Transcript
March 9, 2006

Senate Appropriations Committee Hearing
Budget Request For Operations In Iraq And Afghanistan

LEAHY:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  And I'm glad we're having this hearing.  I'm finding it very interesting, both the things requested and some of the things not requested.

I notice in the supplemental there are some areas -- well, the agencies requested money that's not in there.  They mention first the request (inaudible) $60 million to continue what I believe is a very cost-effective program in Iraq, USAID's Community Action Program. Four U.S. NGOs are doing it.  Only $15 million each.  In fact, one was named after a young woman who was killed there, Marla Rezeka (ph).

And they restore basic services, they create jobs.  What I've been told by commanders in the field, these funds have been extraordinarily helpful to our military over there.

Now, I want to help Iraq's provincial councils, but this is some area that we ought to be looking at.  If we're going to shut down programs, let's pick some of the ones that are not working -- and I can give you a list of those -- not those that have been a success and the Iraqi people appreciate.

Mr. Chairman, I'll work with you and Senator McConnell to try to find the money needed to continue this.

LEAHY:  And, secondly, Liberia and Haiti.  We've talked about that.  They've recently elected new leaders, have daunting challenges.  Secretary Rice, you and the first lady were in Liberia for the inauguration of Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, the first woman African head of  state I think I shared the pride you had in that.  

But I look at the supplemental.  There's only a small amount for returning refugees.  I think we should be doing more to help that government.  It costs us an awful lot of money because of the failures in the last government (inaudible) avoid those failures.  

And, of course, Secretary Rumsfeld, you mentioned the cost effectiveness of the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Haiti, but this supplemental has no money in it for that peacekeeping mission -- even though you read the reports out of Haiti, it's obviously needed. 

The supplemental does include $51 million for refugees.  In FY 2006, the administration requested $893 million; Congress provided only $782 million.  So we're low on that, not just in Sudan, but in many other countries around the world. 

I mention these as areas -- you know, we get the request, a lot of money is lumped out that everybody knows we need, and then the Congress has to figure out how to find the money. 

Secretary Rumsfeld, you did mention the limitation aid to the Indonesian military.  Of course, during that period, they were behaving sort of like a criminal enterprise -- all types of corruption and killings of political dissidents and so on.  If this country stands for something -- I believe it does -- we have to show that we do have limitations on help we will give. 

Mr. Secretary, when you came in here this morning, I mentioned something to you -- or, I've written several letters.  I've gotten back several very nice form letters, but didn't answer any questions. It's about the Talon program.  

We find from the press, not from our own government, that a number of peaceful protest groups, like the Quakers , have somehow ended up in the department database.  And I worry about the department spying on citizens that goes beyond any reasonable or legal effort to protect Defense Department personnel or installation. 

I worry that we're getting back into the COINTELPRO days of Vietnam.  My letters ask for specific things that, one, should have been very easy to answer:  Is the press right that there was surveillance of citizens in my home state of Vermont?

I would think that senators that have been here for 31 years ought to be able to get an answer to a simple question like that.  For months, everybody's refused to answer my question. 

So I'll ask you, did they have surveillance of citizens in Vermont?

RUMSFELD:  Senator, I'm told that the Department of Defense did not conduct any investigations of the domestic activities of persons in Vermont, nor did it target any groups in Vermont for the collection of intelligence. 

Apparently, the Department of Defense did receive two reports that came to it from the Department of Homeland Security, and they were reports about protests, or potential protests, against DOD recruiters by Vermont groups.

Subsequently, the report came to the Department of Defense.  The Army personnel generated a report based on that information, that they had not generated themselves, and placed it into the database.  

The first TALON report contained information about a potential protest action against military recruiters attending a career function on March 8th...

LEAHY:  March 8th of what year?

RUMSFELD:  I'm sorry, of 2005, in an unidentified Vermont town. Two participating groups were named in the report.  The second report focused on a protest at an Army recruiting office in Washington, D.C., and also noted that another protest was planned that day in an armed forces recruiting center in Williston, Vermont, but no group was mentioned.  

