Hearing Of The Senate Foreign Relations Committee - To Consider The Nominations Of Jeffrey Feltman To Be Assistant Secretary Of State For Near Eastern Affairs; Robert Orris Blake To Be Assistant Secretary of State For South Asian Affairs

Statement

Copyright ©2009 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Carina Nyberg at cnyberg@fednews.com or call 1-202-216-2706.

SEN. CASEY: Well, thank you very much. The hearing of the Committee on Foreign Relations will come to order.

Today the committee meets to consider the nominations of Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman to be assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs and Ambassador Robert Blake to be assistant secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs.

These two State Department regional bureaus are at the forefront of American foreign policy and national security. And I believe President Obama has nominated two qualified men to lead them.

I want to thank both of them for their long service to our nation and their willingness to serve in difficult hardship assignments at various points in their careers. Although Afghanistan and Pakistan have dominated the headlines in recent weeks, we must not forget the overwhelming challenges posed by Iraq. As assistant secretary, Ambassador Feltman will devote substantial time to ensuring stability and security in Iraq as American combat forces begin to draw down next year.

While I support the president's plan to withdraw our troops, I'm concerned by a number of long-term post-conflict issues that could jeopardize an already fragile environment in Iraq. In particular I worry about the lingering effects of the Iraqi refugee crisis, which has displaced approximately 5 million Iraqi citizens inside or outside of Iraq's borders.

I hope Ambassador Feltman and the department will develop a comprehensive strategy to deal with the problem. It not only presents a major humanitarian challenge, but also threatens Iraq's political stability and security interests.

Iran will also be a major focal point for Ambassador Feltman in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. Members of Congress take the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program extremely seriously, and I know the administration shares that sentiment. An Iran with nuclear weapons is completely unacceptable. And while I strong support President Obama's use of diplomacy to engage Iran, I believe just as strongly that diplomacy must be reinforced by the threat of coercive tools like economic sanctions. Otherwise Iran will have no incentive to negotiate in good faith.

Due to sharply lower oil prices and the global recession, Iran should be susceptible to greater economic pressure. I'm a co-sponsor of the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act introduced last week, which would authorize the president to impose additional sanctions against foreign firms that export reprocessed gasoline products in Iran.

Next week I'm introducing a bill in conjunction with Senator Brownback to authorize state and local governments to divest from companies that do business in Iran. Until the Iranian regime decides to become a responsible partner in the international community, it must realize the consequences for its own behavior.

Iran's influence is also felt in the Middle East peace process, in the area in which Ambassador Feltman was actively involved during his tenure as counsel general in Jerusalem. As President Obama has stated on numerous occasions, a two-state solution, in which Israelis and Palestinians are living side by side in peace, is the only path forward to a lasting and enduring peace.

To this end, I hope the ambassador can lay out how the United States intends to play a leading role in forging a comprehensive peace that would normalize relations between Israel and Palestine as well as Israel and the Arab world.

As if these issues were not enough for one assistant secretary, Ambassador Feltman will also lead efforts to diplomatically engage Syria, protect the sovereignty of Lebanon, improve economic ties with our North African and Gulf partners, and strengthen civil society, governance and democracy in the region through the Middle East Partnership Initiative.

Ambassador Feltman served with distinction as U.S. ambassador to Lebanon during the Israel-Lebanon war of 2006, and I am confident the ambassador's long career of service in the region will prove to be invaluable in this next assignment.

Next we have the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs, which has no shortage of challenges of its own. We're all aware of the gravity of the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The president has made clear his strategy to defeat al Qaeda and other extremists in these two nations and build the capacity of the respective governments.

Although Ambassador Richard Holbrooke will be primarily responsible for the direction of our so-called Af-Pak policy, Robert Blake will not be far removed from these issues as assistant secretary. He will be directly involved in formulating a regional strategy to combat the trafficking of drugs from Afghanistan through Central Asia. With our loss of the air base, Ambassador Blake will also lead efforts to find alternative supply routes into Afghanistan.

Regarding Pakistan, he will work closely with our Indian partners to defuse tensions along the Indo-Pakistani border and improve cooperation between the two neighbors on combating extremist elements in the region.

Ambassador Blake will also have to confront another major crisis in the region, one he knows all too well, and that is the civil war in Sri Lanka. Having recently returned from the island where he served as U.S. ambassador, Bob Blake can provide important leadership in bringing the sad chapter in Sri Lanka's history to an end.

This humanitarian disaster is no longer just alarming; it is indeed tragic. For months I've followed the crisis, and I am no longer surprised, just saddened, when I hear accounts of starvation, hospitals being shelled by artillery, child soldiers and forced conscription in the rebel army.

The United States and the international community, in particular the United Nations, must become more involved in urging the government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE rebels to lay down their arms and reach a political settlement. A military victory by the government will not end this conflict definitively. The government must incorporate the ethnic Tamil minority into the construct of the Sri Lankan state and award them equal standing in Sri Lankan society.

For their part, the Tamil population must reject the terrorism of the LTTE. There are positive signs that the LTTE is indeed losing support. Recently, over 50,000 civilians broke free from the conflict zone, where they were being held against their will by the rebels, and escaped into the government-controlled safe zone.

Unfortunately, the government has not treated their citizens must better than the rebels. Not only does the military continue to bombard heavily populated areas, including hospitals, but the government stubbornly refuses to allow sufficient amounts of international humanitarian aid into the safe zone.

Tamils lack food, water, sanitation and medical assistance, and are dying unnecessarily as a result. In government camps for internally displaced persons, that we know by the acronym IDPs, Tamils are being held indefinitely in deplorable conditions without prospects for return to their homes. Many are accused of being LTTE sympathizers, giving the government grounds for keeping them detained. International observers do not have enough participation in the screening process for incoming IDPs, and the government won't allow more access to the U.N. and NGOs, non-governmental organizations.

Ambassador Blake will be in a position to influence the direction of our policy toward Sri Lanka. We need to identify points of leverage to induce more responsible behavior by the Sri Lankan government and facilitate a lasting peace between the parties to the conflict.

I trust the ambassador, following the strong leadership already demonstrated by Secretary Clinton, will award this crisis the attention it deserves.

Ambassador Blake will also be able to draw on his experience as the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in New Delhi to enhance our partnership with India, the world's largest democracy. We're witnessing an historic period in U.S.-Indian relations. Trade between our two countries is booming, and we continue to enhance our security partnership. And in October of 2008, the United States and India signed an agreement to authorize trade in civilian nuclear technology for the first time in more than 30 years and improve safeguards for India's nuclear facilities.

Of course, the relationship is not without its challenges. We must now take the necessary steps to implement the civilian nuclear agreement in order to commence nuclear trade with India.

Sometimes overshadowed by their neighbors to the south, the five Central Asian countries will also be part of Ambassador Blake's portfolio. Over the past decade we have slowly begun to grasp the strategic importance of this region. Situated between Russia, China and Iran and an unstable Afghanistan, these post-Soviet states have started to forge their own identities.

