About this transcript: This is a full AI-generated transcript of Mike Waltz, Jeff Bartos testify before House committee on United Nations reform — full video from Face the Nation, published July 23, 2026. The transcript contains 29,907 words with timestamps and was generated using Whisper AI.
"and hired an American to go in and do the work that the U.N. had failed to do at a fraction of the manpower, at a fraction of the cost, and with great success. We simply cannot ask American taxpayers to continue funding failed missions. We can no longer fund programs in the U.N. that support..."
[0:00] and hired an American to go in and do the work that the U.N. had failed to do
[0:04] at a fraction of the manpower, at a fraction of the cost, and with great success.
[0:10] We simply cannot ask American taxpayers to continue funding failed missions.
[0:15] We can no longer fund programs in the U.N. that support abortion,
[0:19] radical gender ideology, LGBTQ education,
[0:24] and other leftist projects that do nothing for the American people.
[0:27] We can no longer give America's enemies a seat at the table.
[0:32] When Iran is nominated to the U.N. committee responsible for shaping U.N. priorities on human rights and counterterrorism,
[0:44] clearly the United Nations has a credibility problem.
[0:48] When Iran is selected as the vice president for the United Nations Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
[0:57] again, the United Nations has a serious credibility problem.
[1:00] You can't make that up, that that took place. It is like a movie.
[1:05] When UNRWA, the U.N.'s relief organization in the Middle East,
[1:10] puts Hamas operatives on its payroll,
[1:13] the United Nations has a serious credibility problem.
[1:17] When the United Nations institutionalizes anti-Semitism
[1:21] and disproportionate condemnation of Israel after it suffered the worst terrorist attack and genocide in history,
[1:28] it should be abundantly clear that the U.N. is rotting from the inside.
[1:33] The U.N. is in severe need of reform.
[1:36] We have to leverage the opportunity we have under President Trump to put America first foreign policy in action at the U.N.
[1:42] We have an opportunity to demand that the U.N. deliver results that align with American foreign policy interests,
[1:49] not Iranian nuclear interests, not Chinese COVID interests, not Russian political obstruction,
[1:56] which is where they have moved to.
[1:58] These reasons and countless others are why I've become the first House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman in history
[2:05] to vote against funding for the United Nations.
[2:09] If there were a vote today in the House to create or join a new organization
[2:16] where the United States of America would be on equal footing with Russia and the People's Republic of China,
[2:24] that perhaps had some good features like the World Food Program,
[2:30] but also had programs like UNRWA and Haiti boondoggles and climate radicalism and U.N. lobbying campaigns for abortion,
[2:41] we would vote against it.
[2:43] We would not recreate it.
[2:44] We would not fund it.
[2:46] We wouldn't give them $14.
[2:51] We wouldn't give them $14 billion.
[2:54] Ambassador Waltz, Ambassador Bartos,
[2:56] you have been doing everything that you can to tear out the rot, to tear out the grift.
[3:04] I give you every credit for that.
[3:05] I admire the steps that you're taking for United Nations reform,
[3:09] and I appreciate your leadership in that den of snakes.
[3:12] While I continue to doubt the effectiveness and the value of the United Nations as an organization,
[3:17] I look forward to hearing your testimony,
[3:20] hearing about the successes that you have had in rooting out that rot,
[3:24] the obstacles that you continue to face,
[3:27] and learning about those U.N. institutions and cultures where the rot is so deep,
[3:32] you and your leadership team have yet to been able to affect it.
[3:35] Now recognize, I would actually remind other members of the committee that opening statements may be submitted for the record.
[3:43] Again, we are pleased to have a distinguished panel of witnesses before us today on this topic.
[3:48] The Honorable Mike Waltz, Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations for the U.S. Department of State,
[3:55] and the Honorable Jeff Bartos, Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations for U.N. Management and Reform for U.S. Department of State.
[4:04] We're honored to have you both.
[4:06] Ambassador Waltz, it was honored to have you as a colleague here.
[4:09] This committee recognizes the importance of the issues before us and is grateful to have you here to speak with us.
[4:14] Your full statements will be made a part of the record.
[4:16] I'll ask each of you to keep your remarks as short as you can.
[4:19] I recognize you, Ambassador Waltz, for any opening statement that you would like to make.
[4:24] Well, thank you, Chairman Mast and Ranking Member Meeks and members of the committee.
[4:28] It's good to see you again.
[4:29] It's good to be back, a little different to be on this side of the dais, I have to admit.
[4:35] Mr. Chairman, colleagues, it should surprise no one that I share the view that the U.N. has drifted badly from its core mission.
[4:44] We've all seen it, and that's from my former constituents in Florida to my U.N. colleagues who say the same thing every day to, I think, most of you this morning.
[4:53] My charge from President Trump is to help the U.N. realize its potential.
[5:00] We are getting the United Nations back to basics, back to maintaining the peace, and maintaining security around the world.
[5:07] Unfortunately, the U.N. has tried to become all things to all people and has literally done nothing but grow for its 80-year history.
[5:17] Its budget, just in the last 25 years, has tripled in size, and I don't think we've seen a tripling of peace break out around the world.
[5:27] We, as part of our reform effort, have worked with the U.N., which they have to do by consensus, to cut its budget for the first time in its existence, ever.
[5:38] We cut it by a billion dollars over the last six months alone.
[5:42] And, by the way, again, that requires consensus of all 190 countries to agree on every line of the budget.
[5:49] Imagine if this body had to get all five, if this Congress had to get 535 members to agree on a budget.
[5:58] But this gentleman, Ambassador Bartos, and his team had all 190 countries to agree, and they should be, I think, appreciated for that.
[6:05] We've also eliminated 4,000 headquarters bureaucrats, cut peacekeepers by 25% around the world, and, importantly, we've ended peacekeeping missions that have not lived up to their mandate, that have failed, those like UNIFIL and Lebanon.
[6:20] We have made it clear that UNIFIL needs to stand down, and negotiations are underway with what would replace it.
[7:06] We're also changing the way UN does development aid.
[7:09] Trump, who I do believe is a peace president, can use to help the United States deliver peace, share the burden, and advance an America-first policy.
[7:19] And, under President Trump, we drove a number of things and a number of successes the American people should be proud of.
[7:26] We drove a landmark Security Council resolution condemning Iran's attacks on its neighbors and the weaponization of the Straits of Hormuz.
[7:34] I hear all the time, we don't have countries that agree with us, that we don't have allies that agree with us.
[7:39] Yet, in this instance, we set a UN record, 136 countries agreed with us that Iran's behavior is an absolute violation of international law.
[7:50] When President Trump proposed his 20-point Gaza peace plan, we secured a Security Council endorsement without opposition of that plan.
[7:59] Again, it now anchors an international stabilization force, local Palestinian governance, a World Bank-managed reconstruction fund, funded largely by regional partners, not American taxpayers.
[8:11] I say again, not American taxpayers, and for the first time in a decade, there are zero hostages in Gaza, something that just six, seven months ago, everyone thought was impossible.
[8:24] In Haiti, Mr. Chairman, where you mentioned, under the last administration, we had a billion dollars of U.S. taxpayer dollars going to fund just 1,000 Kenyan policemen,
[8:35] where drugs, guns, thugs threaten the United States, our southern border, Europe, West Africa, and the Caribbean.
[8:42] We now have a gang suppression force with an offensive mandate with international troops, Francophone troops, not U.S. troops, and U.N. logistics have now cut our costs by 75%.
[8:55] In Western Sahara, we're pushing peace for the first time in 50 years, and our friends and adversaries are seeing what the U.N. can accomplish when it gets refocused, when it does fewer things better.
[9:08] Look, colleagues, there's still more to do. We certainly realize that. There is more in our crosshairs for reform, slashing these ridiculous benefits programs.
[9:20] I think that would be quite hard to explain to your constituents why U.N. bureaucrats have private schools paid for, yet our own constituents are struggling to go to their schools.
[9:31] A 17% pension contribution, 17% more than anywhere else in the United States and the world that we're aware of, and we're fighting this year for a reform-minded Secretary General.
[9:46] Look, at the end of the day, we need more Americans serving in U.N. agencies for our businesses and standard-setting bodies, and for ultimately a U.N. that, again, does less better for the American people.
[9:58] Our charge is to make the U.N. great again. Thank you.
[10:03] Thank you, Ambassador Waltz. Ambassador Bartos, anything you'd like to add?
[10:08] Yes, just briefly. First, Chairman Mass, thank you for your hospitality. Thank you for allowing us to be here. It's an honor to be with you, Ranking Member Meeks, and to your staff.
[10:19] We've had a wonderful working relationship, both with the majority staff and the ranking member staff, the minority staff.
[10:24] Throughout my time, we've been at the post for about 10 months and worked very, very closely with the staff here.
[10:30] I really appreciate the professionalism and the diligence of everyone we get a chance to work with.
[10:34] If I could just set the table, last July, when Ambassador Waltz, Ambassador Lissetta, and I sat for our confirmation hearings just across the way in the Senate in the Foreign Relations Committee,
[10:44] we were told things like, very fairly told, by the way, U.N. reform is an oxymoron. It's impossible.
[10:52] Some senators even said, good luck with that.
[10:54] My wife even asked me, why are you doing this job? It seems impossible.
[10:58] But we hit the ground running in September. First day at work was the President's speech on the floor of the General Assembly.
[11:05] And we have not come up for air. We have not stopped running hard since minute one of putting our right hands up and taking the oath of office that we were all so honored to do.
[11:13] And this work is amazing, the work we get to do.
[11:17] Ambassador Waltz and I wrote an op-ed in January, just a couple months ago, and it was entitled,
[11:23] Reforming the U.N. Was Impossible Until President Trump Came Along.
[11:27] And that is the spirit in which we've taken all of our work here.
[11:31] And what we've achieved in six months, with the President's vision and leadership,
[11:35] with the Secretary's support vision and leadership, and with the remarkable team we get to work with at the State Department,
[11:40] and of course with Ambassador Waltz's leadership as our Chief of Mission,
[11:44] as he said, we have achieved $1.1 billion in budget cuts across the regular budget and the peacekeeping budget.
[11:51] Not only is this historic reform, it is the first budget cut in the 80-year history of the organization.
[11:59] And we did that in the last six months.
[12:00] 4,000 civilian posts cut.
[12:04] Repatriating 25% of peacekeepers who were underperforming.
[12:08] That's diplomatic, nice speak of saying these were sexual abusers.
[12:13] These were troops who were engaging in sexual exploitation and abuse.
[12:17] And because the U.S. drove these reforms, force commanders had the political cover.
[12:21] Their words, not mine.
[12:23] They had the political cover to send home these abusers.
[12:26] First time, really, in a long time that they've been able to do that.
[12:30] Culture at the U.N.
[12:31] What have we done to address culture?
[12:33] Our team, for years, has worked on, before you, as a troop contributing country, you could send equipment into theater,
[12:40] park it, and get reimbursed just for having it sit there.
[12:44] Our team, and I have a remarkable management reform team that I get to work with at the mission,
[12:47] they've been working on this for years.
[12:49] But we drove it through this spring in the contingent-owned equipment working group.
[12:54] There is such a thing at the U.N.
[12:55] Who knew?
[12:56] We changed the way the culture of the U.N.
[12:59] Now, to get reimbursed, you have to put the equipment into use.
[13:03] It has to be used.
[13:04] It has to be working.
[13:04] It has to be effective.
[13:05] It has to go out on patrol.
[13:07] Saving $30 million a year when it's fully up and running.
[13:09] But more importantly, the culture of the U.N., no longer are you getting paid for not doing anything.
[13:13] And these are such important foundational changes.
[13:15] And, Chairman, as you said, as Ambassador Waltz said, what we have reached for thus far far exceeds our grasp.
[13:22] We have to go way further over the next two-plus years to achieve real, meaningful, durable, consequential reform.
[13:29] That's our charge from the President.
[13:31] But that's what we're doing every day.
[13:33] And so we bring, as you and I have discussed, there's so much work left to do.
[13:37] If I could just say also, and the Ambassador touched on this,
[13:41] the U.N., in standard-setting bodies like the ITU, like WIPO, like IMO,
[13:47] we are bringing U.S. leadership to make sure that our interests are not only preserved, but also our interests lead.
[13:55] Because if we're not leading, our adversaries are waiting in the wings to do that.
[14:00] And so we are bringing that American leadership, that American innovation, that American focus to do just that.
[14:06] I look forward to your questions.
[14:07] As I said, it's an honor to be here.
[14:08] And thank you for having us.
[14:10] Thank you, Ambassador Bartos.
[14:11] Ranking Member Meeks, do you want to forgo your questions?
[14:15] Forgo?
[14:16] Yeah.
[14:16] Never.
[14:17] Okay.
[14:18] Just checking.
[14:20] You're up.
[14:24] Let me start this.
[14:25] I want to, because this committee, we have not had any real oversight on this war of choice of President Trump.
[14:34] And I know that, Ambassador Walsh, you've been the face of that at the U.N.
[14:41] And so I just have a few questions I want to ask you in that regards.
[14:45] You know, the White House declared on June 19th that President Trump's ceasefire agreement
[14:51] with Iran, quote, ensures Iran will never obtain a nuclear weapon, unquote.
[14:58] But the International Atomic Energy Agency, an organization in the U.N. system, has reported
[15:04] that its inspectors have been unable to access Iran's highly enriched Ukrainian stockpile
[15:11] or previously declared nuclear facilities for nearly a year?
[15:16] So I'm going to ask you a simple question, because I'm trying to figure this out since
[15:21] we have not had any oversight in this regards and any hearings on it.
[15:25] I'm going to take advantage of this.
[15:27] Can the IAEA account today for all of Iran's enriched uranium and verify that Iran has not
[15:35] moved nuclear material or equipment to undeclared locations?
[15:41] Do you know?
[15:42] Yes or no?
[15:44] Thank you, ranking members.
[15:47] In terms of oversight, I'll note that Secretary Rubio has testified before this committee this year.
[15:52] But in terms of the IAEA, you're absolutely right.
[15:56] Iran is not allowing the inspectors access to the sites in contravention of its obligations
[16:04] to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
[16:06] Unfortunately, that's one of the things that our technical negotiators are negotiating now.
[16:10] We are in constant contact with the Director General, Rafael Grossi.
[16:16] Iran has to let those inspectors back in.
[16:20] By contrast, you have the United Arab Emirates just over the Gulf with a civilian nuclear program
[16:26] that does allow the inspectors full access.
[16:29] So Iran kicked the inspectors out.
[16:31] They have to let them back in.
[16:32] What confuses me is that the President will then tell the American people on June 19th
[16:38] that his ceasefire agreement has eliminated Iran's path to a nuclear weapon.
[16:42] So why would he say that if, in fact, what you just said, the IAEA cannot verify and there's
[16:49] no one else verified so that it has not been eliminated?
[16:52] But at one time, the President said, because of this agreement that he made, that Alon's
[16:58] path to a nuclear weapon had been eliminated.
[17:01] In fact, he also said that it was completely annihilated, you know, on June 19th, et cetera.
[17:07] But it seems as though he was not telling the truth then.
[17:11] And now we hear something else differently then.
[17:13] And so that's what I'm concerned about is, you know, what what the President is talking
[17:19] about, because it is the President that tore up the JCPOA in his first turn.
[17:25] And and I believe that you told Fox News on June 22nd that, quote, that what we never saw
[17:34] with Obama or the Biden administration trying to do the CPO, the JCPOA 2.0 was a credible
[17:40] military option on the table.
[17:41] Now, we've spent the DOD budget has almost tripled, and I don't see more peace that's
[17:50] happening there.
[17:51] The American people is is paying for that.
[17:54] So I look, there was a pursuit.
[18:00] You pursued the military, the military action.
[18:03] It has cost at least thirty seven point five billion dollars, according to Pete Hexf, and
[18:09] others say up to 100 billion.
[18:11] So what I'm trying to find out and what I'm asking you before I move to the U.N.
[18:14] real quick, what has this war achieved on the nuclear threat that diplomacy, sanctions,
[18:21] inspections and allied coordination did not?
[18:24] Well, number one, going to the U.N., we have snapback sanctions that are back in place.
[18:29] The the international community has joined the United States in that maximum pressure
[18:33] that is in place.
[18:34] It was snapback in place with the with the JCPOA also.
[18:36] Well, that actually the sanctions.
[18:38] And we were not at war.
[18:39] No, I'm sorry.
[18:40] The strainer of our booth was open.
[18:42] The sanctions were lifted.
[18:44] They were snapped back under this administration.
[18:46] Number one.
[18:47] Number two, you're right.
[18:48] The Iranians cheated under JCPOA.
[18:51] That was exposed.
[18:52] The IAA verified that there were sites that they hid that were not discovered under that
[18:56] agreement and that they were growing their nuclear program.
[18:59] President Trump did obliterate the nuclear program last June, but now but it is very clear
[19:04] the Iranians still intend to reconstitute it.
[19:07] They still intend to enrich and they still have highly enriched and they still have high
[19:11] enriched uranium that we have to deal with.
[19:13] Gas prices over four dollars.
[19:15] Food prices were not going up.
[19:17] We were not spending nearly a billion dollars almost a day.
[19:21] He's coming back now asking the Senate and we'll be asking the House about 300 for 300
[19:26] billion dollars more.
[19:28] There's not been he's not come to Congress.
[19:31] He has not talked about and talked with us on how we end this war.
[19:35] Secretary Rubio has been before Congress.
[19:37] And he has not answered the questions also.
[19:39] So I'm taking advantage of everybody that is coming here because unfortunately there's
[19:43] been no oversight in this committee and you have been the face of this war at the
[19:48] U.N., sir.
[19:48] I'm here today, Ranking Member, and proud to be here.
[19:52] Thank you, Ranking Member Meeks.
[19:53] You may not recall the oversight of Secretary Rubio just about a month ago because
[19:57] you left halfway through and never came back.
[20:00] So maybe you forgot about it.
[20:01] That might make sense.
[20:02] I'm going to recognize, right?
[20:04] Representative, you must have.
[20:05] I did not.
[20:06] He did not.
[20:06] He has not.
[20:07] Have we had?
[20:08] He came here.
[20:09] You probably don't remember because you missed half of it.
[20:11] I didn't miss half of it.
[20:12] I could see it in my office.
[20:13] You missed half of it.
[20:13] You don't know what I missed.
[20:14] I know what you missed.
[20:15] I know you weren't.
[20:16] I know you weren't sitting here next to the rest of us.
[20:17] I know you have not had any hearings and oversight.
[20:20] I know you weren't sitting here next to the rest of us.
[20:22] Hey, Mike, nothing ever changes.
[20:24] Well, this was him when he was here.
[20:27] Also, I would thank you for attending Monday's classified briefing.
[20:31] I think it might have been the first one you attended.
[20:32] So thank you for attending that.
[20:34] But Representative McCall, you're recognized.
[20:36] Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ambassador Waltz.
[20:38] Great to see you again.
[20:40] It's great to see a friend and a former colleague in this position.
[20:44] And let me just say, I think you're doing an outstanding job.
[20:47] Reforming the United Nations is quite a daunting task.
[20:51] As Ambassador Bartos, you mentioned your wife questioning your sanity and taking on the job.
[20:59] But I commend you for it.
[21:00] Let me just, I want to follow up with Iran.
[21:03] You know, since 1979, a dark veil of terror has reigned over the Middle East.
[21:08] This, in my judgment, was a reckoning that was eventually going to happen.
[21:15] It was unavoidable with this regime as long as the regime is in power.
[21:20] I commend this president for being the first president to take on this regime and Iran on its path to a nuclear bomb.
[21:30] Negotiating in the past hasn't worked.
[21:33] I have to be honest with you, Ambassador.
[21:35] I'm not sanguine about the current negotiations.
[21:38] I understand we have to give that a chance and give peace a chance.
[21:42] We have to try to negotiate.
[21:44] But I do think that, as Reagan said, peace through strength, as Colin Powell talked about, the Powell doctrine,
[21:53] either you go all in to win or you get the hell out of there.
[21:58] Right now, they're reconstituting their centrifuges in underground storage facilities.
[22:04] And their launch pads are still striking.
[22:09] It is my sincere hope, and it's not your responsibility, but this, that the president unleashes our Department of War on Iran.
[22:18] I know that's what is happening now, to take out the launch pads, to take out the IRGC, to let Mossad and Israel do its job.
[22:27] Because I think as long as this regime's in power, we're going to continue to have this problem.
[22:34] And Russia providing targeting information is absolutely unacceptable from my point of view, and I think from the United States' point of view.
[22:42] I'm really pleased to see the White House join with Lindsey Graham as I went to Ukraine.
[22:50] His last wishes were his Russian sanctions bill to pass.
[22:55] I will be introducing that in the Congress here today.
[22:58] And I want to thank the White House for its work there, because nothing will end that war sooner than passing that sanctions bill.
[23:06] It's a path to peace, not a path to war.
[23:08] However, my question to you is, the Straits of Hormuz, we're a net-game producer.
[23:16] We don't really even have to rely on this.
