February 5, 2010
On
February 3, 2010, President Obama’s nominee for the new US Ambassador to Nepal
Scott Delisi was introduced and questioned by the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee.
Mr. Delisi has been
with the Senior Foreign Service for 28 years. He has served as Ambassador to the State of Eritrea and as
Deputy Chief of Mission of the American Embassy in Gaborone, Botswana. Most
recently, Mr. DeLisi has been the Director of Career Development and
Assignments in the State Department’s Bureau of Human Resources, where he has
played a key role in the staffing of embassies. This has included missions in
Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.
Previously, as the
Director for Entry Level Programs, Mr. DeLisi was responsible for the training,
placement and career development of 600 new entrants and over 2500 existing
Foreign Service Officers. Mr. DeLisi has also served as Director for Southern
African Affairs, Vice Counsel for the Embassy in India, the Chief of Political
Section in Sri Lanka, in addition to other postings in Madagascar and Pakistan.
A native of Minnesota, Mr. DeLisi holds both a B.A. and J.D. from the
University of Minnesota.
The following are
excerpts from the hearing, chaired by Senator Jim Webb, Chairman of the
Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs.
In Senator Webb’s
opening statement, he acknowleged that Asia was of vital importance to the
United States:
Equally important is
while countries in this region differ politically, economically and culturally,
they also pose varied security and engagement challenges to the United States.
…Nepal's political
transition has been nascent. Peace only came to this South Asian nation in
2006, following a long insurgency led by Nepal's Maoist communist party.
Following the
establishment of the Republic in 2008, the Maoists won more votes than any
other party cast in the constituent assembly elections. However, they soon
pulled out over political disagreements, and a coalition government has been
formed.
As this suggests,
Nepal faces considerable task in consolidating its newly formed parliamentary
system. A benchmark in this process will be the completion of its constitution
-- expected later this year.
Given these hurdles,
as well as its valuable location as a bridge between East and South Asia, the
United States has a compelling interest to engage Nepal as a geostrategic
partner and to unwaveringly support its transition to a stable, free democracy.
…our diplomacy and
policy toward these countries must be consistent, predictable and firm…
…our message should be
put forward in an unmitigated position toward advancing democratic freedoms and
supporting internationally recognized individual rights.
In his opening
statement, Mr. Delisi concurred with Senator Webb assessment:
Nepal and the United
States have a long-standing relationship, and our friendship is more important
today than ever as Nepal confronts multiple challenges. There are urgent needs
in the areas of economic growth, health, climate change and food security, in
particular. I also hope to build stronger trade and investment ties between our
nations.
Progress in these
areas, however, will require a stable partner in the government of Nepal, and
that stability will come only with the successful completion of Nepal's peace
process. The U.S. is funding critical aspects of the process, and we will
continue to work closely with Nepal's political leaders as they seek to
establish a system of governance that represents all of Nepal's citizens and
respects their fundamental rights.
Helping to
successfully conclude the peace process and draft a new constitution are the
most critical areas in which we can offer our support to the government of
Nepal in the short term. If confirmed, I will encourage Nepal's political
parties to exercise strong leadership and judicious flexibility to reach
consensus on key elements of the peace process, and I will match their efforts
with my own in offering the support of the United States as Nepal seeks to make
the hope of a durable peace a reality.
I will also work
vigorously with Nepal's political leaders to end the prevailing culture of
impunity regarding human rights abuses. As documented extensively by Nepali and
international human rights organizations, the Maoists, the Nepal army and the
Nepal police committed serious human rights abuses during the decade-long
insurgency. If confirmed, I will press all of them to cooperate in a thorough
and transparent investigation of human rights cases and will urge them to hold
accountable those who committed abuses so that the nation can move forward on
the path of reconciliation.
Finally, I hope we
will continue our robust development assistance program, which contributes
significantly to building a peaceful and stable Nepal. We were the first
country to sign a technical cooperative agreement with Nepal in 1951, and that
cooperation continues today. The United States plays a critical role in
supporting the government of Nepal's efforts to increase access to vital health
care for its citizens, and we have contributed to the government's marked
successes in reducing maternal and child mortality and in stemming the spread
of HIV/AIDS.
After Mr Delisi’s
opening statement, Senator Webb voiced his concern about the Maoists continued
inclusion in the United States terrorist exclusion list and asked Mr. Delisi to
comment on this ongoing political hurdle.
Mr. DeLisi’s response:
The decision to place
the Maoists on the list of specially designated -- specifically designated
terrorist organizations stemmed from their activities during the insurgency,
much of which -- many of their actions were quite horrific. And in particular
our concerns were magnified when we saw them bomb the American Center in
Kathmandu, and also there were the deaths of two of our employees, two of our
local guards, who were killed by the Maoists. And I think that the decision to
place them on the list at that time made absolutely good sense.
The political
landscape has changed since then in Nepal, and the Maoists' conduct has changed
as well. Whether their beliefs and attitudes have changed or not remains to be
seen.
What we have seen that
is good is that they have signed the comprehensive peace agreement. They've
participated in the electoral process. As the peace process is moving forward,
right now they are actively involved in the constitutional drafting process,
which is well on its way. They're participating in the high-level political
mechanism to resolve the outstanding issues, which we welcome. They've assisted
-- they've begun the process of discharging some of the disqualified fighters
from the cantonments, and that process should complete by the end of February.
And that's also good.
We also welcome that
recently they agreed to allow parliament to resume functioning. Much of that
had been forestalled by strikes. They've postponed or they canceled the general
strike they have called for. All of these things are good, and we welcome it.
And we're talking to them.
But nonetheless, some
of these fundamental things that we have asked of them to remove them from the
list have yet to be addressed. One of them is for them to fundamentally
renounce the use of violence and terror as a political instrument. It seems a
simple step, but they have yet to do that.
We're also concerned
because the Young Communist League, their youth wing, continues to engage in
acts of violence and criminal activities in support of their agenda. And that
is something else that has to stop, and they have to renounce that.
Again, we've asked
them to engage in the peace process. They're doing so; we hope that will
continue. But they, like the other actors in Nepal, also need to be involved in
the human rights process.
So we've got a mixed
bag with the Maoists. Yes, we have to engage them; we have to talk to them both
as a key political actor and as part of the peace process. We hope that they
will take some of the steps that will allow us to look at removing them from
the terrorist exclusion list.
Finally, Senator Webb
asked the future ambassador to voice his views on Nepal’s effect on the
relationship between its neighbors China and India and what the United States
position should be
Mr. DeLisi’s response:
It's an interesting
question. It is an interesting location, Senator. The Nepalese, generally they
talk of themselves as a yam between two bounders. And it's a delicate balancing
act for them. There's no question about it.
I think that
traditionally in many ways they have looked south where the border is more open
and their engagement, their trade relationship and other relationships with
India have always been fairly robust, but certainly the Chinese have played a
role there as well.
I think for us in our
engagement in Nepal we certainly want to work closely with the government, but
in doing that I think we have to recognize that we also have to talk to the
other regional actors and that Nepal has the ability to play a role within the
region. They're the headquarters for the SAARC Secretariat as well.
And I think we want to
continue to see a stable Nepal that rests comfortably between its two large
neighbors, and we can use that as a platform to engage, as I say, both China
and India on some of the issues of regional concern. With India there are many
cross-border issues that we'd like to be able to talk to them and look at some
of these issues regionally. Certainly when we look at China there's the issue
of the Tibetan refugees, and there are those refugees who are in Nepal and
there's an engagement there as well.
So they'll keep us
busy on both sides of the border, I think.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
