tv Secretary of State Nominee Mike Pompeo Part 2 CSPAN April 13, 2018 12:19am-1:39am EDT
>> we will begin our second round. >> i would like to introduce these letters to the record. >> i want to go back to my first line of questioning. for me, all of these hearings are super important. when i asked you about the march 22, 2017 meeting, your first i am not going to talk about the conversation the
president and i had. furtheren i press to whataid you did not recall he asked you that day precisely. iat seems to be going from know what the conversation was about but i'm not going to talk it,t it to i do not recall what was asked, then you gave a blanket conversation. well, if you do not want to talk about it then you can't remember it, i do not a highly jump to that conclusion. it is concerning to me because we need a secretary of state who will be for right with us and forthcoming as well. on april 4 this picture was taken. can you tell me what is wrong with this photo? pompeo: senator, you will have
to help me. i have seen this picture before or a similar picture. >> what is wrong is that the united states of america is not there. what is wrong is that iran, .ussia, and turkey turkey is supposed to be our nato ally fighting the same kurds have depended upon to defeat isis. it is a convention about what to do about syria and the united states is not even present. pompeo: i largely agree with the
predicate of your question. we need to have a robust diplomatic effort. for the purpose of discussing how they were going to carve up syria, a rough statement of their mission, that is what they were therefore. america needs to be part of that conversation. >> what is our strategy? pompeo: it is incredibly complex. entry took an already incredibly complex situation and put another twist in the cartwheel. we have the primary mission we have been engaged in, to defeat isis. we did so using a group of men who did great work. it took the caliphate down. that mission is that yet complete. next a limit it. i need you to be precise.
to talk about serious strategy in two minutes is an enormous challenge. the other objective is to achieve a diplomatic outcome so we can take down the violence. this is a diplomatic task to get to a place where the syrian people can ultimately govern themselves. our goal is to make that a post-a solid syria one day. >> let me move to another part nearby, iran. is it in the u.s. security interest to unilaterally withdraw from the iran agreement without a strategy? i am confident that whatever course the administration takes we will have a strategy. >> you are at -- your answering that it is in the interest to withdraw because you will have a strategy? should develop a
strategy to achieve the objectives we all share. to the president unilaterally withdraws in may, what does the administration intend to do? what would you be recommending a terms of sanctions on iran and countries that engage with iran? pompeo: there is an active policy discussion around all of these issues about how they will proceed in the next 30 days. clear, toive is very fix the shortcomings of iran. >> does that mean snapping back sanctions? pompeo: i do not want to speculate. put my faithe to in you, but i cannot do that blindly. i have to have some sense of what you will be advocating. do the sanctions depend upon whether the europeans will be in sync with us?
are they going to ultimately come along with us or reciprocate? and, if we do not snap sanctions that, i'll be nothing but a toothless tiger? these are the critical questions i am looking to understand. what you will advocate for. a is not that you come as candidate who is not had dealings with this issue, because in a different context as the cia director you have had dealings. pompeo: i have had dealings, and i have avoided being part of the policy discussions around this. as you know, some of would critique me from entering those discussions too much. it is hard to hypothesize about what the conditions will be in may and how close may be to objecting -- achieving the president's objectives through
diplomacy. it is difficult. situationpothetical but which we still have a number of facts that are unavailable. >> i was asking you for a , and i donot goals not think the strategy is one that invades space presently occupied. easier for melot when i have to vote on you to understand what you will be advocating for. >> thank you mr. chairman for your testimony. thank you for being very forward in your answers. well asserve you secretary of state. i look forward to supporting you. there has been some news made while you are in testimony earlier today about president trump.
according to news reports, he has directed ambassador like heiser along with larry kudlow to open up the possibility of re-engaging in the transpacific partnership. the national security strategy china andn 2017 says russia are attempting to the road american security and prosperity. china is using economic toucements, penalties, persuade other states to heed its agenda. i talked earlier about the militarization of the south china sea, the fact they are planning to conduct live fire exercises in the taiwan straits. this, how toabout counter china's influence in what we need to do to make sure we have a policy for china? pompeo: that news was news to
me. i have watched the and i supported tpp when i was a member of congress. component toonomic what china is trying to do. we need to be engaged. there is a diplomatic component as well. we need to be deeply engaged there. i am confident this administration will do that. >> talking a little bit about southeast asia and our challenge. how many fighters from southeast asia do you think are in syria today? how many islamic fighters from southeast asia do we estimate are in syria? pompeo recall theo not exact number. there was a lot of them. detail,giving too much
it is better in some places than in others. do with oure european partners and partners in the middle east, we do our best to track these terrorists as they move around the world so they can identify ways to prevent them from conducting their terror. >> fighters went to syria then returned. doing off any of them were involved? pompeo: i do not recall sitting here today. taiwan, thes to taiwan travel act, do you agree with the policy provisions? would youvel authorize personnel to visit taiwan? pompeo: i am familiar with america's one china policy. i know what is there. ofh respect to the level appropriate authorities, i just need to look at that and turn to
the state department to give me guidance before i opine on the issue. support arms sales to taiwan? i think it is important we provide the arm sales necessary consistent with that one china policy. taiwan towe invite u.s. led exercises? pompeo: i do not know the answer to that. let's turn back again to north korea if you do not mind. does north korea present a nuclear proliferation threat? pompeo: we talk about the missile systems, delivery, risk to the homeland, to the extent of the nuclear capability. the technology and capacities north korea has. --y percent and a marvelous
they present a enormous proliferation threat. >> is that currently includes syria? pompeo: i cannot speak to that. know if north korea provided any of the elements or supplies to syria that could've been a part of the recent gas attack in syria? pompeo: i cannot speak to that. >> just quickly, what are your plans at the state department for the cyber security position? senator, i've had the chart shown to me. beyond that i have not given a great gil of consideration to people filling particular positions. i can only say that every element of government has a piece of cyber duty. it is one of the challenges. at the cia we spent a great deal of research and i hope we
delivered value on her cyber efforts. >> ila look forward to working with you on that. it is an important element. rob strayer is there now, who is not only dealt with homeland security issues, but foreign-policy issues. i know he is working right below that position now and just an outstanding job on your behalf. you should know that. >> thank you mr. chairman. pence bevice president heading to peru for the summit of america's. meet with him to but some other members of our committee. i mentioned that because you have been very strong protecting american values, diplomatic principles, etc..
