of ms. secretary greenfield. would you describe boko haram as an anti-christian terror group, whose main motivation is -- and i say that based on a video released by their laterers.
this is a wear against christians democracy and that i constitution. >> i would say they're more than that. they're part of the ideology, but they have killed more muslims in the north than they have killed christians. they are a terrorist organization and have no boundaries. would you support nigeria as a country of particular concern for religious freedom? >> i would not designate nigeria as a country, because we have huge, huge and very active christian populations in nigeria throughout the southern parts of nigeria into the middle belt, even in northern nigeria, and a huge muslim population there as well. so both communities until boko haram were ability to live attorney general and work together harmoniously. i think that that can continue
once boko haram is brought into justice. >> from usaid, what programs exist to assist the victims of boko haram, in particular the psychological program for women and girls who have been victims of sectionium violence? >> i think you put the nail on the head. we have a comprehensive program right now that is in design to really target the northeast of nigeria, and looking at the victims of boko haram. we are working with communities right now, because as we have seen, when people who are leaving boko haram or who have been the victims of boko haram return to the communities, sometimes they suffer from a second wave of victimization. >> in terms of like stigma? >> stigma, and it's been very heartbreaking actually. so we're working to educate communities as to what it actually means, what people suffer, what they go through, and the fact they can still be
productive members of communities and societies. we also provide psychosocial care, a number of the girls that we did manage to return home are receiving that type of care right now. we are also making sure that we're working with local clinics and medical providers to train them in the right techniques, and we are also working with community influence makers, religious leaders, so that there is at message that can be amplified through various channels, that there is recovery that's possible. s where possibly wee rear started basic social services, such as education, more money into emergency education in the north and hoping where we can, we can increase access. we're also providing assist dance to those internally displaced through basic
humanitarian assistance. >> with all of this instability in subsaharan africa, how has it affected your ability to implement programs? have there been any programs suspended due to security concerns? >> throughout we have programs that have to exercise flexibility. we have multiple times suspended perhaps, and it has to be based on this idea of really developing long-standing long-term networks with these communities so when insecurity prevents us from moving into an area for a period of time, we have through our networks and through understandings of local people on the ground and our staff, they understand when we
can come back and how to have access and figure out crawive ways to figure out assist tons for those intended neficiaries. i would emphasis the flexibility of the program is understanding sometimes it's not always a continuous flow of programming without stops and starts. that has to be highly disruptive. security concerns require us to eliminate people from that setting, and then it's suspended and restarted. is this a commonplace problems, these stops and starts, because of the security environment? >> it's not that the program will stop entirely. usually what we try to do is we have a combination of working local implementing partners, so a lot of times what happens is we've managed to train the trainers, so they still receive some types of support even as
international ngos or our own staff have to pull back. we try to layer on interventions so we have creative ways to reach the beneficiaries, but it is disrupt up, and in extreme cases where we have to completely not be in a particular hear for some time, of course these are hugely disruptive. what we have found, though, is that over time, when it's been for sustained period of times such as that, the on the pop lazy is also moving as well. >> on the counter-terror front there's been rumors that the leader of boko haram sheku is perhaps fighting in syria with isil. could you shed any light on that? eve seen some open source reports on that. >> i have not seen that. he periodically appears in videos that we are how -- that are distributed and we are aware of. one of the things we have noted is after the -- and watched to, after the affiliation of boko
haram with the islamic state, whether there was any difference in the quality of their media output, which is usually an indicator of an actual strong link. i have not heard -- i don't know that there's any reporting that i have seen that he's actually in syria. >> are there any countries that you're particularly concerned about in terms of recruiting i.s. fighters? and how significantly do you assess the threat with more fighters flowing out of east africa to be? >> yes, we're quite concerned about isil or daesh, islamible states attempting to affiliate with existing organizations. we know they've been attempting to move into somalia. shabab itself has recognized this as a threat. there's been a fierce struggle internally to hold off isil, but that then raises the possibility they will look at other somali
communities in the region to include kenya, elsewhere, so this is something we ver concerned with. we know that isil will have -- will want to continue to build its network of affiliates, so we have to remain attuned to that. of course, libya is a major isil affiliate, and there is always the threat that the connections might be made from libya throughout the region and we're watching that very closely as well. as far as individuals traveling to the conflict. the numbers generally speaking are low and compared to -- north africa. from the caucuses, from southeast asia in comparative terms. >> senator kane.