[23:19] We are doing this to the benefit of our European allies.
[23:23] The U.N. Security Council, you know, I want to ask you, where is the U.N. Security Council?
[23:30] I applaud the president as well for getting the Gulf states involved to help finance this operation,
[23:37] because it's in their best interest to open up these Straits.
[23:42] I think it's a very doable thing if we unleash our military and allow them to do what they do best.
[23:48] Sir, and you know the military better than I do, they're fully capable of accomplishing this mission.
[23:55] I know that's not the hat you wear today, but I'd like for you to comment on the overall status of the Straits
[24:01] and what role, if any, are, you know, the Gulf states, but I think the Gulf states are stepping up,
[24:09] what role, if any, is the United Nations and Security Council playing in this?
[24:15] Well, thank you.
[24:16] And just to set the table for the answer, I want to answer that very specifically.
[24:20] You're absolutely right.
[24:21] Iran has been at war with the United States since 1979,
[24:25] has killed thousands of my fellow servicemen in Iraq, in Lebanon, in the Gulf,
[24:32] literally all over the world, in addition to its plots here in the United States
[24:37] and to kill the president of the United States and members of his cabinet.
[24:41] Yet, Iran is in the worst place, is in the weakest place it has been
[24:47] through a combination of both military and diplomacy in its war against the United States.
[24:53] In Lebanon, you have the Lebanese government, you had the president here yesterday and today,
[24:59] you have Lebanon negotiating with Israel for the first time,
[25:02] you have the Assad regime is gone, and probably the most hope in Syria that we've seen in a generation.
[25:08] You just had the Iraqi president here in Texas signing deals with American oil and gas companies,
[25:16] and the Iranian regime is literally cratering economically, militarily,
[25:20] and at war, frankly, with its own people, in addition to the region.
[25:26] To your point on the Straits of Hormuz, Secretary Besant just said yesterday,
[25:30] China, the main buyer of illegal Iranian oil, has cut its purchases by half,
[25:35] and nobody else wants to buy it.
[25:37] The blockade is absolutely working.
[25:38] And then on the UN, look, we've had Iran absolutely diplomatically isolated.
[25:44] We may not pay a lot of attention to what happens in the UN Security Council here in our media,
[25:50] but I can tell you around the rest of the world, they are glued to every word.
[25:53] It's the only forum Iran really has on the global stage,
[25:57] and 140 countries have sided with us and condemned their attacks on civilian shippings,
[26:03] the mines that they're putting in international waterways,
[26:06] and their violations of international law across the board.
[26:11] Keeping them diplomatically isolated is my job,
[26:14] and as the ranking member mentioned, we also have sanctions authority.
[26:18] The snapback sanctions that were lifted under the JCPOA are now back in place,
[26:23] and the rest of the world has joined us in that economic isolation.
[26:26] Thank you, sir.
[26:27] Representative Sherman.
[26:28] I thank Mr. McCall for pointing out that America is self-sufficient in oil.
[26:35] Our oil does not go through the Strait of Hormuz.
[26:38] If we prohibited the export of American oil, except for refine and return,
[26:44] then we would be paying American prices for American oil.
[26:48] Instead, the president has decided that we need to pay that world price
[26:53] to the great enrichment of American oil producers that have done nothing
[26:58] except sell us the same oil at the same gas stations now for a much higher price.
[27:03] The ranking member was correct to point out that this committee has not provided oversight
[27:08] for this horrendous war in Iran.
[27:12] But even more timely is that we need hearings in this committee
[27:16] about the proposed nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia.
[27:22] Now, there are those who think that the Saudi possession of nuclear technology is totally benign.
[27:31] But I've been involved in this for a long time.
[27:34] And I remember when the most powerful monarch in the Middle East was a good friend of America.
[27:39] And the Shah got his hands on important U.S. military technology.
[27:43] Thank God nothing nuclear.
[27:45] And everything the Shah had in 1978 was in the mullah's hands in 1979.
[27:50] We have no idea who is going to be running Saudi Arabia 10 years from now.
[27:58] Mr. Walts, the administration has decided to share certain elements
[28:03] of the nuclear cooperation agreement with the press.
[28:08] And so all I have is press reports.
[28:09] Have you read the agreement?
[28:15] Mr. Sharman, I have seen the agreement.
[28:17] Any chance we'll get to see the agreement?
[28:19] Could you provide it to us perhaps today, perhaps either in a classified session
[28:24] or an open session?
[28:25] I would happily take that for the record.
[28:28] And that's obviously to the secretary and the president, what he shares between the two bodies.
[28:31] Well, as to the secretary, let me point out that Senator Rubio and I, in 2018,
[28:38] introduced the No Nuclear Weapons for Saudi Arabia Act,
[28:43] which mandated that any agreement with Saudi Arabia would have to have the affirmative approval
[28:49] of the United States Congress.
[28:51] And I miss Senator Rubio.
[28:53] The secretary Rubio takes a completely different position.
[28:57] Now, the press reports indicate...
[28:59] Mr. Chairman, can I just be clear for the record?
[29:00] I understood you to mean the MOU that, with Iran, I have not seen any proposed agreement...
[29:06] I'm talking about Saudi Arabia.
[29:08] Saudi Arabia, so...
[29:09] So you have not...
[29:09] Here's my confusion.
[29:10] No, I have not.
[29:11] Oh, so you have not read...
[29:12] Okay, well, then he won't share it with you or us until some later date.
[29:17] He'll have to share it with us at a later date.
[29:20] But the press reports indicate that there'll be no...
[29:24] That Saudi Arabia is not agreeing to the additional protocol.
[29:27] The United Arab Emirates did agree to the additional protocol.
[29:34] Is there any reason we should be bombing Iran because they won't agree to limit their nuclear program
[29:42] while telling Saudi Arabia we give them the green light
[29:45] and they don't even have to agree to these additional inspections?
[29:47] Yes, absolutely.
[29:48] There's been half a dozen UN resolutions saying Iran cannot and should not have a nuclear weapon.
[29:54] And they're the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world.
[29:58] So yes, there's a reason we should be bombing Iran.
[29:59] Mr. Chairman, can you keep order?
[30:01] And not Saudi Arabia.
[30:01] It's kind of a ridiculous question, frankly.
[30:02] Mr. Chairman, can you keep order?
[30:04] You asked him a question.
[30:05] He's trying to answer.
[30:06] I reclaimed my time.
[30:07] Who owns the time?
[30:08] That's not a real thing.
[30:09] It's not a real thing for members of this committee to control their five minutes of time?
[30:15] You asked a question.
[30:16] I did, and I got a filibuster, and I stopped the filibuster.
[30:19] It's also rich to hear this side of the aisle celebrating oil after they were at war.
[30:24] I look forward to this committee being run in accordance with committee rules,
[30:27] and only the departure from committee rules prevents us from exposing the great hypocrisy here.
[30:33] Saudi Arabia is not agreeing to the additional inspections
[30:38] that could make sure that their program is not used to develop a nuclear weapon.
[30:44] We have no idea who will be running Saudi Arabia ten years from now.
[30:49] We are bombing Iran because they insist upon enriching and reprocessing.
[30:54] We are entering into an agreement with Saudi Arabia,
[30:58] giving them the green light to reprocess and to enrich.
[31:03] We are, and the only difference I see here is that Westinghouse stands to make an awful lot of money on this deal,
[31:12] whereas the Iranians were not enriching American companies.
[31:15] I look forward to having a process with Congress where you'll tell us what you're doing,
[31:22] and I hope that Senator Rubio will return to us and insist that Congress approve any agreement.
[31:30] I know that someone will introduce, or I predict someone will introduce, a resolution of disapproval,
[31:36] and I invite members of this committee who have worked with us to prevent nuclear weapons in the Middle East
[31:42] from non-democratic countries to join in that effort.
[31:45] I yield back.
[31:46] Representative yields back.
[31:47] Just so everybody knows, I shouldn't have to tell people this,
[31:51] but if you ask the witnesses a question, I'm not going to prevent them from answering you.
[31:56] I would think that's common sense.
[31:57] Representative Smith, you're recognized.
[31:59] Mr. Chairman, the time belongs to the member, and the member utilize their time.
[32:05] Mr. Smith, there's a regular order in this hearing.
[32:09] There's order.
[32:09] He asked a question.
[32:11] The witness was trying to answer.
[32:12] The witness was trying to filibuster.
[32:14] This is your MO.
[32:14] You guys ask questions, and then you don't want answers.
[32:17] You ask about Rubio's shoes, and you don't want answers about his shoes.
[32:20] He controls the time.
[32:22] Members control the time.
[32:23] Mr. Smith, as you seem unfamiliar with the rules of this committee.
[32:26] Members control the time.
[32:27] Don't ask questions.
[32:28] Not a witness.
[32:29] Don't ask questions if you don't want the answers.
[32:31] Well, witnesses can't answer yes or no also.
[32:33] They can answer.
[32:34] You've got to give them a chance to answer.
[32:35] They don't answer.
[32:36] They try to filibuster.
[32:37] They don't if you talk over them.
[32:38] They try to filibuster.
[32:41] Consider yourself warned.
[32:42] You ask them a question, they're going to have the opportunity to answer.
[32:45] We've got to apply by the rules of this committee.
[32:47] The members control the time.
[32:50] You are not going to control the time of the members of at least this side of the aisle.
[32:54] The members control their own time.
[32:56] They determine whether or not their question is being answered or not.
[32:59] They determine, because they only have five minutes, whether they want to move on to another question.
[33:03] We're not going to have a situation where witnesses can filibuster and members can't ask the questions they want to answer.
[33:09] Let me just be clear again.
[33:11] You will have a situation.
[33:13] I want you to be, you know, make sure you understand, because sometimes you leave and you don't come back.
[33:16] I want you to understand that if your members ask a question, the witnesses are going to have the opportunity to answer.
[33:23] Whether you leave and come back, it will be the same rule.
[33:25] So just so you know.
[33:26] This is not high school trying to be personal.
[33:27] Representative Smith.
[33:28] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[33:30] And first of all, let me just say a very special thanks to Ambassadors Wallace and Bartos for your extraordinary leadership, your tenacity, your vision.
[33:38] I am so glad we have the A-Team at the United Nations, and you are indeed that.
[33:43] You know, in 2011, I would note parenthetically, even President Obama cut off funding to UNESCO.
[33:48] I remember it well because of their rampant anti-Semitism.
[33:52] So withholding funding to an egregiously flawed institution or agency is in the best interest of not only the United Nations, but of course the United States of America.
[34:03] So thank you for that.
[34:04] I do want to thank you for working and pushing so hard to reform a system that is so egregiously flawed and broken.
[34:13] So many of the agencies, it is in disrepair, including peacekeeping.
[34:18] You know, I went to Darfur and I went to Sudan several times.
[34:22] But in Darfur, I met with the peacekeepers when they first were deployed.
[34:25] Found out they were getting a dollar a day.
[34:28] Came back, talked to Condoleezza Rice.
[34:30] Our Secretary of State said, this is outrageous.
[34:32] And of course, she worked to reform that and to fix that.
[34:36] In 2005, I became aware that UN peacekeepers in D.R. Congo were raping little children.
[34:43] Ambassador Swing was in charge of that mission.
[34:46] When I raised these issues, I was dismissed and then dissed.
[34:49] So I went there and I met with the people.
[34:52] I ran into an O.I.O.S. Mountie, who was in charge of investigating.
[34:56] He was a font of information.
[34:58] Came back here, had four hearings on it and said, how dare they?
[35:04] They go in there to protect and they're raping little children, 10, 12 years old.
[35:09] And for a meal, these kids were being exploited by UN peacekeepers.
[35:13] Kofi announced, to his credit, tried to reform it.
[35:16] And then what did he do?
[35:16] He turned around.
[35:18] He had a zero tolerance policy and he repatriated people who were committing these crimes.
[35:24] And then I had another hearing because we soon found out.
[35:27] And the hearing was called, zero compliance with the zero tolerance towards human trafficking.
[35:32] I say that as the author of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 and four other
[35:37] anti-human trafficking laws.
[35:39] I take this seriously.
[35:41] And the UN has to be on the side, absolutely, of protection.
[35:44] So thank you for what you're doing there as well.
[35:47] On Nigeria, Mike, Secretary Waltz, thank you for your leadership on Nigeria.
[35:52] You are one of the few people I know who was deployed there to try to help protect those
[35:57] who are being slaughtered, including the Christians.
[36:00] Yes, Muslims get killed too if they speak out.
[36:04] Christians get targeted because of the infidels.
[36:06] And the radical Islamic belief is you deserve to die.
[36:09] And whether it be Boko Haram, ISIS West Africa, or the Fulani, we need to do more.
[36:15] And you have taken the lead on that.
[36:16] And you might want to speak to that if you would, because I think Nigeria is one of those
[36:21] cases where if the government gets serious, and I mean really serious, they can come off
[36:26] the CPC designation, but do so by murdering it.
[36:29] I yield.
[36:31] Well, thank you, Representative Smith.
[36:33] And thank you for your long history of taking these issues on and actually getting out there
[36:37] on the ground to see them firsthand rather than opining from D.C.
[36:42] And I will say, I have to give credit where credit's due.
[36:44] Secretary Gutierrez has taken on the issue in a meaningful way of not just peacekeepers,
[36:51] but it's often local vendors being paid by the U.N. who are conducting this type of abuse.
[36:56] On Nigeria, yes, we are taking the persecution of Christians very seriously.
[37:02] I have to say, I did not have Nicki Minaj on my dance card, but to have her with her global
[37:08] following at the U.N. to put a spotlight on this issue was a real honor.
[37:13] And I think it's one of the things the U.N. can do well in terms of having that global platform
[37:19] and having the entire world right there in New York.
[37:21] And we've seen the Nigerian government move as a response to the president's attention,
[37:26] our attention, her attention, and others on the issue.
[37:29] They're cooperating with us more than they were on counterterrorism.
[37:33] They're cooperating in terms of their security force capacity.
[37:36] They still have some work to do, frankly, in terms of the Sharia law that is in place
[37:40] in many of these local provinces.
[37:43] And make no mistake, churches are being burned.
[37:47] Pastors are being executed.
[37:48] People are being arrested literally for just wearing a cross around their neck.
[37:55] And the Christian religion is the most persecuted religion in the world right now.
[38:01] And this administration and I, as its representative at the U.N., are taking it incredibly seriously
[38:06] in every action that we can.
[38:07] I do.
[38:08] Thank you so much for that.
[38:09] You know, on anti-Semitism, I'm almost out of time, but the U.N. has been accused credibly
[38:15] in many of its agencies of being profoundly anti-Semitic, including UNRWA, which is a child
[38:22] soldier factory where you teach a kid, a Palestinian youth, from his earliest days to hate Jews
[38:28] and to hate America.
[38:29] And I've read their documents.
[38:30] I've had hearings on the textbooks.
[38:32] So I'm out of time.
[38:33] So thank you for the work that you're doing in that realm as well.
[38:37] Representative Keating.
[38:37] Mr. Chairman, may I just a quick response to the work we're doing on combating anti-Semitism?
[38:45] May I?
[38:45] Very briefly.
[38:47] Representative Smith, thank you for the point.
[38:49] The U.N. is really at a crossroads since the day we landed, but really even before that,
[38:53] the president came into office with a focus on this and his leadership and vision, the secretary,
[38:58] and everyone we work with at State has been focused on this issue.
[39:02] The U.N. is at a crossroads.
[39:03] It does a lot of good work in the field in the humanitarian space, really important work.
[39:07] And at the same time, it employs a lunatic like Francesca Albanese, an absolute lunatic,
[39:13] a virulent anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-West, anti-Judeo-Christian, anti-Jew, anti-Israel bigot.
[39:20] She puts on that U.N. uniform, and it's such a disservice to the brave humanitarians who are out in the field
[39:27] risking their lives for total strangers, and it does such a disservice to the brand of the U.N.
[39:32] It is the greatest self-sabotage as a businessman I've ever seen in my business career
[39:36] that the U.N. allows its brand to be soiled and spoiled by this bigot.
[39:41] And the U.N. has a decision to make with a new secretary general coming in.
[39:44] Are they going to continue to tolerate this bigotry, this hatred of America and the West and Jews and Israel,
[39:50] or are they going to move in a new direction?
[39:52] And we are watching, not only watching very closely, we have a great team that works on it every day,
[39:55] and we are, rest assured, sir, we are going to hold them accountable.
[39:59] Representative Keating.
[40:02] Ambassador Waltz, in your opening statement, you took great pride in pointing out the hundreds of countries
[40:09] that sided with the U.S. on given resolutions.
[40:12] And I just want to note a point of shame brought to this country when the U.S. sided with three countries,
[40:21] Russia, Belarus, and North Korea, and refusing to condemn Russia's actions, illegal actions,
[40:28] illegal aggression against Ukraine, and denied supporting their territorial integrity.
[40:34] Prior to being in Congress, I was a district attorney.
[40:38] I had my own sexual assault unit, my own sexual assault investigatory unit, prosecutorial unit.
[40:44] I started a child advocacy to treat children that were victims of sexual assault.
[40:51] And I worked with regional and federal-based task force dealing with human trafficking,
[40:57] particularly trafficking of children.
[41:01] And in Congress, I had the opportunity to travel and to hold a hearing with Ukrainian,
[41:08] mostly women, on the ground, risking their lives in a hot war zone,
[41:13] trying to bring rescue, recovery, and treatment to children that were sexually assaulted by Russian soldiers.
[41:23] The stories they told me were horrific.
[41:26] Serial rapes occurring to young children with Russian soldiers, starting in the morning,
[41:30] continuing through the day and all night, with their parents and grandparents being forced to witness this.
[41:36] Terrible, terrible examples of sexual assault time and time again, and war crimes with Ukraine.
[41:45] Now, I want to ask you, given all that, and given my experience, knowing that we're going to combat this,
[41:53] we have to do this on an international basis and a regional basis to be successful,
[42:00] the way I was with those task force.
[42:03] Why did the U.S. withdraw from the U.N. on key offices, the offices for children in armed conflict,
[42:12] the office of sexual violence in conflict, the office of violence against children?
[42:17] Why would the U.S. ever withdraw, given what I just laid out, given what Russia's doing,
[42:24] but given what's happening all over the world, why would they ever withdraw for that?
[42:30] Congressman, I would not conflate our evaluation of the effectiveness of a particular office of an organization
[42:37] versus caring about the issue.
[42:39] I just, last week, hosted with Tim Tebow and the Tebow Foundation.
[42:44] To your point, to your point, sir.
[42:44] Can I answer your question?
[42:46] Thank you for it's five seconds filibustering?
[42:47] No, you answered that.
[42:48] Now I'm taking your answer that you gave me, and I'm asking you another question.
[42:52] Sure.
[42:53] And I wasted time doing it.
[42:54] Don't filibuster me.
[42:56] Listen.
[42:56] Is 10 seconds a filibuster, Mr. Chairman?
[42:58] You just said you were talking about having agencies that you didn't have control over, that were ineffective.
[43:03] Okay, let's talk about one that the Trump administration does have control over, that does have the ability to shape, and that's the State Department.
[43:14] If that's the case, why did the Trump administration, when it has control with the State Department,
[43:19] why did they fire 70% of the Department's Trafficking in Persons Office, and that office, as you know, closes legal gaps and deals with online exploitation, sexual exploitation of children.
[43:35] The office develops protection and partnerships with foreign countries with the goal of strengthening that capacity, preventing, and effectively prosecuting and convicting child traffickers.
[43:48] So, all right, you don't want, you just want to dismiss the meager, probably, monies that it takes to deal with international, you had control over.
[43:56] President Trump just signed this year an executive order.
[43:59] President Trump just signed this year an executive order getting after, in a very serious way, sexual exploitation of children.
[44:08] I just hosted a major event at the UN around the sexual exploitation of children.
[44:12] Oh, why isn't that effective?
[44:13] Why is that so effective when foreign countries as a whole, when that's ineffective, you're subjectively choosing what's effective, what is it?
[44:22] No, I'm giving you an answer.
[44:23] The president takes this very seriously.
[44:25] You just don't like the answer because it cuts against your narrative.
[44:28] Isn't it?
[44:28] I wonder how you would have reacted when you were on the other side of this.
[44:31] I'm sorry if the facts run headlong into your narrative.
[44:32] Listen, Mr. Chairman, would you allow the witness to answer this question?
[44:34] The first lady has expatriated Ukrainian children from Russian camps.
[44:42] The first lady herself is going after this issue.
[44:45] The executive order, and we know how they're working out, the executive order dealing with it.
[44:48] It has the force of law, as you know.
[44:51] Your administration is sitting there withdrawing from having a place at the table on these critical issues,
[44:57] and you're sitting there putting your own spin on the religious aspect of that being the most important thing,
[45:03] and you're hurting children.
[45:05] You are saving children around the world while this body was hot air.
[45:09] They shouldn't be withdrawing from this.
[45:09] They shouldn't be cutting personnel from this.
[45:11] I yield back.