this committee has passed down legislation that would task the state department to establish rankings for countries in fighting corruption, similar to what we do in trafficking of persons. but there is always resistance within the state department for more work being given to them. do we have your commitment that anticorruption is so important we need to have an effective means of using our influence in develop theies to anticorruption tools to fight corruption? yes, and i promise not to complain about workload. >> i appreciate that. pompeo: at least publicly, senator. >> this committee has been at the forefront of providing tools to deal with civil rights violators. we have gotten really good cooperation of both the state
department and treasury on implementing statutes. do we have your assurance that you will work with us? it is a cooperative effort between congress and the administration to identify human rights violators that are nothing health held accountable in the wrong country. do we have your assurances that you will work closely with us? those are both powerful tools. you have my commitment to we will work to use those tools to the full capacity the state department can't. >> i thank you for that. administratione come in with dramatic cuts to the state department's budget. we need a champion in the state department, and i heard you say you would ask for the resources you need. i heard you say that. one of the other problems we have is there have been appropriated funds that have not
been spent. when you follow the direction of congress on how we establish priorities, and when we established a priority you will carry out those priorities? pompeo: i have a lawful requirement to do so. this from both sides as a member of congress and in the executive branch. i know the rules. sure i am to make doing so anyway that delivers value, but yes, you have my commitment but i will work towards doing that. >> that happened in regards to russia. defending against propaganda and the state department did not take the money we provided. you obviously know a lot more information than any of us do in regards to russia, as far as intelligence information. can you had knowledge publicly that russia was not involved in our 2016 elections?
pompeo: yes, sir. a topic we it to talked about in my office, and that is torture. torture is one of the major issues we talk about in global human rights. roomu give a dictator any on torture, on the definition of torture, it will use it with impunity. yes, i have confidence in our professionals and how they go about getting information, but if there is any ambiguity on waterboarding were issues that are clearly within the purview of being abused, it leads to the erosion of global human rights in regards to people who are under custody.
can you just clarify for me how you would, as secretary of state, he clear as to america's commitment against torture? pompeo: senator, i will. i have 15 months of data you can take a look at. i had a similar question asked to me when i'm speaking for as director of the cia. torture is illegal and never permitted. today, the techniques are unlawful. we have not heard anyone seek to undermine that particular piece of legislation. we are all committed to that. tomr. chairman, i would like complement the nominee for giving precise answers. it is refreshing. >> you can complement him, not me, if you wish.
while we were on the issue of human rights, the committee has and the president has signed legislation to end modern slavery around the world to we have 27 million people minimally better in slavery today. there is an effort underway. the state department has funded $25 million. the united kingdom has done the same. it, i you are aware of know you're are committed to numbers and things, but i hope you will commit to working with us to improve this, to make it even stronger than it is, and to continue this effort. i will.senator, i worked on issues related to human trafficking when i was a member of the house. you have my commitment. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman.