given some of the constituents and the deaths, why is there less focus about some of these challenges in africa and elsewhere. they asked the africa center for strategic studies some experienced in africa. i would like to introduce it for the record. >> absolutely. it didn't seem to provoke much, but it was meant to be provocative. >> it bears out your point exactly. one of the reasons i really admire my colleagues is there are many who have spent a lot of time in africa and noncommittee members, too, and hearings like this are really helpful. just a thought on this. >> i don't have to diplomatic, because i'm not a diplomat. on the question of the differential, you have to acknowledge -- we have to look in the mirror and ask ourselves
if race is part of the reason. if we look backward at our own history, often things get explained in retrospect and race is part of the reason. we put japanese-americans in internment camps, but we didn't put german-americans. they looked a little bit different. there's a school of thought that explains the differential action of the united states in the '90s in terms of intervening dramatically to stop genocide in the balkans, but not in rwanda, and why did we intervene in one at not the other one? some of the answer to that isn't pleasant. so i think that part of the reason to have a hearing like this, and part of the reason i applaud my colleagues who spend a lot of time in africa, we have to as leaders kind of challenge, and some ways it's a media
portrayal, too, that terrorist attacks in cote deivoire are not as much attention as those in paris or -- so the not suggest that some lives are worth less than others. i think in the middle east, we've needed something. we've needed oil, so that has probably made us more focused on the middle east and we haven't focused as much on africa, as we perceived we didn't neat something as much. this is a good reason to have a hearing like this. our foreign policy as a nation has had an east/west access that's been undeniable. we've cared about europe, the middle east, the soviet union, russia, now china, but if you look at the diplomatic effort that focuses south of the
equator, a afrite africa and am has been less. i'm actually going to make you do homework. we're writing the defense authorizing bill this week, and we're going to grapple with some issues, especially deal with afri-com. probably more than any of the other co-comes it integrates cross-disciplinary, usaid, and trying to deal with challenges in africa. as folks who aren't part of the d.o.d., talk to me about your perceptions of afri-com. one proposal is to roll it back into u-com. i would be curious about your thoughts, and second talk to me about the efficacy following up on senator markie's questions, less about the arms sales, but about the training and exercises
that we do with african are can mill tears. i know that many of our ambassadors ask through afri-com that we devote marine units and other units into africa to do training, to build capacity. in your view, as professionals in this area, how successful are those training efforts that we do with african security forces? >> i'll start and then turn to my colleagues. i hope that afri-com is not folded back into u-com, because what it's meant for us is we have a military more focused on africa, and over the years has become more understanding of africa, and have become a great partner for us. we very much appreciate that partnership with africom and with the military. as a member of the authorizers
for armed services p. that's a key area where we do have concerns. those concerns are as their authorizations are being considered they're crossing some lines into the area of diplomacy and development. those are the authorizations we would like to keep and where we feel we have better skills, we have better skill sets to carry out those responsibilities, particularly in the area of community development, in areas of working on governance. some of those authorizations need to be guarded for the state department and for usaid, and we have raised concerns there. but in terms of our relationships with aft fri cafr.
we have areas the disagreement and we've been able to establish channels of communication between general rodriguez and myself, where we address those issues. and we have, i think had positive impact on the region. in all of that training, they have train modules in every single one of thoughts efforts that we have made. i think they have paid dividends. to get messages, then in terms of lethal weapons. when the nigerians asked for
cobrasings we did not think they were probably. we were concerned about how they would be used and we want know. we think the super tocanos are a better piece of equipment. we can train them on how to use this equipment effectively and not have a negative impact on communities and on civilians. so we're working very closely with them to address those concerns to make sure that they don't have the negative impact.
