Spread Freedom, Not Woke Values: An American Agenda for Democracy and Human Rights

House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Civilian Security and Trade

2025-05-08

Loading video...

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

This meeting discusses the reauthorization of Department of State programs related to democracy and human rights, featuring a panel of distinguished former government officials and policy experts[ 00:01:04-00:01:58 ] . The discussion highlights concerns about the effectiveness and oversight of current programs, the impact of recent budget cuts, and the strategic importance of promoting democracy and human rights globally[ 00:18:18 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
.

Themes

Effectiveness and Oversight of Democracy Programs

The effectiveness of current democracy promotion efforts and the return on investment of taxpayer money are significant concerns. Mr. Destro points to past failures, such as outcomes in Libya and Cuba, questioning the success of previous initiatives. He suggests that funding is not always effectively utilized, citing an example where a government-funded NGO undermined local constitutional reform efforts in Belize. A major issue raised is the lack of comprehensive oversight regarding how human rights funding is allocated and spent across various government agencies. Conversely, Dr. Kirk argues that cost-effective democracy programs strengthen American security and prosperity by fostering democratic societies that resist authoritarian influence and promote transparent markets. He cites historical successes in former Soviet bloc nations and ongoing efforts to counter Chinese influence in places like Taiwan and Sri Lanka. Mr. Malinowski disputes the notion of a lack of oversight, affirming that as Assistant Secretary, he personally reviewed and approved every grant, and DRL has dedicated staff for grant management.

Current Administration's Cuts and Reorganization

There is widespread concern regarding the current administration's actions to cut and reorganize democracy and human rights programs. Mr. Malinowski states that the administration is "eliminating the basics" by terminating grants for democracy and civil society, blacklisting key organizations like Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and reducing annual human rights reporting. Dr. Kirk confirms that nearly all of the International Republican Institute's (IRI) active awards from the State Department and USAID have been terminated without specific rationale or allegations of waste, fraud, or abuse. Both Mr. Destro and Mr. Malinowski express strong disapproval of proposals to move DRL functions to regional bureaus, arguing that this would dilute the prioritization of human rights, as regional bureaus typically prioritize bilateral relationships over contentious human rights issues[ 01:11:43-01:12:05 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. The speakers emphasize that these budget cuts and reorganizations pose an existential threat to US democracy promotion efforts, potentially leaving only military tools for foreign policy.

The "Woke" Debate and Foreign Policy Alignment

The term "woke" and its application to democracy programs are debated[ 00:49:15-00:49:22 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Mr. Destro dismisses the idea of "freedom versus woke," noting that individuals who self-identify as "woke" are equally committed to freedom. Representative Jacobs and Titus question the definition of "woke" in this context, arguing that promoting freedom of the press, women in office, and anti-corruption are fundamental democratic values, not "woke" priorities[ 00:48:58-00:49:22 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Dr. Kirk clarifies that while "woke" terms might have appeared in work plans due to previous administration priorities, IRI's actual programming was not "woke". The underlying sentiment is that the "woke" label may be used to inappropriately discredit valuable democracy and human rights initiatives.

Strategic Importance of Democracy and Human Rights

There is broad agreement that supporting freedom and human rights is a crucial component of American foreign policy and national security[ 00:18:18-00:18:32 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Mr. Malinowski emphasizes that this commitment is a bipartisan American tradition and a "comparative advantage" over adversaries like China, inspiring people globally. Dr. Kirk highlights that strong democracies abroad reduce conflict, mitigate migration pressures, and promote transparent markets, all benefiting American interests. Speakers warn that diminishing these tools would cede ground to adversaries who exploit democratic weaknesses and undermine US interests. Representative Jackson underscores the urgency, stating that at a time of global instability, it is unwise to diminish tools designed to address these challenges[ 00:43:18-00:43:37 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
.