when you are in my office we discussed the role of the state department in empowering women around the world. since women make up half of the world's population, as we get more information about what empowering women does we learn that women are more likely to give back to their families and their communities when they are able to go to work and benefit economically. that have empowered women generally do better on everything from how they deal to a democracyts scale. one of the things we have also the unitedt is states is the first country to agree we need to try to make sure that when there is conflict
resolution that women are included in those conversations and are at the negotiating table. because that means those negotiations are going to last longer and be better. we have an office of global women's issues. there has been an ambassador in that office, and right now it is unfilled. it has in the past reported to the secretary. i appreciate your concerns about the organizational chart, but i hope you'll take a look at this position against and that you will commit to ensuring that not only do we have a qualified but aador in that role, position that works directly with the secretary. senator, you have my commitment to find that person. >> thank you. has been reported that state
department officials have been asked to compare back language on women's rights, and sexual discrimination, international family planning, and the annual human rights report. again, can i have your commitment that countries and groups but continue to discriminate against and abuse women are exposed in this report as they have been for many years? senator, i am only a little bit familiar. i had a briefing with respect to the issue you raised. you have my commitment that we things like that. >> good. i appreciate that. we also discussed the issue of refugees when you are in my office. as of april 1, halfway through
the fiscal year, only 10,548 refugees have been resettled. 45,000 just 23% of the admissions ceiling that has been established. first, we you ensure the state department makes a good faith effort to meet the refugee admissions ceiling in the fiscal you 2018, and how would look at trying to make sure that happens? you have my commitment to that. you also have my commitment because i think america has a important role with respect to refugees. to provide humanitarian services for those seeking refuge. i've had a chance to meet with some of these refugees in difficult situations. you have my full commitments that we will work on these
issues together. >> thank you, i appreciate that. you have a very good idea how expensive the betting is for refugees invited into the united states. pompeo: yes, i am familiar with that process. very much appreciate your statements with respect to addressing morale at the state department, to addressing staffing at the state department. i hope you also look at promotions. that is another place that has been an issue at the state department. it is my understanding that there is still a hiring freeze at the state department. that is the only department within the federal government but still has a hiring freeze in place. i hope you will commit to repealing that hiring freeze and move forward as quickly as possible on filling the vacancies that exist. pompeo: senator, i will. i have heard different things
about the status of the hiring freeze. i spent a lot of time working on recruiting human capital at the cia, making sure we have the best americans in the world applying to become cia officers. we were not structured properly to do that. we devoted more resources to it. i think we have the building blocks in place. i want to do that at the state department, too. i want the best of america. >> iq, i appreciate that. said, it makeshy no sense for us to be undermining hours china is plucking up theirs. so, thank you. >> thank you, director pompeo. we had a very constructive conversation yesterday and then
confident you'd be a good advocate for career professionals. some of thefocus on management and budget and so forth, i'm going to focus on areas where i still have some unresolved questions. i wanted to make sure i recognize that i think you have clarity about the importance of the mission. you said in your prepared statement that representing requires promoting america's ideals, values, and priorities. i agree with you. i like to introduce for the ghcord an article from the pu research center. the 2017 annual survey looked at global levels of confidence. putinent trump, president
, the chinese president, and german chancellor angela merkel, and the confidence they would do the right thing for the world. it was striking that for the first time there has been real slippage. i you concerned to see polls such as this? ever morerst time leaders around the world trust president putin and the chinese president then america under president trump. i want the people around the world to accurately understand the beacon of democracy that united states is. i cannot tell you the depths of the poll, i do not know of it. it is the case that there are actors in the world seeking to achieve exactly the perception you laid out, and we need to
make sure we are doing all that we can to counter that perception. >> i'm sure you agree the united states has and promotes quite different values than china. whatld be quite interested your strategy would be for investing in the resources needed to push back. what role do you think our both in ourd play bilateral relationship with china and how we engage in the world? the last 15 months our values were not as front and center as our interests. how do we change that? pompeo: i believe that our drive those interests. we should be unashamed about that. we should speak to the reason why we operate the way we do.
we should defend american values every place we go. days, we do end up having to deal with unsavory characters from time to time to achieve an outcome we deem important to american national security. we should never do that exclusively. should never put away this american vision. we should be proud of that entity should always have that as part of the discussion. >> i think that is a vision that does not just tolerate, but celebrates, our differences. how we makeed about sure we make that celebration of difference in piece of our foreign policy. i would be interested of whether you take lb gtx you rights are human rights, and whether you
would advocate for them as a piece of our broader agenda advocating for diversity? and what is your strategy for .reventing partners like turkey pompeo: i deeply believe lb gtx you persons should have every right that every other person has. responsibility when dealing with those countries to do our best to have an impact to make them recognize the fundamentals for every human being the same way we do here in the united states. >> last question. there was some exchange previously about statements you make to an elected official
right after the boston marathon bombing in 2013, and whether .hat sends a message just tell me something about who the leaders are in the muslim world that you will be willing to work closely with, and what priority you would place on ?hanging that perception i think it is important to of a sense on the record of your view of the religion of islam and our partnerships in the muslim world. pompeo: let me try and do that. let me try to give evidence. i have worked with our intelligence partners throughout a broad range of muslim majority countries. we have done very difficult things together. it might be difficult for you to chase some of them down, but if you could speak to them you would find the view you
-- i think that come to understand i deeply honored their religion. some of the challenges of asked in your previous question, we have tried to push back. we have taken on some of the civil rights issues in a crisp and square way. i sure i will continue to do that. >> thank you for your answers. pompeo, this question has been asked by several members, but i am going to ask it in a little bit different way. in an living extraordinary time in terms of our constitution and what is unfolding. thatderstanding is rosenstein has been called over to the white house.
as you know, director comey was fired by the president. you went to the best law school in the country. you are a harvard trained lawyer so i think you really understand the difference between right and wrong here. circumstance, and we look very close to it and i do not think we can dismiss this if you eithercal, have the firing of the deputy district attorney or the special prosecutor this would be an unbelievable, extraordinary event in our history. i think it is clear it would be a violation of law. it would be obstruction of justice. i think it would put us in a
constitutional crisis. wondering would you refuse this position that this happened? senator, i did answer this question once before. i think the answer is no. again, i've not had a long time to think about it. arises, itic turmoil is important to have strong leaders. there was a time we had a president impeached. enormous domestic turmoil. ofis my regulation that most the cabinet members chose to continue to do their best. my thought as i sit here before you today is that i would continue to endeavor to do that.
