[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
U.S. POLICY IN THE PACIFIC:
THE STRUGGLE TO MAINTAIN INFLUENCE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 23, 2016
__________
Serial No. 114-176
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
20-532 PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California
DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
MATT SALMON, Arizona KAREN BASS, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
MO BROOKS, Alabama AMI BERA, California
PAUL COOK, California ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas GRACE MENG, New York
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
RON DeSANTIS, Florida TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
TED S. YOHO, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
CURT CLAWSON, Florida BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
DANIEL DONOVAN, New York
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific
MATT SALMON, Arizona Chairman
DANA ROHRABACHER, California BRAD SHERMAN, California
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio AMI BERA, California
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania GRACE MENG, New York
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Mr. Matthew J. Matthews, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Islands, Senior
Official for APEC, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs,
U.S. Department of State....................................... 4
Ms. Gloria Steele, Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator, Bureau
for Asia, U.S. Agency for International Development............ 15
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
Mr. Matthew J. Matthews: Prepared statement...................... 8
Ms. Gloria Steele: Prepared statement............................ 17
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 34
Hearing minutes.................................................. 35
The Honorable Matt Salmon, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Arizona, and chairman, Subcommittee on Asia and the
Pacific: Material submitted for the record..................... 36
U.S. POLICY IN THE PACIFIC:
THE STRUGGLE TO MAINTAIN INFLUENCE
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2016
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:12 p.m., in
room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Matt Salmon
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Salmon. The subcommittee will come to order.
Members present will be permitted to submit written
statements to be included in the official hearing record.
Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for
5 calendar days to allow statements, questions, and extraneous
materials for the record subject to the length limitation in
the rules.
The Pacific Island region, far from both the mainland
United States and the core of Asia, is perhaps the most
overlooked region of the Asia-Pacific. This cluster of 14
sovereign states, although home to only 9 million people,
nevertheless deserves the United States' attention for the
important roles that they play in regional security, as
participants in international organizations, and as the
neighbors to our own U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam,
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in the
Pacific.
I welcome the Delegates to Congress from the U.S. Pacific
territories who have joined the hearing today. Thank you for
coming. We appreciate your attendance.
Many of us remember the Pacific Island countries for the
role they played during World War II. Following the war, the
United States administered a number of the Pacific Islands
under an arrangement with the United Nations. This included
three now independent nations, Palau, the Marshall Islands, and
Federated States of Micronesia, with signed a Compact of Free
Association with the United States of America.
The United States maintains a specific relationship with
these three countries today, including important military ties.
The Marshall Islands, for example, hosts the vital Ronald
Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site, which provides
regional radar centers and launch sites. Our strategic planners
following World War II also recognized the importance of the
Pacific Islands to regional security, developing the island
chain defense theory where our U.S. territories and compact
states form the second island chain defensive line.
The Pacific Island states are also of economic interest,
especially for the U.S. fishing industry and as the South
Pacific supplies roughly one-third of the world's tuna. For the
past 28 years, the U.S. tuna fleet has gained access to these
rich fishing grounds under the South Pacific Tuna Treaty, which
exchanged fishing rights for licensing fees and $20 million in
U.S. aid. Earlier this year, the United States suspended the
treaty as the terms were ``no longer viable.'' The treaty is
now under renegotiation, and I look forward to hearing from our
witnesses about our efforts to support U.S. business and jobs
in this important treaty negotiation.
We are not alone in recognizing the importance of the
Pacific Island nations. Our friends in Australia and New
Zealand play an active role as major donors and in promoting
peace and security in the Pacific Islands region as they work
to maintain a good relationship with their neighbors.
France, which also maintains territories in the South
Pacific, plays an active role in the region as well. But not
all new activity in the Pacific Island region is aligned with
our interests. Five years ago, the Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton testified to Congress that the United States was in
direct competition for influence in the Pacific Island region.
But very little seems to have been done since then to bolster
our position. Beijing, on the other hand, has made significant
advances. It has opened new Embassies in the Pacific Islands,
provided an average of $150 million per year in economic
assistance and established a strategic partnership with eight
Pacific Island countries. China has started providing military
training and equipment to some Pacific Island countries, and
the People's Liberation Army frequently refers to the island
chains in their own planning documents.
Chinese trade with the Pacific Island states is nearly 10
times larger than the United States. China has targeted the
Pacific Islands in its diplomatic efforts. Vanuatu, a country
that qualified for U.S. Millennium Challenge Corporation
compact in 2006, is one of only eight countries to publicly
back China's position that arbitration in the South China Sea
is illegitimate. Although China is working to gain ground in
the Pacific, the United States and its friends still maintain
solid relationships there.
I do want to recognize the Pacific Island nations of
Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, the Solomon
Islands, and Tuvalu for maintaining full diplomatic relations
with Taiwan. That, to me, is very, very important and near and
dear to my heart. In light of this competition between the
United States and China in the Pacific, how is the United
States faring as it struggles to maintain its longstanding
influence in this important region? Have we devoted adequate
resources to the Pacific Islands as part of the
administration's rebalance?
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on these
issues, and I am going to refer, first of all, to the other
member on the committee before I go to our guest today, so, Mr.
Perry, did you have an opening statement you would like to
make?
Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I really don't. I didn't
want to waste the time of everybody so I want to hear from the
witnesses, but I appreciate the opportunity.
Mr. Salmon. Okay, well, great. We have a couple of guests
today, and I will first turn to Congressman Sablan. It is
customary to recognize the other sides of the aisle in the next
statement, so we welcome any opening statements you would like
to make.
Mr. Sablan. Well, thank you very much, Chairman Salmon. I
got promoted to ranking member just like this in probably my
second invitation to this committee.
But, Chairman, thank you very much for inviting me to
participate in today's hearing on the struggle to maintain
United States influence in the Pacific. Before I continue on, I
would like to recognize in the room the presence of the Dean of
the Diplomatic Corps, the Ambassador of the Republic of Palau
to the United States, Ambassador Kyota.