thank you very much. we have all enjoyed a chance to work over many years telling. just two opening statistics, you reminded all of us there are positives and negatives to the security situation. as some of you know i host an annual opportunity to try to emphasis the positive. africa is a vast and complex conned nent of 54 countries, the world bank says seven out of the ten fastest growing economies in the world in this decade are in africa, but eight of the ten peacekeeping operations are also in the continent. i think one of the challenges is to remain totally focused on a sustained strategic frame democrat work while still recognizing the significant growth opportunities, positive opportunities to reinforce our values and to work together with
our many allies and partners on the continental moving forward. i also just at the outcelt want to thank the countless dedicated foreign service officers at the state department and usaid who worked so heart to promote or interests. on a recent trip with senator cardin, i took the time to meet with a number of fsos. it's always interested to hear how hard they work. i'm impressed with their determination while working on different, dangerous and often remote conditions. let me ask this panel, what lessons we have learned from fighting terrorism in africa. we've got in front of the you broughtly speak three case studies. a fog can us on mali, with the late chad area with a focus on nigeria and the horn where the focus is on somali. we have different levels of
engagement, expenditure, to the significant stability challenges. i think they have made substantial success in pushing back al shabaab. in the lake chad region, boko haram was literally the deadliest in the world, and it should get and deserves higher attention and higher priority, as senator kane suggested. the united states, by the way gets moss oil from the continent of african that the middle east. if it was about resource -- we would have long ago put africa at the top of the list, and i'm concerned we're allowing other to become dominant players and we're lagging. in the sahal, we have
predominantly left the hard work for the u.n. and the fremplg, and these are very different responses, but in all three there are no significant u.s. troop deployments. we may be central to the activity in somalia and in nigeria, but it's a quite different scenario than we have seen in iraq, and and currently in syria. where are we getting the best bang for our buck, the best progress in advancing our values, and what role does different sill development security play in this work. >> i'll start, then turn to my colleagues. you asked early what lessons we have learned. i think the most valuable lesson is that this has to be multifaceted. it can cannot be just focused on security and military. we have to bring in the civilian agencies, and we also have learned that we could open it.
we have to built the capacity of local organization. we have to build their capacity to own it, and we have to get supportive of them. third i think we have learned we have to partner. we have extraordinarily proactive, but we're not in the lead. we have been involved in the peace negotiations. our military han extraordinarily supportive of the fremplg effort there. and in that case we look very closely with our partners. pell st. to make sure we are
having an impact. this has been said in the room by everyone. we have to be concerned about human rights. we have to ensure that these governments understand that human rights are important for us. as i've said before, it's a core value, and they expect to hear from us on human rights issues, if we don't raise it, i think everyone would be shocked. so we generally start out in that air. >> before we continue, we had an exchange earlier about the prioritization of -- where ranking mesh cardin appropriately said -- senator shahin and i are both appropriators, and it is an issue i pressed. we are underfunding democracy and governance dramatic. it is something that i have made a priority in my appropriations request. frankly we send the wrong
message, and i frankly appreciate the message if where he don't fund our values, that surround democracy and for adjournists, they draw conclusions. please, if you would. >> sure. i know very quickly. what i will say is core lessons learned, partnership, partnership, partnership, whether it's through other donors and partners, but also bringing in the private sector. there, as you mentioned before, africa is also a continent of opportunities. we have a diverse society of partner very interested in stability and stabilization. they can be the drivers to help us fuel and fund these economic opportunities that we're talking about for young people, for actually making the case to host governments of why inclusion policies are important, out of making sure that they're working with us to make sure that the international norms are seen as something that's not only an imposition from a western government, but as something
that should be a standard to which everybody should aspired to, so i think we have a lot of opportunities here through partners with governments, private sector, but also local community, making that you are that we're touching people on the ground where we live. this weekend the world economic forum is in and continued engagement, and ambassador frommen and fred hockberg are being sent, as well as many others. thank you. >> well, i think in general, the lessons learned in each of these three conflict areas, as you pointed out is that we have in