>> you're speaking to the impeachment of nixon. many officials decided as a moral matter to step aside. there were not going to have anything to do with it. everything happened very quickly after that. now wherea situation i think this is going to be one of the biggest moral issues of our time. as the rest of our government and constitution crumbles around us, would you resign as cia director? i was thinking of a more recent impeachment when president clinton was impeached. that is what i had in my head when you asked the question. cabinet members decided it was incumbent on them to continue to
perform their functions ably. >> i think a closer parallel is nixon. to would you take any action do anything about it? to express your opinion in terms of right and wrong? we are a long way down into a hypothetical. >> yes, but i hypothetical that may happen. i think you should answer the question. pompeo: i'm going to give the same answer i gave previously. >> so your answer is you and not do anything? pompeo: i cannot say that. >> tell me what you would do. pompeo: i have to tell you again you are asking a hypothetical. i will not comment on hypotheticals today. >> mr. chairman i would just say
i am very proud of many of the republicans in the united states senate standing up and saying a think this would be intolerable and they would not accept it. i think they're going to step forward, so thank you very much. i appreciate it. >> thank you mr. chairman. pompeo, and 2016 you wrote that congress must act change i romney and behavior and ultimately the iranian regime. i think the topic of iran has been amply discussed today. you, you think regime change in another nation is an acceptable form policy goal for the united states? if you do, i would like you to tell me whether our earlier efforts have shown any success and also describe for me how we can embrace regime change as a foreign-policy goal without
encouraging other nations. senator, let me try to unpack the three or four questions there. first, with respect to the specific comment, some have suggested this was by use of force. fact that wet the have a theocratic regime. to the extent we could engage in activities that freed the iranian people. i am probably what the administration did earlier this year or the fall of last year. i was probably of the way this administration responded. it forcefully did so in support of iranian's demand a change. those of a kind of things i was thinking about when i was speaking to what u.s. policy can achieve.
if you say that regime change should be an official policy, why wouldn't russia be completely justified in saying regime change should be our official policy. the really want to go down the route will be take upon our own why wouldn't russia be completely justified inshouldere change in another country. there are examples of us thinking we could and finding out we do not know so much of our other countries as we think. pompeo: i cannot disagree with you about our success in achieving that. i do not disagree. that ifou would agree we embrace regime change in other nations can conclude it's an acceptable form policy for them? i cannot find the moral
equivalency there in each case you are describing. this is a unique, exceptional country. >> sensitive to your concerns, but look at election-meddling.. different in terms of how we engage. we should be proud and continue to make her we stay on the right side. cracks this came up earlier. the president announced he would not attend the summit of the americas. that and other actions, threatening to pull out of nafta
, it is suggesting that the administration does not put a high priority on the americas. what would you do to show our caribbean and other allies that you would maintain these relationships? mike pompeo: a traveler there. places of enormous opportunity, economic and a place that is a and of america walks away does not engage. venezuela, the administration is trying to achieve the outcome of their. they are trying to get the venezuelan people to be successful at getting what they need in terms of leadership and government. crisis, a deeply important place. will get thei secretary from the western hemisphere confirmed.
we will deliver great diplomatic solutions. it --far as you know, is is this administration's policy consistent with the previous administrations, finding peaceful solutions with israel and palestine? >> yes. >> thank you. the line of questioning. i talked with senator menendez. the regime change issue, i remember things like it. maybe everybody on this committee except senator paul with -- from kentucky -- a green agreed. a greed -- it seems that was unanimous but maybe not. that is indicative of some feeling of a regime change. dictator, brutal, a subject to sanctions and criminal prosecution. i don't think the united states
has the right to decide who should lead another country. it seems to me that a president stating someone has to go is going down that road. it was the stated policy of the united states of america that assad had to go. i thought that was unfortunate. it raised expectations. do regime change, it was going to be great with gaddafi con -- gone. >> i didn't agree with gaddafi. i remember the secretary, pummeled by committee members to ensure that it was the policy of the administration that assad had to leave. i remember, maybe not every person, but i'm sorry. not upset with everybody on
this committee. senator booker. senator booker: my last line of questioning, i do appreciate your religious freedom, my religious freedom. you hold your beliefs, what you think about, homosexuality, create thell this climate of said -- treating people equally, even though it might put a chill on people that worked with you. worked with you sent me a letter today. sen. coons: for work a minute ago, that objection. ellisonwelcomed keith to the united states. it is very heartfelt, personal letter about the nomination. i wonder if we could move on a little bit, talk about freedom of the press. administrations treatment of the press has been adversarial at
the least a gentle way of putting it. the president attacked the media on his first day in office on the reporting of the inauguration. enemy ofthe press the the people. that's very dramatic. his fake news accusations have meme where-- a meme in our country. according to the committee to protect journalism, we have journalists being imprisoned around the world at a significant rate. that is not a historical high. there is actually about 24 journalists, excuse me, 21 journalists now in prison in places like turkey, in china, on fake news charges. you recently -- you're currently the head of the central intelligence agency, which understandably should be a
lot more opaque and doesn't engage -- i think i heard you say earlier in this hearing you had just a handful of public statements. to the more recent people you've talked to, a culture of much more openness towards the press. let me ask you for the record real quick, you do not believe the press is the enemy of the state, do you? >> i do not, senator. >> you're going to engage with
the press. be open, be transparent, allow an robust engagement. >> it is my every intention, yes. >> great. when it comes to your posture towards the press as you travel internationally, you're going to become in many ways like the american you are, an apostle of the idea of the free press. >> yes. >> thank you very much. i want to move on to syria, if i may. the president -- and you and i talked about some of the -- you and i both comment we believe we need to counter the threat of iran. and then i talked to you yesterday about the incongruncy about our policy is in syria. the president has announced that he would freeze $200 million in stabilization assistance and that the u.s. would pull out of -- as soon as isis is defeated, he wants to pull out of -- pull out as soon as possible. and i'm wondering what your view on that presidential intention is. >> that is an active discussion. i want to be a little bit careful. with respect to the longer term strategy in syria, i can speak to that as opposed to
the near term events that are before us now. i don't want to prejudge what the administration's going to choose to do. with respect to the president's statement about departing from syria, which i think is at the core of your question, i think the president made clear he wants to get out. that he does want to have fewer american men and women there. we have fewer there today than we had some period ago, right? we're trying -- secretary mattis is trying to get the footprint right there to achieve the american objective. it is also the case that we hope that we can find partner forces to help achieve some of the very same goals that you referenced in your question. but i think we'd all agree, to the extent we can achieve those objectives for america, do it with fewer american men and women on the ground and better diplomacy, that's the task that's before us. senator: i know this was explored before, but i just want to ask it very simply, does the president have the authority to launch strikes against the government of syria? director pompeo: senator, yes, i believe that he does.