Ambassador, welcome.
Mr. Chairman, you could say that I am a Member of Congress
today because of America's decision over half a century ago to
maintain its influence in the Pacific. After World War II, the
United Nations created a Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
out of islands that the United States had fought the Japanese
for and the United States took responsibility for incorporating
those islands into our Nation or giving them a path to
independence.
The people of the Northern Mariana Islands voted to join
the United States in 1976 and became U.S. citizens 10 years
later. And as of 2009, the people of the Northern Marianas are
represented alongside other Americans here in this House of
Representatives, the seat I now hold. So America's influence in
the Marianas, part of the Pacific, an area the size of
California and Oregon combined, by the way, is secure. The
people of the other three districts of the trust territory,
however, chose independence. These new independent nations were
created in free association with the United States. If we want
to maintain influence in the Pacific, I believe then it is
particularly important to focus on keeping those existing
relationships with America strong. And I am very concerned
about the relationship with one of those nations, the Republic
of Palau.
The relationship is based on a Compact of Free Association,
which established Palau's existence as an independent nation.
The compact also pledged United States' economic support for
the new republic and gave the United States exclusive military
rights in the land and waters of Palau. The original compact,
negotiated in 1994, also calls for a renewal of the agreement
after 15 years. And, in 2010, the U.S. Representatives signed
the renewal updating and extending the provisions of the
compact for another 15 years.
Unfortunately, however, 6 years later, that agreement to
extend the compact has not been approved by Congress. So,
instead of giving Palau the assurance of a long-term
commitment, we have been sending assistance to Palau on an
installment basis, year by year. From the point of view of the
Republic of Palau, you can imagine how this appears. It seems
as though the United States is not good for its word. From my
point of view, the people of Palau are very patient people. But
patience has its limits. From the point of view of Palau's
neighboring nations, imagine how America's unfulfilled promise
appears? This is no way for our Nation to maintain influence on
what is becoming, every day, a more strategically important and
contested area of the world.
To address our unfulfilled promise, I introduced
legislation in this Congress to approve the 15-year extension
of America's compact with Palau. My legislation would make up
to Palau for the financial assistance that it would have
received under the extension agreement but which it has lost
because of the Congress' inability to act. And to further push
for resolution, in December, a group of Members from the
Pacific--Ms. Bordallo of Guam, Ms. Gabbard and Mr. Takai of
Hawaii and I--asked the Defense Department to support including
the compact extension in the 2017 National Defense
Authorization Act. And I understand the Defense Department has
now reached out to both the House and Senate Armed Services
Committees supporting resolution of the Palau issue in this
year's NDAA. Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono was also able to
include in the Senate-passed defense bill this month a sense of
Congress statement calling for resolution of the Palau issue.
The Defense Department sent letters, and Senator Hirono's
amendments are important signals that we may be ready to get
the congressional approval of the Palau Compact extension, but
we have to get to the finish line in this Congress. And I am
glad to report the chairman Bishop of the Natural Resources has
agreed to hold a hearing on my bill approving the compact
extension on July 6. And the hearing today, shining a light on
America's struggle to maintain influence in the Pacific, can
also help us reach our goal.
Mr. Chairman, I congratulate you for your decision to hold
this hearing, and again, I thank you very much for inviting me
to be here.
And I yield back my time.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you. We are very grateful to be joined
today by Mr. Matt Matthews, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Islands, as well as
senior official for APEC in the State Department's Bureau of
East Asian and Pacific Affairs--welcome--and Ms. Gloria Steele,
the Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator in the U.S. Agency
for International Development's Bureau for Asia.
And we thank the panel for joining us today to share their
experience.
We will start with you, Mr. Matthews.
STATEMENT OF MR. MATTHEW J. MATTHEWS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, AND THE PACIFIC ISLANDS,
SENIOR OFFICIAL FOR APEC, BUREAU OF EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC
AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Mr. Matthews. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Sherman, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on U.S.
public policy toward the Pacific Island countries and for your
leadership on these issues. The Pacific Island region has been
free of great power conflict since the end of World War II, and
we have enjoyed friendly relations with all of the Pacific
Island countries. This state of affairs, however, is not
guaranteed. Our partnerships and engagement in the region
matter very greatly. Today, we partner together on a number of
issues of global importance from standing together for human
rights in the U.N. and contributing to global security through
peacekeeping operations to combating climate change and
illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing.
The Pacific Islanders punch above their weight, and the
United States must continue to encourage them through our
support for their sustainable and inclusive development.
However, it is equally important that we do not take Pacific
goodwill for granted. Our relationship with our Pacific
partners are unfolding against the backdrop of a shifting
strategic environment where emerging powers in Asia and
elsewhere seek to exert a greater influence in the Pacific
region through development and economic aid, people-to-people
contacts and security cooperation. There is continued
uncertainty in the region about the United States' willingness
and ability to sustain a robust forward presence that has been
a hallmark of much of the 20th century and that has contributed
to peace, stability, and prosperity in the region. To
counteract this uncertainty, the administration continues to
ensure that the Pacific piece of the rebalance to the Asia-
Pacific is not forgotten. The United States has always been a
friend and partner to the Pacific Islands, providing the region
with significant levels of foreign assistance. Under the
rebalance, we have stepped up our level of engagement,
including expanding our staffing and programming and increasing
the frequency of high-level meetings with the Pacific Island
leaders.
In 2011, President Obama met with Pacific Island leaders on
the margins of APEC, and in 2015, he met with the leaders of
the Marshall Islands, Kiribati and Papua New Guinea at the COP-
21 climate meetings in Paris. In 2012, Secretary Clinton became
the first Secretary of State to attend the Pacific Islands
Forum, the key policy body of the region. Since then, we have
continued to engage Pacific Island leaders at high levels
through the annual Pacific Islands Forum leaders' forum, most
recently with the visit of Deputy Secretary of State Heather
Higginbottom to the forum in 2015.