As we formulate U.S. policy towards these countries, we need to understand that they are intricately linked to, not dependent -- and not independent from South Asia.

Whether the discussion is about energy and electricity, supply routes for our forces in Afghanistan, counternarcotics or combating terrorism, we need to realize why the Department and the Senate Foreign Relations committee have joined these two regions together.

The United States, indeed, has several interests in Central Asia. We seek to encourage the emergence of stable, democratic governments that respect human rights -- respect human rights universally, and we need to diversify and expand our sources of energy.

We must expand our security partnerships and enhance cooperation to prevent drug trafficking, and we want to ensure that these countries do not become satellites of any global power against their will.

So, our two nominees, if confirmed -- and I have confidence, have great confidence they will be confirmed, will have much on their plates as they assume their positions.

And now, at this time, let me turn to our distinguished ranking member, Senator Risch, for any opening statement.

SEN. RISCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, let me say that this is certainly a challenging part of the world, and the issues that we have been grappling with in this subcommittee and the committee have shown us how important it is to American interests what occurs in this area of the world.

And I'm certainly interested to hear what the two nominees have to say, as far as how they will move America's interests forward in that area of the world.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SEN. CASEY: Thank you, Senator Risch. And I'm pleased by your work on the Foreign Relations committee and our subcommittee, and I'm grateful for your presence here today.

I'm pleased to introduce a colleague of mine, someone that I know well and someone that was elected the same year that I was in 2006, Senator Whitehouse. He's a distinguished member of the United States Senate, representing the State of Rhode Island. He's on a number of critically important committees, such as the Judiciary committee and the Intelligence committee, someone who follows and advocates for important policies, both domestically and internationally, and we respect his voice. I appreciate his friendship and his service, not only to the State of Rhode Island but to the people of the United States of America, and we're pleased he can be this morning.

I like to kid him that when I started in the Senate I was among a small group of senators, and one senator introduced me as Senator Whitehouse to someone else. (Laughter.) And I proudly stuck out my hand said, yes, I represent the State of Rhode Island. (Laughter.) Because I figured in this business, if you're confused with someone like that you'd better take it.

But, I think this person has since had the record corrected. Now they know the difference between the two of us. But, I was honored to be so confused -- that someone confused me with Senator Whitehouse, because of his reputation up that point in time was so sterling, as a prosecutor and as a leading public official in Rhode Island, but now even more so.

Senator Whitehouse, we're honored by your presence here and thank you for your testimony this morning.

SEN. WHITEHOUSE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, I have to say, I think it was my reputation that was improved by the confusion -- (laughter) -- and I'm glad to see that, by dint of hard and diligent work, you've been able to overcome the resemblance that you bear to me -- or at least that you appeared to bear to whoever spoke to you at that time. And it's always a happy occasion for a member of the Senate Class of 2006 to see another member of the Senate Class of 2006 chairing a hearing.

I am honored to be here. I thank you for your courtesy in allowing me to speak. I thank you for your friendship and for your distinguished service to the people of Pennsylvania and to the country.

And to the ranking member I also want to thank you.

I'm here on a labor of love, to some degree, because Bob Blake is my first cousin. He comes to this position from a long tradition of service to our country. His grandfather slept outside of St. Petersburg with a pistol under his pillow during the Russian revolution as a young Foreign Service officer, and went on to serve as what was then called "minister" of our country in Colombia and Guatemala.

His uncle -- my father, weathered months of house arrest in Conakry, Guinea, smuggling radios and bread loaves to the other American families who were pinned down in their houses, so that they could communicate and keep up morale; and went on to serve with distinction at the ambassador level throughout the Southeast Asian conflict in Vietnam, Laos and Thailand.

His father, who is here today, Bob Blake, and his mother, who is also here today, Sylvia Blake -- my aunt and uncle, are also a part of this distinguished tradition of foreign service. Bob Blake senior served with great distinction in the Foreign Service for many years; also rose to the rank of ambassador; served in far-flung places like Mali and the Congo; and he raised his son in the highest principles of duty, patriotism and principle that Bob has displayed throughout his career.

As a result of all that, Bob Blake knew exactly what he was getting into when he signed up for the Foreign Service many years ago, and he has served in that capacity with great distinction. He has been our ambassador in Sri Lanka. He has been for years our acting ambassador in India.

Before that, he served overseas in postings in Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt and Nigeria. He's been the desk officer for Turkey, at the Department; and he has served in the Ops Center, where all the cables come in and get shipped out. He has served directly in the secretary of State's office.

And I can tell from my own experiences traveling around as a senator, whenever I mention his name with Foreign Service officers he is known. He is well-regarded. He is viewed as one of the "leading lights" of the career Foreign Service. So, it does me great honor to have the chance to be able to introduce him today and to say these words on his behalf.

He brings, I think you will find, a sense of duty to this job that is at the very core of his character. He brings a keen sense of principle that, over the years of experience, has been blended with an equally keen sense of the practicalities of going forward. He brings immense experience and he brings a cheerful and open temperament that helps him be extremely effective in his diplomatic work.

I had the occasion to visit him in Sri Lanka while he was the ambassador there, and we had a casual family dinner at the residence with no guests other than the president of the country, who -- I think for the first time ever, came in a purely informal and social environment because of his trust in, and regard for Ambassador Blake. When a chief United States representative overseas can quickly forge a relationship of that kind, there's a platform through which innumerable good things can be accomplished.

And I will end my remarks there. I wish him well in this process. And I've warned him that you intend to grill him very, very sternly at my request. What can one cousin do for another? (Laughter.)

I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And I thank the ranking member. And, Senator Isakson, I thank you for your courtesy in allowing me here.

I have other business and have to take my leave.

SEN. CASEY: Well, Senator, as you take your leave, we want to thank you for your testimony here and your presence. We're grateful that you did so. I have to say that's one heck of a family. (Laughter.)

We appreciate the perspective that Senator Whitehouse brought to this hearing. We're grateful.

Ambassador Blake, maybe what we can do is have you present your opening statement, and it'll be followed right after that by Ambassador Feltman. And we'll go from there.

Senator Isakson, I don't know if you have anything you want to say now, or wait for the questions?

(Senator Isakson defers.)

Okay.

But, I'd encourage both of you -- as we always say, "you know the drill," to try to keep your remarks as brief as possible. And I'll say, on the record, that both of your statements, the full text of your statements will be made part of the record. So, you don't have to worry that everything that's in the statement won't be on the record.

And if you're able to summarize, we'll call it a comprehensive summary, as best you can, that would speed things up.

But Ambassador Blake, thank you very much.

MR. BLAKE: Thank you, Senator.

Chairman Casey, members of the committee, I'm honored to be here today as nominee for assistant secretary of State for South Asian Affairs, which includes responsibility for the countries of Central Asia.