senator: you believe he does? does -- so you do not believe there should be a new -- there is a need for a new authorization for the use of military force to cover such an attack? director pompeo: senator, i believe that he has the authority he needs to do that today. i don't believe we need a new aump aumf for the president to engage in the activity you described. i think i said earlier, if confirmed, i'm looking forward to working with you. i do believe it is important that we refresh the aumf. that we bring it forward. we have current members serving who have supported the policies of the united states with respect to the use of force. senator: let me just say in closing, because i was very grateful for our conversation privately, but i just want to have it said out there in the public, myself and senator flake and especially i would consider a specialist on our committee
senator coons, our focus on issues in africa from the sahil region to what i think senator flake asked you about directly, zimbabwe. the feeling i got from his trip recently was the feeling of the neglect, not just from foreign countries, but a yearning for more engagement from the state department. clearly they're there essential u.s. interests there. clearly the chinese activities are something i know you find concerning. i just want to make sure and hear for the record what you told me privately that this will be a priority for you you will address your time and attention to in a significant way, not only in boosting morale, boosting positions, but putting forth a real strategy to deal with everything from the humanitarian crisis in sudan and congo. director pompeo: i think i confirmed that for you yesterday. i'm happy to confirm it also. full-scale. from humanitarian needs to all the other elements of u.s. diplomacy. >> before moving to senator
markey, the refreshing of the aumf was the '01/'02. director pompeo: yes, sir. i was thinking at that point the particular 2001 aumf. senator: i assume, again, when you talk about the strikes in syria, the president having the authority, you're talking about surgical strikes, no prolonged efforts. show less text -- efforts. >> that is correct. yes, senator corker. >> senator markey? senator: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. pompeo, i'd like to look at your record on human rights a little closer. next monday is the fifth anniversary of the patriots day marathon bombing in boston, and it, of course, was a horrific day in our history. it was something that proved once again that we are boston strong. but following those attacks, you falsely alleged that american muslim leaders were, quote, potentially complicit in violent acts for failing to speak out, even though the american muslim community and its leaders had already condemned that attack. because words matter, mr. pompeo, i have to ask you, do
you believe that your statements falsely accusing american muslim leaders of being complicit in the boston marathon attacks exemplifies the kind of moral leadership that our country should have in the post of secretary of state? director pompeo: senator, i think i answered this for you yesterday. i'm happy to do it here again. i'll answer the same way. i felt then and feel now that everyone has a responsibility to speak out about these terror attacks, the threat from extremist terror around the world remains, in spite of all the good efforts and resources provided. that's what i was speaking to today in the aftermath of the attacks you referred, those horrific attacks. that's what i was speaking to. it is true that many leaders spoke out about it. i'm not sure that we ever get to a point where it's enough, and when i said to senator booker yesterday, i'm happy to share with you as well, we talked about it in a different context, but it is the case that different people have greater and lesser credibility on
particular issues, and that's what i was speaking to there. steve: right. do you apologize to the boston muslim leadership for those comments in relationship to that incident? do you apologize to them? director pompeo: senator, it was not my intention in any respect to suggest that they were part of the chain of events that led to the attack. that wasn't my point. senator: in your opinion, were they complicit? director pompeo: senator, my statement is clear; to the extent we are silent, don't respond to these, make sure our educational systems -- senator: that's what i'm asking you. director pompeo: this is it. we all are, senator. senator: the boston muslim community came out and condemned it. is there any way in your mind that they are complicit? director pompeo: senator, to the extent they condemned the attacks, they did what i think it was we all have the responsibility to do. senator: to the extent which they did. they did. senator then yes, i'm happy they did that. i think it's a good thing. i think it decreases the
risk that an event like this is ever likely to happen again. director pompeo: well, you're being nominated for the position of secretary of state, and, of course, the rohingya are largely muslim. director pompeo: yes. senator: the burma military are engaged in a vicious destruction of this culture. this brutal campaign has already driven over 600,000 rohingya survivors to bangladesh. what's your message to the burma military with regard to how you view muslim leadership inside of burma, who are fighting to protect the very existence of this muslim minority inside of burma?