U.S. engagement at the Pacific Island Forum provides an
opportunity to press issues of concern with Pacific Island
leaders and for the U.S. to be responsive to the region's needs
for assistance and economic development. The Pacific continues
to look to the United States for leadership and support,
including on fostering sustainable economic development,
enhancing maritime security and combating climate change. The
United States has provided over $350 million in Fiscal Year
2014 in its engagements with the region through 15 U.S.
departments and agencies.
U.S. assistance includes $21 million annually provided to
the Pacific Island parties to the U.S.-South Pacific Tuna
Treaty. As we speak, the United States is in active
negotiations over the future of this nearly 30-year-old treaty.
As we deepen our longstanding engagement with the region, the
United States partners closely with Australia and New Zealand,
which like us, share a strong interest in ensuring the peace
and prosperity of our Pacific neighbors. In recognition of the
leading role Australia and New Zealand play in the Pacific, we
frequently consult with them on our strategic and development
issues. And we work to ensure our assistance to the region is
complementary, advances our common objectives to promote
sustainable and inclusive development.
While Australia and New Zealand frequently play a lead
assistance role in the South Pacific, the United States and the
countries of the North Pacific share especially close
relationships. In particular, the Freely Associated States of
the Republic of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands,
and the Federated States of Micronesia are an important
component of the U.S. position in the Pacific. Through our
respective Compacts of Free Association, the United States has
maintained extraordinarily close relations with the FAS. In
Fiscal Year 2014, we provided over $200 million in assistance
primarily administered by the Department of the Interior to
support their governance and economic advancement.
In the United Nations, the FAS have some of the highest
voting coincidence with the United States. For example, in
2014, Palau had the second highest voting coincidence with the
United States. Despite an increase in assistance from others
interested in enhancing their engagement with the region, Palau
has not only supported the United States on Israel- and Cuba-
related votes but has been at the forefront of actively helping
garner support of others.
Palau has supported U.N. resolutions seeking to combat the
spread of weapons of mass destruction and joined in efforts to
address systemic human rights abuses in North Korea, Syria and
Iran.
Our relationship with not only Palau but with other FAS
states allows the United States to guard its long-term defense
and strategic interest in the region. We have full authority
and responsibility for security and defense matters in and
relating to each of the FAS, and we have the right of denial of
third-country military access to them. Admissible FAS citizens
have the right to work and live in the United States as non-
immigrant residents. While the FAS does not maintain their own
military forces, their citizens are eligible to serve in the
U.S. Armed Forces. Citizens of FSM, RMI, and Palau volunteer to
serve in the U.S. military at high rates, and we are grateful
for their sacrifices and dedication to promoting peace
worldwide.
In February, I accompanied Assistant Secretary Russel, U.S.
Pacific Fleet Commander Admiral Swift, and U.S. Coast Guard
District 14 Commander Rear Admiral Atkins to several Pacific
Islands. One of the countries we visited was Palau. As
Assistant Secretary Russel said, our commitment to the
development and self-determination of the people of Palau will
always endure because it is built on common history and values.
We are united by the sacrifices of the thousands of Marines and
other U.S. servicemembers who were killed or wounded liberating
Palau during World War II, and we appreciate the Palauans who
serve in the U.S. Armed Forces today.
The original process that led to our compact with Palau and
the subsequent review was based on a solemn promise to help
them achieve self-governance and long-term economic
advancement. The assistance package within the agreement as set
forth in the administration's February legislative proposal is
designed to reduce Palau's dependence on U.S. direct economic
assistance as it continues to grow and reform its economy.
In addition to U.S. assistance, the terms of the agreement
commit Palau to a range of economic reforms designed to help
increase fiscal transparency, sustain progress achieved under
compact funding, and create a stronger foundation for economic
self-sufficiency. After nearly 6 years and multiple endeavors
by the administration and Congress, we have as yet been unable
to secure the funding necessary to bring the Compact Review
Agreement into force. But bringing the agreement into force
will demonstrate to Palau and our partners across the region
that our commitments are not empty promises.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I wish to reiterate the
Pacific region's strategic importance to the United States. Our
identity as a Pacific power was affirmed on the beaches of the
Pacific during World War II. And since that time we have built
positive and multifaceted partnerships with these countries.
Our engagement in this region is about our long-term strategic
interests. We will continue to work constructively with our
partners in the region to maintain peace and foster
sustainable, inclusive development. But we will also need the
support of Congress, not only to secure funding for the Palau
Compact but also to continue to support our engagement efforts
across the Pacific. Thank you for the opportunity to testify
before this committee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Matthews follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Salmon. Thank you, Mr. Matthews.
The Chair recognizes Ms. Steele.
STATEMENT OF MS. GLORIA STEELE, SENIOR DEPUTY ASSISTANT
ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR ASIA, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
Ms. Steele. Chairman Salmon, Ranking Member Sherman,
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify on USAID's role in advancing U.S. foreign policy
interests, including the Asia-Pacific rebalance in the Pacific
Islands. The Pacific Island nations may appear as tiny and
scattered dots on the globe, but they are as central to global
security today as they were during the Second World War. Their
strategic position in the Asia-Pacific make them more vital
than ever to the global economy. A vast proportion of the
world's shipping passes through Pacific waters on which
millions of people depend for food and income. Many of these
nations, however, are threatened as never before by the
depletion of their natural resources by health threats such as
HIV, TB, and the Zika virus, and especially by natural
disasters. While typhoons and cyclones have long plagued the
region, they are becoming more frequent and more intense.
Rising seas threaten the very existence of low-lying
nations such as the Marshall Islands, the Tuvalu, and Kiribati.