It's a privilege to appear before this committee again, and I'm grateful for the confidence that President Obama and Secretary Clinton have reposed in me.

Even though he's already left, I'd like to thank my cousin, Senator Whitehouse, particularly his discretion in not sharing some of the embarrassing stories of our childhood and I appreciate very much his kind words.

As Sheldon said, I'm very happy that my parents are here today. My dad enjoyed a distinguished 30-year career with the Foreign Service and he and my mother, Sylvia, have been a constant source of support for me. So I'd like to thank them as well.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to submit my full statement for the record and make a few brief comments as you suggest.

In no region in the world are the stakes higher for U.S. national security than in South and Central Asia. If confirmed, I will do my utmost to support the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, in ensuring the success of the president's strategy in those two countries.

South and Central Asia also is a region of extraordinary opportunity for the United States. If confirmed, a top priority for me and for the Bureau of South and Central Asia, will be to seek an expanded strategic partnership with India. In addition to our shared democratic values, we have common interests in combating terrorism, stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction, getting the global economy back on track, addressing global climate change and reinvigorating trade talks.

In the other countries of South Asia, the United States will seek to strengthen democracy and expand educational opportunities and outreach to the young people of the region.

The five states of Central Asia have helped the U.S. and coalition efforts in Afghanistan by allowing vital over flights facilitating shipments into northern Afghanistan. But our bilateral relationships with these countries go beyond cooperation on Afghanistan.

We will continue our longstanding policy to support the sovereignty and independence of these nations and plan to take a fresh look at each country in Central Asia to see if new opportunities to promote reform and cooperation -- both for the United States and our neighbors.

Mr. Chairman, South and Central Asia currently is one of the least economically integrated regions in the world. Integration is vital to help create vibrant economies in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the broader region. If confirmed, I will seek new opportunities to expand cross-border trade, transportation, infrastructure development and energy links.

If confirmed, I hope to collaborate closely with this committee and Congress and look forward to your support in gaining the resources necessary to advance our goals ins the region and your guidance as we pursue the opportunities for political and economic openings -- and most importantly, partnership in this pivotal part of the world.

Thank you. And at this time I'd be pleased to take any questions that you and members of the committee have.

SEN. CASEY: Ambassador Feltman.

MR. FELTMAN: Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to be assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.

I would also like to take this opportunity to introduce my wife, Mary Draper, who's a fellow Foreign Service officer. Mary's behind me. Mary and I feel a profound sense of pride to have represented the United States in a variety of countries abroad.

I'm grateful to the president and Secretary Clinton for entrusting with the responsibility, if confirmed, to lead what we in the State Department refer to as the NEA Bureau.

Given the challenges in the region, NEA works in partnership with distinguished special envoys and advisers, as well as other bureaus, colleagues and other civilian agencies and the Department of Defense. If confirmed, I shall do all possible in support of Senator Mitchell's efforts to advance a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

If confirmed, I shall also devote myself to the success of our national strategy as set forth by President Obama on February 27th to end the war in Iraq responsibly, leaving a nation that is sovereign, stable and self-reliant. My colleagues and I work in support of this strategy, mindful of the efforts and the sacrifices of our courageous troops.

If confirmed, I would lead NEA in implementing what Secretary Clinton has called a diplomacy powered by partnership, pragmatism and principle. Our partners must be given confidence in our commitment to their security. Pragmatism and principle come together in our approach to countries that have been a source to much of the region's instability.

NEA will support the president and the secretary's commitment to sustained and principled dialogue with all countries in the region -- even with those with which we have strong disagreements. I'm very aware that talking cannot be for talking's sake, but to actually advance our foreign policy objectives.

Consistent with America's democratic ideals, if confirmed, I shall make it a priority to address regional deficits and political openness, good governance, opportunity, human rights and the status of women. I'll do my utmost to ensure responsible oversight of the use of taxpayers' dollars and I will keep foremost in mind the impact of development in the NEA region on America's security and American interests.

If confirmed, I'd rely on the talents of my NEA colleagues in Washington and abroad -- Civil and Foreign Service, as well as the locally engaged staff. I would dedicate myself to the security, the moral, the professional development of our personnel and this would include efforts to ensure that our representatives overseas have the skills they need to do their job with special focus on the areas of foreign language and public diplomacy.

I will also work, if confirmed, to ensure that our posts overseas provide effective services to American citizens. It's my firm belief that serving U.S. citizens abroad is any chief of mission's highest duty.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, if confirmed I look forward to close collaboration with this committee and with other members of Congress to further our nation's foreign policy goals in the challenging area of the Near East.

Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

SEN. CASEY: Thank you both for your statements.

And what we'll do now is we'll move to questions and 10-minute rounds. And I'll start the first round.

Ambassador Feltman, I wanted to ask you about Iran, and in particular, the threat posed by their nuclear program. And the subset of that is the particular question about the so-called zero enrichment policy.

As you know, and are well aware -- and members of Congress have dealt with this -- we have, I think, a consensus in the Congress about the threat posed by Iran having nuclear capability to use not only in the region or to threaten the region, but even beyond the region in terms of its effect on our security and international relations.

The prior administration was adamant that any final agreement with Iran would need to preclude any -- any uranium enrichment, even under the -- under very strict international inspection. So we have the so-called zero enrichment policy.

It's clear that Iran is beyond that now. So the question I have is: Do you believe that policy is still an option and how do we deal with the reality of where things are right now in the context of that enunciated policy?

MR. FELTMAN: Mr. Chairman, thanks. Thanks for focusing on what is one of the key challenges in the area, that if confirmed, I would have responsibility for overseeing the bureau.

The real -- the goal here is to prevent a nuclear-weaponized Iran. That's our goal.

Iran has a right to civil, peaceful nuclear power, but Iran has a responsibility to prove to the international community, which has profound mistrust over Iran's intentions right now, that in fact what it's pursuing is a civil nuclear program

The IAEA has made it clear that Iran has not come clean on past weaponization programs. Iran is not in compliance with three Chapter 7 Security Council resolutions.

They have made technical progress; you are right. But the international community has been clear that Iran needs to suspend its -- (word inaudible) -- its proliferation-sensitive activities. It needs to come clean with its past activities. It needs to build the trust of the international community in what it professes to -- be a peaceful civil nuclear energy program.

I don't know where the engagement with Iran will lead us. We have not really started. I would not want to guess where this might go.

I'd refer back to the April 8th statement that the P-5 plus one -- or E-3 plus three, how you call it, the Security Council partners plus Germany -- said to Iran, which is, don't miss this opportunity. We, the P-5 plus one, will engage you. The United States is a full partner in this effort, but we need you to comply with your international obligations.

And that's the goal; get Iran to comply with its international obligations, have Iran step up to the responsibility to show that its program is truly peaceful and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

SEN. CASEY: I know that -- we'll try to develop that even further.