[45:13] Mr. Keating, would you like an extra five seconds where he was answering you earlier?
[45:19] Sir, I was answering the in-part question that was there.
[45:22] He kept trying to filibuster.
[45:24] Let's not have this hearing be about filibustering.
[45:27] What goes around comes around.
[45:28] I just wanted to make sure you didn't want an extra five seconds when you tried to answer.
[45:31] Representative Wilson.
[45:33] Thank you very much, Chairman.
[45:35] I'm Brian Mast.
[45:36] And indeed, thank both of you for being here today,
[45:39] and I particularly appreciate, Secretary Walts, your lifelong achievements as a graduate of Virginia Military Institute.
[45:47] And for the people of the United States, military service, public service, thank you.
[45:52] And Mr. Bartos, we appreciate UVA Law School, too.
[45:55] With that in mind, I want to congratulate you on your success implementing a streamlined U.S. mission to the United Nations.
[46:01] For far too long, America has helped foot the bill for programs that are undermining American national security.
[46:09] Your successes amplify the reforms so appreciated by former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley.
[46:15] Friends of freedom and democracy are to be recognized in totalitarian dictatorships promoting terrorism are exposed by you and former Ambassador Haley.
[46:25] Additionally, I'm really concerned that to assist you, I've addressed a letter to you and Secretary Rubio requesting a review of certain U.N. officials who are promoting extremist and anti-Semitic ideologies.
[46:42] These bureaucrats have called for the arrest of President Donald Trump and Secretary Hagsad.
[46:47] They have called to minimize, they have minimized Hamas atrocities, dismissing murderous rapes that claiming they didn't occur.
[46:56] Additionally, they have questioned democracy while visiting Tehran and praising Havana, Cuba.
[47:02] With that in mind, I'd like to submit the letter for the record.
[47:07] Not objection.
[47:07] Additionally, Mr. Ambassador, under your leadership, I appreciate your efforts to address diversion of critical aid to prevent food and other critical aid to provide that it go to those intended instead of being diverted to dictatorships.
[47:25] What's the status of reforms to protect programs that really are legitimate, Ambassador Waltz, or both?
[47:33] Well, I'll just tell you from a broader sense that we have worked at the aid diversion program by pooling our funding by downsizing the number of agencies that receive some of the funding.
[47:49] Again, that doesn't mean we don't care about the issue.
[47:51] It means we're trying to make it much more effective.
[47:53] I can tell you, Representative, how many times across Africa and the Middle East that I pulled up to a ministry in a small country.
[48:01] It has maybe six people in it, and there's 18 UN cars outside from 18 different agencies, all well-meaning but highly, highly inefficient.
[48:11] So we've pulled that funding.
[48:12] We've forced a number of these agencies to use shared warehousing, aviation fleets, vehicle fleets, shipping mechanisms so that more sense on the dollar actually gets to people at need.
[48:22] And they now have the UN organization called OCHA now has data up on a dashboard, publicly available.
[48:30] We are auditing that data.
[48:32] We are providing that kind of oversight.
[48:34] But the entire world can see now where that money is going.
[48:38] That level of transparency was not there just a year ago.
[48:41] And indeed, to get the aid to the people rather than diverted to dictatorships to maintain their power.
[48:47] With that in mind, too, President Trump has acted courageously to destroy the Iranian nuclear capability.
[48:53] It was Envoy Steve Whitcoff who identified that Iran was bragging that they could provide 11 bombs with the capabilities they had.
[49:03] And it should be reminded to the American people, simultaneously, they're chanting, death to Israel, death to America.
[49:10] And so it's not a hypothetical of what they might be doing.
[49:13] With that in mind, Ambassador Walls, you've said our relationship with the Gulf allies has never been stronger, which I agree with.
[49:21] Additionally, they've all thanked the United States and President Trump for acting before Iran could destroy the region with nuclear weapons.
[49:31] With that in mind, the only country that has not adjacent to Iran that has been helpful is the Republic of Georgia.
[49:41] The rigged elections in Georgia by the Georgian Dream Party has resulted in a political party which is anti-American, pro-Iranian.
[49:50] What's being done to strengthen our allies and then try to reform enemies?
[49:56] Well, I would just add, importantly, to the countries that don't necessarily neighbor Iran but that have been incredibly helpful, Jordan, as well, which, as you know, was just struck and has been struck repeatedly, not just as a result of this conflict, was struck and were a law servicemen and women under the last administration as well.
[50:19] I'll have to take that for the record, Representative Wilson, in terms of our specific actions in Georgia.
[50:25] There's not a large UN presence there.
[50:27] And I don't know if Ambassador Bartosz, you wanted a comment.
[50:30] Representative Wilson, I just want to say thank you for your leadership on the issue of the special rapporteurs.
[50:34] I made reference to one lunatic, Francesca Albanese.
[50:37] Unfortunately, she's first among equals amongst the crazies, but she's not the only crazy.
[50:41] And your letter is really important.
[50:42] And just to give a quick example, there's a special rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures
[50:48] that we happen to know has received over $1 million in foreign funding from countries like China.
[50:53] And rest assured, sir, that our administration is taking action and that every option, sir, is on the table.
[51:00] Well, we have faith in both of you.
[51:01] Thank you for your service.
[51:03] Representative Barra.
[51:04] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[51:06] When the UN was founded in 1945, core mission was maintain international peace and security,
[51:11] protect human rights, deliver humanitarian aid, promote sustainable development, and uphold international law.
[51:19] What we accomplished as the United States of America, creating an architecture of relative peace, stability, prosperity.
[51:26] And I think the UN was a component of that.
[51:31] I'm not one here who is going to deny that the UN doesn't need to be modernized.
[51:36] You know, the P-5 was a reflection of the world, what the world looked like in 1945 and the post-World War.
[51:46] Multiple proposals to either expand the permanent membership, include the G4, you know, bringing in Brazil, Germany, India, Japan.
[51:55] If we were designing a United Nations that was reflective of today's world, we would design it very differently.
[52:01] The politics of the UN are worse than congressional politics.
[52:05] Obviously, you have to get to consensus, and it becomes difficult.
[52:08] But it's what we have, and we've got to reform it to be a reflection of the 21st century world.
[52:15] If we want our kids and grandkids to have the same peace, stability, and prosperity that I think we've benefited from.
[52:23] You know, an example of where I think the UN is breaking down is, you know, I'll look at the South China Sea.
[52:29] You know, in 2016, you know, a tribunal under UNCLOS rules essentially delivered a unanimous, legally binding decision in the case brought by the Philippines against China's nine-dash line.
[52:46] And they said there's no legal basis for what China is claiming here, and they are encroaching on the Philippines' EEZ.
[52:52] Obviously, that's been ignored.
[52:55] It's not been enforced and so forth, and it does create a real flashpoint that I worry about.
[53:01] I'd like you guys to give us an update.
[53:03] Internally, the UN is looking at UN-80 reforms, if that's working.
[53:09] And then also strategically, I do want to modernize the UN.
[53:13] I do want to make it an effective organization that's reflective of its original core mission
[53:18] and reflective of the 21st century world.
[53:24] What would need to happen for us to make those reforms take place to change the P-5 membership?
[53:30] Well, thank you.
[53:30] Just I'll give a very broad answer, and we have our ambassador here who has an enviable mission of actually leading that reform.
[53:39] There's a number of reforms underway under this secretary general.
[53:44] One of the questions we're asking the candidates of the next secretary general is what would they keep, what would they discard,
[53:50] and what do they propose themselves?
[53:52] But, for example, sit aside the debate on climate.
[53:56] I don't think we need seven agencies that list as its primary, with its own headquarters, own executive bodies, right, that are focused on that issue.
[54:05] Let's get it down to one, do less, better.
[54:07] We have four.
[54:08] These are the secretary general's proposals, not mine.
[54:11] I do worry about the P-5 not reflecting today's world bail.
[54:16] So there, I'll just tell you very candidly, Representative Barra, there is very little consensus, whether it's on Russia, China, UK, France.
[54:26] On the P-5, there has been proposals to have more elected members.
[54:31] There has been more, there have been proposals to give some, make them permanent, but not have a veto.
[54:36] It's really kind of all over the map in terms of security council reform, and the secretary general is part of UN-80.
[54:42] That's not part of it.
[54:43] So there's just a lot of discussion and not a lot of consensus.
[54:47] And if we were to try to put some muscle into it, I mean, what's the best?
[54:52] Because, again, I think the UN is going to be very hard to reform in its current structure with the permanent membership of the-
[54:59] I think we could make the most, personally, the most gains by what happens in the general assembly,
[55:05] where you just have literally 80 years of accumulated mandates that then the UN bureaucracy has to try to fulfill.
[55:13] There's no end date.
[55:14] There's no cost associated.
[55:16] There's no deconfliction.
[55:17] And we actually just worked with New Zealand, who led this reform effort, to try to put some brackets and some guidelines around what happens in the general assembly.
[55:27] That also drives costs onto the UN secretariat that they struggle to fulfill.
[55:33] And it's one of the reasons they've done nothing but grow for 80 years.
[55:36] I don't know if you want to ask.
[55:37] Congressman, if I just may jump in.
[55:39] An example of U.S. leadership working with the secretariat, the secretary general has, for 10 years, tried to reform the credit system at the UN.
[55:48] And it's crazy.
[55:49] Basically, the system was whatever the assessments were, what was unspent, there would be a refund based on the assessments, not based on what people contributed.
[55:56] And the UN, regardless of who was paying what, the UN was on a pathway to insolvency, regardless of anything else,
[56:02] because these credits were just growing.
[56:05] We took the mantle of leadership, working with lots of other countries at the most recent second resumed session of the Fifth Committee.
[56:10] And after a decade of the secretary general pushing on this issue, we ultimately, with U.S. leadership, reformed the credit system.
[56:18] It's for a four-year trial period.
[56:20] We all want to see how it works out.
[56:21] But that's the type of thing, to Ambassador Waltz's point, this is happening in the GA, and I'll say proudly in the Fifth Committee, which is completely consensus-driven.
[56:29] It's the most professionally challenging thing I've ever worked on in my life.
[56:33] It's actually crazy when you say 193 countries have to agree, but somehow it works.
[56:38] It's three different bites at the budget.
[56:41] We'll have, Sarah, when we come back and see you next, we'll see how the regular budget goes this fall and then into the next secretary general.
[56:46] But those types of reforms, that type of working together to common sense, but sometimes it takes, a lot of times it takes a lot of leadership just to get there,
[56:54] and we're providing that leadership.
[56:56] But thank you for the question.
[56:59] Representative Perry.
[56:59] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[57:01] Thank you, Ambassadors, for being here.
[57:02] I'm going to start with Ambassador Bartosz, since a colleague on the other side of the aisle essentially accused the United States and this administration of not caring about children.
[57:12] So I just want to highlight the case of, or the fact that 747, there are 747 open cases, including minors, among the victims of sex used as currency for food and shelter by the organization itself.
[57:28] And just, Ambassador Bartosz, if you want to take a moment to briefly address America's views on that circumstance.
[57:34] Ambassador Bartosz, first of all, General, it's great to see you, fellow Pennsylvanian, so great to see you, and thank you for the question.
[57:42] I would say I've had a lot of proud moments in my 10 months at Post.
[57:45] Perhaps one of the most proud moments was watching our Chief of Mission last week, sitting up with Tim Tebow, with representatives from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime,
[57:57] our own colleagues at the State Department and the INL Bureau, leading a panel discussion on real efforts to combat transnational sex trafficking of children.
[58:06] Now, the statistics, the work that's being done, the Tebow Foundation, Tim and his wife, remarkable people, they devoted their now post-professional football lives to this issue.
[58:19] And to sit there and listen to the devotion they have to fighting this issue, to Ambassador Waltz for convening all of us, it was one of the most proud moments I've had at Post.
[58:28] And any assertion that the Trump administration, that the State Department or at US-UN were not laser-focused on combating this issue, not only in the UN, but there's a lot of, and Ambassador Waltz could go into greater detail,
[58:41] a lot of just shockingly making nauseous statistics about what's happening, the flow of miners from Africa to Europe is, I didn't know about it, and it redoubles and retriples our efforts to combat this scourge.
[58:56] Yeah, American taxpayers don't want their dollars to be spent on trafficking of children on some official capacity.
[59:03] Ambassador Waltz, I wanted to ask you about the UN's Peace and Development Trust Fund.
[59:10] The Secretary General himself said that the 2019 Belt Road Forum, BRI, and the 2030 Agenda are inextrably linked.
[59:19] The report catalogs programming between Belt Road Initiative, UNDP, UNEP, UNICEF, UNCTAD, UNESCO, spanning Ethiopia, Serbia, Kazakhstan, and dozens of other countries.
[59:32] The UN didn't just stumble into this.
[59:34] There's a partnership by design, and it is not foreign aid.
[59:38] It's debt statecraft, you know, from leveraging ports, telecom, backbones, critical infrastructure.
[59:46] For instance, Sri Lanka handed over its port on a 99-year lease after it couldn't pay, and of course, it's by design.
[59:52] The pattern repeats itself, and of course, the Belt Road Initiative countries shift their UN General Assembly voting patterns
[1:00:00] to align more closely with Beijing after the money arrives.
[1:00:05] Now, this is a voting bloc that's bought and paid for over time with these loans,
[1:00:11] and then it involves military basing, surveillance infrastructure, all that follows the money.
[1:00:17] With that pattern in mind, what do you assess the risk to UN agencies using taxpayer dollars to pimp out developing nations to our greatest adversary,
[1:00:28] and what do you think the administration is willing to demand regarding our funding for UN entities formally serving the co-programming
[1:00:38] and the co-publication activities tied to the Belt Road Initiative?
[1:00:42] No, thank you for the question.
[1:00:44] It's a very good question.
[1:00:45] I think it gets to the broader issue when we get asked, why do we even participate in this thing at all?
[1:00:51] Like, why are we even there?
[1:00:53] And, you know, one of my answers is, unfortunately, if we didn't invent it, somebody else would.
[1:00:58] And I don't want to see UN Beijing or UN Brussels or what have you.
[1:01:02] My second answer is there's these global standard-setting bodies, these little baby UN agencies that many people have never heard of
[1:01:11] that set the rules of the road for our industries around the world.
[1:01:14] There's a World Intellectual Property Organization.
[1:01:16] China was running to head that.
[1:01:18] Imagine China heading global IP for how we treat our patents.
[1:01:22] We supported a pro-business Singaporean that's now the head of that agency.
[1:01:26] The International Telecommunication Union, cables, spectrum, radio, things that truly matter to our economy.
[1:01:35] We're running now an American for re-election to set those rules of the road.
[1:01:41] I want pilots around the world speaking English, air traffic controllers trained to a certain standard.
[1:01:47] So these bodies matter.
[1:01:49] We can't just walk away because then that would be 192 countries without us.
[1:01:55] We just need to get in there and fight and win.
[1:01:57] To answer your question, Representative Perry, more directly, we've demanded the UN Secretariat stop using that slush fund.
[1:02:05] And as part of our pooled funding model, we have much greater transparency and visibility on those aid dollars as they go out.
[1:02:14] But make no mistake, whether it is the EU and their version of safety standards or censorship on AI or whether it's the Chinese trying to set the rules of the road that's not in line with our interests, we have to get in there and fight and win.
[1:02:28] We have an example of that when the International Maritime Organization was within a week of putting a global carbon tax, a billion dollars a month on global shipping.
[1:02:38] It was absurd. They thought it was a done deal. We got in there and fought and won to the point where our representative on the ground said the EU ambassador just called us diplomatic gangsters.
[1:02:51] So we're going to get in there and fight and win for the American people and for American industry and put America first.
[1:02:56] Appreciate your service yield back. Representative Jacobs.
[1:03:00] Chairman, Ambassador Waltz, it's great to see you back here.
[1:03:05] Good to see you and appreciate you coming up to New York last year.
[1:03:07] Yeah, absolutely. I want to ask you about the war in Iran.
[1:03:12] As you know, I represent San Diego, the largest military community in the country.
[1:03:16] So this is personal for my constituents, for me, as I know it is for you.
[1:03:21] Right now, we've got about 2,500 San Diego service members deployed off the coast of Iran.
[1:03:26] Thousands more have received 48-hour deployment notices.
[1:03:29] I know you served multiple combat tours in Afghanistan, so you know firsthand what these service members and their families are going through.
[1:03:36] And while they willingly make the sacrifices for our country, it's our job on both sides of this dais to make sure that those sacrifices are worth it.
[1:03:46] So I wanted to ask you a simple question.
[1:03:48] Are we better off now than we were before we launched the war in Iran?
[1:03:56] The world and the American people are safer.
[1:03:58] Okay. Let's get into some more specifics.
[1:04:03] Before the war, are Americans better off when the Strait of Hormuz is open or when the Strait of Hormuz is closed?
[1:04:14] The American economy is largely unaffected by the Strait of Hormuz.
[1:04:19] We fortunately, I find it a little bit rich to hear this kind of clamoring for oil and gas when, frankly, your side of the aisle has been at war against the American fossil fuel industry for quite some time.
[1:04:32] In fact, we had an LNG export ban just under the last administration.
[1:04:37] But fortunately, because of drill baby drill, because of fracking, we are largely self-sufficient in the energy space.
[1:04:44] Well, my constituents who are paying, on average, thousands of dollars more a month in costs because of this war would beg to differ that our economy is not impacted by the Strait of Hormuz being closed.
[1:04:56] But California imports much of its oil and gas, unfortunately, because of its own regulations.
[1:05:01] Yeah. I want to talk about the national average of gas, actually.
[1:05:03] The national average of gas before the war started was $3 a gallon.
[1:05:08] It is now, once again, over $4 a gallon.
[1:05:11] You said, actually, in saying that the war was getting better on June 21st on Face the Nation, that it is now below $4 and falling to show that we're making progress.
[1:05:26] But it's back up at $4 a gallon now.
[1:05:29] So are Americans better off when they're paying $3 a gallon nationally for gas or $4 a gallon nationally for gas?
[1:05:36] I think Americans are better off than not paying the highs of over $5 under the last administration because of this administration's energy policy.
[1:05:42] Yeah, that happened for two weeks during the Ukraine war.
[1:05:46] It's been over $4 for more than three months just this year.
[1:05:50] Let's turn to the new-
[1:05:51] I would also-
[1:05:52] Americans are better off with Iran not having a nuclear weapon in the rest of the region exploding in a nuclear arms race.
[1:05:57] Saudi Arabia has said they will get a nuclear weapon if Iran tests theirs.
[1:06:01] I wanted to ask about the nuclear threat, actually, so thank you.
[1:06:04] Before the war began, Iran had 440 kilograms of near-weapons-grade uranium.
[1:06:10] We can all-
[1:06:11] Illegally.
[1:06:12] Yes.
[1:06:12] Enough, according to nuclear experts, for up to 10 bombs.
[1:06:15] The president says Iran's nuclear program has been completely obliterated, but, Ambassador, you testified today that every single kilogram of that enriched uranium is still in Iran.
[1:06:26] And we know that because the president is currently negotiating what to do with it, and you don't negotiate the disposal of uranium you've destroyed.
[1:06:34] So, the uranium is still there, but we currently have no inspectors to see the uranium or know anything about it.
[1:06:43] So, are Americans better off when we knew where the uranium was and had inspectors, or are they better off now when we don't?
[1:06:52] Well, I think the premise of your question, respectfully, is flawed.
[1:06:56] Iran had kicked out the inspectors, was not allowing it to those sites, developing its program.
[1:07:03] And so, when the president says he obliterated the program, he was talking about its enrichment capability.
[1:07:10] That was a year ago, and they are working to reconstitute that capability.
[1:07:17] Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an article from Bloomberg, Iran atomic risk seen higher than before Trump attacks began.
[1:07:25] Without objection.
[1:07:26] Thank you.
[1:07:27] Mr. Ambassador, we are obviously not better off.
[1:07:31] This administration has just asked Congress for $87 billion more to pay for this war.
[1:07:36] We've lost at least 18 American service members, with at least 427 wounded.
[1:07:42] Before the war, the strait was open.
[1:07:43] Now it's closed.
[1:07:44] Before the war, the national average of gas was under $3 a gallon.
[1:07:48] Now it's $4.
[1:07:48] The nuclear risk from Iran is higher now than it was before.
[1:07:52] And Americans have already paid $37.5 billion for this war, according to Secretary Hegseth's testimony yesterday.
[1:07:59] Last year, you personally added a reporter to the signal chain, where this administration was texting about war plans.
[1:08:04] And at the time, many of us were concerned that your administration's incompetence would get people killed.
[1:08:10] Well, now we've lost at least 18 U.S. service members because of your administration's incompetence.
[1:08:14] And you should all be ashamed.
[1:08:16] It's very clear that Americans are not better off.
[1:08:18] Potentially the only people better off are the Ayatollah and his cronies.
[1:08:22] Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[1:08:23] Representative Birch.
[1:08:24] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[1:08:25] May I respond to that?
[1:08:29] We have a lot of talk of filibuster here, and it's quite the filibuster.