Ocean acidification and rising sea temperatures are damaging
coral reefs and fisheries, posing major threats to food
security. At USAID, our mission is to end extreme poverty and
promote resilient democratic societies while advancing security
and prosperity of the United States. Key to achieving success
in the Pacific Islands is helping nations cope with the
changing environmental conditions. Our development assistance
across 12 Pacific Island nations helps people improve their
lives while building a more sustainable, equitable future for
all.
Next, I will provide brief overviews of our primary
assistance areas. First, on adapting to changes in climatic
conditions: The people of the Pacific Islands depend primarily
on tourism, fisheries, forestry, and agriculture for their
livelihoods, all of which are highly sensitive to changing
climatic conditions. In 2015, we supported over 280 communities
across 12 Pacific Island nations to mitigate the negative
impacts of natural disasters. With an emphasis on women's
participation, we are also providing grants and training civil
society organizations to help communities adapt to changing
climate while also addressing related community needs such as
improving livelihood and food security. At the same time, USAID
is focused on increasing regional cooperation and coordination
on climate change and on strengthening intra- and
intergovernmental capacity at the national level to address
issues related to climate change. When disasters do occur,
USAID delivers humanitarian assistance to help with basic
needs. For example, in response to the drought in the Marshall
Islands, which is affecting nearly 40 percent of the
population, we are helping to provide supplemental food
assistance, hygiene supplies, and safe drinking water. In the
Marshall Islands and in Federated States of Micronesia, we also
assist in post-disaster reconstruction. To help reduce the need
for disaster assistance in the first place, we support
communities in effectively preparing for, responding to, and
mitigating the impacts of natural disasters. Assistance
includes programs to develop early warning systems, train
volunteers on first aid, and climate-proof water sources and
community infrastructures.
On fisheries, it is estimated that more than 200 million
people in the Asia-Pacific region are dependent on fisheries
for food and income, yet illegal, unreported and unregulated
fishing poses a major threat. In support of sustainable
fisheries management, USAID is helping to develop an electronic
traceability system to ensure that fish and other marine
resources are legally caught and properly labeled. Currently,
we are piloting this system in Indonesia and the Philippines,
and once operational, we plan to expand it to other countries,
including the Pacific Island nations. We are also working with
the Government of Papua New Guinea on a new bilateral
assistance agreement to improve sustainable management of
natural resources and biodiversity. In health, we are helping
to address Papua New Guinea's HIV/AIDS epidemic and related
gender-based violence. We are responding to the government's
recent request for assistance in addressing its multidrug-
resistant TB crisis. And, finally, in democratic governance,
USAID has targeted efforts to address trauma and other social
issues in post-conflict Autonomous Region of Bougainville in
Papua New Guinea. We are also helping to increase awareness of
and preparation for its referendum on full independence that is
slated to take place in 2019. USAID provided election support
in Fiji during the run up to the country's 2014 elections, the
first to be held since the 2006 coup.
Mr. Chairman, USAID's investments in the Pacific Islands
are a critical part of the United States' vision for a
peaceful, prosperous and stable Asia-Pacific. Our support for
the region's sustainable inclusive development contributes to
stronger U.S. diplomatic, commercial, and people-to-people
relations with the Pacific Island countries, helping to advance
our own security and prosperity. I appreciate the opportunity
to testify today and look forward to your counsel and
questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Steele follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for a chance to
deliver an opening statement. We had a markup and a hearing
scheduled at various times, and I am glad that we have started
this hearing.
I want to thank you for holding this hearing on countries
with 9 million people living in a dozen countries. These
islands, as has been noted, play an important role in U.S.
history over the last 75 years, particularly during World War
II. I believe these islands will be more important this century
than perhaps they were last century because they, you know--I
want to get testimony on this from our witnesses--they control
an enormous amount of economic zone ocean floor and fish
resources. The ability of our species to exploit the ocean and
its floor are going to increase. Our need for natural resources
is going to increase. And 200 miles around every inhabited
island adds up to a tremendous portion of the Pacific.
I will also be asking our witnesses, and they may or may
not know this, whether an island that has previously been
uninhabited acquires a 200-mile radius economic zone when one
family chooses to live there. Many of these islands, as noted,
were important in World War II. They were important during the
cold war, and we get support from most of these countries when
issues come before the United Nations.
The Compact of Free Association that we have with
Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Palau, represent our
recognition of our international partnership with these
countries over the years and our joint interests. One issue
that needs particular attention is the Palau Compact review.
This agreement was designed to help people of Palau achieve
self-governance and economic self-sufficiency. The United
States should abide by its commitments. I know we have had
difficulty securing the funds necessary to bring the Palau
Compact review fully into force, and I look forward to working
with the administration and our colleagues to achieve that.
As to climate change, the nations of the Pacific are the
most vulnerable, along with the other island nations in the
Indian and Atlantic Oceans, to climate change. Climate change
is already impacting the everyday lives of residents through
sea level rise, more frequent storms, et cetera. Assistance in
responding to these impacts often constitutes a large part of
our aid and our other relations with Pacific Island countries.
Extreme climate events have also impacted water, coastal, and
marine resources and agriculture. I will point out that there
are some on the right who will say we shouldn't talk about this
because there couldn't be any global warming, and then there
are some on the left who say you cannot talk about remediating
or preparing for global warming either because you should not
admit that that is a possible thing to do or because anything
that diminishes the harm of global warming diminishes our
incentive to deal with it. The fact is we need to be practical.
There is global warming. We will not fully stop it in the
decade to come, and helping our friends of the Pacific deal
with it is one of the best uses of our USAID budget.
I would like to hear specific details from USAID of efforts
to help these countries deal with critical climate affected
needs. What programs have worked and what countries have been
most capable of working with us?
Finally, I want to address a legal matter involving Tonga.