One of the sanction policies, or potential policies to have a strategic approach on sanctions would be to recognize the reality that Iran imports up to 40 percent of their refining capacity for gasoline.

As I mentioned before, we have a bipartisan bill, the Senate Bill 908, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act. That act would authorize the president to impose additional economic sanctions against those firms, foreign firms that export reprocessed gasoline to Iran.

And I and others are a co-sponsor of that.

How do you view the efficacy and the viability of those kinds of international sanctions with regard to Iran?

MR. FELTMAN: Mr. Chairman, I think it's worth keeping in mind that a couple of years ago the United States alone was pursuing sanctions. Now we've got Security Council Chapter 7 resolutions that other countries are implementing.

We have the E.U. that has gone beyond the Security Council in implementing its own measures. We have the Financial Action Task Force that has called for countermeasures in the world's financial community because of the risks that Iran's financial system poses to our -- to the global financial community.

We've actually made some great progress in focusing people on the illicit practices, the deceptive financial practices that Iran carries out.

We are working hard to build an international coalition that is focused on Iran's misbehavior that is focused on finding ways to use international levers, reputational risk, what have you, in order to try to persuade Iran to modify its behavior. We'd like --

We would like to keep the focus on Iran's misbehavior, and as I said, I think we've had some success in this over the past couple of years. So we would -- we don't want to end up in a situation where we're taking steps that could make it harder for us to strengthen the international coalition that's focused on Iran.

We want to keep the focus on Iran and what Iran is doing, and what we can do collectively in order to try to persuade Iran to take a different course.

SEN. CASEY: Thank you. I know I've got about three minutes left, so maybe I'll move to Ambassador Blake and get back to you, Ambassador Feltman.

Ambassador Blake, I wanted to go to the question that occupied some of the space in what I was -- in my opening statement, as well as yours, and that's the tragedy that we're seeing unfolding in Sri Lanka, a country that you're so familiar with.

I don't need to recite the humanitarian stakes in terms of what's happening to people with regard to basic necessities of life, whether it's food or water, sanitation, or medical care.

But I wanted to ask you about USAID and any other U.S. officials. What kind of -- can you outline for us the current -- or the recent, I should say -- steps that our government has taken to positively impact the conflict, any steps that have been taken and any that are contemplated that you're aware of?

MR. BLAKE: Thank you, Senator, for that important question.

Let me try to answer in two ways, by addressing first the situation in the safe zone and then secondly the situation in the camps in an area known as Vavuniya, where about -- approximately 190,000 internally displaced people are now located.

With respect to the situation in the safe zone, which is in the northern part of Sri Lanka, there are approximately 50,000 civilians who are trapped there still.

President Obama gave a very detailed statement yesterday on the White House lawn expressing America's concern about the situation in the safe zone, and he called on the LTTE, the Tamil Tigers, to allow those civilians to leave, and he called on the LTTE to lay down its arms and stop -- renounce terrorism.

He called on the government to stop shelling into the safe zone, and expressed our concern about the large number of civilians who've been killed in recent days as a result of that shelling.

So we will continue to be very involved in that and we will be working with the U.N. and with other partners like the British, the French, and others to try to amplify those messages that the president articulated yesterday.

With respect to the situation in the IDP camps in Vavuniya, again, we're working very closely with our partners in the U.N. and with other friends to encourage the government first to ensure that the camps are managed according to international standards -- that is, that NGOs, U.N. and ICRC workers are allowed access into those camps, that the IDPs inside the camps are allowed freedom of movement in accordance with international standards and, most importantly of all, that the IDPs will be resettled expeditiously.

The government has made a pledge that the IDPs will -- 80 percent of the IDPs will be resettled by the end of this year, and that's certainly a very commendable goal which we hope the government will stick to, and we'll be working very hard to help support that.

As you mentioned, USAID, through the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, has played a very important role in providing food assistance, but also non-food assistance to assist that transition.

SEN. CASEY: What can you tell us -- and I'm out of time, but just one quick question -- what can you tell us about visits, real presence in any part of the north near the conflict area, by USAID or any other U.S. officials?

MR. BLAKE: The only people who have been allowed access are the ICRC and a limited number of U.N. officials who go in during very short pauses that are negotiated between the LTTE and the government to deliver food and medicine and to evacuate wounded.

All others have not been permitted access.

SEN. CASEY: Mm-hmm. (In acknowledgement.) And that's -- well, we'll follow it up later. I've got some more questions, but --

MR. BLAKE (?): Right.

SEN. CASEY: I wanted to turn to Senator Risch, but he's temporarily not here, so maybe we'll skip over to Senator Isakson.

SEN. JOHNNY ISAKSON (R-GA): Thank you, Senator Casey.

Welcome to both of you.

Ambassador Feltman, I was struck two weeks ago in a speech that Benjamin Netanyahu made to AIPAC, when they were here in Washington, with what appeared to be an open and solicitous attitude towards the rest of the Arab world to unite to hold Iran accountable for what it's doing.

And I'm -- these are my words, but that's the way in which I took that. And I detected it --

(To Sen. Casey.) Do you want to go back to Senator Risch? (Response off mike.) Okay.

I detected that as a very positive sign in not only the way he said it, but how he said it.

Do you sense there is any rising of interest in the Arab world of uniting together to hold Iran accountable on this nuclear enrichment that they're doing?

MR. FELTMAN: Senator Isakson, thanks for the question. You raise a -- what I think is a very important, dramatic development that's taken place in the NEA region.

If you had -- when you traveled around the NEA region, I don't know, five, six, seven years ago, almost everywhere you went the first thing that came up was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

It could come up in different ways, whether you're talking to an Israeli or an Arab audience, but that was almost the first thing that came up, was -- is that we need to address and solve the Israeli- Palestinian conflict.

When you travel around today, likely as not what you're going to hear about is concern about Iran, whether you're talking to the Israelis or you're talking to many of the Arabs.

This is -- there's potential here, in my view. And if confirmed, I would want to talk to this Committee about your ideas.

I would want to try to pursue some opportunities here, given the shared international and regional concern about Iranian practices.

It's one reason why I would define it, the two-state solution for the Israeli and Palestinian conflict, to be in the U.S. interest, not simply in the party's interests but the U.S. interest because we want to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to remove one of the tools that Iran uses to distract the region from what Iran is doing.

I think you've identified a key development in the region, which is the growing concern by most countries about Iran, not simply the United States, not simply Israel.

SEN. ISAKSON: You were in Lebanon as ambassador when Hezbollah launched some attacks into Israel, weren't you?

MR. FELTMAN: Yes.

SEN. ISAKSON: And I was at Gaza in November of '07 shortly before the Hamas started launching its rockets into Sderot and then further. In both those cases, it's patently clear, and correct me if I'm wrong here, that Iran was a significant supporter of both Hezbollah and Hamas. And those two incidences, combined with the fact of the enrichment that they're doing, appear to me to have raised the level of the Iranian nuclear development all across the Arab world. And people see the danger of an unfettered Iran sponsoring violence throughout the Middle East.