that african continent partners who are willing to address the challenges from within the region. so they are committed to the solution. that is something that is maybe even unique globally in the way that terrorism issues are being addressed. so each of those three examples has the neighbors coordinating. it hasn't been easy. it station constant effort to coordinate and keep the momentum in each of these areas, but the solution you would want in somalia is a solution that has developed in terms of the contributing countries to amazon. of course the bigger challenge there is these are governments also generally speaking in many cases weak and poor and lack in capacity, and a sustained solution that addresses the root causes will require improved
governan governance. so it's a long-term effort here, but the buy-in and the commitment of the countries themselves to solving the problem is a virtue in my view. >> and the fighting is every bit as urgent and large in scale as it is in the middle east, a key difference is we have allies who are putting their soldiers into the fight. african soldiering are fighting again terrorism, and we are providing critical support, training, funding and resources, but unlike other places in the world, we have significant numbers of willing allies sending their troops into the fight. it's made a difference, and we should be grateful for their partnerships, and i'm grateful for your service and thank you for the opportunity to ask questions. >> i wanted to follow up on some of the questions that senator markie asked regarding the interaction of security
interest, and assistance provided by the state department. in 2014 it was the first time that dod funding in africa surpassed that, provided by the state department, and it comes through a lot of different places, but in particular a rather opaque fund calling building partner capacity, which is about $10 billion globally, is increasingly the sort of d.o.d. funds to help promote former military -- and stand-up military capacity. so ambassador thomas-greenfield, i wanted to ask you about to what extent the state department and african bureau is read into about the decisions at the defense department on to the extent to which you are read in, the extent to which individual
ambassadors have a say as to how that money is spent and make sure it doesn't counteracting the work they are doing on the ground, and thoughts on this sort of long-term transition away from the majority of money in these countries being state department money to department of defense money. >> thank you for that question. we work closely with africom on any activities that they are involved in africa. we have an annual strategy review meeting with them where our dcms from across africa and usaid mission directors are invited to come to stuttgart. i'm there. my colleague from usaid is there as well, and we look across the board at what they are planning
to do and look at what they're planning to do in the context of our mission programs, in terms of our own strategy. so, we do work closely with them. our ambassadors have veto power on any actions that they are taking, any programs that they are doing, and in general if there's any disagreement, general rodriguez and i work those disagreements out between ourselves. so, we're very much in sync with them. we wish we had that $10 billion to program on the continent of africa and we'd be doing some different things. they have the money, so we want to help them channel that money to places where it will make a difference on the continent as we work to fight insecurity and terrorism together. but $10 billion would be a huge contribution to democracy and governance. i describe my democracy and governance funding as scraping
the mayonnaise jar to get just enough to do the job that we have to do. >> how much -- just tell me how much do you have in democracy and governance? >> let me get back to you with that figure. it's a moving target. >> i would submit that it's probably well less than -- >> oh, yes, it is. >> -- what the department of defense is spending in the building partner capacity account, which, by the way, is not broken down on a country-by country basis so as members of the foreign relations committee all we know there is $10 billion spent at the department of defense. i'm glad you are optimistic about the coordination that is happening. for members of the appropriations committee it's probably a topic that should get more attention. let me ask one additional -- >> will my colleague yield for one second? i'll give you some extra time. i think you're raising a very fundamental point. it's been a growing problem and as we get to the nda bill there's another effort as the
ambassador already pointed out there may be efforts to even expand dod's role in traditional state department areas. i think it's an area that we need to look at in a broader scale than just africa. >> there's been a long-term shift from the state department to the defense department and that's what happens when you're engaged in very dangerous places. but i guess i'm not as optimistic as the witnesses as to the ability to coordinate this work on a country-by-country basis. >> it's an effort. i actually have the figures here. we're looking at increasing that funding in the -- in the president's request, increasing support for dng programs in africa in fy-'17 the request for that sector is 20% above what we did in 2015. our figure for 2015 was $286 million. and our figure for -- our