Two families in the San Fernando Valley were among the victims
of an investment fraud scheme where the alleged fraudster
absconded to Tonga. For the past several years, efforts to
extradite him to face trial in the Central District of
California, where he has been indicted, have moved, shall we
say, slowly through the Tongan courts. A lower Tongan court
recently determined that the U.S. Tongan fraud laws were too
dissimilar to warrant extradition under the treaty, a decision
that appears highly questionable.
The application of dual criminality that is at the
extradition law concept--the alleged criminal activity must be
a crime in both countries in order for it to be an extraditable
offense--has been applied, but it should be applied to lead to
extradition. In this fraud matter, it would be a violation if--
and obviously, the defendant has not been convicted--but the
crimes set forth in the indictment would constitute a crime in
every country of the world that maintains as reasonable rule of
law system. So now that decision is being appealed by the
Tongan Government with the expectation that the appeal will be
heard in September. And I for one will be looking to see
whether the rule of law and reasonable decisionmaking is taking
place in Tonga.
The life savings of my constituents were wiped out. There
is an indictment of an American suspected of having defrauded
them and others. The activities for which the individual is
wanted in the United States would be a crime in every country,
and he ought to be extradited as soon as possible. And keep in
mind, this is an American suspect. There is no argument that
somehow a Tongan is going to be discriminated against in the
United States court system.
I urge the State and Justice Departments to work closely,
and I know our witnesses, whether they choose to comment on
this case right now, I know that the State Department will be
focused on this.
I yield back.
Mr. Salmon. We will now go to the questions.
I would like to ask the first question. The U.S. still
hasn't completed a long-term solution to the Tuna Treaty
stalemate. Voices within the U.S. tuna industry continue to
view the treaty as obsolete, irresponsive to market conditions,
and economically unfeasible. How would the U.S.' withdrawal
from the South Pacific Tuna Treaty affect the diplomatic
relationships between the United States and the Forum Fisheries
Agency member countries, Mr. Matthews?
Mr. Matthews. Mr. Chairman, if in fact it comes to the
point where there is no way to bridge differences over the key
elements of extending the Tuna Treaty and we do, in fact,
complete withdrawal, I believe that the United States'
relationship with Pacific Island nations are sufficiently broad
and deep that we can find ways to sustain our close cooperation
and the important relationships that we have today. I believe
there are many ways in which we are providing assistance and
development aid, that our cooperation on capacity building and
in areas of security will continue. That said, the Tuna Treaty
and the work that has been done under it has been very helpful
in maintaining our position, so we do continue, even as we
speak, to work during a fifth round of negotiations that are
currently being conducted in Auckland in hopes that some
workable path forward can be found.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you very much.
My next question is regarding Taiwan. And, Mr. Matthews,
you were just there so maybe it would be appropriate. It would
probably be appropriate for either one of you, but of the 22
nations that maintain full diplomatic relations with Taiwan,
six are Pacific Islands region: Kiribati, the Marshall Islands,
Nauru, Palau, and Solomon Islands and Tuvalu. With tension
between President Tsai's new administration and the government
in Beijing, some experts are worrying about a return to dollar
diplomacy and efforts to change recognition ending a multiyear
truce. Are we concerned about such efforts in the Pacific? Are
we taking steps to encourage countries in the Pacific to
maintain the status quo? Would you like to take a first stab,
Mr. Matthews?
And, Ms. Steele, I would love to hear you thoughts, if you
have any, on that.
Mr. Matthews. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Steele. No, I would defer to my colleague on this.
Mr. Matthews. The United States has a longstanding policy
of supporting the maintenance of international space for
Taiwan. We do that through a number of different venues. Of
course, we support Taiwan's participation in any international
organization that does not require sovereignty. And those
organizations that do require sovereignty, we still seek
meaningful participation for Taiwan, and we also have
additional venues for helping Taiwan maintain international
space, and that includes a cooperation framework that I
participated in just a few days ago in Taiwan, the Global
Cooperation Training Framework, where we work together with
Taiwan to bring international players to Taiwan where Taiwan's
expertise and the United States' expertise can be used jointly
to help promote development and dissemination of important
knowledge. That last session that we had was on energy
efficiency, and it not only had participation from India and
Southeast Asia, but also from Pacific Island nations.
So I think there are a number of venues by which we are
able to assure that Taiwan does have international space. I
won't say that there is not any concern that there might be
some, you know, future stress placed on their international
space, but it is clear that the United States is there to help
support and maintain it.
Mr. Salmon. I thank the gentleman.
I am going to recognize Mr. Bera.
Mr. Bera. Thank you, Chairman Salmon, and thank the
witnesses.
You know, let me ask my first question.
Ms. Steele, as, you know, the administration pivots to
Asia, you know, we often talk about China, Japan, Korea, South
Asia, you know. With regards to the pivot to Asia and the
Pacific Islands, specifically, you know, could you give us how
the administration is viewing the potential for Pacific Islands
and what their focus there is?
Ms. Steele. Thank you, Mr. Bera. Just as soon as then
Secretary Clinton announced the pivot to Asia, within a month,
we opened up a USAID satellite office in Papua New Guinea, and
within 6 months, we started implementing climate change
programs. These are very important to the people of the
Pacific, as I have mentioned earlier. They are among the most
disaster-prone countries in the world, and we are helping to
mitigate the impact of the natural disasters and helping them
to be prepared for those impacts.
And in Papua New Guinea itself, we have set up programs to
address HIV/AIDS and TB. They are suffering from multidrug-
resistant TB right now and the related gender-based violence in
those countries. And in the runup to the elections in Fiji, we
also provided assistance, which has resulted in contributing to
the drafting of their Constitution of 2013 and a very
successful election in 2014, the first one since 2006.
Mr. Bera. Great, thank you, Ms. Steele.