MR. FELTMAN: Senator, you are exactly correct. I couldn't agree with you more on those points. Our goal and the goal of the Israelis, the goal of the moderate Arabs is to promote a comprehensive peace as quickly as possible. Iran is trying to be a spoiler. They're using Hezbollah's rockets, Hezbollah's weapons, endanger peace, endanger Israel, even endanger Lebanon, as we saw a year ago.

The rockets fired out of Gaza are not taking us closer to a two- state solution. Iran is being a spoiler on these issues in the region. And there's recognition of that throughout the region. As I said, if I'm confirmed, I think that we have an opportunity here to use this growing concern on Iran to promote a number of objectives.

SEN. ISAKSON: Well, I think your qualifications make you eminently qualified for the position to which you've been nominated. And I think you're right. I had a visit yesterday, and I'm not going to get into who it was from. But they visit with me once a year. And usually, the Palestinian issue is the first issue. Well, it was down two or three and Iranian-sponsored terrorism and the nuclear threat was the number one thing on their agenda, and I see that throughout the region.

I enjoyed meeting you yesterday, Ambassador Blake. And I had the privilege of going to a number of the countries you will be over. But in particular, I was in Delhi the week that we made the offer, under the Bush administration, to be a nuclear program. How is that going in India?

MR. BLAKE: Well, it's going very well, Senator. And thank you very much for your interest. There still, as Senator Casey said, there's still a couple of steps that the Indians have to take to fully implement that agreement. First of all, they have to bring the IAEA safeguards agreement into force. And then they also have to file with the IAEA a declaration of their nuclear facilities. That would be consistent with the separation plan that they outlined in 2006. So there are still several steps that need to be taken, and we'll be working closely with our friends in the Indian government to see that those are done rapidly.

SEN. ISAKSON: And I understand Ambassador Holbrooke is sort of the umbrella State Department spokesman for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Is that correct?

MR. BLAKE: Correct, sir.

SEN. ISAKSON: And you're kind of under his -- you're next in line in that area, but he is superior in that policy. Is that right?

MR. BLAKE: Correct.

SEN. ISAKSON: Do you think the actions of the last five days by the Pakistani army with regard to the Taliban -- that's the first indication I've seen that they're really going to do what they're going to have to do to protect Pakistan to remain outside the hands of either al Qaeda influence or the Taliban. Is that progress continuing well?

MR. BLAKE: We are encouraged by the steps that the Pakistanis have taken in Suwat. And obviously, we hope that that will be sustained. And let me also say that the prime minister, Prime Minister Gilani made a very important national address where he, too, began this process of trying to build popular support to sustain this campaign. So we do think important progress is being made.

SEN. ISAKSON: Well, I know Senator Casey and Coffman and Risch were all at the luncheon last Thursday at the Mansfield Room. But I noticed that the timing of the Pakistani offensive against the Taliban coincided with the day after that lunch when Zarqawi and Karzai were together. So I think that was a very effective use of this committee to create a platform for those two leaders to come together and focus on who the real enemy is, which is al Qaeda and the Taliban.

I wish both of you the best of luck. And I thank you, Mr. Blake, for your visit yesterday. I enjoyed it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SEN. CASEY: Thank you, Senator Isakson.

Senator Kaufman.

SEN. EDWARD KAUFMAN (D-DE): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And I want to thank both of you. You're exceptional diplomats. I want to thank you for your public service. The country is well- served by you and what you've done and your sacrifices in doing these jobs. And we are very fortunate you are continuing.

Ambassador Feltman, how do you think Syria can or will be helpful as we withdraw from Iraq?

MR. FELTMAN: Senator, thanks for raising that question. I have been in Syria twice in the past couple of months. I went with Dan Shapiro from the NSC on March 7th and then again on May 7th. These were tough talks with the Syrians. We have some profound differences with the Syrians. But we're looking for areas where, according to what the Syrians say, we have some common interests. We want to try to work together on common interests and also try to work to bridge the very sharp differences that exist between us. And one of those common interests is Iraq. The Syrians have told us that they are interested in a stable, secure, unified Iraq. Well, that's what we want to see.

So I would say that the focus of our discussions, one of the main areas of focus of our discussions last week with the Syrians was Iraq. How can we work together to achieve what the Syrians say is their goal and what is certainly our goal? The Syrians have taken some important steps. They've sent an ambassador back to Iraq. The prime minister of Syria took a large delegation there a few weeks ago. The foreign minister has gone. They've signed some security agreements. So we acknowledge the Syrians have worked to increase the cooperation with Iraq. But we would like to see more.

We would like to work together, you know, with the Syrians, if possible. If not, we'd like to encourage them to work bilaterally with the Iraqis directly. We think that there is more that they could do. And one of the goals of this dialogue we're having with Syria is to explore what they might be able to do with us or bilaterally with the Iraqis on supportive Iraqi security.

SEN. KAUFMAN: How do you assess the ongoing attempts by the Palestinians to form a unity government?

MR. FELTMAN: Well, the Egyptians have tried extremely hard to try to bring a responsible Palestinian unified government together. And the Egyptians, like President Abbas from the Palestinian side, know that they need to bring a government together that can move the Palestinians toward the two-state solution that would allow the Palestinians to meet their aspirations. So far, these talks have not produced anything tangible. Part of it's internal politics themselves between Hamas and Fatah, but part of it is the fact that the Palestinian Authority and the Egyptians have been clear that a unified Palestinian Authority must abide by the commitments of the PLO.

This isn't something that should be that hard. You know, people want to see a responsible state of Palestine emerge out of a peace process. To be a responsible state, you live up to the commitments you've made. But this is all the Egyptians are asking from the Hamas side is, agree to live up to your commitments, renounce violence, act like what a state should be acting like if you want to achieve statehood.

SEN. KAUFMAN: And following up on Senator Isakson, this seems to be a perfect place where the Arab states in the region could get together and help Egypt try to bring this together. Are you seeing that? Or is there anything more we can do to kind of get encouragement from all sides of this?

MR. FELTMAN: Senator, it's a good question because the Egyptians are definitely in the lead. And the Egyptians have the relationships, the proximity to Gaza, the interest in seeing Palestinian unity that they should be in the leadership position. But there are some Arab states that aren't being as supportive as we think needs to be, that aren't being as clear with Hamas that Hamas needs to start acting more like a responsible player, you know, living up to international standards or behavior.

So to the extent that all of us are in contact with the Arab government, and if I'm confirmed I would certainly want to do this myself, I would encourage those who do talk to Hamas, we do not, to try to get Hamas to move in a direction of living up to PLO commitments, renouncing violence, those sorts of issues so that it makes it more likely rather than less likely there's a responsible unified government.