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting is primarily concerned and urgent, reflecting deep worry about the direction of US human rights policy and the future of democracy programs[ 01:17:43-01:17:58 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. There is a bipartisan consensus among the panelists, particularly former DRL officials, that the current administration's cuts are detrimental, despite some differences in opinion on past program effectiveness[ 00:18:18-00:18:32 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Speakers are passionate and assertive, with Mr. Malinowski, Representative Jacobs, and Representative Titus expressing strong emotions regarding the perceived dismantling of crucial functions. While Mr. Destro advocates for process improvement and greater efficiency, Mr. Malinowski emphasizes that these discussions are "academic" if the core programs are eliminated, highlighting an underlying tension between advocating for nuance and addressing an existential threat[ 01:17:43-01:17:58 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
.

Participants

Transcript

for the record, and we are pleased to have a distinguished panel of witnesses before us today on this important topic, starting with the honorable Robert Destro, the former Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor at the Department of State.  Welcome, sir.  Wonderful to hear your statements.  Patrick Kirk, vice president of Strategy, Innovation and Impact of the International Republican Institute.  And finally, the honorable   Tom Malinowski, former member of Congress.  I remember serving with you the first term.   and former Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor at the Department of State.  Now, this committee recognizes the importance of the issue before us, and it's grateful to have you here to speak with us today.  Your full statements will be made part of the record, and I'll ask you to keep it to five minutes in order to allow time for other member questions.  And I recognize Mr. Destro for his opening statement.  Welcome once again, sir.
Thank you, Madam Chairman, and Ranking Member Castro, thank you for your comments.  And I'm going to try and keep it brief, but one of the things I think we should see here, and I'm really happy that you have Tom Malinowski and Patrick Quirk here, because this is what you're looking at, I think, is a great working group.   That what we need to do, it's not a question of whether we're committed to human rights.  We wouldn't be here unless we were.  What we're concerned about here is we have now, we have, I think, a once in a several generation opportunity to look at the organization of state,   Secretary Rubio has given you the proposed reorganization.  Lots of questions about that in my mind, too.  And I particularly have the same concerns as you do, Mr. Castro, about giving it all to the regionals.  I'm not so sure about that.  But what we need to be looking at is we have an opportunity here for Congress and the president to be working together to optimize it.   because the country is not made of money.  We can't afford to, we should be spending on human rights.  I completely agree with that.  But whatever the disagreements we might have,   we need to be focusing on the outcomes of our programs.  And that's something we just don't do.  So what I would begin with basically is inviting my colleagues here and offering our services to the staff, if I can, to say, let's sit down around a table and start talking about some of the hard questions.  And so one of the hardest questions is that   I think we often need to put our areas of disagreement out on the table.  The first one is even in the title of the hearing.  It's not freedom versus woke.
My friends who would proudly describe themselves as woke see themselves as just as committed to freedom as I do.   In fact, my son coached at a university that had its woke rating right on its website.  So I see the issues we have as one of process.  If our goal is to spread freedom and foster inclusiveness, sovereignty and interdependence, because that's really what we're talking about, is the interdependence of our people and the people of these who live under repressive regimes or who live in pretty good places.   we must look at how the State Department actually operates.  Now, spreading freedom is a laudable goal, you know, but the hard question is how successful has the State Department actually been?  What are the outcomes?  You might want to start with asking the people of Libya, where our regime change operations and democracy building has left them with slave markets.   You could ask the people of Guatemala or Venezuela or Cuba, how many years have we been working on Cuba and we don't seem to be making much progress?  There's a lot of money been spent on that.  What's our return on investment?  I would argue not very much.  So whatever we're doing, it's not working.  So I've seen with my own eyes that   you know, how other organizations, it's not just state, it's not just USAID, it's all of it, including the Millennium Challenge Corporation.  You know, I just got a text this morning from a friend in Belize, and I've been working with the Belizeans now for several years in a really, they're really innovative, wonderful People's Constitutional Commission reform process.  Our embassy has not been around.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up