Either Mr. Matthews or Ms. Steele, you know, the ranking
member touched on climate change. He touched on preparations
for climate change. If you were to quantify, you know, how big
a threat climate change and rising oceans is going to be and
then also how the islands are preparing. I don't know if you
want to start, Mr. Matthews, or----
Mr. Matthews. Well, I think it is commonly recognized that
particularly Pacific Island nations that are atoll nations and
who have very little space to deal with in terms of the high
points above sea level--some nations have a maximum of 3 meters
above sea level is their highest point. And these Pacific
Islands, like the Marshall Islands, like Kiribati, are
particularly vulnerable. They are vulnerable to the potential
impacts of sea rise, but they are vulnerable already to major
climatic storms and sea surges, and they already suffer
problems and do, in fact, require remediation. As Congressman
Sherman mentioned, remediation is a necessary aspect of the
work we do with them, and we are, in fact, already engaged in a
number of programs. But we are also, under the new Paris
Agreement, going to be ensuring that we provide access for
Pacific Island nations to funding that will be a part of the
global fund, and we are actually initiating programs to help
them learn how to go about doing that and to do it effectively
and efficiently.
Ms. Steele. If I may add, Mr. Bera.
Mr. Bera. Yeah.
Ms. Steele. The Pacific Islands, as I mentioned earlier,
bear a lot of the brunt of natural disasters. Just look at
statistics, when we first opened their operations there,
emergency assistance was at $175,000 for the entire year. Last
year, in 2015, it was $13.3 million. The frequency and the
intensity of the disasters have become very obvious. The
strongest typhoon hit Micronesia in 2015, and then in Fiji in
2016. And so it is an issue because these countries depend
largely on natural resources, tourism, fisheries, agriculture,
and forestry.
Mr. Bera. In the last minute that I have, in terms of
preparation to deal with sea rise and the increasing frequency
of these natural disasters, what do you think it will take, and
what is our timeline like?
I don't know, Ms. Steele or Mr. Matthews, whatever.
Ms. Steele. It will take a significant amount of effort and
collaboration and cooperation among the different parties
involved, from the communities to civil societies to
governments and regional institutions. There is a lot of work
that needs to be done, measures that need to be taken at the
household and the community levels, and proper planning and
policymaking at the national level.
Mr. Bera. And do you see that taking place right now, the
framework of that?
Ms. Steele. Yes, Mr. Bera. All of the donors are
coordinating and working very closely, leveraging each other's
resources to support the different countries in the 12 Pacific
Island nations.
Mr. Bera. Great. Thanks.
My time has expired. I will yield back.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman. Oh, you don't have a----
Mr. Salmon. We actually go to the noncommittee members
after all of the members have asked their questions.
Mr. Sherman. Tulsi, you want to go now, or do you want me
to go now?
Ms. Gabbard. Either way.
Mr. Sherman. Why don't we go to the gentlelady from Hawaii?
Mr. Salmon. Great. We will.
Ms. Gabbard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, thank
you both for being here today.
I wanted to ask you about Vanuatu. According to a recent
report from the Center for Strategic Studies' Maritime
Transparency Initiative, they added Vanuatu--or Vanuatu is on
the list of countries that publicly stated the South China Sea
arbitral tribunal under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the
Sea is illegitimate. I am wondering if you could share your
thoughts on why they have taken this position and where you
think other Pacific Island nations stand on the Philippines v.
China tribunal case.
Mr. Matthews. I believe, you know, China has been reaching
out to Pacific Island nations over the past year seeking their
support. I believe, to date, Vanuatu is the only Pacific Island
nation that has spoken out in support of Beijing's position on
the arbitral panel's future decision. The other Pacific Island
nations, I believe, like us, believe that the outcome of the
arbitral decision is going to be any member of the UNCLOS
treaty is subject to it and that they should abide by the
outcome of that.
They also believe that--and they have not agreed to China's
claims to the South China Sea. Most recently, there were
statements from Beijing that Fiji, in fact, had agreed to
Beijing's position, and the Prime Minister Bainimarama
specifically spoke out to say, no, that was not the case and
that they did not take a position on among claimants and that
they stood for international law applying to the resolution of
those decisions.
So I think, in general, we are in a very good place. Once
our new Ambassador to Vanuatu, who is resident in Port Moresby
in Papua New Guinea, is able to present her credentials, she
will be reaching out to the government there to engage on this
issue.
Ms. Gabbard. With respect to Fiji and our relationship with
Fiji, given the strain that occurred after their military coup
and the democratic elections that followed, can you speak to
what the status of our relationship is and, you know, kind of
what you see as the path going forward, both with Fiji but also
looking to see how we can strengthen our relationship with
these other Pacific Island nations?
Mr. Matthews. In the case of Fiji, we do, in fact, welcome
the return to democracy in 2014. And since that time, we have
been increasing our interaction with them, both on the
diplomatic side but on the security side as well.That process
will continue in a step-by-step fashion, and we are continuing
to encourage the Government of Fiji to create greater space for
civil society and for their opposition consistent with their
commitment to democracy. And as that happens, I think you will
find the pace of our relationship speeding up and
strengthening.
For other Pacific Island nations, I mean, we have ongoing
warm and close relationships with all Pacific Island countries,
and I fully anticipate that will continue to be the case.
Ms. Gabbard. Were there any specific hard actions that were
taken by the United States against Fiji or anything withheld
after the military coup took place?
Mr. Matthews. Well, there was a cessation of military
exchanges and training, and that is beginning to come back into
play as a part of the Pacific Command's general process of
reengaging. And I think that is fully appreciated by the
Fijians.
Ms. Gabbard. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you. Mr. Sherman, did you----
Mr. Sherman. No, absolutely.
The briefing materials for this hearing basically indicate
that, for the area, we are providing $233 million per year in
aid and elsewhere say that China may be doing $150 million, but
the $150 million is really just loans similar to what our Ex-Im
Bank would do; that is to say promoting their own economy by
giving concessionary financing for the export of their goods
and services.