[1:08:34] In response, Lebanon is in a better place in end-peace negotiations.
[1:08:40] The Assad regime is gone.
[1:08:42] Syria is on the best path we've had in my lifetime.
[1:08:48] Iraq is now visiting the United States and in the best path in my lifetime.
[1:08:54] Iran is absolutely trying to hold the world's economy hostage in violation of international law.
[1:08:59] And thankfully, the president, we finally have a president that is doing something about Iran killing Americans for 47 years.
[1:09:07] Mr. Ambassador, I can concede.
[1:09:08] It did not start this year, last year.
[1:09:11] It started in 1979.
[1:09:12] Point of order.
[1:09:13] And we finally have somebody to do something about it.
[1:09:14] Mr. Ambassador, I can concede.
[1:09:17] And Mr. Birch.
[1:09:18] I can concede that some things are better off, but none of them are because we bombed Iran at the behest of Bibi Netanyahu.
[1:09:28] Mr. Birch, you're recognized.
[1:09:29] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[1:09:31] Mr. Ambassador, you graduated from BMI.
[1:09:34] You're special forces.
[1:09:35] You're decorated.
[1:09:36] You love your mama.
[1:09:37] You got some beautiful babies.
[1:09:38] We got show ponies up here, and we got workhorses, brother.
[1:09:42] You are a workhorse.
[1:09:43] And I'm proud to know you, and I consider you a friend.
[1:09:47] And we came to Congress together.
[1:09:49] So I really appreciate you and your incredible service to our great nation.
[1:09:54] So to Birchett household, you're a pretty big deal.
[1:09:57] And now I'm not even going to go for the juggler.
[1:10:00] I'm going to say all those nice things.
[1:10:01] I mean, we'll come after you.
[1:10:02] I just want to ask you some simple questions.
[1:10:05] What does the United Nations provide that America could not achieve through direct diplomacy or alliances or other international organizations?
[1:10:18] Two things, just to answer you very, well, three, to answer you very directly.
[1:10:22] We need one place in the world, especially with a president who puts peace and diplomacy first, backed by military strength, but puts diplomacy first.
[1:10:32] I want one place in the world where everyone can come and talk.
[1:10:35] We don't always agree, but I can tell you as a soldier, as a veteran, if we're using words and not bullets, that's a good thing.
[1:10:43] I don't want to see UN Beijing, UN Brussels, or UN anywhere else.
[1:10:46] I want it right here in the United States of America.
[1:10:48] The second thing, burden sharing is a key part of an America first foreign policy.
[1:10:52] I don't want to see U.S. troops in places like Gaza or Haiti.
[1:10:56] We now have UN troops there for all their flaws, but better than American troops in my book.
[1:11:03] And in order for them to do that, they need a stamp of international law, which by treaty is agreed upon by the UN.
[1:11:09] And then finally, I talk about the standard setting.
[1:11:12] We have to get in there and fight and win for our industries.
[1:11:15] We have these global regulatory bodies that set the rules of the road for everything that crosses a border.
[1:11:20] And it's been astounding to me how absent we've been in those fights, but no more.
[1:11:26] We're in there fighting and winning for the American people.
[1:11:28] I'm sure the Latin folks had a saying for it, but East Tennessee, they say, you're at the table or on the menu.
[1:11:35] So I suspect you're an at-the-table kind of guy.
[1:11:38] I'm still not a fan of the UN, but they consistently, they've been promoting these crazy liberal policies like abortion and gender identity.
[1:11:47] How do those things align with promoting global peace and security?
[1:11:53] They don't.
[1:11:54] That's why we regularly vote against them.
[1:11:56] Case in point, we just had a commission on the status of women.
[1:11:59] And 11,000 delegates showed up.
[1:12:04] And rather than dealing with countries who still have rape laws where you have to have multiple witnesses for a woman to bring a case,
[1:12:12] instead of dealing with countries that have abusive and ridiculous domestic violence laws,
[1:12:17] instead of dealing with countries that have genital mutilation laws still on the books or those types of things,
[1:12:24] instead, they're going on about this gender and other kinds of nonsense.
[1:12:29] It's not only a waste of time and money, it's a huge missed opportunity for women who are struggling under these types of oppressive circumstances around the world.
[1:12:38] And as a veteran of Afghanistan, I've seen the worst of the worst.
[1:12:42] Why do we continue providing funding to the United Nations peacekeeping initiatives when they're almost always a colossal failure?
[1:12:51] Well, I'll hand the mic over to our reform ambassador, but I'll tell you we're trying two different things, at least in our time, under President Trump's leadership.
[1:12:59] The gang suppression force has an offensive mandate, unlike everything that's been tried before.
[1:13:05] So they can go after the likes of Barbecue and ESO and others that are recruiting child soldiers and terrorizing the Haitian people.
[1:13:13] We now have the International Stability Force under the Board of Peace with a heavy American hand on that,
[1:13:19] rather than surrendering that force over to the U.N. bureaucracy.
[1:13:22] And I'll defer to Ambassador Bartos for additional reforms.
[1:13:26] Thank you, Congressman.
[1:13:26] Very briefly, what we've managed due to, we just finished the peacekeeping negotiations for the budget for the 26-27 year.
[1:13:33] And through Ambassador Lissetta, our colleague and her great team in the political section,
[1:13:38] they negotiated a major streamlining of the mission in South Sudan,
[1:13:41] which led to an almost $90 million reduction in that budget on a going-forward basis.
[1:13:46] We've sunset, with Ambassador Waltz's leadership and the Secretary's leadership, we've sunset UNIFIL.
[1:13:52] And so on December 31st of 2026, UNIFIL will sunset, and then it will be wound down in the first part of 2027.
[1:13:58] So we are taking a real hard look at every single budget at the level of, sir, the granularity of what we're looking at.
[1:14:05] We're even looking now, going forward, at the calories per day per troop to try to get the UN's metrics to align with U.S. Army and Navy, Air Force, Marines metrics.
[1:14:17] That simple change, that simple change will save, we estimate, almost $40 million a year just getting it in line with U.S. standards.
[1:14:23] So we're taking a look at every single part of peacekeeping.
[1:14:26] The last thing I'll say is there is a mission in the Central African Republic that I visited earlier this year
[1:14:32] that is on the pathway to stabilizing that country, and they had successful elections, so keep an eye on that one.
[1:14:39] But you're right, sir. Too often, failure.
[1:14:41] Thank you, sir. You're a credit. Both of y'all are a credit to what you do,
[1:14:44] and that still scares the hell out of me when I see those blue helmets show up in newsreels.
[1:14:49] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
[1:14:51] Representative Titus.
[1:14:55] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[1:14:56] You know, I am astounded that at a time when our soldiers are dying in the field
[1:15:03] and our bases are being bombed throughout the region
[1:15:07] as we fight a war of choice, that you have called the president a peace president.
[1:15:16] I can't even believe that.
[1:15:18] Apparently, the Nobel Committee didn't agree with that assessment either.
[1:15:23] But anyway, that gives us some idea of where you're coming from, apparently.
[1:15:30] I want to ask you just about the cuts and how they're affecting our relations with our allies.
[1:15:36] Now, some of our partners and allies agree that they need reforms at the U.N. for operational efficiencies,
[1:15:43] but they don't support this kind of doge-like approach to just blanket cuts and withholding of funds to the regular budget or the peacekeeping budgets.
[1:15:54] In fact, they've communicated this to the administration and said that the impact of these cuts are undermining,
[1:16:01] is undermining their own contributions to the U.N., and it's struggling now, as we've heard, just to keep the lights on.
[1:16:09] And in doing that, the U.S. is isolating itself from our once like-minded allies and partners.
[1:16:16] We've taken extreme positions on several issues recently.
[1:16:21] I'd just name a couple of them.
[1:16:23] On February the 24th, 2025, which was the third anniversary of Russia's invasion,
[1:16:30] the U.S. voted against a Ukraine-sponsored General Assembly resolution,
[1:16:35] just said advancing a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine.
[1:16:42] It reaffirmed Ukraine's territorial integrity and called for Russian withdrawal.
[1:16:48] We voted against that.
[1:16:50] We broke with Ukraine and our NATO allies.
[1:16:53] That's incorrect, Representative.
[1:16:54] Your staff has given you bad information.
[1:16:56] We abstained from that resolution.
[1:16:57] Well, I'll double-check that, but the people we were in line with there were Russia, North Korea, and Belarus.
[1:17:06] I don't think that's incorrect.
[1:17:09] How about this one?
[1:17:11] March 2026, the U.S. was one of just three nations to vote against a resolution that was against the transatlantic slave trade,
[1:17:21] saying that slavery did not violate contemporary international law.
[1:17:27] Is that correct?
[1:17:28] A key provision of an international slavery reparations fund, I would not put a single dollar of your taxpayer money
[1:17:37] from your constituents into that fund.
[1:17:41] Well, this didn't create the fund.
[1:17:43] It was just a...
[1:17:45] It proposes an international reparations fund, and even for African Americans who are fighting for reparations,
[1:17:54] should it pay for the entire world?
[1:17:57] How far does slavery go back?
[1:17:59] That resolution did not set up calling for a payment.
[1:18:01] It was a wide-open money grab on behalf of a number of these countries.
[1:18:05] I'm taking my time back.
[1:18:08] All right, how about this one?
[1:18:09] We voted against 38 resolutions in the General Assembly Human Rights Committee, along in 2025.
[1:18:16] That included, and we've heard some reference to this, combating exploitation and discrimination against children,
[1:18:24] a resolution on children's access to nutritious food, a Second World Summit for Social Development that we oppose,
[1:18:32] 180 to 3, with just Argentina and Israel on our side.
[1:18:37] Do you consider that us working with our allies?
[1:18:40] And tell me, since you're so strong on some of these issues and feel so determined that they are a good idea,
[1:18:48] how is this helpful?
[1:18:50] How is this incompetent and extremist foreign policy that you support, you carry out, you're championing,
[1:18:57] isn't that driving a wedge between us and our allies, and doesn't that fracture the foundations of U.S. diplomatic partnerships?
[1:19:05] And is that a good thing for our national security?
[1:19:09] Congresswoman, just on the point about the General Assembly and the resolutions you're referencing,
[1:19:13] it costs $28,000 per hour to run the GA.
[1:19:18] They run the same resolutions year in, year out.
[1:19:20] They're performative, almost all of them, and it is a colossal waste of the time and resources of the U.N.
[1:19:27] The Security Council costs $15,000 per hour.
[1:19:30] That is how these things cost.
[1:19:32] We are looking at all that and pushing the U.N. to get back to basics.
[1:19:35] So it is actually promoting international peace and security and all of its core missions and not doing this performative year in, year out.
[1:19:42] I appreciate that, Ambassador.
[1:19:44] Thank you.
[1:19:44] I'll take my time back.
[1:19:46] I appreciate your assessment.
[1:19:48] But as I understand it, you had no prior government service, no diplomatic experience,
[1:19:53] and nothing really to recommend you to serve in this role because you're a real estate lawyer.
[1:19:59] So I thank you for that assessment.
[1:20:02] Well, in fairness, Congresswoman, I have led the efforts of the United States to build consensus on all of these budget resolutions,
[1:20:09] which is helping the U.N.
[1:20:10] I led the efforts, my team, and I led the efforts to help the U.N.
[1:20:12] Save itself from itself on the credit system.
[1:20:16] So you can say that all you want, but the witness is responding.
[1:20:20] Whose time is he using?
[1:20:22] The general lady yielded back.
[1:20:23] I provided the leadership.
[1:20:24] Whose time is he using?
[1:20:25] He's responding to a question.
[1:20:27] Again, it seems like you don't want questions answered.
[1:20:29] I just want to afford a lot of that.
[1:20:31] The general lady have yielded back her time, and so I want to know whose time he's now using.
[1:20:36] The clock was still going, as you saw.
[1:20:38] The time does not belong to the witnesses.
[1:20:40] The time belongs to members of Congress.
[1:20:41] The clock was still going, and again, if you don't want answers to questions, you made that abundant.
[1:20:47] The general lady yielded back her time.
[1:20:48] You made it abundantly clear you don't want answers to questions.
[1:20:50] But when the general lady yielded back her time, I just wanted to, my question was whose time was being utilized.
[1:20:55] Thank you for-
[1:20:55] One time when you were the chairman, you took my time away because you didn't like my questioning.
[1:20:59] That is-
[1:21:00] The chairman.
[1:21:01] Respectfully.
[1:21:02] Other chairmen.
[1:21:03] Former chairmen.
[1:21:04] Yeah.
[1:21:05] Representative Kim, you are recognized.
[1:21:06] Focus on today, please.
[1:21:07] Always.
[1:21:08] Focus on today, please.
[1:21:09] Always.
[1:21:10] Representative Kim, you are recognized.
[1:21:11] Thank you, chairman.
[1:21:12] Thank you.
[1:21:13] And ambassadors, Walts and Baltos, I want to thank you for joining us today and testifying,
[1:21:19] answering questions.
[1:21:20] I do want to start by commending the administration and your efforts to deliver more than $1 billion
[1:21:27] in U.N. budget savings in just six months, recently.
[1:21:31] I call that real progress on behalf of the American taxpayers.
[1:21:36] That demonstrates what strong, principled leadership can achieve at the U.N.
[1:21:41] So with that, I want to ask Ambassador Bartos, can you walk us through the strategy that you
[1:21:47] used to build that coalition and support from other member states for those savings?
[1:21:52] And what was the most effective ways that you were able to overcome opposition?
[1:21:59] Was it targeted engagement?
[1:22:00] Was it burden sharing arguments or something else?
[1:22:03] I want to hear from you how you did it.
[1:22:05] Thank you for the question.
[1:22:07] It turns out that applying common sense business principles to an organization that is failing
[1:22:13] in its fundamental purposes and is hurtling every year closer and closer to insolvency through
[1:22:18] its own ineffectiveness, not through who pays or doesn't pay, but its own failure to meet
[1:22:23] its mission, applying common sense business principles and good old fashioned roll up your
[1:22:27] sleeves, go meet with other representatives, go meet with other ambassadors, go meet with
[1:22:31] the experts who do this work in day out.
[1:22:33] Look, I'm blessed to have an outstanding team of professionals who spent their whole careers
[1:22:38] on U.N. reform.
[1:22:39] But what wasn't there before we got to post was the leadership.
[1:22:43] The Trump administration has brought the leadership that so many reform advocates have been yearning
[1:22:47] for for their entire careers.
[1:22:49] And I hear this from across the U.N.
[1:22:51] The president's vision and leadership, the secretary support vision and leadership, Ambassador
[1:22:57] Walts is charged to make it happen, get this organization back to basics, make it hit and
[1:23:01] then exceed its fundamental purpose has been our driving mission since day one.
[1:23:06] And it is good old fashioned work with everybody, build consensus, build relationships, honor your
[1:23:12] word, do what you say you're going to do.
[1:23:14] And so it turns out it's actually not that hard to reform an organization.
[1:23:18] Bringing that common sense leadership in the U.N.
[1:23:20] Common sense.
[1:23:21] And we need more of those here on the Hill as well, if I may say so.
[1:23:25] It's no secret that U.S. adversaries like Iran, Russia and China, they seek to advance their
[1:23:31] interests through the U.N.
[1:23:32] And we saw how Iran's terrorist proxy Hamas infiltrated UNRWA.
[1:23:37] This is a fatally flawed organization.
[1:23:41] Investigations uncovered that over 100 UNRWA staffers participated in the October 7 massacre
[1:23:47] and Hamas terrorists were disguised as UNRWA school principals and teachers.
[1:23:52] Ambassador Walts, can you talk to us what steps you are pursuing within the U.N. system to permanently dismantle UNRWA and ensure that humanitarian assistance to Palestinians across the Middle East is delivered?
[1:24:06] Is delivered through alternative mechanisms that are not tied to refugee status?
[1:24:11] Well, thank you for the question.
[1:24:15] And as you know, Secretary Rubio has labeled UNRWA a virtual arm of Hamas.
[1:24:20] The USAID inspector general has identified over 100 employees that actively participated in the October 7 massacre.
[1:24:32] We have ended U.S. funding to UNRWA as effective last year.
[1:24:38] We've also, just as an aside, in the broader fight against anti-Semitism, withdrawn from the so-called Human Rights Council that has the likes of Francesca Albanese, who is now under sanction, and UNESCO, which I will remind everyone, the Obama administration also withheld funding from.
[1:24:55] In terms of additional actions, I want to make it clear that we're focused on UNRWA Gaza.
[1:25:01] UNRWA also has activities in Jordan that our Jordanian partners and allies find incredibly useful, activities in Syria and Lebanon.
[1:25:10] But we are focused on UNRWA, about 70% of what they do is education.
[1:25:16] Sadly, it is shown again and again to be radicalizing the next generation of Palestinians, talking about eliminating the state of Israel completely.
[1:25:25] There's no two-state solution coming out of Hamas and coming out of these schools.
[1:25:30] They're talking one state, which is eliminating Israel.
[1:25:33] The bottom line is we are looking to transfer that function to the newly established National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, which was established under the Board of Peace by UN resolution.
[1:25:45] We've got a lot of help from Morocco, a lot of help from UAE on the curriculum, and then the other pieces, the humanitarian pieces, need to be handled by other organizations that have not been compromised and radicalized.
[1:25:57] I want to quickly touch on your role and your leadership in regards to dealing with China, because they are significantly expanding its pressure there, both financial contributions and institutional influence at the UN.
[1:26:10] So can you talk to us about how administration is working with like-minded countries to expand Taiwan's meaningful participation in the international organizations?
[1:26:20] Well, we have repeatedly pushed back on the PRC's interpretation of its role and Taiwan's role at the UN.
[1:26:32] So part of that is just constantly level setting of what the UN resolution that established the seat for China actually did.
[1:26:39] And we are, I know we're out of time, but we are fighting for Taiwan's meaningful participation in UN bodies across the board as a matter of U.S. policy.
[1:26:48] Representative Liu.
[1:26:49] Thank you.
[1:26:55] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[1:26:57] Thank you for the witnesses for being here today.
[1:26:59] My questions will be for Ambassador Waltz.
[1:27:02] American service members are in the Middle East risking their lives in the war with Iran.
[1:27:08] How many U.S. troops have been wounded in the Iran war?
[1:27:14] My understanding from the Defense Department's latest numbers is over 100, but about 70% or 90% of those have immediately returned to duty.
[1:27:24] Okay.
[1:27:27] That number is wrong.
[1:27:28] According to defense casualty analysis system, 482 American troops have been wounded.
[1:27:35] Now it's not surprising to me that you did not know their answer to that.
[1:27:39] The reason you are here today and in your position is because you were fired by the President from your former position as National Security Advisor.
[1:27:47] The President has never said a negative word about me.
[1:27:49] You disclosed classified information that harmed American pilots and put them at risk.
[1:27:55] A single negative about me.
[1:27:56] That's your spin, I guess, for your next campaign commercial.
[1:27:59] I don't know.
[1:28:00] How many American troops have been killed in the Iran war?
[1:28:06] In these ongoing operations, 18.
[1:28:08] Okay.
[1:28:09] Now, President Trump has repeatedly stated that Iran's military was obliterated.
[1:28:14] On March 16th, President Trump stated that Iran's military was, quote, literally obliterated, end quote.
[1:28:23] How is it possible that 482 American troops have been wounded and 18 service members killed by a Iranian military that's been purportedly obliterated?
[1:28:37] The Iranian Navy Air Force Air Defense system and industrial capacity have been massively damaged, if not completely ineffective.
[1:28:50] But this is a state that is trying to reconstitute.
[1:28:53] This is a state regime that is obsessed with a nuclear weapon.
[1:28:57] And it's a regime that still maintains some missile and drone capability that it's firing on all of its neighbors, including our bases.
[1:29:05] I think that's a pretty common sense evaluation.
[1:29:08] But if I need to explain it to you further, I can.
[1:29:12] You need to explain to American people how an Iranian military that's been purportedly obliterated killed 18-year service members and wounded 482 service members.
[1:29:23] As you know, seven of those service members died in a plane crash.
[1:29:26] Well, let me finish my question.
[1:29:28] It has struck multiple U.S. facilities in the Middle East repeatedly.
[1:29:34] So I'm going to show you a video from Jordan.
[1:29:37] And this is an Iranian strike.
[1:29:40] And if we could play the video, that would be great.
[1:29:43] Thank you.
[1:30:01] I would hope the Republican Controlled Foreign Affairs Committee would know how to use audio next time.
[1:30:05] But we did see the video.
[1:30:06] And it showed multiple missiles hitting this base in Jordan.
[1:30:11] Let me tell you what happened.
[1:30:15] It was disclosed later that two U.S. troops died in that strike from a purportedly obliterated Iranian military.
[1:30:24] And this is what Donald Trump said.
[1:30:27] He said that the Iranians, quote, did slip something through in Jordan.
[1:30:31] And if we had other operators, it would not have happened.
[1:30:34] He then went on to say, when you let other people do your job, with the United States, we let other people do a job.
