During a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing last week, Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) called out previous administrations for hindering efforts to reauthorize the U.S. Department of State.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00I'm your new member here, but there has been extensive opportunity to debate the merits of
00:06programs, and unfortunately we've had person after person from the previous administration come here
00:11literally lie to Republicans and Democrats to our faces about the programs that they said they
00:17weren't doing, that they were doing. No, they don't exist. No, these slide decks don't exist. No, we
00:23weren't expanding atheism in Nepal or in other countries, and then we would get the phone calls
00:28after the hearing saying, ah, sorry, we were wrong about that. We were in fact doing that, and, you
00:35know, sorry that we spent the last however long denying these things that we were doing it, but
00:39never apologizing and never, you know, never saying this is something that we shouldn't have been doing.
00:45This is not true diplomacy. These are just the facts of what has taken place prior to your arrival here,
00:50and it's a lot of what brings us to where we are today is the fact that there has not been oversight
00:57at the State Department, and there has not been a comprehensive State Department reauthorization,
01:01unfortunately, which has really allowed these programs to continue, whether it's atheism in Nepal,
01:08or drag shows in Ecuador, or transgender job fairs in Bangladesh, or, you know, take your pick of the
01:15thousands of programs that, unfortunately, the State Department is wasting American dollars on.
01:20Uh, Representative Lawler, the floor is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank you for,
01:25uh, holding this hearing today, and, uh, certainly as this committee gets about, uh, its important work,
01:32uh, as Chair of the Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee, and, uh, with oversight over M Branch,
01:39uh, I certainly am, uh, committed to and focused on, uh, the importance of a State Department
01:45reauthorization. Uh, I think the fact is, uh, this has been a failure on the part of Congress for
01:52many years, uh, in both parties to actually reauthorize, uh, the work of the State Department
01:59to, uh, provide the level of, uh, oversight that is necessary, uh, and sadly, prior administrations
02:08have refused to cooperate. Uh, you know, we've had multiple hearings where we have asked, uh,
02:14administration officials, uh, for information. Uh, we had Samantha Power here, for instance,
02:21uh, as head of USAID and asked her numerous questions and no answers provided, uh, about
02:29expenditures, uh, and programs that USAID was, uh, conducting itself. So, uh, this hearing is, uh,
02:37immensely valuable, but obviously the work that we are undertaking, uh, is important. Right now,
02:44the Foreign Service Institute is not a degree-granting institution, unlike many of its, uh, service-related
02:51counterparts. Uh, what would be the benefits of, uh, accrediting FSI, and why has this not previously
03:00been pursued, and, and what challenges might, in fact, uh, persist here? Leave it open to any of you
03:08to engage. Uh, I'll start with that. I never thought of that as a, um, and of course, the military
03:16does do that with their, uh, programs, but they're very different programs. They come in in general
03:21staff schools, the war colleges. These are year-long programs. They're very, um, academic. They're very
03:27focused on the core skills of the profession. Uh, the Foreign Service Institute, aside from its superb
03:35long-term language training, which is in a separate category, basically does, uh,
03:42short tradecraft courses. In fact, my main criticism with it is, other than the language training,
03:51most of it could be also offered to the Department of Transportation. It's all about process-y,
03:56managerial, get along with each other stuff. There's almost no training in the diplomatic,
04:01uh, tradecraft. There's almost no, uh, diplomatic history. The other things, if you go to any military,
04:09uh, college or any military... Would you push, would you push to actually, uh, ensure that it engages in that?
04:17Yes. I was actually, uh, did a six-month course once when we had it briefly, a model on the military,
04:23uh, 40 years ago. We then got rid of it. If we look, took a look at how the military does it,
04:28and do those kinds of courses that build long-term expertise in our profession, certainly they should be accredited.
04:37I think the importance of language training for our diplomats who will be interfacing with their foreign counterparts
04:44daily cannot be understated. Uh, foreign language training is one of the most crucial aspects of FSI's mission,
04:51as you mentioned. How thorough is the foreign language training at FSI, and what can they do better
04:58to better equip our foreign service officers?
05:00Uh, I think the language, uh, program there is excellent. Um, I'm sure everything can use a little bit of reform
05:08and, and, uh, and being, making sure it's up to date. Um, but I think it's one of the best things FSI does.
05:14Uh, I would just, not take your time, but I would follow up on what Jim said, and where we, I think FSI falls down,
05:22is making, you know, not giving us necessarily in the foreign service the skills we need to do tomorrow's job.
05:27Uh, tends to be backward looking, and, uh, the management stuff is very weak.
05:32Uh, most people in, encounters with FSI during the course of their career is little, sort of,
05:39computerized modules on things that are important, but routine, like how to, how to keep your security,
05:44you know, your, your computer safe from, on security grounds, and how to make sure you're living up to ethics rules.
05:50Whereas we need to understand better our core function of diplomacy.
05:54Mr. Hale, can you just describe how the Bureau of Counterterrorism's efforts integrate with broader
06:00national security strategies, uh, led by the National Security Council or other agencies?
06:07Yeah, I think, um, you know, it was, it was founded in the early 70s. Uh, it's one of those examples
06:13of an important international activity in which the State Department doesn't actually have the lead.
06:17Uh, our domestic agencies, uh, have that, and they have their own relationships overseas,
06:22which are very important, uh, intelligence and, uh, law enforcement and, and security. Uh,
06:28but it's very important that we have someone who's helping to coordinate that, make sure our embassies
06:31are, uh, on point on doing everything possible to defeat terrorism, and that they're at the table
06:36in their interagency discussions here in Washington, and I think they're well-staffed to do that.
06:40Thank you. Thank you, Representative Law.
06:43You're welcome.
06:48Thank you, Representative Law.
06:50Thank you, Representative Law.