If we want to compare apples to apples, aid dollars, here
is money to benefit you, you get to keep, are we at 233, and
what is China at?
Mr. Matthews. The figures I have, Congressman, are that our
total package of assistance in 2014 was actually $350 million.
That is in addition to aid. There is a lot of direct
government--U.S. Government agency assistance to the Pacific
Islands. There are over 30 different government agencies and
departments that actually do contribute. And that is real
substantial assistance.
For China, I actually don't know what the split is between
actual grant amounts and the actual loan amount. I would be
happy to go find that information out for you and get back to
you on that.
Mr. Sherman. Okay. The information I had included
development assistance, economic support fund, global health
programs, international military education and training, and
regional development mission to Asia plus the South Pacific
Tuna Treaty. In addition to those that did add up to 233, what
are the ones that are missing from our briefing materials?
Mr. Matthews. There is other assistance that is provided.
The FAA provides assistance for aviation authorities in the
Pacific Island states. I believe in the case of Palau, there
was over $30 million provided over the past couple of years to
help upgrade their airport and other associated facilities.
Health and Human Services provides assistance, and I would have
to go back through, but there are--it is actually pretty
substantial.
Mr. Sherman. Good. And, yet, we still are not in compliance
with the agreement with Palau.
Mr. Matthews. To the extent, you know, all of the aid I
have noted is really important, but as many people have already
spoken up to say, if we can fulfill our obligation under the
2010 treaty to fund Palau, we will be in a far better place. It
is incumbent on us to do that and the sooner----
Mr. Sherman. Is there any aid we are providing to Palau
that doesn't qualify under the treaty and if we just gave money
for this rather than for that, without increasing our total
expenditures, we would be in greater--we would be closer to
compliance?
Mr. Matthews. I think we actually have to take this
specific action to fund the agreement, and there is--the other
thing I would say about this is that we want to be able to fund
the agreement for the long term to actually fulfill our promise
and to signal to the region that our commitment is real.
Mr. Sherman. Well, then, let me move on to another
question. Papua New Guinea has agreed to allow the Bougainville
regional government to hold a referendum on self-determination.
The date could be in mid-2020 or even a target date of June
2019. Is this referendum actually likely to occur by the end of
2020? And how is it likely to turn out? Are we about to see the
birth of a new nation?
Mr. Matthews. Well, first of all, we really welcome Papua
New Guinea's decision to move forward on this. They are
obligated to do so, but now they are actually clearly signaling
that they are prepared to move forward on this, and it is very
possible. Well, we don't know what the outcome of that
referendum vote will be, but it is possible that it would lead
to the creation of a new state.
Mr. Sherman. What would be the population of the new state,
or what is the population of the regional government's area?
Mr. Matthews. Bougainville, I am not sure. It is going to
be under a million in any case. The total population of Papua
New Guinea is a little over 7 million.
Mr. Sherman. Got you.
Ms. Steele. If I may.
Mr. Sherman. Yes.
Ms. Steele. We are currently helping the Autonomous Region
of Bougainville by working with their civil society, raising
awareness, and getting dialogue going about the meaning of the
referendum that is coming, so that they are well aware of what
this means to them, what the implications are when they go and
vote, if and when they go and vote.
Mr. Sherman. And you have a world structure that is based
on a sovereign state being a much larger entity than that. I
realize there are exceptions in the islands of the Pacific. I
would hope that just in terms of defining what it is to be an
independent sovereign state, that various regions that had a
population of just a million or so could be suitably federated
parts of or autonomous regions within states. When you start
going to the United Nations General Assembly and meet people
who represent fewer folks than I do, one wonders why the San
Fernando Valley doesn't have at least one vote in the United
Nations.
And I yield back.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
Mrs. Radewagen, did you have any questions?
Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank you and the ranking member for inviting me
here to be at this hearing. The Pacific Island nations are near
and dear to my heart because I have lived in the Marshall
Islands as well as the Northern Mariana Islands. I have been
all over those islands, and so I am very understanding of the
compacts, as well as the Palau Compact, which I fully support.
However, I am here today because of the importance of
fishing in my home district of American Samoa. So I have a
couple of questions here, Mr. Matthews. I understand that the
U.S. Tuna Treaty negotiations, which are going on right now,
are reaching a critical stage. I trust you realize how
important the successful conclusion of these negotiations is to
American Samoa. The treaty is vital for fishing access by
United States vessels, many of which land their fish in
American Samoa. I would appreciate assurances that the State
Department is doing all it can to finalize a new treaty, which
provides a viable future for the U.S. fishing fleet. And I
understand that an agreement on minimum days has been reached
or is close. But how companies contract for extra fishing days
may be subject to Department of State approval. What is the
reason for that?
Mr. Matthews. First of all, I can assure you that we are
making every effort possible to reach what we believe, in
consultation with the U.S. fishing industry, which also
includes representatives from American Samoa--they have been
participants in all four rounds, and I believe they are
participating now--that we will reach an agreement if we can
reach a sustainable economically viable outcome. That requires
understanding on fishing days, charges for fishing days,
certainty of how elements under the agreement will be dealt
with to make sure that the American fishing fleet gets proper
clarity on what its obligations are and how those will be
executed for the period of the agreement and that the agreement
will be for a substantial period of time to provide the
industry with a clear path forward to know how to invest, how
to prepare, and to know that they will have an economically
viable future.
All of these elements are critical. We certainly understand
the great importance of American fishing to American Samoa and,
particularly, to providing fish for the canneries that are
there, and we will be making every effort to make sure we have
an economically viable outcome. If we do not reach an
agreement, if that does not happen, the American fishing fleet
will still have the ability to negotiate with the relevant
states on their own, and we will be working to make sure,
though, that if there is any possible way to get to a viable
outcome under the treaty itself, then that will be our first
order of approach.
Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you. One of the key elements of the
treaty and, even more importantly, of the United States'
position at the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries
Commission, the other international mechanism governing U.S.
fishing access in the region, is the matter of fishing on the
high seas. I am sponsoring legislation intended to ensure that
the WCPFC regulation of fishing by United States vessels,
especially on the high seas, is science-based and establishes a
level playing field relative to fishing by other flag fleets. I
hope that the Department of State and other U.S. Government
agencies will support this legislation.
Mr. Matthews. Thank you, Congresswoman.
I just want to say that we are committed to ensuring that
the U.S. Pacific fleet does, in fact, fish in a sustainable way
in a manner which is consistent with laws and requirements, and
we believe that their behavior over time has been exemplary.
And we hope that other fishing fleets in the Pacific will
follow similarly sustainable approaches.
Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I yield back.
Mr. Salmon. Thank you.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Sablan for any questions he
might have.
Mr. Sablan. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Matthews and Ms. Steele, thank you very much for
joining us today and also for your service to our country.
I am the only Micronesian in Congress, having been a
citizen of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. And
growing up, of course, I heard stories about World War II. Just
to set the facts straight--and this is in no way intended to
disparage anyone--Guam was indeed liberated by the United
States. The rest of the Pacific Islands were caught in a war
between the United States and Japan, just to set the record
straight.
But let me ask if--I have been on two trips to Australia
and New Zealand, actually booking on flights, one with Natural
Resources, and the other one with Foreign Affairs. But, Mr.
Matthews, how much do we rely on Australia to form our view of
what is going on in the South Pacific?
Mr. Matthews. Actually, Congressman, Australia and New
Zealand are both important partners for us and have extensive
involvement in the South Pacific and provide a substantial
amount of aid to Pacific Island nations in the South Pacific
whereas we probably are the more, you know, critical partner in
the North Pacific.
Mr. Sablan. I understand, but in terms of----
Mr. Matthews. In the South Pacific, they are very important
partners across the board, and we do, in fact, rely on them for
a lot of our understanding about what is happening there, sir.
Mr. Sablan. Okay. And so when we are going--the difference
between our treatment of Australia and New Zealand, there still
remain some differences, I think, in the level of treatment. Is
there any time in our foreseeable future where the Prime
Minister of Australia would be welcome to the United States--
and I don't know what they call it--have a state dinner, maybe
address a joint session of Congress? Are we getting close to
that?
Mr. Matthews. For Australia?
Mr. Sablan. For New Zealand.
Mr. Matthews. Oh, for New Zealand. Well, we have a very
close and growing partnership with New Zealand. The
relationship between President Obama and Prime Minister Key is
very close, very warm. They get together on the margins of
international meetings, and Prime Minister Key has, in fact,
visited Washington. And so whether or not there will be a state
dinner planned, I can guarantee you that this is a relationship
on an upward trajectory.
Mr. Sablan. That is what I would like to hear. I hope it
continues to go upward----
Mr. Matthews. It will.
Mr. Sablan [continuing]. And what has happened in the past
will, you know, eventually be water under the bridge.
Let me go back to my specific interest here. Does the
administration believe that Palau is of strategic importance to
the United States because of its geography and proximity to
countries potentially unfriendly to the United States?
Mr. Matthews. We absolutely believe that Palau has enormous
strategic value, not just Palau in isolation but Palau as part
of the larger Freely Associated States. They represent a vast
swath of the Pacific where the United States, under the compact
agreements, has specialized defense rights, and its
geographical location is in fact quite critical, and it is
among the various reasons that we really ought to do everything
we can to fund the Palau Compact as soon as possible.
Mr. Sablan. With no disrespect, but I am running out of
time. There are 12 Pacific Island nations. And three have
compacts with the United States, including Palau, of course. As
for the other nine, China is trying to establish a foothold in
the area. Cuba has actually established through a medical
program in the Solomon Islands that relationship. Now, even
Russia has engaged in Fiji. We have transfers of military
equipment. The general population in the region is friendly
toward the U.S., but if the U.S. does not follow through on its
commitments to a compact state, that sends a bad signal to
other states in the region.
And you keep saying that you continue to engage with the
different countries, but continuing to have conversations when
you reach an agreement and then, for 5 years, not approve that
agreement, not enacted it into law, that doesn't send a good
signal, does it, Mr. Matthews?
Mr. Matthews. Well, I agree with you totally, Mr.
Congressman. But, actually, everything has been done to put
that agreement into force, except the funding.
Mr. Sablan. Well, no, no, not everything has been done.
Mr. Matthews. The funding.
Mr. Sablan. Yeah, I don't argue whether it is a problem
with helium gas or U.S. passports, the cost of U.S. passports,
but for the people of Palau, they are looking to the United
States and saying, what happened to the piece of document we
signed, we negotiated, we agreed? Why is the issue of helium
gas and passports becoming their problem?
Mr. Matthews. All I can say is the sooner we can fund the
agreement, the sooner it will enter into force.
Mr. Sablan. Then why did we enter into an agreement that we
couldn't fund?
Mr. Matthews. I have to refer that question back to
Congress. It is up to Congress to decide how to go about
funding it.
Mr. Sablan. Congress didn't sign the agreement. With no
disrespect, I am just trying to iron it out.
Mr. Matthews. Sure. I appreciate it.
Mr. Sablan. Thank you very much.
Mr. Matthews. Thank you.
Mr. Sablan. Mr. Chairman, I yield.
Mr. Salmon. I thank the gentleman.
And I thank the witnesses today. It has been a great
hearing. We appreciate all your hard work on behalf of the
islands and the region. And I thank the ranking member for his
support for this hearing today.
And, without objection, this hearing will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:07 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Material submitted for the record by the Honorable Matt Salmon, a
Representative in Congress from the State of Arizona, and chairman,
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]