senator: american diplomats have and must continue to do our level-best to stop this strategy -- this tragic activity, and that's the burmese military in particular who is responsible for that. senator: well, i think it is important that there be a moral clarity that is uttered by the secretary of state, by the
president of the united states, about the muslim population of the planet. you know, leaving an impression that somehow or other they are less entitled to full protection or respect for their commitment to human rights, i'm afraid says to those who wish to use the member population as an excuse for actions that would otherwise be condemned is something that the united states leadership, and you as secretary of state potentially, have to be responsible for dispelling on an ongoing basis, and that's what i'm afraid of in terms of the message that is sent. unless you explicitly make clear that in your opinion there are isolated instances of abhorrent muslim activity, but in the whole that these are good people. they're religious people. and they have to be given all the full protections that every other religion and people are given. and that's your responsibility. director pompeo: senator, i agree with you. i'm happy to say that. i agree it is a tiny fraction. i think i've said that previously publicly as well. no one's brought that forward today. perhaps i should have done so myself, but i agree with almost everything you just said there. maybe everything but i'd need to go grab the record. with respect to treating them each with the individual dignity they deserve, i'm with you, senator. >> i do wish the buddhist leadership in burma would
conduct themselves a little better as it relates to the rohingya, i will say that. senator: i agree with you 100%. there is a religious struggle there. i don't think any demonization of any american of muslims in general as not respective of human dignity, of human rights, is very important. >> i agree. show less text . -- >> i think we have to hear it consistently on a bipartisan basis at every level, especially when we reach this level. >> senator murphy? you, senator markey. >> i thought it was merkley but i'll go to murphy. [laughter] >> merkley, murphy, it's hard. our ears are not -- >> i don't want to be standing to be corrected. it's murphy. go ahead. [laughter]
>> thank you, mr. chairman. we are belaboring these questions of authorization, and i suspect you know why. many of us have had misgivings about how the executive has expanded the ability to act unilaterally without congressional authorization. both in this administration and in prior administrations. there are differences, though. president obama didn't think he had the authority to launch missile strikes against syria without congressional authorization. this administration believes it does. but the concern spans both. so i'll ask one last question on this subject. the rationale for u.s. military troops in syria has been to fight isis and many of us support that even if we don't believe the authorization exists, we believe in the mission. the administration has started to signal publicly that there is a follow-on mission for our existing presence, which is to combat the influence of iran in the future settlement of accounts inside syria. do you
believe that u.s. troop presence is necessary inside syria to try to stem iran's influence? and if so, what is the legal basis for that activity? director pompeo: so, i will concur with you, while it's complicated, the legal basis gets much more difficult. the clarity that i think we have today, it sounds like you may disagree about the clarity today. i think we're coloring inside the line there. it becomes much more difficult. senator: do you believe that a troop presence is needed there to try to combat iranian influence? director pompeo: senator, it depends on precisely how that mission is constructed. no, i think there are other places, lots of other tools in the
american foreign policy tool kit that will allow us to achieve that. it may be the case that the president concludes that we've got to do it that way, that in order to achieve his goal there, and i am confident that the administration will comply with the law if it chooses to do that. i think it's hard to -- we talked about the jcpoa singularly. we've talked about this element of countering iran singularly. we talked about sanctions on iran singularly. the truth of the matter is that the strategy that's been laid out by the administration comprises multiple parts, and to the extent one piece or another is succeeding the outcomes we're looking for. i guess this is yesterday. $58,000 to the dollar. that's a very weak iranian economy. iranian people are about done with trying to figure out how it is that they're going to benefit from the place they find themselves today. they are frustrated with the economic failures of the administration in iran. there are lots of tools in the tool kit, senator murphy. and i can't answer without considering each of them precisely how i think
about the continued presence there. while i concede the legality is more complex. show -- senator: i think it's charitable to call what we're doing in syria today a strategy. i think as we watch a president move troops in then propose to pull them out, it's hard for us and our allies to figure out exactly what the strategy is there. finally, i just wanted to ask you a question that we talked about privately. and that's how you perceive the utility of the tool kit that is given to a secretary of state, and i'm of the belief that, you know, our foreign policy tool kit is badly misresourced today. i'm a big believer in peace through strength, but i'm not sure it makes sense to spend 20 times as much money on the military as it does on diplomacy. especially when countries like russia are standing up all sorts of nonkinetic capacities in order to win friends and influence adversaries. one of the frustrations we had with secretary tillerson, he was fond of telling this committee if we gave him one more dollar, he would have no idea how to spend
it. this was one of his favorite phrases when he met with it. it seemed to belie the reality of the world that there are lots of threats you can't meet with all the great military equipment we make in connecticut. you have to stand up capacities that the state department and u.s. aid has alone. i wanted to get you thoughts on that theory of the international case. director pompeo: if i can broaden out a little bit, i'll answer that one. i'll take the extra dollar. i'm convinced i can figure out ways to add value to create american national security value with resources. by the way, when i don't need the dollar, i'll send it back, too. that is if i conclude the program doesn't work, i'll let you know. we'll work our way through that. we've come through 15 years as a nation where the
ct fight has been at the front of much of the way we've thought about the world, and now these challenges, i think, do move on. i think we are out of balance with respect to how we're thinking about using these tools and these levers of power. so i think your sense of that is correct. senator: thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. senator murphy? senator: thank you. will you work to have our president be a visible, vocal, forceful advocate against the genocide and ethnic cleansing in burma? director pompeo: i'm sorry. was that a question? senator: that was a question. director pompeo: will i work? yes. yes. yes. senator: thank you. we would love to hear president trump speak out on that topic. transparency in resource extraction payments is a principle designed to prevent scenarios like that in engine torial guinea where oil payments go directly to the family rather than the treasury of the country. it has vast wealth but most people live under $2. do you believe we should work to increase transparency in
resource extraction payments? director pompeo: senator, it sounds right but i don't know much about the situation there in that country in terms of where the resources are going. if i might take that question and get you an answers. yes, as a general matter, i think that's appropriate. senator: it is an issue in many, many, many countries where the country is more or less robbed while the people live in abject poverty. the war powers act you referred to earlier, and we talked about it in the context of libya, it says that the president can send u.s. armed forces into action abroad only under statutory authorization by congress or in case of, quote, a national emergency created by an attack upon the united states, its territories or possessions. do you believe in a situation in syria where neither of those two qualifications are met that, in fact, the president has the power to send u.s. military forces into action?