SEN. KAUFMAN: Ambassador Blake, I have the feeling in the last three or for weeks there's been a real change in the Pakistan government's concern for our concerns. I think in the past it was fair to say that they were doing us a favor by helping in the FATA, they didn't much care about that part of their country, they hadn't cared about it for hundreds of years. But it seems to me the Swat Valley and what's been going on there, that we now have a much more cooperative partner moving forward. What's your assessment of that?

MR. BLAKE: Senator, I agree with that assessment.

And as I said earlier we just hope that that effort will be sustained to really address what the president has identified as our principle goal there which is to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its allies in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

SEN. KAUFMAN: I mean there's a lot of attention about Pakistan, Afghanistan but there's many other countries in your region that are festering potential problems. What do you think we can do to bring more attention to these other problem areas?

MR. BLAKE: Well one thing I've learned Senator as a U.S. ambassador is that there's no substitute for engagement and I think particularly in Central Asia we need to do more there because we have a lot of shared interests now both in the stability of Afghanistan but also in stopping the flow of narcotics out of Afghanistan. But we also have some things that we need to accomplish there and we'd like to develop more open societies there and we think that by engaging more positively with them with higher level visits that we can make progress on both counts. I mean, the president has repeatedly stated that he doesn't see a contradiction between pursuing our security and our ideals. And so we will certainly do that if confirmed in that part of the world.

SEN. KAUFMAN: Do you have any thoughts especially about freedom of the press? This seems to be a, to be a problem almost anywhere you look in your area.

MR. BLAKE: Yeah, I would agree, I think freedom of the press is one of the essential freedoms that we must pursue and it's something that if allowed can enable outreach to everybody in all of these societies. And so we need to do more to promote freedom of the press and to allow NGOs to have, to help us in that respect as well.

SEN. KAUFMAN: Well I just want to thank both of you for what you're doing. You are, what is the old Chinese curse when you live in interesting times you're allowed to move into very interesting times. Thank you very much.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

MR. BLAKE: Thank you Senator.

SEN. CASEY: Thank you, we're going to turn Senator Risch and I'll do that at the moment he arrives. He's like a lot of us here having to juggle meetings occurring in the same time -- (inaudible) --

Professor Blake I wanted to take you back to some of the questions that relate to Sri Lanka. Can you give us a current assessment as best you can, I know you're here and not physically on the ground, but from what you know about the conflict and what you've seen in the press and otherwise to the extent that you can tell us about the conditions in the IDP camps and what if anything you can tell us about that.

MR. BLAKE: Well sir the conditions are quite frankly not optimal. There's I think the single most pressing problem now is just simply overcrowding, there's a large number of civilians that have come down from the safe zone as I indicated earlier I think about 190,000 civilians are now in these camps. So it's very important for the government to work with the U.N. to clear new spaces to accommodate all of these IDPs but then also to make sure going forward that these camps are run according to international standards. And most importantly, that civilians can be resettled as expeditiously as possible once the mining takes place.

SEN. CASEY: Um-hum. And you know from the statement that I made that we've tried and I think the president achieved this yesterday to point out fault on both sides here but just for purposes of this question, the responsibility of the government, what if anything can you say with regard to what the government has done up to this point in time with regard just to the question of the camps and how they're treating people? And secondly what can you say going forward with regard to the government's responsibility here? Because you do have fault on both sides, but one is a government --

MR. BLAKE: Yes.

SEN. CASEY: And it has I think at least in my opinion a heightened or should have a heightened sense of responsibility in how it approaches this conflict. So maybe just a brief comment on that.

MR. BLAKE: Well as a sovereign government, they have complete responsi8biilty for the management of the camps and we have been pressing them since this conflict began to try to allow greater access by the U.N. and by the international committee for the Red Cross to ensure again that these are managed according to international standards that there is clear cooperation that takes place and that these IDPs are well treated. And frankly there have been some problems there. So the United States I can assure you has been extremely engaged on this. I'm a member of what's called the coordinating committee on humanitarian affairs. I represent the international community on that committee which is a high level committee that meets ever single month with all the most senior people in the government to address these issues.

And so all I can say is that if confirmed, we'll need to just continue to work on this very important issue because once the situation in safe zone does conclude, and we hope that will be soon with minimum loss of life, an additional 50,000 or more IDPs are going to come south into the camps. So it's very important that the government have a plan to be prepared to accommodate those additional IDPs and then going forward they have a resettlement plan, a demining plan, and then a development plan for how they're going to develop the north.

So if confirmed I and the members of the mission in Sri Lanka will be working very closely both with the government and with our U.N. and ICRC partners. .

SEN. CASEY: Thank you. I'm going to switch gears to Ambassador Feltman we're trying to do our best to balance here. We don't have a calculation of the minutes, but we'll provide -- (inaudible) -- after the hearing about who got more time.

Ambassador Feltman an important part of leading in a positive direction on the Middle East peace process is what we do about the arms smuggling in Gaza. I know that the United States and Israel signed a memorandum of understanding regarding the smuggling and I know that preventing the flow of arms from Egypt into Gaza through a network of tunnels has also been the subject of numerous discussions with our Egyptians partners. Can you give us a sense of the status of that memorandum of understanding and then we may have some follow up questions on that.

MR. FELTMAN: Senator, thanks for the question. We are working on the implementation of that memorandum of understanding, and more broadly we're working at ways to combat arms smuggling into Gaza. This problem has a number of facets. Part of the MOU talked about working internationally as well.

That's something that we have started. We're working with Canada, with European partners to find ways to promote interdiction of illegal arm shipments, you know, beyond Egypt, beyond Gaza. There have been a couple of international meetings about this already, and this again stemmed out of an idea that was discussed as we were working on the MOU.

We're also working with the Egyptians. The Egyptians have made progress. The Egyptians recognize the danger to two state solution as arms smuggling imposes. The Egyptians recognize the danger to the region that this kind of arms smuggling poses. So Egypt has taken action.

Part of this too has to do with getting, making sure that the people of Gaza have access to food, to basic supplies via legitimate trade so they don't have to rely on tunnel trade, the smuggling that allows arms to go in as well.

So it's a, you're right, Senator, the focus on this and if I'm confirmed I will continue to focus on this. But we're committed to working with Israel, with Egypt, through international partners, to stop illegal arms smuggling. .

SEN. CASEY: Thank you. I'm going to yield to Senator Risch and he's been juggling like we -- (inaudible) --

SEN. RISCH: Such as life here, isn't' it? Ambassador Feltman, thank you for those comments on Egypt. Egypt certainly is critical to us in the region and the president, we were there last month, in fact we visited Rafa, we visited with President Mubarak and thanked him for his constant vigilance on trying to bring peace to the region. It's really unfortunate that everyone there didn't have the mindset that he has. He's a wise, wise gentleman that brings a lot to all of this process.