[1:30:39] And sometimes it doesn't work out so well.
[1:30:42] So let me ask you this question.
[1:30:46] Do we still have American troops stationed in Jordan right now?
[1:30:49] It doesn't surprise me that you're referring to Al Jazeera in terms of your video.
[1:30:57] I'm here as the U.N. ambassador, but I'm happy to refer you to Pete Hegseth, Secretary Hegseth's testimony yesterday.
[1:31:06] Of course we still have.
[1:31:07] And your opening statement, you bragged about doing a Security Council resolution on Iran.
[1:31:13] So, yes, Iran is in your job responsibility.
[1:31:16] Focus on it and focus on the troops that have been wounded and killed.
[1:31:20] Do not be so callous with the safety and lies of American troops.
[1:31:23] I'm going to ask you again, are U.S. troops currently stationed in Jordan?
[1:31:30] Are U.S. troops currently stationed in Jordan?
[1:31:34] Try to get reelected.
[1:31:35] I will.
[1:31:37] You should try.
[1:31:39] November is coming for you and this administration.
[1:31:41] Are U.S. troops stationed in Jordan?
[1:31:43] It's not even a trick question.
[1:31:44] Are they?
[1:31:45] Of course they are.
[1:31:46] Okay.
[1:31:47] And if Donald Trump doesn't trust the Jordanians to protect U.S. troops, do you trust them?
[1:31:53] Who are we going to have to protect U.S. troops?
[1:31:54] They are exposed right now in the Middle East.
[1:31:57] Repeatedly being exposed to Iranian missiles and missile strikes and drones.
[1:32:02] You don't even know how many U.S. troops were wounded in this Iran war.
[1:32:06] Shame on you for not even knowing basic facts.
[1:32:09] You are the U.S. ambassador and you don't even know how many U.S. troops were wounded in the Iran war.
[1:32:15] You got that wrong.
[1:32:16] You should be shameful.
[1:32:17] You don't know basic facts.
[1:32:19] You should resign.
[1:32:20] You don't even care about the number of U.S. troops that were wounded.
[1:32:24] You did not know how many U.S. troops were wounded.
[1:32:27] You gave false information to Congress.
[1:32:29] You should be ashamed of yourself for not even knowing how many U.S. troops were wounded in the Iranian war.
[1:32:35] The gentleman's words should be taken down.
[1:32:37] You should not use such derogatory language for the distinguished ambassador.
[1:32:43] Seriously, I know you're upset, but you bring dishonor in yourself.
[1:32:47] Nothing in the last administration.
[1:32:48] Zero.
[1:32:49] Politics and the worst of it.
[1:32:51] He lied to Congress.
[1:32:52] He gave a flat-out false number minimizing the number of U.S. troops wounded in Iran.
[1:32:58] That's what he did in his first answer to my question.
[1:33:01] It should be recognized that the ambassador is a 27-year veteran of the military.
[1:33:05] Thank you.
[1:33:06] Mr. Smith, do you have a point of order?
[1:33:11] You know, disagree all you want, but do it civilly.
[1:33:16] And that was not so.
[1:33:17] No point of order.
[1:33:18] Representative self is recognized.
[1:33:20] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[1:33:23] Mr. Ambassador, I yield my time to you, as you may consume, for anything that you would like to comment on that past exchange.
[1:33:30] And it is my time, and either you or I will be speaking.
[1:33:35] Mr. Ambassador.
[1:33:36] Yeah, I would just thank you for your time, Representative.
[1:33:40] The Iranian regime has been killing Americans for administration after administration after administration.
[1:33:48] We finally have a president that has said, enough is enough.
[1:33:51] I don't think that nonsense merits additional response.
[1:33:56] Okay.
[1:33:57] Very good.
[1:33:58] First of all, I want to just verify one thing with you.
[1:34:02] Should we decide that we do not want to meet what dues, assessments, whatever, we would keep the most important thing in the UN for us, which is our seat on the secure, our permanent seat on the Security Council.
[1:34:15] Is that correct?
[1:34:18] I'm sorry.
[1:34:19] Can you repeat the question?
[1:34:20] I don't mean to use your time.
[1:34:21] If we choose not to meet our dues or assessments for the UN, we would lose our voice in the General Assembly, but we would keep the most important thing, which is the seat on the secure permanent veto.
[1:34:32] That is correct.
[1:34:33] And importantly, the UN Security Council, the resolutions that come out of there are binding in international law.
[1:34:38] What comes out of the General Assembly is not binding.
[1:34:40] Correct.
[1:34:41] I want to turn to peacekeepers.
[1:34:43] You mentioned in your testimony there were 90,000 at the height of peacekeeping.
[1:34:49] You mentioned the sexual abuse, which happens often with those forces.
[1:34:53] I wanted to talk about measures of success.
[1:34:57] And my example is UNIFIL in Lebanon was a total failure.
[1:35:02] So what measures of success are you trying to get the UN to use in their peacekeeping forces?
[1:35:07] To your point on UNIFIL, and it's an important one, its mandate was to prevent non-armed actors from arming and operating south of the Latani River in southern Lebanon.
[1:35:20] I think we've seen the exact opposite for the last 20 years from Hezbollah at the cost of half a billion dollars a year for that peacekeeping force of 11,000 international troops.
[1:35:30] And the administration has put a policy in place that UNIFIL will not continue.
[1:35:34] What we have tried to do with every year, typically these peacekeeping forces are renewed.
[1:35:40] And we have made it very clear to the rest of the Security Council that they cannot just continue.
[1:35:45] For example, DRC Congo, that force at the cost of a billion dollars a year has been there for 30 years.
[1:35:52] And I don't think we've seen it result in peace.
[1:35:56] So we are tying the renewal of these peacekeeping forces to an actual peace process, to a political process.
[1:36:04] And whether that's in DRC Congo or Western Sahara or Libya or other locations, they need to work themselves out of a job.
[1:36:13] And not become a cash cow for the troop contributing nations.
[1:36:17] And not become an excuse for the actors on the ground to not have to make the compromises they need to make to achieve peace.
[1:36:24] Yeah. Mr. Ambassador, I would just recommend you come up with measures of success for each of them.
[1:36:28] I mean, concrete measures of success.
[1:36:31] Thank you. We just had a report for the gang suppression force in Haiti with actual measures of success.
[1:36:37] We're a few months into the job.
[1:36:41] We're trying to undo 80 years of not always great performance and behavior.
[1:36:47] Yeah. One of the most egregious examples of institutional bias in the UN was a special committee to investigate Israeli human rights practices, SHRP.
[1:36:57] And I will tell you, they failed to mention not a single word about the atrocities in their 10,000 plus word report, 21 pages.
[1:37:09] I believe that you have had some successes in turning the vote in the SHRP vote.
[1:37:15] Can you share that with us?
[1:37:20] Congressman, we'll take that one for the record in terms of looking at that vote.
[1:37:23] On the more broadly, with respect to UN, the Commission of Inquiry, the Special Rapporteurs, the Human Rights Council, which of course we've withdrawn from, and other measures.
[1:37:33] As I mentioned before, the UN is at that decision point.
[1:37:36] And it has to decide whether it wants to get back to basics and foundational peace and security,
[1:37:41] or whether it wants to just be a machine to have General Assembly resolutions, 183 against Israel over the last so many years versus 70 against the rest of the world.
[1:37:53] It's a shocking, it's a hotbed, or as the chairman said, a snake pit of anti-Americanism, anti-West, anti-Judeo-Christian values, anti-Israel, anti-Jew.
[1:38:05] It is, they have to decide, and we have a selection coming up that's going to decide the future of this organization with the next Secretary General.
[1:38:12] Okay, well, I know you've got plenty of examples, but that report, which was literally weeks after the October 7th attack,
[1:38:20] in which their report did not mention a single atrocity, might be a good one to use in your working on SHRP.
[1:38:28] Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[1:38:30] Representative Jackson.
[1:38:32] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[1:38:33] Thank you, Ranking Member Meeks.
[1:38:35] Ambassador Waltz, on March 25th, 2026, the United States was one of only three nations to vote against
[1:38:42] the United Nations General Assembly resolution declaring the transatlantic slave trade
[1:38:48] and racialized chattel enslavement of Africans the gravest crime against humanity.
[1:38:53] The resolution passed by the world, 123 to 3, with 52 abstentions.
[1:38:59] For many Americans and for people of African ancestry and descent around the world,
[1:39:03] that vote raised serious questions about our nation's moral leadership.
[1:39:07] I would ask you, Mr. Waltz, why did the United States vote no, as did our few and so few allies with us?
[1:39:16] I think there were two issues that we had with the resolution.
[1:39:23] And of course, the issue of slavery both here in the United States and around the world was abhorrent and should be condemned.
[1:39:30] But the issue with the language of that resolution was that it advocated for international reparations fund,
[1:39:38] something that the administration is not in favor of.
[1:39:42] And further, despite our-
[1:39:43] Okay, let me follow up on a second question, if you don't mind.
[1:39:45] We tried.
[1:39:46] But despite our efforts, they could not put a real bracket around it.
[1:39:50] Okay, I received that.
[1:39:51] What was slavery in world history?
[1:39:52] Let me ask you a second question.
[1:39:53] Do you personally recognize the transatlantic slave trade as a crime against humanity?
[1:39:57] And if so, what specific language in the resolution would you prefer to have in the proposal for you to do?
[1:40:03] I'll have to go.
[1:40:04] I can go back and we're happy to come talk to you about the language that we proposed.
[1:40:08] I'll have to take that for the record.
[1:40:10] But I do know broadly-
[1:40:11] In the United States for the record has paid reparations in the past.
[1:40:13] More broadly, we tried to put some brackets around what was slavery.
[1:40:16] We have paid reparations to those that had been enslavers as well as those that have come over here from other countries.
[1:40:21] Does it affect African nations that participated in the trans-slave trade?
[1:40:26] We couldn't get a good definition around it.
[1:40:27] Let me finish my question.
[1:40:28] Thank you so much, Ambassador.
[1:40:30] Many African leaders have raised questions about the restrictions during the World Cup.
[1:40:34] It was a great time and a time that we should have been very joyous.
[1:40:37] It was the 48 nations that participated.
[1:40:41] But something came to light during that period is that there were 12 African nations that have total bans on travel to the United States.
[1:40:48] Also, embarrassingly so, I would say for the grandmother of Cape Verde and Goli, a country of 500,000 people,
[1:40:55] he couldn't get his grandmother in here.
[1:40:56] I don't know what threat she meant to the United States or to a person that works in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
[1:41:03] But fans were denied the opportunity to be here.
[1:41:05] There are 14 other countries that have partial bans such as Zambia having to pay $5,000, $10,000, $15,000 for a visa.
[1:41:13] So effectively, that's 26 nations that are banned in the African continent from coming to the United States.
[1:41:20] Almost half of Africans are banned from entering the United States of America, roughly 700 million people.
[1:41:27] Do you agree with this policy or would you like to see it changed?
[1:41:30] The only restrictions that I dealt with from the UN context are around the Ebola issue, which did affect DRC.
[1:41:42] I just spoke to the DRC foreign minister this week about those.
[1:41:46] In terms of the visa bond issue, if that's what you're referring to, I would have to refer you to DHS in terms of those restrictions.
[1:41:55] I mean, I thought the World Cup was a fantastic success.
[1:41:58] We spoke to the Algerians, to the Moroccans, to the DRC.
[1:42:01] Well, I would just highlight that half of a continent has been excluded.
[1:42:02] This came to light during that period.
[1:42:04] To others.
[1:42:05] And as we look to our growth and future and relationships with African nations, that they can't come here.
[1:42:09] I've heard of major foundations and other people that cannot bring employees over here.
[1:42:13] And countries, companies that have investments in Africa that want to do job retreats cannot get their employees to come over here.
[1:42:21] So it's excluding us from a nation.
[1:42:23] Let me ask you with Cuba.
[1:42:25] Would you say we are at war with Cuba in your definition?
[1:42:28] I would not say that we are.
[1:42:32] And I only highlight that because we have a naval blockade around an island nation.
[1:42:35] We do not have a naval blockade.
[1:42:36] That is Cuban propaganda.
[1:42:37] So goods and fuel can get to the island nation?
[1:42:40] That is absolute propaganda.
[1:42:41] Can fuel get to the United?
[1:42:42] We contributed over half a billion dollars in goods.
[1:42:44] Can fuel go to the Cuban people?
[1:42:46] In goods from the United States to the Cuban regime.
[1:42:48] Are we blocking fuel to get to the Cuban country?
[1:42:49] A blockade would be a ring of Navy ships that are stopping anything from going in.
[1:42:53] No denying fuel to get to the Cuban people.
[1:42:55] That is literally Cuban propaganda.
[1:42:57] There is no blockade on Cuba.
[1:42:58] So Cubans can receive fuel from anywhere around the world?
[1:43:01] There are humanitarian waivers that the administration has put in place.
[1:43:03] So the answer is no.
[1:43:04] I would appreciate if you just simply were to answer the question.
[1:43:06] And last question regarding the Middle East.
[1:43:08] Cuba is failing because of communism and the corruption of its regime.
[1:43:11] Do you deal specifically with Secretary Rubio or do you take advice from Mr. Jared Kushner and Mr. Witkoff?
[1:43:16] Who's your primary point of contact for Middle East negotiations?
[1:43:20] I deal with all three on a regular basis.
[1:43:22] Are they on the same par?
[1:43:23] I'm not sure you're.
[1:43:25] I mean, are they equal in statute?
[1:43:27] Some, one person is in the administration.
[1:43:29] Two people are super volunteers.
[1:43:31] I just want to know for a point of structure.
[1:43:33] Well, I think our Secretary of State has been Senate confirmed in accordance with our Constitution and Senate rules.
[1:43:39] Okay. Thank you very much. I yield back.
[1:43:41] Representative Baird.
[1:43:43] Representative Baird.
[1:43:44] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to our witnesses.
[1:43:51] And it's appreciative to have a colleague that's doing the job you're doing, Mr. Walts.
[1:43:58] You know, the UN is filled with inadequacies in its personnel management and its implementation of programs and oversight or accountability of UN agencies.
[1:44:08] While originally established to maintain peace and security as we develop a friendly relations worldwide cooperation in economic and humanitarian issues,
[1:44:17] the organization has now forged its own policy that frequently contradicts the policies of the United States.
[1:44:22] And one example of this is Anwar employing proven Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip.
[1:44:31] At least 10 employees of the agency were identified to also have partaken in the heinous acts of October the 7th.
[1:44:40] Another example of this is when the UN Interim Forces in Lebanon, personnel shot down an Israel surveillance drone that was conducting a mission against Hezbollah terrorists.
[1:44:49] So President Trump and the United Nations Ambassador Mike Walts have taken a step in the right direction to ensure that the UN acts in the interest of our member countries instead of formulating its own policies that serve well its contributions and its balance sheet.
[1:45:05] So how can the U.S. effectively conduct oversight within UN agencies to ensure terrorists and human rights violators aren't retained for employment?
[1:45:14] That's a very kindly stated question, Representative Baird.
[1:45:24] I appreciate your service as well, but not an easy answer.
[1:45:27] We are trying to get oversight and effectiveness and frankly better leadership for many of these UN missions across the board.
[1:45:40] In the case of UNRWA, as Secretary Rubio has said, it has served as a virtual arm of Hamas.
[1:45:46] It is radicalizing the next generation of Palestinians.
[1:45:49] It is literally aiding and abetting a terrorist organization as it brutalizes the Palestinian people of Gaza.
[1:45:59] In fact, many of them just tried to rise up against Hamas.
[1:46:03] And according to the UN's own report, Hamas went on a kneecapping campaign to prevent those protests.
[1:46:09] So I'll just turn it over to Ambassador Bartos in terms of additional actions.
[1:46:13] Thank you, Representative. Great question. Important question.
[1:46:17] Broaden out just for a second.
[1:46:19] In the aftermath of the atrocities of October 7th, many UN organizations, as one of your colleagues just referenced before, were silent.
[1:46:27] UN women could not speak.
[1:46:31] The organization UN Women refused for months to even acknowledge the sexual violence, the rape, the mutilations against Israeli women on that awful day.
[1:46:40] So for the UN to lecture about these things should be offensive to every American.
[1:46:47] UNRWA, as the Secretary, has boldly and very clearly said, and it's an honor to serve under his leadership,
[1:46:55] he has boldly and clearly said UNRWA will have no future in Gaza. No future.
[1:47:01] I had the honor to deliver remarks on behalf of the United States a couple of weeks ago at a pledging conference for UNRWA.
[1:47:06] And I said on behalf of the United States, doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result, is the definition of insanity.
[1:47:14] And I looked around that room and said, you all keep contributing, expecting a different result.
[1:47:20] And every year, same speeches against Israel, same failure to condemn Hamas, same sort of platitudes that you give.
[1:47:27] In fact, I said, you give the same speeches every year. You don't just change the date.
[1:47:32] What was interesting about this year, and again, credit to President Trump, Secretary Rubio, Ambassador Waltz.
[1:47:37] What was different this year is that the acting director of UNRWA actually agreed with a couple of the points we raised.
[1:47:43] I almost fell over in my chair. He agreed with some of the points, didn't agree with everything.
[1:47:47] Are we making progress glacially? We're making progress against this important issue, but we are making progress.
[1:47:55] I think stay tuned, sir, and be happy to come down here and brief your team or anyone here who's interested on some of the work we're doing,
[1:48:01] not only to reform these UN agencies and organizations, but also to take a different look,
[1:48:06] a different look at how we serve the humanitarian needs in Gaza without the UN continuing to employ terrorists.
[1:48:15] I appreciate your comments, and you know the fact that you made any kind of progress, I think, is admirable for the work you're doing and the ambassadors are doing.
[1:48:23] And so I think I'm out of time, but I appreciate your comments.
[1:48:27] Representative Bocheski.
[1:48:29] Thank you, Chairman Mast, Ranking Member Meeks, and to our witnesses for being here today.
[1:48:34] Ambassador Waltz, I want to start by thanking you for your years of public service as the father of a 10-year-old daughter and a former public school teacher.
[1:48:42] I appreciate your work in Congress, especially supporting children and especially women and girls.
[1:48:49] But I have to start with a topic that I've discussed with many of your colleagues across the administration during these hearings.
[1:48:56] And I do so because it is so foundational to the work that we do here.
[1:49:01] And that is my very serious concern with the clear conflicts of interest and the massive corruption coming out of this administration.
[1:49:10] So I want to ask you, from your personal perspective, your own values, do you think it's wrong for elected officials and their families to profit from positions of power?
[1:49:21] Do I think it's wrong? Just generally speaking?
[1:49:25] Your personal values, yes, sir. I'm pleased to hear that.
[1:49:29] So I guess the question then is how do you square that circle working for a president who just last year made 20,000 stock trades,
[1:49:39] including companies who benefit from markets that he is actively manipulating,
[1:49:44] whether that's through announcing ceasefires, reversing course and allowing chip exports, or simply promoting these firms on his social media?
[1:49:53] How can you say it's wrong but be silent as the president's sons benefit from mining deals paid for by U.S. taxpayers as one of America's top diplomats?
[1:50:04] As a former member of Congress, does that not conflict with your values, sir?
[1:50:08] Well, let's not talk about Congress and the stock trading that...
[1:50:11] I support a full ban. I think it's wrong for any member to trade.
[1:50:14] That wasn't the question, though, sir.
[1:50:15] I hope to see that bill...
[1:50:16] You should. I'm on the discharge petition.
[1:50:18] Number one. Number two...
[1:50:20] And a full ban, not the joke that my colleagues are trying to put forward.
[1:50:23] The president, members of his cabinet, have all complied with the Office of Government Ethics, as have myself.
[1:50:33] We have ethics rules in place. We have an agency that oversees ethics.
[1:50:37] We all subject ourselves to the Senate and to this office and receive that clearance before we come for confirmation.
[1:50:44] So you're okay with the president's stock trades?
[1:50:47] In accordance with transparency and in accordance with the rules of the Congress, we publicly put our finances out there every year in our financial disclosures.
[1:50:55] So you're comfortable with the president buying stocks in companies like Energy before he announces a ceasefire?
[1:51:02] I think the president is...
[1:51:03] You're comfortable with...
[1:51:04] The president is complying with the ethics rules, as they said on the books.
[1:51:07] Do you think that they should be changed?
[1:51:09] Do I think that...
[1:51:12] They should be changed?
[1:51:13] I'll leave that to this August body.
[1:51:15] Well...
[1:51:16] I'm trying to change the United Nations, which makes this look like an appetizer.
[1:51:20] Well, I think it makes your job harder because these conflicts of interest, the president's insistence on outsourcing high-stakes diplomacy to family members and business associates, impacts our standing in the world in a profoundly negative way.
[1:51:33] They impact your ability to effectively do your job as one of our country's top diplomats.
[1:51:37] Can I just answer your question?
[1:51:39] I have never regularly deal with Secretary Rubio, with the president...
[1:51:42] You answer the question.
[1:51:43] It's okay.