director pompeo: i do. with the clarification that senator corker so gratefully provided to me in response to the previous time i answered that question. senator: that's a longer conversation, but that does go against most of the international findings of law, that there has to be a threat, and it's our law as well. the 2018 cia assessment presented to congress said the impacts of long-term trends towards a warming climate are likely to fuel economic and social discontent and upheaval. secretary mattis and general dunford have said that climate change is a national security threat multiplier. do you believe that climate change is a threat multiplier? and will you undertake to help lead the world in reducing this threat by reducing carbon dioxide
pollution that is heating the planet? director pompeo: senator, i'm familiar with the report that the agency i was leading issued. i see no reason to take any fault with what it committed to. i also believe that the climate is changing, that there is a warming taking place. i'm happy to concede that there is likely a human component to that, and i'm equally prepared to tell you that as we find tools that are effective to prevent the risk to the united states, national security challenges, the state department ought to appropriately be involved in them. senator: you're heading in the right direction. we don't have you quite -- director pompeo: wasn't even grudgingly, senator. senator: on a major threat to the planet. it is interesting the epa this year said greenhouse gasses from human activities are the most significant factor in climate change since the mid-20th century. i see all of the impacts in oregon, but we also see it in national defense situations around the world, including syria, where it was a prolonged drought that drove people into the cities and was the spark that ignited the civil
war that became the complete fiasco and mess that we have now. that's the sort of thing the defense department is talking about when they talk about a threat multiplier. i just saw this in northern africa as well. that the president of somalia, who is also an american citizen, made a powerful case that that is a huge source of disruption of his ability to restore normal rule of law in the country. so i do hope the world is looking at this and saying, where is the u.s. leadership? i hope you will be a leader in taking on the carbon pollution because we don't have a lot of time on this. will you continue to investigate it and wrestle with it? >> i will, senator. i promise you. we had a good discussion about this
yesterday. >> i also saw in africa the role the u.n. fpa. and it is providing health care to women who are coming from extreme conflict and duress, a combination of corruption and climate change and civil conflict. and, in fact, 61% of the maternal deaths in the world take place in humanitarian crises in fragile settings where health care services are unavailable. the administration has not wanted to restore funding to the u.n. fpa under the concern that they might possibly be involved in supporting programs that provide abortions, but there has been absolutely no evidence. will you look into that issue? and if there is -- if that task of the administration is not met, fight to restore this funding for the health of women around the world? director pompeo: i will look into it. if the data sets you describe, we become convinced of that, you have my word we'll work on it. senator: thank you. my time is out. director pompeo: thank you, senator. >> thank you. i know senator murphy had some questions also about syria and the aumf. i know you did also. having been involved in that and working with senator menendez to write
the aumf on syria, the administration's position was they had the authority without congress but numbers of seniors convinced the administration that our country would be stronger if they came to congress for an aumf. i think they fully felt they had 100% authority to make the kind of strikes they were going to make. it was going to be a ten-hour operation. there were going to be no ground troops and they felt they had that authority. senator menendez i know wants to have some closing questions and comments. i'm glad to offer the time for him to do so. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would just on your comment remind us that when we pass that authorization for the use of military force, which then president obama took to the g20 summit, it convinced putin at the end of the day to have assad give up the chemical weapons that he had, at least at that
time, which were internationally supervised and destroyed. so i think it is a powerful use of an authorization that got a goal at the time resolved without the firing of a single shot. director, the breath anddth and scope of your potential job is so large, even with the hours spent, i admire your tenacity there, we haven't even touched the surface. i'll submit a whole host for the record, but just a couple of things. mexico's the second largest export market for goods and services produced by united states companies with american jobs. second largest in the world. yet, our relations with them are the worst since the 1980s. the president using language and attacks reserved for our most ardent adversaries has personally insulted the mexican people, calling them murderers and rapists. threatened to deport young dreamers. threatens to cut
security cooperation and agreements. unilaterally suggests that the mexicans are going to bay $25 billion for a wall that is offensive to them, their people and their culture. how are you going to deal with this if you become secretary of state? do you think this is really the type of rhetoric that promotes the national interests and security of the united states with one of our most significant neighbors? director pompeo: i would agree with you, senator. my task if i'm confirmed would be to work to develop a set of relationships there that benefit both countries, specially ours, as the secretary of state for the united states. on the trade agreements, i've watched the team move forward trying to put america in a position that we have a trade deal that the president deems is fair and reciprocal. that's the objective. there are others. i've worked -- i and my team have worked in mexico extensively on the counter-narcotics challenges that come from that country. i think i'm still committed to -- i will still be committed to doing that. senator: your job is a lot more