I want to talk for a minute about Afghanistan if you would. All of these things, and you're right about the situation with the peace process between the Palestinians and Israelis so important to all of us, to the world really, and when you add the uncertainties and the deliberate frustration of that, that the Iranians are visiting on all of us, it is very frustrating. But I want to talk about Afghanistan which to me is a fresher frustration if you would.

And one of the -- after being there and after listening to everyone and visiting with the president, visiting with the Cabinet, I am very frustrated by the lack of progress we've had over the last six years.

And there's a lot of reasons for it. Everyone has different ideas or different focuses. Mine is on the drug trafficking. And it seems to me, until something does -- somebody does something about the drug trafficking there, all of this is for naught. And I use this example: It's kind of like telling the Mafia, "Okay, you can deal in the drugs, but we don't want to see any corruption in your ranks." And that corruption, everyone admits, is throughout the government over there. And how you stabilize an area where it is involved primarily in drug trafficking for its survival and it -- and it is rife with corruption, how you talk about stabilizing that is very difficult.

I'd like to hear from both of you, if possible, if not one of you, a clear and concise statement about what our objective is here. And I've asked this question over and over again, and I'm -- I understand, by necessity, it needs to be general in some terms. But it seems to me, if we don't get -- if we don't go -- if we don't go over there with a rifle instead of a shotgun, pursuing goals, we're going to be setting ourselves up for failure. And I'd like to hear what your description is of our goals in Afghanistan; what we can consider -- I don't think you can ever put it in terms of a victory, but what we can put in terms of some success there. And more importantly, what's the end game? The other problem that I have is looking into that hole and there's no bottom to that hole.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

MR. BLAKE: Senator, thank you very much for that important question. I think that the president and Ambassador Holbrooke share your assessment of some -- the lack of progress that was made over the last several years. And that's why the president determined that a new, more comprehensive policy was needed that would address the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan together as one problem. And as you know, the senator -- the president announced his new policy in March.

With respect to some of the issues that you raised in Afghanistan, first of all, how to stabilize the country -- as you know, Senator, the president has announced that he will deploy 17,000 more troops into primarily the southern and eastern parts of the country, which are also the centers for the drug trade, as you correctly pointed out, to drive the Taliban and their allies out of those areas and to begin to stabilize those important parts of Afghanistan.

One of the -- one of the key new ingredients in the president's strategy will be a much greater emphasis on agriculture and a reduced emphasis on eradication. I think the president and Ambassador Holbrooke feel that eradication had some success but also alienated and actually in some cases increased support for the Taliban because there were not good alternatives, new livelihoods once those crops were eradicated. So there's going to be a much greater emphasis on promoting agriculture, which will provide jobs and will help what we call "drain the swamp," that is, provide new opportunities for Taliban so they don't join the fight against the United States and our 41 partners.

You mentioned, you know, what is the objective and what are the -- what is the end game. The objective, as the president has stated, is to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda and its allies in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. With respect to what is the end game in Afghanistan, the end game is to empower the Afghan government so that it can address these problems by itself, and that is to train the Afghan army, increase its capabilities, increase the capabilities of the Afghan National Police so that they can take on many of these functions.

And then the second objective is to extend economic cooperation, again, to reduce the appeal of the Taliban so that there are other alternatives out there. Our assessment that there's a -- there's a small group of hard-core Taliban that will continue to fight, but there's a much larger group of Taliban who are opportunists, who join the Taliban because of higher pay or because of grievances with the government. So it's important for the government to reduce corruption, to provide new opportunities and for us to help to -- the government to extend its writ into those provinces.

So those are the objectives of our -- of our strategy. And obviously, we look forward to working very closely with you and members of the committee. And as you know, the president has put forward very substantial supplemental requests that we hope we can have your support for.

Thank you.

SEN. RISCH: Ambassador, I appreciate those thoughts. And I don't want this to sound critical, because certainly President Obama needs to be given the opportunity. My fear is that the problem is so difficult that success over there is going to elude us for some time.

And I think that the shift away from eradication to trying to convince people to go to other types of agriculture is incredibly naive. And the resistance that we saw to eradication certainly, I think, demonstrates that. And I do not have an answer for that, and that's why it's very difficult to be critical. But if the people are doing this -- and it is a bad thing that they're doing -- and they refuse to stop doing it, and as a result of that we say, "Well, okay, we'll try something else," it just doesn't seem to me to be the direction we ought to be going. But certainly, the president needs the opportunity.

The other issue is the objective of trying to get the Afghan government and the Afghan people themselves to do what they should be doing, and that is operating their own government. And we have spent so much money over there and so many lives -- standing up a military, we've done that; standing up a police, we've done that; standing up a government, we have done that . But even though we've done that, nothing seems to change. And the culture over there where they don't have -- and never have had an allegiance to a national government and don't have that national feeling and rather have an allegiance to a tribe or a valley or an area makes this very difficult.

So I wish you well in it. We'll help every way that we can. But it is a very, very challenging problem.

MR. BLAKE: Thank you, Senator.

SEN. RISCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ambassador.

SEN. CASEY: Thank you, Senator Risch.

I wanted to return to Ambassador Feltman with regard to the questions that relate to Iraqi refugees. Our subcommittee, a number of weeks ago, had a hearing -- actually a number of months ago now -- had a hearing on this issue. It's not an issue that the American people are as focused on, I guess, or often we're not confronted with the realities there in a way that would better inform our policy. And so I think we need to spend more time on it and bring it into focus more often. It involves millions of Iraqis, either, as you know, as -- whether internally displaced within Iraq or beyond its borders.

And I wanted to ask you about, I guess, first of all, the priority that our government places on it, both with regard to our relationship with the country itself, the country of Iraq, but also with regard to other governments as well, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and other Middle Eastern nations. So I guess the first question would be the priority we place on constructively dealing with it, and secondly whether the administration and/or the Department of State has a concrete plan to deal with in terms of our involvement.

MR. FELTMAN: Mr. Chairman, thanks for the question. This is an example of a priority where NEA works with other parts of the U.S. government and other parts of the State Department. For example, this is an issue on which NEA and PRM, the Population, Refugee and Migration Bureau, you know, work in tandem on this, because it is a priority. It must be a priority. And, if confirmed, I assure you I want to work with this committee, I want to work with other parts of the U.S. government to make sure we that do keep our focus on this.

We're working in -- we're working in three different areas on this dual problem of internally displaced and refugees in the neighboring countries. First, we're working on protection and assistance of those people where they are. We are the largest donor to the support of the refugees. We provided over $400 million last year, we provided over $150 million so far this year to help those refugees that are in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, that you mentioned. So one area is to actually provide some direct assistance.

One area is to process those who are eligible -- those who are most vulnerable and eligible for immigration to the United States. Last year, we were able to exceed our goal of 12,000 and brought in 13,800-and-some refugees into the United States. This year we should be able to bring in over 17,000. So that's the second pillar.