request for '16 is $311 million. so, it's really a drop in the bucket when you compare that to $10 billion. >> and, listen, it's just another way by which we communicate our priorities to these countries, so when we are looking at $300 million on a good day in democracy assistance and then we're handing out potentially ten times that amount of money in an account that has very little oversight from the united states congress, it tells these countries what we think is most important. and as part of this balance it's difficult to do when the numbers are that skewed in favor of military and security assistance. to that end, i don't know exactly who to put this question to, but maybe mr. siberell and others i'll ask it to you. in the three conflict zones we're talking about, can you talk a little bit about this mystery which is the attractiveness of a
wahhabi-oriented, sunni ideology amidst areas that are often dominated by sufi muslims and the story has to be partially about schools on the ground funded by some of our allies in the middle east. some of it has to do with young men who go to the middle east to get taught in schools, funded by our allies in the middle east. what is the level of seriousness about -- about the countries on the ground in understanding and trying to tackle this problem of radicalization that happens in these wahhabi-funded or salafish-oriented schools either in theater or back in middle east? >> i think it's a real concern on the part of many governments in the region, and we hear that from those governments. as you pointed out, there are likely a variety or number of different vehicles through which these ideas are -- or this
ideology, you know, penetrates a society. this is not something that is limited, unfortunately, to areas of africa. we see it in southeast asia. we see it in other places where you've had historically kind of an approach to religion and faith that is tolerant of other traditions. and that is being kind of worn down by this salafi ideology, and then that causes polarizaton, it causes intolerance and it causes even sectarian conflict. it's a problem globally and it probably also relates to the fred spread of media. there have been media funded through -- from -- coming out of certain regions that have propagated or emphasized a particular view. so, there are a number of different vehicles. and it's a major concern in these countries. i think, though, that when we talk about what -- you have to
look at the particular circumstances almost, you know, at the community and village level sometimes what are those influences and that's where the very difficult work of countering violent extremism will be, will be identifying through research and through data, understanding of the drivers at a local level. it's a very hard issue to address. but especially amidst what is really a global phenomenon of the infiltration of this particular religious view. >> i'll just say in ehanding bak my time, we can spend money chasing these dollars around the world, but we are never going to be able to keep up. it's probably a better strategy for us to ask why these dollars are moving into areas like africa out of the middle east, out of the pockets of many of our friends. probably a better use of our time and money. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. i want to thank our panelists. and i think you can see there's a lot of interest in what we had to talk about today. if you could, we'll have
questions i know after this. if you could respond fairly quickly. we'll take questions until the close of business on thursday, but we thank you for your service to our country. and if you could, with your crew, we'd like to shift out now to another panel. okay? thank you very much. thank you, sir. >> thank you very much. >> yes, sir, thank you. >> thank you, senator. >> our second panel will consist of two witnesses.
the first witness is mr. mardilla. any corrections needed there, sir? okay. thank you. assistant administrator and director for the u.n. development program regional bureau for africa. the second witness will be mr. christopher formunia, senior associate and regional director for central and -- okay. senior associate and regional director for central and west africa at the national democratic institute. we'll recognize mr. diya first with his opening comments and if you would follow. we thank you both for sharing your expert teaise and knowledg with us today. go ahead, sir. [ inaudible ] >> i'm very honored as director
of the regional bureau for africa of the united nations development program undp to be invited as panelist before the u.s. senate committee on foreign relations. this is my very first appearance. i have it? ed submitted a longer text, so i have tried to limit my remarks within five minutes. my purpose today will be two-fold. first, i want to briefly update you on what we as undp have learned about instability in africa. and second, i would share our view on the possible developmental approach to mitigate the threats to peace and stability in what is often referred to as africa's arc of instability which encompasses the lake chad, nigeria and the whole of africa. the continent is doing extremely great. for the last 15