difficult than promoting our interests with the mexicans if that continues to be the language of this administration. i don't think we can meet the challenge of the opioid, heroin and fentanyl crisis without mexican cooperation as parts of your challenge. i'm glad to hear you say you're going to support a robust state department. that's important for the secretary of state. will you oppose recessions that are being contemplated on the state department's budget? director pompeo: senator, i haven't seen the recessions that have been talked about in the press. i'll look at each one. i'll determine whether they are resources that are needed. if they are, i will fight to -- i want to make sure i get this right. to oppose the recessions. i'll make the case in the administration to say the -- senator: to oppose. is that what i heard you say? director pompeo: i will make the case to defend the resources that the state department needs. so if there are recessions to resources i believe we need, i'll be there arguing for -- senator: we talked about human rights. what do we do in a country hike egypt, which just
-- a country like egypt which , just had a sham election, you know, violates the rule of law with ngos, both of the united states and others. ultimately violates the rights of its own people. what's our value-driven mission there? director pompeo: senator, i spoke earlier -- perhaps generically and not about egypt in particular, about places we find complex challenges where different interests come into play. our obligation is to do our best. we have -- we have a population of 80 million egyptians with a weak economy that is subject to the threat of terror from its -- many of its neighbors. there are multiple tasks that are -- many of which are diplomatic that we have to do with egypt. as i've said before, when we come across a country that's engaged in human rights violations, things that are inconsistent with our
values, we should call them out. senator: you know, as we close here, i'm trying to think about which of the mike pompeo i'm going to be asked to vote on? is it the one that today said the solution to preventing iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is through diplomacy, which i would agree? or is it the one who said the only way to do that in my judgement is regime change in a speech of 2015? is it the one that said i've never advocated for regime change here today? or is it the one that said, should mr. kim vanish, given the history of the cia, i'm just not going to talk about it. the most important thing we can do is separate those two, right? separate capacity and someone who might well have the intent to break those two. is it the one that says the historic the story -- who says the historic conflict between the united states and the soviet union and now russia is caused by russian bad behavior? which i agree. or is it the one that stood alongside the president when he said much of the bad blood by russia is caused by the fake and corrupt russia investigation headed by all-democratic loyalists or people that work to obama? is it the mike pompeo who said in his
2013 speech that the failure of muslim leaders to repudiate acts of terrorism done in the name of islam make them, quote, potentially complicit? or, unquote, in these attacks. that this alleged behavior, quote, casts doubt upon the commitment of peace by adherence to the member faith? is it the one in 2010 in the congressional campaign tweeted out to your supporters an article calling your opponent an american of south asian heritage a, quote, turban topper? stating that you thought it was, quote, a good read. an article that you tweeted that said your opponent, quote, could be a muslim, a hindu, a buddhist, who knows, or as a member of congress when you co-sponsored legislation that sought to slow the spread of marriage equality, when the supreme court endorsed marriage equality in 2015, the highest court in the land, you said it's
a shocking abuse of power. it flies in the face of centuries of understanding of our constitution. co-sponsored a bill to defund planned parenthood. voted against the reauthorization of the violence against women's act, a bill that funds programs designed to help victims of violence passed annually since '94 and on and on. so the pompeo i hear today, much more different than some of the pompeo of the past. and so i'm trying to figure out which is the one that is going to act if he gets confirmed as the secretary of state. because some of these things of the past i could never support. some of the things you've said here today could actually be supportive of. so i hope you can help me understand this as we move forward in your nomination. senator: well, director pompeo, thank you for being here today. i think you've answered questions distinctly and fully when necessary. we're going to keep the record open until the
close of business tomorrow. there will be a number of qfrs from members. i hope that you will answer them promptly. i know that you will. just from my perspective, unless there is something that glaringly occurs between now and the time that we vote, i have to say, i haven't known director pompeo, maybe we shook hands a couple of times in years past. i don't remember if we did. no offense. i have not had much contact with you as the cia director. but based on my personal meetings and the phone calls and certainly your outstanding testimony today, i think you're a person of high intelect. i think your background could not be better to serve in this capacity. director pompeo: thank you. >> i 00 senator: i think you have the personal characteristics to lead the state department in a way that generates the kind of culture and leverage we need
around the world for active diplomacy. and for that reason i plan to avidly support your nomination and confirmation. i thank you for being here. director pompeo: thank you, senator corker. thank you, senator menendez. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]