[1:51:44] I have never seen them, ever heard them mention anything at all where they would gain personally from any of their policy decisions.
[1:51:52] They have the interests of this country, first and foremost...
[1:51:55] Ambassador, you don't have to ask...
[1:51:57] People don't often announce, I am corrupt, but we can see it plainly when the president has put billions of dollars in his pockets,
[1:52:04] and the pockets of his associates, of his children, of his friends, of Mr. Witkoff, of Mr. Kushner.
[1:52:10] If you can't see it, sir, that's on you.
[1:52:13] But the truth is, whether you can look past it, and you're choosing to look past it, which is fine, but the world is watching, and it is impacting our national interests.
[1:52:22] I deal with them on a regular basis.
[1:52:23] Regardless, you're in this role, Ambassador, and that's fine.
[1:52:25] So I'm going to go back to the first topic I mentioned.
[1:52:27] One I think we actually agree on, because we clearly disagree on this one.
[1:52:31] I think the corruption the president is executing is morally wrong.
[1:52:35] It should be legally reprehensible, and I think he should be out of office.
[1:52:39] But UNICEF has been one of the government's strongest and most transparent partners.
[1:52:43] Do you agree that UNICEF's field presence and cross-sector capacity make it a natural partner of choice for the U.S.?
[1:52:49] UNICEF is led by an American.
[1:52:52] It could always do things better.
[1:52:55] It often, both their mission at times is duplicative of others, like World Food Program, like UNHCR, and other organizations.
[1:53:05] But we are working with them through our pooled funding model to streamline their mission.
[1:53:10] Okay. The organization has yet to receive its fiscal 26 core resources, even though we've appropriated funds.
[1:53:15] I'll follow up there with a few written questions.
[1:53:18] But I'll just end and say we have to be better.
[1:53:22] Any one issue of corruption this president has perpetrated would have ended prior presidencies.
[1:53:27] And I just hope that you and your colleagues can speak up and find the courage to push back against what's happening here.
[1:53:32] And with that, I yield back.
[1:53:34] Representative Biggs.
[1:53:35] Thank you, Chairman Maas, and thank you to our witnesses for your testimonies here today.
[1:53:39] China is the largest troop contributor to the UN peacekeeping missions among the five permanent security council members and the second largest funder of the UN overall.
[1:53:51] Chinese peacekeeping deployments are concentrated in strategically sensitive regions, including areas along Belt and Road corridors, near ports, mineral resources, and existing or potential basing locations.
[1:54:09] These are longstanding concerns about whether Beijing is using its peacekeeper designation as cover to advance military and intelligent objectives
[1:54:20] in regions where the U.S. has strategic interest.
[1:54:24] So, Ambassador Walts, my question to you is, how would you characterize the military objectives behind China's peacekeeping deployments?
[1:54:33] And are these genuine contributions to UN missions, or are they a vehicle for broader PLA strategic positioning?
[1:54:43] Thank you for the question, and it's frankly a very good question.
[1:54:47] China does contribute to these peacekeeping missions.
[1:54:51] They are often better equipped than many of the other countries.
[1:54:58] They come with what they've promised to come with.
[1:55:02] That said, I don't think for a second that they don't serve a dual purpose as eyes and ears on the ground for the Chinese Communist Party.
[1:55:13] Do we have evidence of PLA-linked intelligence collection reconnaissance or military liaison building occurring under the cover of Chinese peacekeeping operations?
[1:55:25] Representative, I'd be happy to come back and see you in a different setting and talk about what we know and don't know.
[1:55:32] Thank you.
[1:55:34] So, separate from the diplomatic or funding-based countermeasures, what is the Trump administration doing to monitor or counter the military dimension of China's peacekeeping footprint?
[1:55:46] Again, Congresswoman, I think it would be better if we talked about that in a different setting.
[1:55:55] However, as Representative Bartos just mentioned, one of the places that they have a substantial presence was in South Sudan.
[1:56:04] And we just worked through the Security Council to seriously streamline and downsize that mission.
[1:56:10] We did not find it to be as effective as it should be.
[1:56:13] The mandate was far too broad.
[1:56:16] And we refocused it on helping the South Sudanese government try to get security and stability to a much more manageable place.
[1:56:27] Okay.
[1:56:28] I'm going to try one more.
[1:56:29] Sure.
[1:56:30] So, in your assessment, does China's military posture within the UN peacekeeping missions pose a direct threat to US force posture, basing access, or military partnerships in the regions where Chinese peacekeepers operate?
[1:56:45] We are keeping a very close eye on all of those dimensions.
[1:56:52] I will say, in fairness to our colleagues, our Chinese colleagues on the Security Council, their contributions often are helpful.
[1:57:02] But again, they can serve a dual purpose, and we are very wide-eyed to that issue.
[1:57:08] Well, I look forward to continuing this conversation in a different setting.
[1:57:11] I'm happy to come back and talk to you about it.
[1:57:12] And very good questions.
[1:57:13] Thank you.
[1:57:14] Again, thank you all for being here today.
[1:57:15] Thank you.
[1:57:16] I yield back.
[1:57:18] Mr. Chairman.
[1:57:20] Representative Castro.
[1:57:21] Thank you, Chairman.
[1:57:22] Thank you, Ambassadors, for being here today.
[1:57:24] And welcome back, Ambassador Walsh.
[1:57:26] I think we served on the Intelligence Committee together.
[1:57:29] The United Nations has been central to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since General Assembly Resolution 181 in 1947, the partition resolution that called for two states and underpinned Israel's own founding and international recognition.
[1:57:43] Security Council Resolution 242, 338, 1397, and 1515, the latter two adopted with U.S. support under a Republican administration, built the framework.
[1:57:55] Two states, two peoples, each with the right to self-determination within secure and recognized borders.
[1:58:01] So there aren't just Israelis in this story and there aren't just Palestinians.
[1:58:05] There are two peoples and both have the same right to determine their own future.
[1:58:10] You drafted Resolution 2803, adopted last November.
[1:58:15] This is a ceasefire and, of course, Board of Peace resolution.
[1:58:18] According to reports, France, a permanent member and one of our oldest allies, asked that it reference the two-state solution and the return of a reformed Palestinian authority to Gaza.
[1:58:29] And so do the other members of the Council.
[1:58:33] The final text that you negotiated, although, however, never once uses the phrase two-state solution.
[1:58:39] And at adoption, France, Algeria, Pakistan, Guyana, and Sierra Leone criticized that omission on the record.
[1:58:45] And so I wanted to ask you, Ambassador Waltz, was that omission deliberate, not mentioning the two-state solution?
[1:58:51] Did the United States refuse to include the two-state solution in its own resolution?
[1:58:57] Well, Representative Castro, I'll come back to you and sit down with you if I'm incorrect in this.
[1:59:03] But out of memory, the Resolution 2803 adopted wholesale as an annex President Trump's 20-point peace plan,
[1:59:12] which the President of France was there at Sharm el-Sheikh and celebrated.
[1:59:18] And in that, for the first time ever, we had both no annexation in terms of directive to the State of Israel
[1:59:26] and a pathway to a two-state solution with appropriate reforms.
[1:59:30] Okay, so just to be—
[1:59:31] Those are both in there now as international law.
[1:59:33] Okay, I got it. So just to be clear, just for the record, it's the policy of the Trump administration to support a two-state solution.
[1:59:39] With appropriate reforms.
[1:59:41] Okay.
[1:59:42] So that was a United Nations resolution that adopted the President's 20-point peace plan.
[1:59:47] Right, but because you had a big hand in negotiating it, I want to know—I'm asking, what's the Trump administration's policy, right?
[1:59:54] So the Palestinian Authority has said yes to the two-state solution.
[2:00:00] However, Prime Minister Netanyahu has told his cabinet that he's, quote, firmly against a Palestinian state, reformed Palestinian Authority or not.
[2:00:09] So what specific pressure is the United States applying on the government of Israel to accept the outcome that our own resolution envisions?
[2:00:18] Well, the resolution, as you know, is very focused on Gaza and putting in place the funding, the International Stability Force,
[2:00:31] and the new Palestinian governance mechanism to pull that away from Hamas and put that back under civilian Palestinian control.
[2:00:39] No, no, fair enough. And I think—
[2:00:41] And by the way, that organization, the Board of Peace, now has a liaison office to the Palestinian Authority,
[2:00:46] and the Palestinian Authority publicly supported 2803.
[2:00:48] Sure.
[2:00:49] But I guess I'm saying that, you know, we've known that we have two sides here for a long time,
[2:00:53] and you have a prime minister who's a longstanding prime minister, may win election again,
[2:00:58] who has said very firmly, and others in his cabinet have said very firmly that they're against a two-state solution.
[2:01:04] So what are we doing to guide them, guide Israel in this case, towards that two-state solution?
[2:01:11] Because on the other hand, on the other side, we have designated groups like Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations.
[2:01:21] We've sanctioned them. We've designated the IRGC as a terrorist organization. We've sanctioned Iran.
[2:01:27] And so where is the guidance on the other side when, over the years, of course, we have provided military support,
[2:01:36] foreign military financing, billions of dollars. We now may, at least in the NDAA, there's a provision to strengthen the relationship between the United States and Israel,
[2:01:46] and perhaps develop weapons together, for example. So without exercising any leverage, without the U.S. exercising any leverage on Israel,
[2:01:56] and Prime Minister Netanyahu, what makes you think, Ambassador, or why would we think that he's going to change his tune about a two-state solution?
[2:02:06] I mean, he's flatly said he's against it. What's going to change that?
[2:02:09] Congressman, I think it's important to point out in the negotiations on 2803, working with the Palestinian Observer Mission at the UN
[2:02:17] and all of our Gulf-Arab partners and friends. It was everybody came together, including the Israelis, on that 20-point peace plan, which, as the ambassador said, concludes...
[2:02:26] I'm running out of time, so I'd like to reclaim my time for a second.
[2:02:28] It includes a path with appropriate reforms to what you're just saying.
[2:02:31] If one side is staunchly against a two-state solution, the Israelis have said, their Prime Minister has said he's against it,
[2:02:38] what leverage is the United States going to use to change that? To me, it seems like giving them more and more and more is not going to change their behavior.
[2:02:46] At some point, this makes the two-state solution, quite honestly, illusory, and it turns this whole thing into a self-delusion. So what are we doing?
[2:02:55] I think at this point, Congressman, we are very focused on those reforms and the security of the Israeli state,
[2:03:02] whether it's from Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, or Iran, to then get to a place where we can have those conversations.
[2:03:08] Okay. I'm out of time, so we'll have to follow up on it. Representative Fein.
[2:03:12] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and it's really exciting to see two friends, mentors, and my predecessor here.
[2:03:19] And on behalf of the people of the 6th Congressional District of Florida, thanks for all the work that you did six years.
[2:03:23] I'm trying to fill very large shoes, so I'm doing my best. But thank you both for being here.
[2:03:28] I start with the premise that I'm not convinced that the UN is sort of fundamentally permanently broken and, you know, should go away.
[2:03:36] I often have said, from the river to the sea, let's make Manhattan UN free. So I come from that.
[2:03:41] But I know that you all are working incredibly hard to deal with the hand that we have been dealt.
[2:03:46] And so I want to start with UNRWA. And the USAID Inspector General found that seven employees actually participated in the Hamas terrorist attack on October 7th.
[2:03:59] They found 14 employees were Hamas-affiliated, including an UNRWA school principal who commanded a Hamas battalion on October 7th, as I'm sure that you know that.
[2:04:09] How do we make sure that there aren't terrorists that are working for the United Nations?
[2:04:16] Well, I think when it comes to UNRWA Gaza, the organization just has to go. And that's, Secretary Rubio has made that clear.
[2:04:26] I think we've made that clear across the board. Actually, the vast majority of what it does is education.
[2:04:32] We are working with many of our partners, namely Morocco, namely UAE, to reform that curriculum that radicalizes the next generation of Palestinians,
[2:04:43] that teaches them that there is no two state solution, that there's only one state solution, and that's Hamas.
[2:04:49] So handing that over, those functions over, and we've had these conversations, whether it's the Palestinian Authority or the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza,
[2:04:59] they have to take over their own educational functions. That's an inherent part of being a governing institution.
[2:05:05] And the humanitarian functions that it conducts, we need a much better vetting process and where those conversations are ongoing with how to vet those individuals.
[2:05:16] But at the end of the day, Hamas rules at the end of an AK-47. Hamas will disarm.
[2:05:23] The President has made that clear. It's going to happen the easy way or the hard way.
[2:05:27] Let's pray they make a more peaceful choice and do it the easy way.
[2:05:30] Okay. So we've talked about UNRWA.
[2:05:32] But as you move up into the UN itself, I think one of the most concerning developments of the UN is rampant, unabashed anti-Semitism by high-level employees at the UN.
[2:05:41] This isn't just UNRWA. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, given they're okay with Hamas terrorists being on staff.
[2:05:47] But nowhere has the anti-Semitism at the UN been more blatant than Francesca Albanese, the UN's special rapporteur on the occupied, quote-unquote, Palestinian territory.
[2:05:57] She used her position to advance extremist and inflammatory claims against Israel.
[2:06:01] She's falsely accused Israel of genocide and promoted false narratives under the guise of her role.
[2:06:06] Ambassador Bartos, what reforms have you been putting in place to fight anti-Semitism at the UN itself and to prevent anti-Semites like Albanese from being placed in these kinds of prominent positions?
[2:06:19] It's a great question. Thank you. It's good to see you, Congressman.
[2:06:23] As I said, as I never tire of saying, the UN is at a crossroads.
[2:06:27] And in one direction is this vital humanitarian work that we see out in the field of people risking their lives to do that work.
[2:06:34] And the UN should be commended for that. And there are successes and failures within peacekeeping, and we've talked about that today, too.
[2:06:39] But right there, in the other direction, is this bewildering, despicable bias that has been around for 60-plus years.
[2:06:50] That has really, if you think about it, infrastructure that has been built within the UN system.
[2:06:55] And former Ambassador, former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan spoke about this brilliantly and beautifully in his 1975 speech,
[2:07:01] calling out Zionism as racism resolution, which was, of course, a Soviet-era, Soviet-driven process.
[2:07:08] So the UN comes to this over many decades of picking on the one Jewish state as a way to get to the West in America.
[2:07:15] But it's anti-Americanism, anti-West, anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel.
[2:07:21] It really is all of that. We have a whole team dedicated, of course, with the Secretary's push and leadership on these issues,
[2:07:30] we have a whole team dedicated to rooting out anti-Semitism throughout the UN.
[2:07:33] So the Commission of Inquiry, UNRWA, as you mentioned, this lunatic Albanese who the UN allows to put on their uniform.
[2:07:39] But I think it all comes back to, in the here and now, it comes back to making sure that we select the right next Secretary-General,
[2:07:45] who will have the leadership, the moral clarity, and the courage to tackle this.
[2:07:51] It's an existential issue for the organization about whether it wants to be a hotbed of hatred for the one Jewish state and for the West,
[2:08:01] or whether it wants to get back to basics in its core founding mission of international peace and security, humanitarian aid.
[2:08:08] And that's a big decision for the UN. We're trying to guide them in the right direction. It is not always easy, as you know.
[2:08:15] But the work is really important, and we get at it every day.
[2:08:18] And I would just add, Representative Fein, that the administration has defunded these inherently anti-Semitic organizations.
[2:08:27] We are trying to shift this culture, but meanwhile, not a single dollar of taxpayer, U.S. taxpayer dollars should go to these organizations like UNRWA,
[2:08:36] like the so-called Human Rights Council, UNESCO, and others.
[2:08:39] Well, I'm not sure anybody can fix it, but if anyone can, I think it's the two of you.
[2:08:43] So thanks. Keep up the good work, and Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[2:08:46] Representative McBride.
[2:08:47] Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and to you and the ranking member for holding this committee hearing.
[2:08:52] Thank you both so much, both of you ambassadors, for joining us, for making it down to the bottom of the dais.
[2:08:58] We are well over four years into a war Vladimir Putin started by invading Ukraine.
[2:09:04] And during the course of the 2024 election, the president promised at least 53 times to end the war on or before day one.
[2:09:14] On January 20th, 2025, as the sun set and the president pardoned more than a thousand January 6th insurrectionists,
[2:09:24] when the sun set, the president failed to deliver on his promise that he would end the war between Russia and Ukraine.
[2:09:31] Ambassador Waltz, why did the president fail to deliver on his promise to end the war?
[2:09:36] The president is doing everything he can to end the war. To date, neither Vladimir Putin with Russia or President Zelensky has seen fit to enter into the final deal.
[2:09:54] However, the president has put significant pressure, this administration, by sanctioning Luke oil, by sanctioning Rosneft, and is doing everything he can to stop the killing.
[2:10:05] So I guess we're in agreement 538 days into the administration that the president has not delivered on his promise that he made at least 53 times during the course of the campaign to end the war on day one?
[2:10:14] The president has found, despite incredible efforts from him and his team, to be a very frustrating effort.
[2:10:21] Well, maybe he shouldn't have made those grandiose promises.
[2:10:24] I'm proud that he has tried.
[2:10:25] Speaking of the pressure that is being brought to bear, on February 24th, a month after the president failed to deliver on that promise,
[2:10:33] U.S. representatives at the United Nations voted no on a resolution advancing a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine.
[2:10:40] Earlier today, Representative Titus brought up this vote, and you incorrectly stated that the U.S. abstained from voting on the February 2025 resolution.
[2:10:48] That's not true. The U.S. voted no alongside Russia, Belarus, and North Korea.
[2:10:54] Really, really great company. Would you like to correct the record that the U.S. indeed voted no?
[2:10:59] I understood, and perhaps I misunderstood her to be talking about a General Assembly resolution just this past summer where the United States abstained.
[2:11:10] My understanding, the words that she specifically used called, was referring to the February 2025 resolution, which the U.S. did indeed vote no on.
[2:11:23] Then, on February 18th, 2026, over a year after President Trump failed to deliver on his promise to end the war on day one, U.S. representation at the U.N. under your leadership refused to vote on a resolution expressing support for lasting peace in Ukraine.
[2:11:40] Ambassador, I'm curious why the United States is scared to call out and stand up to Vladimir Putin at the United Nations.
[2:11:47] The United States, under this administration, has put more pressure on Russia to come to the table.
[2:11:54] Their economy is reflective of that, and this administration sanctioned their top two oil producers and the dark fleet, not the last administration.
[2:12:02] They're now getting more money because of the Strait of Hormuz, but that's neither here nor there.
[2:12:07] Why did the United States vote no and refuse to vote to denounce Vladimir Putin's illegal war in Ukraine?
[2:12:13] I'll have to come back to the record that prior vote was obviously before my time, so I'll have to look at the wording and the resolution.
[2:12:20] Like legislation, which many of you know, there can be specific phrases that we find objectionable or who cross our red lines.
[2:12:27] Yeah.
[2:12:28] The title says one thing and the actual legislation or resolution says another.
[2:12:32] Apparently, the only other countries that objected to any of the specific language in that resolution, at least in February 2025, were Belarus, North Korea, and Russia.
[2:12:42] So not very good company.
[2:12:43] My memory is we were shifting to a more neutral mediator position as we tried to end this war, unlike the ill-defined victory, so-called, of the last work.
[2:12:54] A strategy that did not work, has not worked.
[2:12:57] Has worked a lot better than the last administration's.
[2:13:00] Well, I don't think that that's true.
[2:13:01] They're at least in the room talking, which is the art of diplomacy.
[2:13:03] Well, there was a photo op in Alaska that the president gave Vladimir Putin.
[2:13:08] And I think these votes, lack thereof votes, no votes, only send a message to Vladimir Putin that we are not there.
[2:13:16] I think President Zelensky has repeatedly been in the Oval Office, not Putin.
[2:13:17] But I want to say while you're treating Vladimir Putin with kid gloves, you are insulting American allies, including our longstanding ally, Denmark, whose soldiers fought and died alongside U.S. soldiers.
[2:13:26] Have you gotten any positive feedback from your colleagues at the United Nations about the president's desire to seize Greenland?
[2:13:34] As one of the soldiers who fought alongside Danish soldiers in southern Afghanistan, they're a fantastic ally.
[2:13:41] At the same time, they were paying very little to zero attention to the Arctic, and they now are.
[2:13:47] And we are in meaningful negotiations to secure our northern border, which is a key charge of the president.
[2:13:52] I'll take that as I know you haven't gotten any positive feedback. Thank you. I yield back.
[2:13:55] I've actually given a lot of positive feedback to the ongoing negotiations to answer your question.
[2:13:59] Sure. Representative Gallagher.
[2:14:01] Yes. Thank you, gentlemen, for your testimony today.
[2:14:05] And Mr. Ambassador, let me apologize on behalf of California for the disrespect and dumbfounding ignorance of my colleagues.
[2:14:16] The gentlelady mentioned that the Ayatollah was better off before the war.
[2:14:21] Maybe she missed the memo that Ayatollah Khomeini is dead and he is definitely not better off than before this war.