But the third pillar is probably the most important, which is to work with the Iraqi government. The Iraqi government needs to be the leader in helping create the conditions by which people can go home. There have been some returns from -- of the refugees, but it's still -- it's still not a large number.

We'd like to see more. We would like to -- this depends in part on security. As the Iraqi security services are able to build their own capacity, with our help, provide more security, there's more of an incentive to bring people home. But this is a priority for us and it needs to be a priority for the Iraqi government as well.

SEN. CASEY: And I -- one point that we need to make continually is that it's got to be a priority because of the humanitarian concern, obviously. That's the first and most compelling reason. But it's also a security --

MR. FELTMAN: Yes.

SEN. CASEY: A national or at least a regional security problem if we don't -- we don't deal with it. So we'll continue to work with you on that and do our best to have this committee stay as focused as we can be on Iraqi refugees and the challenge posed by that.

Ambassador Blake, I wanted to move to you with regard to India, a fascinating country, a place that I had the honor to visit a year ago this month in a trip to the region. We have a natural alliance or a natural partnership with the world's largest democracy and the world's oldest democracy. So there's much we can -- we can be fascinated by and much we can talk about with regard to the tremendous economic growth in India, the wonderful culture. But there are also a lot of challenges, and I wanted to explore some of those with you.

First of all, just with regard to the broader vision that you have and I know the administration has with regard to U.S.-India relations, just in particular, if you can focus your response on this, in the aftermath of the civilian nuclear agreement. How do you see that playing out, A, I guess, where it stands now in terms of how it's playing out? And B, where do you see that -- where do you see the relationship going in that context?

MR. BLAKE: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for that important question.

President Obama has said that the United States sees India as a global power and as a very important partner for us in addressing the challenges that we will face in the 21st century. And so our task will be to try to strengthen the strategic partnership that exists between the United States and India, to base that on our converging values and our converging interests.

You mentioned the civil nuclear agreement. That's an extremely important part of our agreement. It's become a bit of a symbol, because it really changed the architecture of the global nonproliferation regime. But I think I would steer you to just point out that we think that we can cooperate on a broad range of fronts, not only bilaterally but to address some of these new challenges such as global climate change, the global trade talks and things like that.

So we are looking for a more enhanced strategic partnership with this important country. And if confirmed, I will be working with members of the administration to define exactly the parameters of that. And we hope to have some announcements for you fairly soon on that.

SEN. CASEY: I wanted to also explore another equally or maybe extraordinarily more significant challenge that involves our country and India but a lot of others as well, and that's the relationship between our governments in two areas that are -- that are related but both urgent. One is counterterrorism generally -- India has been an important partner in that for us -- but I guess more urgently, in the aftermath of what happened in Mumbai, and in particular with regard to the role that India can play with respect to the conflict in Pakistan.

I guess the first question is we know that the -- we know that the Pakistanis, for whatever reason -- and maybe for many reasons -- have a real obsession about India, have a lot of their forces deployed in a way that anticipates or is in preparation for a conflict with India, just at a time we need to have more of their forces and more of their focus on defeating the Taliban. Some of that has changed for the -- for the better. It's -- we -- it's hard to definitively assess that in a positive way, because there's still, in my judgment, not enough of a focus on defeating their Taliban. Their actions -- the Pakistani government's actions and the military actions recently have been a step in the right direction, but we have to continue to monitor that.

In light of that -- in light of that history and that obsession and especially in light of the horrific tragedy in Mumbai where the Pakistanis still have a lot of explaining to do, candidly -- even in light of that reality -- and I posed this to Ambassador Holbrooke and he wanted to keep his focus on -- for purposes of the question on Afghanistan and Pakistan, and I understand that. But we need to get an answer to the question about what, if anything, we can urge the Indian government to do to be a constructive force in this challenge that is posed by what's happening in Pakistan. What can we expect or what can we ask of the Indian government to play a constructive role, even -- even as we point to, justifiably, that history and that obsession that the Pakistanis have with regard to the border?

MR. BLAKE: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for that very important question. And I must say, I agree with everything you said.

Let me start the answer by taking you back a little bit, which is to say that prior to the attacks in Mumbai, the governments of India and Pakistan were making quite good progress in forging closer relations across a broad range of fronts. They had something called the "composite dialogue," which was -- had a number of components to it to try to address some of the most ticklish issues in Indo-Pak relations. And again, I think they were making very good progress in that -- in that regard. That was, of course, stopped after the attacks on Mumbai.

As you correctly point out, the United States and India have strengthened our counterterrorism cooperation in response to those attacks. The United States helped in the investigation. And we will continue to be involved in that.

And as you also mentioned, Pakistan needs to do more. They've taken some steps to bring cases against nine of the suspects in the -- in the Mumbai attacks. But now it's important that they prosecute those. And I believe that concerted action by the Pakistanis against not only those suspects but against LeT would enable the two countries to regain some of the progress and restart some of the progress that they've made in the composite dialogue and other areas of their cooperation.

And I think that India will have a very important role to play in areas like trade. As you know, the recent trilateral meeting between the president and Mr. Zardari and President Karzai, one of the important agreements that was reached was on transit trade. And so we hope that the two countries later this year will be able to reach a final agreement on transit trade. And that, in turn, will enable a much greater exchange and a much higher flow of goods and services, potentially from the subcontinent up into Central Asia and certainly would benefit most of those countries tremendously. So that's one area where I think there's opportunities for progress.

But let me stress that this is primarily going to be an effort between India and Pakistan. The United States, as a friend of both countries, has always offered advice and ideas, and we will continue to do so. But if confirmed, we will -- I will continue to seek your advice and your help and the advice of the members in this committee to try to help improve relations between these two important allies of the United States.

SEN. CASEY: Well, thank you for that answer. It's -- I think it's going to be critical in terms of how we continue to positively impact what's happening in Pakistan, which is central to our national security. And that, obviously, effects what happens with regard to the war in Afghanistan, where we're still engaged and we're losing American lives. And the more we can help resolve that, the better. And India, among many other countries, plays a role in that.

I have lots more questions, and I know Senator Risch has a lot more questions. We don't have time today. We have to -- we have to wrap up. But I do want to thank both of you for your public service to this point in your careers, in difficult assignments. And we look forward to your continued service. And I know I'm going to be supporting you and I know others will as well.

Let me, just for members of the committee and for purposes of the record, I'll ask that the record for today's hearing be closed by the end of today. Any members wishing to submit questions for the record should do so by the close of business today -- not tomorrow, today -- so we can make that clear, because we want to move forward both of your nominations and the confirmations. The process is very important that we complete expeditiously.

And so for any and all questions that we have to supplement, we will submit ours for the record and others will as well by the end of today. And unless there are any other further proceedings, this hearing is adjourned. (Sounds gavel.)

Source