So what happened was...

LEAHY:  So the press account saying that Quakers were under surveillance by the Department of Defense is inaccurate.

RUMSFELD:  I didn't see the press report, therefore I would not want to characterize...

LEAHY:  But if there was a press report that said that Vermont groups were under surveillance by the Department of Defense, such a press report would be inaccurate -- if there was such a press report, it would be inaccurate.

RUMSFELD:  I'm reluctant to heave charges around.  

LEAHY:  I'm not asking for charges.  That's a simple yes or no.

RUMSFELD:  Well, it isn't for me.

Let me explain this program.  The program is for the purpose of force protection of the United States military facilities in the United States of America, which is a legal obligation of the Department of Defense, to protect their forces and their bases.

So they have a program that allows information to be sent to them that raises questions about possible threats to their bases.

If that information comes in and is not evaluated, it sits there...

LEAHY:  Mr. Secretary, that's not my question.  The question is, if there was a report of surveillance of Vermont groups protesting the war in Vermont by the Department of Defense, that report is inaccurate.  Yes or no?

RUMSFELD:  I would have to see the report.  I have read to you the fact that some reports about Vermont groups came into the department, but they were not originated by the Department of Defense.

LEAHY:  I should point out, we have -- I know there are a number of Quakers, some older than you and I, who peacefully protest once a week in Vermont on the war.  There are some in Vermont who do not support the war in Iraq.  And if the intent is to surveil them, you could save your time.

I'll speak against the war on the floor and you can just take it off CSPAN and save your money.

Let me speak about the Darfur peacekeeping because Senator Cochran spoke about this.  A lot of people call for more, Secretary Rice, for more peacekeeping troops in Darfur.

The administration does not support that.  I see this as genocide.  I don't know how you could call it anything else.  The African Union peacekeepers are incapable of performing some of the basic functions.  There seem to be no consequences for attacking civilians.  And some of the attacks are just horrendous.

I mean, they're nightmarish, when you hear the descriptions.  And I will not go into them.  You've read the same intelligence reports -- actually, some of the same press reports I have.

Now, the $161 million you've requested as a supplemental for peacekeeping in Darfur will cover our share of sustaining the current inadequate number of troops.  It doesn't do anything to help pay for the doubling of U.N. troops, even though the president has acknowledged that's needed.

Do we need more money?

RICE:  Senator, I think, at this time, we believe that this is an appropriate amount of money for the coverage of the U.N. peacekeeping force that is likely to be available in this period of time.

As you know, we would authorize the U.N. peacekeeping force in the Security Council.  There would then be an effort to actually raise that force.  And we believe that this funding from the supplemental can help us with the first stages of that.

But we certainly will need to have our contribution be adequate to cover the peacekeeping force.

LEAHY:  Let me ask, just so you can add to your answer:  Can we stop the genocide in Darfur?

RICE:  Well, Senator, I hope that we can stop the violence and the genocide in Darfur.  That's certainly what we are attempting to do.  There are really three prongs to this policy.

Let me first say that we do, in fact, favor both a U.N. peacekeeping force and an expansion of the numbers of peacekeepers that are now on the ground.

And one reason that we want to go to a blue-hatted force is that we believe we would have a more sustainable way to attract enough forces to have a doubling of the force in Darfur.  So we do favor that.

We also favor, as the president has said, a role for NATO in the planning and logistics and support to that force.  And General Jones is working within NATO to see what we can do to effectively bring that O piece into it.

So we want a more robust peacekeeping force in Darfur.

The president himself has spoken to that.

But it's going to require more than a peacekeeping force in Darfur to end the violence there.  It is also going to require an effort at a peace agreement between the parties.  And we are spending a lot of time in the Abuja talks trying to bring a peace agreement between the parties.

We also, Senator, are trying to make certain that the comprehensive peace agreement for the agreement between the south and the north is fully implemented, because that ended a civil war that
killed millions of people over decades.

And so there are many pieces to our policy in Darfur, but we do favor a more robust peacekeeping force for Darfur.

# # # # #