[2:14:29] And maybe if they had their way, he would still be alive directing attacks against our allies and also against our American soldiers.
[2:14:42] If they had their way, they would be much further along in their nuclear program instead of being decimated in their nuclear program, as is the case today.
[2:14:51] And I do think it's interesting to hear the other side, Democrats, especially from California, talking about high gas prices.
[2:14:58] As of today, the average gas price in California is five dollars and fifty cents a gallon.
[2:15:04] On the East Coast, in a state like North Carolina, it's three dollars and seventy cents.
[2:15:09] That's a function of policy. In California, there's been a war on oil and gas.
[2:15:13] There's been crazy policies, Green Green New Deal mandates that have led to that highest gas price.
[2:15:19] And I want to thank you for the administration to help stop the International Maritime Organization from from imposing what would have been the world's first global carbon tax on shipping, which would have raised all of our costs.
[2:15:32] And so going on that vein, you know, what are you doing at the U.N.
[2:15:37] And in your role to help stop these kind of California policies from going global and raising all of our costs of energy through the roof?
[2:15:45] Yeah, thank you. I mean, talk about taxation without representation.
[2:15:48] This was the first attempt by an international body to levy fines, which would have amounted to a tax on all global shipping, I guess in some ill-fated effort to push these massive tankers towards EVs.
[2:16:02] I don't know. And by the way, we've asked directly who would then manage the upwards of twelve to fifteen billion dollars that would have raised passed on to consumers and then put into a U.N. slush fund.
[2:16:15] And the answer was unclear. It was kind of like what we heard in this body, Mr. Chairman, just vote for it and you'll figure it out later.
[2:16:21] But thanks to the president, secretary and our intervention, we stopped that effort.
[2:16:25] It's also an argument, though, of why we need to get into these organizations in a meaningful way.
[2:16:31] We can't just walk away because if we do, our adversaries and in some cases our partners who don't share our industry's interest and want to advantage their industries will pass global regulations that massively disadvantage the American people in our businesses.
[2:16:48] We stopped it in that case. We are blocking, fighting and tackling.
[2:16:54] For example, I just worked with Secretary of Agriculture Rollins on some regulations in the Food and Agriculture Organization that serves as a global FDA, for lack of a better term,
[2:17:03] that would have advantaged European partners and disadvantaged farmers, excuse me, and disadvantaged American farmers.
[2:17:09] So, rest assured, we have a team that's in all of these organizations fighting for us.
[2:17:15] Thank you for that work. It's much appreciated.
[2:17:18] And it brings me to my next question, which is roughly 12 percent of global trade passes through the Baab El-Mandeb Strait.
[2:17:27] And we, you know, currently the Iran-backed Houthis are threatening to blockade this critical waterway again.
[2:17:34] If successful, this would force ships onto longer and more expensive routes around Africa, which would undoubtedly disrupt our global trade.
[2:17:42] There has been a resolution 2826 that simply extends the Secretary General's reporting mandate on Houthi attacks in the Red Sea.
[2:17:51] Is the United Nations capable of organizing a more meaningful international response to keep this vital waterway open?
[2:17:58] I think you're, well, you're certainly speaking to a broader issue here that no state, no terrorist organization can choke off international waterways that are vital for commerce.
[2:18:12] The Iranian regime right now is acting as the Somali pirates with drones and cruise missiles of back years ago,
[2:18:19] where we did gather an international coalition and took that problem on.
[2:18:22] Thankfully, the president, the Defense Department right now, as we speak, is massively destroying and degrading Iran's ability to choke off that waterway,
[2:18:31] which 146 nations have agreed with us is in violation of international law.
[2:18:36] Yeah. And thank you for that. And again, I mean, I think if my colleagues had their way with their diplomacy of enablement,
[2:18:41] you know, we'd be in a much worse position, you know, from that standpoint as well.
[2:18:45] So I thank you for your leadership and for coming here and testifying today despite, you know, some some blatant hypocrisy from the other side.
[2:18:54] But I appreciate your efforts and appreciate the administration and what it's doing.
[2:18:57] Congressman, it is incredibly rich to see one side of the aisle now suddenly in love with oil and gas that they have sought to degrade our own domestic capability.
[2:19:07] But but thank you for your leadership in a very tough place.
[2:19:10] I don't know if being a member in California is tougher or easier than it is in the United Nations.
[2:19:15] But I'm here to bring the voice of the forgotten Californians to this body.
[2:19:20] So thank you. Representative Pocan.
[2:19:22] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for being with us.
[2:19:26] Thank you. Without going into detail, just naming names, what three countries are the greatest adversaries to the United States?
[2:19:32] From a broader sense, I would refer names. Well, I would refer actually to our national security, national defense strategy.
[2:19:41] Three names is all I'm looking for, not the narrative that are working against us, Iran, China, Russia, North Korea.
[2:19:49] Thank you. Have you ever been to Cuba? I have not. You have not.
[2:19:54] OK, did you get a chance to read the report that came out this week from the State Department on Cuba, 95 pages?
[2:19:59] I have not read the entire report. But as a native Floridian, I'm familiar with the the the antics and adversarial.
[2:20:08] Gotcha. But you haven't read the report. Gotcha.
[2:20:11] Can you explain to me on July 7th, there was a vote in the U.N. to continue debate about the U.S. blockade of Cuba.
[2:20:17] And we opposed that. We kind of had an embarrassing defeat, 136 to nine with 30 abstentions.
[2:20:23] But given what this report said, why are we afraid to have that debate?
[2:20:30] If there's so much information we want to share with the world about Cuba, why did we not extend that debate?
[2:20:34] That's a mischaracterization. What we opposed was Cubans or others, for that matter,
[2:20:41] abusing the General Assembly to have the same debate over and over again.
[2:20:46] It just seems that if we had such damning information that this report claims to have, that that would be a great venue to have that.
[2:20:53] I guess my question is, it's been over 65 years.
[2:20:55] If it uses the U.N. for its propaganda, that's what we opposed.
[2:20:57] Yeah, no, thank you. It's been over 65 years that we've had essentially this blockade, this embargo on Cuba.
[2:21:03] And have we moved closer to a democracy, steer them towards human rights?
[2:21:09] As the other ambassador said, you know, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result.
[2:21:16] Have that 65 years brought us to where we want to be?
[2:21:19] I would encourage you to read that report.
[2:21:22] I did and you didn't. I did and you didn't. Correct. Yes.
[2:21:26] Oh, no, I have not read it word for word, but I am very familiar as a native Floridian.
[2:21:31] I did too. I read it. I've highlighted it.
[2:21:33] I felt like, you know what, I put on the kinks and the who, because everything's about the 60s and 70s in here.
[2:21:38] And then there's this giant jump to today.
[2:21:40] Then you would know we don't have a blockade. A blockade is a ring of ships. A blockade is what we have right now in Iran.
[2:21:44] No, this is a blockade of fuel, of medicine, of food, of supplies.
[2:21:49] Even in war, we allow medical supplies to go through. We don't allow medical supplies to go through to Cuba.
[2:21:54] So my question is, do you think that we've had a noticeable change?
[2:21:59] Because of the corruption of the communist regime.
[2:22:00] Okay. Can I just ask my question, please?
[2:22:02] Sure.
[2:22:03] Because I respect you are in this role.
[2:22:04] And so I'm just asking, do you think we've had a measurable difference in 65 years of the policy we've had?
[2:22:10] I think we have, much of which is in statute, have had a meaningful effect on not allowing the Cuban regime to expand its revolution,
[2:22:23] its communism, and its anti-American, anti-left revolution, as it calls it, across the Western Hemisphere and into the United States.
[2:22:34] I get you. So Secretary Rubio just a few hours ago said, the goal is to have a Cuba where people of Cuba can experience prosperity, safety, security, and a better life moving forward.
[2:22:44] I just got back from there 10 days ago. I've been there 30 years ago. I was there three and a half years ago in an official delegation.
[2:22:50] And I was there with a nonprofit most recently. And what I've seen is a crushing of the Cuban people.
[2:22:56] And it's not a Cuban regime.
[2:22:57] Let me finish, please.
[2:22:58] Did you visit the prisoners?
[2:22:59] Give me the respect I've given you, please, because the rest of this drives me crazy.
[2:23:03] You know, we're not allowing medical supplies. So we've doubled the infant mortality rate because of our actions.
[2:23:10] We're the ones blocking that. It's not the Cuban government. That's us.
[2:23:13] We're blocking fuel, which means while I was there, 42 hours of no energy. We had an hour and a half.
[2:23:18] Surgeons literally finish surgery, sometimes with their cell phone lights, right?
[2:23:22] That's because of us. Do you think that what your goal is, we're running completely counter to that?
[2:23:28] And I just don't understand that. May I answer your question?
[2:23:32] Yeah, please. But I would like 30 seconds at the end.
[2:23:35] During your visit, did you visit the private island from the Castro regime? Did you visit their private jet, which seems to have fuel to go back and forth?
[2:23:41] Well, considering you've never been to Cuba, I'm not going to take your advice on where to go.
[2:23:45] I know, but considering, I mean, you've never been there, I'm not going to tell you how to groom your hair because I can't give good advice on that.
[2:23:52] I don't think I need your advice at Cuba. Are we going to have a military action against Cuba?
[2:23:57] It seems like that's what this report is setting up.
[2:23:59] I am not going to take options off the table for the president of the United States, but I would hope that you would not allow your visits to be used for Cuban regime propaganda that has oppressed and massacred people.
[2:24:10] Yeah, you know, I'll tell you, I wish, I understand, but I would strongly urge you, Marco Rubio, who's never been to Cuba, so many others who have strong opinions.
[2:24:18] Its entire family is from Cuba and fled the regime.
[2:24:20] They left before the revolution.
[2:24:22] That is decades ago.
[2:24:24] That's a ridiculous answer.
[2:24:26] I know, but to be fair, that is a ridiculous answer.
[2:24:30] For being oppressed and imprisoned.
[2:24:31] It's worth going there if you're going to have such strong opinions.
[2:24:33] I think you'd maybe look at it a little differently.
[2:24:36] I yield back.
[2:24:37] Representative Moylan.
[2:24:38] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ambassador Waltz and Bartos.
[2:24:43] Thank you so much for being here.
[2:24:45] Appreciate that.
[2:24:46] Ambassador Waltz, July 5th, 2026, the UN supported the launch of the Global Network of Centers for Exchange and Cooperation on AI Capacity Building.
[2:24:58] As the AI risk pushing the world towards even greater inequities.
[2:25:04] So what do you believe is the U.S. role, should be the U.S. role closing the artificial intelligence gap to face this regarding connectivity, infrastructure, and energy access?
[2:25:15] I think we have to be incredibly careful, and I have been in touch with a number of leaders of our private sector, our Office of Science and Technology Policy, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Treasury,
[2:25:29] on efforts within the UN towards AI governance that are not in line with our values and that would hinder our entrepreneurial spirit and our innovation.
[2:25:40] I'm also in touch with them as we gather the framework or understand the framework we want here federally in the United States to understand that and how we should propagate that outward to the rest of the world.
[2:25:55] I like to talk about AI freedom.
[2:25:59] Countries from, say, the EU and other places like to talk about AI governance, and that's a very slippery slope.
[2:26:04] I appreciate that.
[2:26:05] I agree with you.
[2:26:06] Another question for you, sir.
[2:26:08] On your confirmation hearing in July, you stated it was absolutely critical for the United States to counter China at the United Nations.
[2:26:17] So China continues to lead four out of 15 specialized UN agencies, including organizations with mandates for facilitating cooperation on technology, agriculture, and food security, aviation safety, and development.
[2:26:32] So, Ambassador, what do you believe the United States response to China's position on this multilateralism should be?
[2:26:40] Thank you.
[2:26:43] I mean, I just give you a few examples.
[2:26:45] One, I gave earlier the World Intellectual Property Organization.
[2:26:48] We supported actively a pro-business Singaporean in the International Telecommunications Union.
[2:26:56] We are running, and this is from the prior administration, so it's a bipartisan effort here to support an American to run that that's in charge of undersea cable, spectrum, space, a number of critical standard-setting bodies.
[2:27:11] Not only at the senior levels, it's important that we recruit and support Americans at every level to staff these bodies.
[2:27:21] And I can come back to you with figures, but I think it's a little bit misunderstood.
[2:27:26] The United States has the largest number of our nationals across the UN system.
[2:27:32] It's actually followed by France, the UK, and Germany before we get to China.
[2:27:38] It's something actually China complains about, that it doesn't have greater representation.
[2:27:43] So we are active in making sure that us in like-minded countries are effectively represented around the system.
[2:27:50] Excellent. We're taking care. Go ahead, sir.
[2:27:52] If I may, sir, we are still underrepresented, though.
[2:27:54] The Ambassador is absolutely right in the number of nationals that work there, but the United States are still underrepresented relative to our contributions to the UN,
[2:28:03] and it's something that we are very much in the ear of UN leadership often, as are the Chinese.
[2:28:09] I'm glad you're well aware. We need to correct that. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:28:13] Speaking of, Ambassador, the U.S. has historically been the leader within the Convention on the International Trade and Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
[2:28:25] So how do you envision maintaining the U.S. leadership on wildlife trade while balancing sustainability and the community interests that depend on healthy marine ecosystem?
[2:28:37] Well, I mean, this is where even though we're not a signatory, we abide by its conventions in the UN law of the sea that establishes standards for nautical waters and particularly for EEZs.
[2:28:51] And one of the things that we're working with both the small island states and the Pacific, but also in South Central America are violations of their EECs often by illicit fishing, most often by large Chinese fishing fleets.
[2:29:07] Not only there, but then the protection in terms from a conservation standpoint, we support international organizations that set those standards around the world and a number of key nonprofits.
[2:29:22] I would just say, sir, that when when our allies have a choice of other countries have a choice in certain, you know, whether it's the Africa group or whether it's other nations that we work with, whether they have a choice to have U.S. leadership or other important powers leadership, they're yearning for U.S. leadership.
[2:29:42] And when we can when we do step in there and provide leadership, it's we have meaningful impacts across the across the system.
[2:29:49] There's a lot to fix. There's a lot to fix. But with Ambassador Waltz's leadership and with the team's focus, we are we are we're present as as many places as we can be.
[2:30:00] I appreciate the hard work you both do. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Bell.
[2:30:04] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ambassador Waltz, U.N. peacekeeping operations funding is a principal source of support for the new gang suppression force mission in Haiti, which will be critical to driving back the control of violent gangs in the country that are wreaking havoc on communities in our own hemisphere.
[2:30:30] And we're in worrying millions of Haitian Americans as they watch Haiti suffer.
[2:30:35] In fact, just the other day, you even said Haiti is only a few hundred miles from Florida.
[2:30:41] What happens there does not stay there. According to a 2024 government accountability office report, approximately 73 percent of firearms recovered in the Caribbean between 2018 and 2022 originated in the United States.
[2:31:00] Additionally, the U.N. Security Council also adopted an arms embargo on Haiti in 2022 to prevent weapons from reaching these gangs.
[2:31:10] So let me ask you this first. What are you doing to ensure we are not violating the Security Council arms embargo?
[2:31:20] And how does the administration justify defunding the United Nations, including slashing its peacekeeping operational budget,
[2:31:29] while simultaneously expecting it to take on a greater role in supporting the U.N. authorized gang suppression force?
[2:31:36] We are mission by mission evaluating the effectiveness of these peacekeeping operations.
[2:31:43] As I mentioned earlier, some have been around for 30 to 40 years at the cost of a billion dollars a year and have not worked themselves out of a job, have not put peace in place.
[2:31:54] As it pertains to the gang suppression force, that's actually a hybrid funding model.
[2:32:00] The U.N. budget is supporting basically the logistics and we have a separate trust fund, the Haiti Trust Fund, that a standing group of partners is contributing to.
[2:32:12] And we have effective oversight over both of those funds and we are supporting both of those funds.
[2:32:18] And again, we will evaluate as that mandate comes up for renewal whether they are meeting the metrics and whether they are actually suppressing the gangs.
[2:32:28] I could tell you having just visited there, the gang suppression force just conducted its first clearing operation and was fairly effective.
[2:32:36] Long way to go. That's coupled with training the Haitian National Police and standing up the Haitian Army once again to take these paramilitary gangs on.
[2:32:46] And of course, we have the embargo in place. I visited the Dominican Republic, whereas a lot of these arms are smuggled and we are coordinating with their foreign ministry and their law enforcement, both the foreign ministry and INL, to better interdict illegal arms that are flowing into the gangs.
[2:33:05] Ambassador Wallace, when you served in Congress, you were a staunch supporter of our Kurdish allies.
[2:33:13] In fact, you frequently emphasize the importance of standing with the Kurdish forces that fought alongside the U.S. against ISIS.
[2:33:21] Recently, President Trump has called President Erdogan a very good ally, end of quote.
[2:33:29] And a good ally to me is an interesting way of describing a leader who simultaneously placates Putin and other dictators, degrades democracy and human rights in Turkey and harbors and supports terrorist regimes.
[2:33:45] On top of that, Erdogan has a long record of targeting Kurdish political and military groups.
[2:33:52] In the early days of this unauthorized war with Iran, reports indicated that Erdogan personally prevented Iranian Kurdish fighters from taking part in President Trump's proposed operation.
[2:34:05] Erdogan himself has publicly celebrated preventing that Kurdish operation.
[2:34:11] Do you also agree that President Erdogan is a very good ally, even though he harbors Hamas, supports terrorist regimes, and has actively gone against Trump and his unauthorized war?
[2:34:24] Well, you mentioned my time in Congress. I was co-chair of the Kurdish caucus that's primarily focused on the Iraqi Kurds.
[2:34:32] And so one of my statement that they have stood with us was the Peshmerga, and that has been going back to the early the early 90s.
[2:34:43] Obviously, Turkey led by Erdogan is a NATO ally. We just had the NATO summit there.
[2:34:49] In fact, years ago, Turkey shot down Russian fighters as they were penetrating their airspace from their incursion into Syria.
[2:34:58] It is sometimes a difficult relationship. We are taking action against Hamas charities, Hamas-funded charities that are funneling goods into Gaza that are based in Turkey.
[2:35:10] We are actively looking at working with the Turkish government on how to shut that funding source down.
[2:35:15] Thank you. Representative Salazar.
[2:35:19] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very much for putting this together.
[2:35:24] I cannot explain to you. I thank you very much for, I mean, I'm delighted to be in front of you.
[2:35:30] We don't have words. You know, I represent the city of Miami, and there are no words of gratitude that we can express on behalf of the constituents of millions of Cuban Americans who saw your testimony the other day at the United Nations.
[2:35:44] And we thank you very much because now more countries, more countries than ever, are voting with the United States against the Cuban regime.
[2:35:54] And not only that, but the fact that the Trump administration has been able to convince companies like Sherrod from Canada or Melia from Spain to leave and stop being an accomplice of making the Cuban labor force a bunch of slaves.
[2:36:11] So I, once again, thank you, thank you, thank you on behalf of the people that I represent, the Venezuelans, the Nicaraguans, people that just want to see freedom and feel the freedom that we have in the United States.
[2:36:24] So thank you, Mike, for being here with us now.
[2:36:27] Can you tell us what else is happening? What other countries are thinking about changing their votes and being with us? Thanks again.
[2:36:35] Well, thank you for that. And as you know, the Cuban regime has used the United Nations for far too long for its propaganda to see other countries repeating that propaganda about a blockade as though there is a U.S. Navy fleet around Cuba stopping things from coming and going to heck.
[2:36:56] We just listened to Representative Polkin here repeating that propaganda after his visit, where apparently he didn't visit the political prisoners.
[2:37:06] He didn't celebrate July 11th, where they rose up to try to throw off this yoke of oppression, nor did he see the Castro family private jet that apparently has enough fuel or the Castro family private island.
[2:37:19] Mr. Chairman, I know he's speaking for me, but I'm still here.
[2:37:22] You're not recognized.
[2:37:23] And I did. I have talked to folks. I just want to.
[2:37:26] Since he's speaking for me.
[2:37:27] I know you want to, but you're not recognized.
[2:37:29] No worries, Mr. Chairman.
[2:37:30] So I'll point up here instead of over to the place where you were sitting.
[2:37:34] The Cuban foreign minister was so upset about having his corruption called out.
[2:37:39] He broke his earpiece, banging it on the table.
[2:37:41] They're not used to people pushing back on their ongoing years of propaganda
[2:37:47] and using, you know, the, I guess, the logic of why do we still maintain pressure on this regime?
[2:37:53] I guess we should lift the pressure on North Korea as well and other countries around the world that want to, for that matter.
[2:38:00] But I will tell you on a positive note, if the Abraham Accords were the story of the first Trump administration,
[2:38:07] what is happening in the Western Hemisphere, I believe, is the story of the second Trump administration.
[2:38:13] Argentina had already come our way, but now to see Chile, Ecuador, Bolivia,
[2:38:19] the inauguration that we're about to have in Colombia on August 7th, Honduras, El Salvador,
[2:38:26] to be down in the Dominican Republic where they're talking about alternative space launch sites
[2:38:32] and the ongoing economic growth there.
[2:38:34] And, of course, we have a horrific situation in Haiti.
[2:38:37] I hope this new hybrid model will work to save the Haitian people from the devastation of the gangs.
[2:38:45] And I agree with you.
[2:38:46] But there is a positive trajectory that's going on.
[2:38:48] And, of course, I know you'll want to talk about Venezuela.
[2:38:50] And Nicaragua.
[2:38:51] And Nicaragua as well.
[2:38:53] Because of my time is running away and I would love to talk to you for the next 30 minutes.
[2:38:58] Daniel Ortega said yesterday that clearly and openly that he was not planning on conducting any more free and fair elections than Nicaragua.
[2:39:08] He said it openly that he is going to become another dictator.
[2:39:11] What can we do to the Nicaraguans?
[2:39:14] We also have hundreds of thousands of Nicaraguans in District 27 in Miami all over the United States that love the system.
[2:39:21] So what can we do so they can have a free country as well?
[2:39:24] Well, what they're no longer getting is free energy and oil from Russia.
[2:39:29] And, like Cuba, they're no longer getting the hundreds of thousands of barrels of free oil from Venezuela.
[2:39:37] That's the story of the blackouts in Cuba.
[2:39:39] And I think it's going to be the story of Nicaragua as well.
[2:39:41] They no longer have their sugar daddy, Maduro, who's now in jail, thank God, outside of the UN building right there in New York.
[2:39:49] What can we do to force Ortega to change his position and feel the pressure from the United States like Cuba and Nicaragua have felt?
[2:39:58] I know we're running out of time.
[2:40:00] Hopefully, I will come back to you and sit down with you in terms of the actions the Treasury Department, the Commerce Department,
[2:40:07] and the State Department will be taking and us here at the UN to take on yet another communist dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere.
[2:40:15] Good. Venezuela, finally, if I have two more minutes. Venezuela, we know that—
[2:40:19] You do not.
[2:40:22] 30 seconds.
[2:40:23] You can have about five seconds.
[2:40:25] Thank you. Venezuela, Secretary Rubio said that the transition was going to start early August sometime this year.
[2:40:32] What can you share with us about that? We want free and fair elections in Venezuela.
[2:40:37] We are providing life-saving aid, as you know, in response to the earthquake.
[2:40:41] We are clearing out the Cubans, Russians, Chinese, Iranians out of Iran.
[2:40:51] I mean, excuse me, out of Venezuela. They are working with us and taking on the gangs.
[2:40:55] And the Secretary has announced the beginning of the transition, which is moving the country in the right direction compared to where we were just a few months ago.
[2:41:02] This is an immense and positive trajectory.
[2:41:06] Thank you. And I will take you up on sitting down.
[2:41:08] Representative.
[2:41:09] Thank you again. Thank you. You go back.
[2:41:11] You are recognized.
[2:41:12] Thank you, Chair. Ambassador Watts, thank you for testifying today. Welcome back to the committee.
[2:41:16] Good to see you.
[2:41:17] Since the start of the Trump administration's war of choice in Iran, tragically, 18 American service members have been killed.
[2:41:24] Hundreds more have been wounded. Tens of billions of dollars have been spent.
[2:41:28] More is coming. The administration is asking for significantly more resources to fight this war of choice.
[2:41:33] Back in America, gas prices are on the rise again.
[2:41:36] The Iran war has cost the average American household an extra $1,000 out of their pocket just since the start of the conflict in February,
[2:41:44] as families are paying more and more for basics like groceries.
[2:41:49] Ambassador, in March, you went on CNN to tell the American people that the war in Iran was, quote,
[2:41:53] a dominant victory, the likes of which haven't been seen in modern military history.
[2:41:58] Just last month, you doubled down on your claims that Iran's military was, quote, devastated, unquote,
[2:42:03] and its nuclear program was, quote, destroyed, unquote, in an interview on June 21st on Face the Nation.
[2:42:10] I believe the American people see it very differently.
[2:42:14] Trump's military venture has accomplished little.
[2:42:17] Iran still possesses missiles and drones necessary to hit American bases a thousand miles away.
[2:42:23] He testified earlier today that when the president said he had, quote, obliterated, unquote,
[2:42:29] Iran's nuclear program, he was talking about enrichment capability.
[2:42:33] But intelligence shows that that activity continues unabated at the Pickaxe Mountain and underground complex
[2:42:40] with enough room to accommodate several nuclear-related facilities.
[2:42:44] Experts have said that fully eliminating Iran's nuclear program would require, quote,
[2:42:49] much more forceful intervention, unquote, including U.S. troops on the ground,
[2:42:53] something, of course, nobody in America would accept.
[2:42:58] Ambassador Watts, I think a similar question may have asked earlier in the hearing,
[2:43:01] but I would like to ask it directly with you.
[2:43:03] Do you stand by those previous statements that the United States has achieved, quote,
[2:43:07] dominant victory, unquote, in this war?
[2:43:09] The context of those statements were from a military standpoint, which was the question asked of me,
[2:43:14] and with its Navy destroyed, Air Force destroyed, air defenses destroyed,
[2:43:18] with dominant air superiority over Iran and its leadership seriously degraded,
[2:43:24] and its industrial base seriously degraded, then, yes, I stand by that statement.
[2:43:29] And from a broader standpoint, I stand by the statement that I made again today.
[2:43:32] Iran has never been in a weakest point since it started attacking the United States since 1979.
[2:43:37] Between Lebanon, Syria, the Houthis, Iraq, its proxies and Hamas, for that matter, are seriously degraded.
[2:43:46] Its currency is tanking. Its foreign reserves have never been lowered.
[2:43:50] No one is buying its oil.
[2:43:52] China has cut its oil purchases in half, according to Secretary Besant.
[2:43:56] So we are negotiating from a position of strength, and the president continues to try diplomacy.
[2:44:02] Iran has made it clear that it's not interested in serious diplomacy as it attacks civilian shipping in the middle of negotiations.
[2:44:10] Ambassador, I might suggest that that rosy outlook is not agreed with by the vast, vast majority of our fellow Americans.
[2:44:20] I would suggest that is a significant minority opinion in the United States of America.
[2:44:24] It's very clear that the United States has not achieved the, quote, dominant victory in this war.
[2:44:28] The American people unquestionably are worse off, burning through taxpayer resources.
[2:44:32] Middle East is in turmoil right now.
[2:44:35] Our ally Kuwait is now rationing electricity after Iran hit its power grid.
[2:44:39] American allied troops are exposed to Iranian missiles and drones, tragically like we just saw in Jordan a few days ago.
[2:44:46] Let me turn to Taiwan.
[2:44:48] Ambassador Watts, I admire the position that you took on Taiwan while you were here in Congress.
[2:44:53] With us, you've been a major proponent of our relationship with Taiwan.
[2:44:57] From working to modernize U.S. military foreign sales process while you were in Congress,
[2:45:02] to working to advance Taiwan's standing at the UN.
[2:45:05] However, following his trip to Beijing in May, President Trump disclosed that he and Xi had, quote,
[2:45:11] talked the whole night, unquote, about Taiwan during their meeting in Beijing and was pausing a major arms package for Taipei, calling it, quote, a very good negotiating chip, unquote.
[2:45:23] Ambassador, you insisted in an interview with Fox News immediately following the President's trip that U.S. policy on Taiwan is, quote, going to be status quo going forward.
[2:45:32] You can't possibly be suggesting that using arms sales to Taiwan as a bargaining chip with China is the status quo, are you?
[2:45:40] What I referred to is, as the President said, there's no change in policy.
[2:45:46] Strategic ambiguity remains.
[2:45:48] And it is worth noting, to be clear, that President Trump this term has authorized more arms sales to Taiwan than the entire Biden administration just last year.
[2:46:00] And you and I know there's strong bipartisan support for that, authorizing it and getting those weapons in the hands of the Taiwan so that they can defend themselves.
[2:46:09] But you and I both know there's a multibillion dollar backlog from industry to actually get those arms off the production line.
[2:46:15] And President Trump is working, as is Secretary Hegseth, to reindustrialize and pull those supply chains back home, reindustrialize America and expand our defense industrial base.
[2:46:26] Thank you very much, Ambassador Watts.
[2:46:27] I have further questions, but I think I'm out of time, so I will yield back and submit those in writing.
[2:46:31] Thank you.
[2:46:32] Representative Lawler.
[2:46:33] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ambassador.
[2:46:37] Good to see you.
[2:46:38] I'm sure you saw what Zoran Mamdani was up to this week.
[2:46:43] Instead of working to lower costs for New Yorkers, Zoran spent the week trying to figure out how to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
[2:46:51] And after days of using his taxpayer-funded lawyers to examine this nonsense, he released a scripted video filled with propaganda,
[2:47:02] sharing what we knew from the start, which is that he doesn't have the legal authority to arrest a democratically elected Prime Minister.
[2:47:11] Ambassador, can you confirm for all of us that Mr. Mamdani does not have the authority to arrest Prime Minister Netanyahu?
[2:47:21] Yes, I can, Congressman, and it is, you know, as probably one of the only Floridians actually moving the other direction into New York now.
[2:47:30] Well, I'll just leave, I'll leave that commentary aside.
[2:47:35] To answer your question directly, the United States is not a party to the Rome Statue, which underpins the International Criminal Court,
[2:47:43] which is a corrupt organization who had just had to fire its head prosecutor for sexual abuse and assault after he chased or is chasing after the Prime Minister Netanyahu with prosecution.
[2:47:58] Number one, we're not a party. We don't have authority to the ICC. There is head of state immunity.
[2:48:04] And under the UN headquarters agreement, heads of state are allowed to come and go to the UN General Assembly.
[2:48:10] But the bigger picture is, why isn't he so adamant about the thugs that come in and out from Iran or from North Korea or from others as he is about Prime Minister Netanyahu?
[2:48:23] Not only that, he was opposed to the arrest and capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, who was twice indicted by our own court system.
[2:48:39] The Southern District of New York twice indicted him and Zoran called for his release.
[2:48:45] Meanwhile, he wants to arrest a duly elected prime minister of an ally based on the International Criminal Court of which we are not party to.
[2:48:58] It's truly remarkable.
[2:49:00] It's also remarkable that one of his key cabinet officials is reaching out to, quote unquote, like minded governments and trying to meet with the Iran regime in the midst of an ongoing conflict.
[2:49:11] I'd expect nothing less from an anti-Semite. This is the fundamental problem.
[2:49:17] Look, you understand full well the challenges that you deal with every day at the United Nations.
[2:49:26] But sadly, we have a mayor of New York City who believes it's his responsibility to uphold international law.
[2:49:40] But meanwhile, this is the same person who wants to release dangerous criminals back out onto the streets in New York City,
[2:49:47] who refuses to cooperate with ICE to turn over violent criminals for deportation to federal authorities,
[2:49:55] who believes in sanctuary jurisdictions because, well, we don't want to hold people accountable for breaking our laws here in the United States.
[2:50:04] But somehow we're going to enforce the laws of the ICC that we are not party to, a corrupt anti-Semitic, anti-American, anti-Israeli entity, all because of politics.
[2:50:18] Which, by the way, and I'll defer Ambassador Bartosz, which, by the way, has ongoing investigations against American soldiers from Afghanistan.
[2:50:26] Yeah, Congressman, thank you for your leadership on so many issues, including UNRWA.
[2:50:30] On the eve of Tishbav, the saddest day in the Jewish calendar, which will start at sunset tonight and go for 25 hours and fasting and everything else,
[2:50:39] it's fundamentally offensive that the mayor is spending any of his time on this issue.
[2:50:45] And the ambassador is absolutely right. Ambassador Waltz is absolutely right.
[2:50:50] The ICC has been weaponized by globalists to seek with one mission, and that is to take down Western democracies like the United States
[2:50:59] and to try to imprison our leaders and our soldiers. And it's the Trump administration.
[2:51:05] It's worth noting that the Clinton administration and every administration since did not join the Rome Statute.
[2:51:12] But it's only the Trump administration, with the leadership of the president and Secretary Rubio, with his tour de force remarks last week,
[2:51:19] that pointed out this and said we're going to dismantle this corrupt court, if necessary, brick by brick.
[2:51:25] Well, speaking of dismantling, we also need to dismantle UNRWA.
[2:51:29] And I have legislation with Josh Gottheimer to do that. And I would encourage the administration to support it and to push Congress to pass it.
[2:51:38] We've read it and it's terrific. And thank you for putting that forward.
[2:51:41] And look forward to working with you and your team on these important issues.
[2:51:44] Thank you. Last and least, I'm going to take my own five minutes to ask questions.
[2:51:49] I want to talk about the sexual exploitation that's alleged within the United Nations.
[2:51:54] Can you just begin by giving me an overlay of what you know about it?
[2:51:59] What silos has this been identified in? I've heard most prevalently, of course, UN peacekeepers.
[2:52:04] But can you identify other silos that this has been an allegation?
[2:52:08] Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. It's every one of us in our confirmation hearings were asked about this issue.
[2:52:19] Democrat, Republican, didn't matter from which side of the aisle, everybody's concerned about this issue.
[2:52:23] And it's something we talk about whenever we meet with senior officials within the United Nations.
[2:52:28] And so we are aware, we look at, I'm going to, I have it right here, the trends, the trend lines and then broken down by whether it's industry or whether it's peacekeepers or whether it's civilians.
[2:52:40] Regurgitate it to me.
[2:52:41] Yeah, sure. Yes, sir.
[2:52:43] In 2025, a total of 520 allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse were recorded across the United Nations system.
[2:52:51] It's important to note these are allegations.
[2:52:53] There are, we believe there are many more that are not reported or not alleged for all sorts of reasons.
[2:52:57] Fear from coming forward, the fact that family can't feed itself if someone is using food as a weapon to exploit.
[2:53:07] Any charges? Is there even an entity within the UN to charge because it's all these different countries?
[2:53:14] You got to the heart of the issue. Nations will protect their own. Too many nations will protect their own.
[2:53:22] And the process of the OIOS investigation and others working within the UN system to refer those to host countries, I'm sorry, to host countries, to countries, you know, their nationals have been accused.
[2:53:33] And then the process of that is abysmal.
[2:53:35] Are you aware of any situation where it's gone beyond an allegation to somebody has been criminally prosecuted somewhere for this?
[2:53:42] I'm not aware of any. If memory serves, it's less than five that I'm aware of. And I've asked these questions.
[2:53:48] You're saying in UN history, to your knowledge, it's less than five?
[2:53:52] Going back in like the most recent past.
[2:53:54] Okay. To some history. You're not saying it's a last year's stat.
[2:53:57] I'm not like, no. And they don't have statistics here about going from investigation to charging to trial and then conviction.
[2:54:04] One of the numbers that I read, I can't exactly attest to its authenticity, it said over 100 sexual abuse allegations, 65 births that were given.
[2:54:16] This was a stat for last year. Are you familiar with that stat at all?
[2:54:20] I'm familiar that it's the fact that innocent people are exploited like this and then fathers don't just run away or go away and are not responsible.
[2:54:38] It's a stain on the organization.
[2:54:40] Your knowledge, has the UN done any paternity tests with those allegations that resulted in births of children?
[2:54:48] I'm aware that there's a unit that solely exists to look at paternity and trying to make the father responsible for the child.
[2:54:58] But to my knowledge, they're responsible for their criminal activity, their rape, their sexual abuse.
[2:55:04] Yes, sir. Your point is well taken.
[2:55:06] Do you know the name of that entity within the UN?
[2:55:08] It's an acronym and I will get back to your team with that.
[2:55:11] Please get back to me with that. The ICC, ICJ has no jurisdiction over this.
[2:55:15] They have not been a part of bringing anything against something like this.
[2:55:18] No.
[2:55:19] To your knowledge.
[2:55:20] Do you know, has the United Nations paid out any settlements to your knowledge?
[2:55:24] Not to my knowledge.
[2:55:25] For sexual abuse.
[2:55:26] Do they have a fund to pay out settlements for sexual abuse?
[2:55:28] Not to my knowledge.
[2:55:29] Is there anything that I've asked, not asked, about the sexual abuse allegations that have gone on within the United Nations,
[2:55:35] that again, many have heard about for years, that you think I probably should have asked this,
[2:55:39] because this would be information that we should know or anybody would want to know?
[2:55:43] Yeah, one, sir, Mr. Chairman.
[2:55:46] Why did it take so long for administrations to be shining a light on this or to shine a light on this issue and to hold the UN accountable?
[2:55:56] It's, I mean, sitting in Central African country in February with a force commander who said to me, quote,
[2:56:04] thank you for withholding payment.
[2:56:06] Now, we don't get told that very often.
[2:56:08] Thank you for withholding payment because it allowed me to repatriate poorly performing, as I said in my opening, poorly performing,
[2:56:14] which means abusive troops in many cases.
[2:56:16] It allowed me to repatriate those troops, send them back.
[2:56:19] Send them back.
[2:56:20] I had the political cover to do it.
[2:56:22] We don't often have the cover.
[2:56:23] In fact, what he said is we never have the cover to send them back.
[2:56:26] In the remaining time, what could you see as a proposition as our representatives there within the United Nations to actually create consequences and penalties
[2:56:37] so that this is an issue that is addressed so that individuals would be imprisoned or castrated or, you know, whatever would be the appropriate?
[2:56:46] Yes, sir.
[2:56:47] The common sense solution, Ambassador Walts, I know you may want to have something.
[2:56:50] The common sense solution would be simply you lose your ability to be a troop-contributing country if you're not going to adequately, not forget adequately,
[2:56:58] you're not going to make it the highest priority to try and hold accountable those who commit exploitation and abuse of innocent people living in these very war-torn and tough areas.
[2:57:10] Thank you for your testimony.
[2:57:11] We'll go to closing statements.
[2:57:12] Do you have any closing statements you wish to ask?
[2:57:15] I do not, Chairman.
[2:57:16] Thank you.
[2:57:18] For my closing statement, I'd simply offer you my five minutes of closing time to say,
[2:57:21] is there anything that you'd like to say, respond to from your time here today?
[2:57:28] Well, we've just heard, I think, a lot of rhetoric about whether President Trump is a president of peace
[2:57:35] and that whether we work or don't work well with our allies.
[2:57:39] I could tell you when we talked to Azerbaijan and Armenia, they believe he's a president of peace
[2:57:44] as they have the free flow of goods for the first time in 30 years.
[2:57:47] It is imperfect, the border situation in Thailand and Cambodia.
[2:57:51] It's imperfect, but moving forward between Pakistan and India, DRC Congo,
[2:57:56] the president is putting political frameworks, peace deals in place.
[2:58:01] The UN should be doing a lot of that.
[2:58:03] The next secretary general should be leading those efforts.
[2:58:07] We are trying hybrid models in terms of Board of Peace or the gang suppression force
[2:58:12] to overcome a lot of the shortcomings of the UN to try to bring stability in efforts around the world.
[2:58:19] But I find it laughable when critics talk about President Trump as not engaged around the world.
[2:58:27] He is truly trying to solve some of these problems, even forgotten conflicts like the Polisario in Western Sahara.
[2:58:34] He has charged us to go out and find a solution.
[2:58:38] It's not easy. The UN is a part of that.
[2:58:41] And our charge isn't to walk away, but is to clean this organization up so that it can then take care of some of these issues in a much more meaningful and effective way.
[2:58:53] And I guess I would just conclude, Mr. Chairman, with thank you for holding this.
[2:58:57] We are taking a hard look and we welcome the committee's oversight and expertise on outputs.
[2:59:03] You know, all too often government and particularly multinational organizations focus on dollars going in and people going in.
[2:59:10] We're looking at effectiveness going out, whether that's in the humanitarian space, the development space or the peacekeeping space,
[2:59:17] because ultimately we owe that to our constituents that are paying 25 percent of this bill.
[2:59:24] I do think this is an organization that can be effective. That's where the president is.
[2:59:29] His charge to us, help make it great again, help it realize its potential.
[2:59:34] And it's an honor to have this team working in that regard.
[2:59:38] And every time we pull up in a chair behind a placard that says United States of America on the world stage,
[2:59:45] every time as a former soldier we are using words and not bullets,
[2:59:49] and every time we actually conclude a deal, not always easy and not always easy to implement,
[2:59:55] that we conclude a peace agreement or a step in that direction representing the United States of America.
[3:00:00] It's an honor.
[3:00:01] I would thank you both for your testimony.
[3:00:03] I would thank you for your service at the United Nations. Tough service there.
[3:00:06] And I would let you both know that we've also sent requests for leadership within the United Nations to come before Congress and testify as well.
[3:00:14] We'd love to have them answer some of these same questions like the ones I just posed to you.
[3:00:18] Members of the committee may have some additional questions for you as witnesses.
[3:00:23] We'll ask that you respond to those in writing and pursuant to committee rules.
[3:00:27] All members may have five legislative days to submit statements, extraneous materials, questions for the record, subject to length limitations.
[3:00:35] And without objection, this committee stands adjourned.
[3:00:37] The committee stands adjourned.