We appreciate the opportunity to testify on efforts we have undertaken to accomplish the important goals set for all of us by the Presidential Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism, and to discuss how these relate to the work of your

two committees.

103.

The Commission did an admirable job in dealing with a very complicated subject following the terrible bombing of Pan Am We appreciate the desire on your part to build on the work of the Commission We all want to channel the nation's grief for the victims of Pan Am 103 into specific measures to do everything possible to prevent future such attacks on civilian airlines. We share your goals of helping make civil aviation safer from attacks by ruthless terrorists who are willing to kill hundreds of innocent people, hijack planes, or attack airports.

For the State Department I can assure you that, together with the rest of the Administration, we look very favorably on the recommendations of the Commission, and we have been reviewing them for follow-up steps. This has been an intensive process. In addition, many of the goals cited in H.R. 5200, especially the statement of findings, already are being pursued. For example, we already have been working with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to improve aviation security standards. We also are working directly with other governments to enhance aviation security and to seek full implementation of existing laws. We also continue to urge ratification of Montreal Protocol 3 on the liability of airlines. Additional expressions of Congressional support are welcome in this process.

You have heard in the testimony from the Federal Aviation Administration, on behalf of the Department of Transportation and the Administration, their clear preference is that action on this proposed legislation be deferred.

What I would like to do at this time is describe for you some of the actions taken by the State Department to deal with the problems your bill addresses, and to assure both committees that the State Department looks forward to working with you, in cooperation with DOT and FAA, on these matters in the future. Our goal will be to ensure that we work effectively and cooperatively to implement the shared goals identified by the Presidential Commission. Let me also make plain that we stand ready to cooperate with you in your oversight capacity, to provide information, and to discuss any concerns you may have at any time.

35-129 - 90 - 3

-2

AREAS OF MAJOR IMPROVEMENT

Let me mention some work we have already been doing:

The Department has been active in working with foreign governments to improve aviation security. We work with FAA to assure that U.S. passengers on all foreign flights are afforded proper protection, as determined by the FAA. Since 1985 we have initiated negotiations for security agreements with 89 countries. Agreement has been reached with 55 countries: 32 agreements are in force, with the remaining 23 in various stages of ratification. Of the 26 countries whose airports have been designated by FAA as high risk, we have security agreements in force or agreed with 17. The Department is renewing efforts to bring the remaining 23 agreements into force. We are also reviewing the negotiations where agreements have not yet been reached and will renew efforts to conclude agreements.

The Department will urge foreign governments to allow U.S. carriers to implement new security requirements. We will continue to take an active role in assisting U.S. carriers who encounter difficulties. We have also made major strides in enhancing our ability to assist families of victims of terrorism.

I am pleased to say that we are well along on implementation of most of the Commission's recommendations in this important field.

We have instituted a case worker system to help families of victims from the early stages of a disaster through all the difficult arrangements which must be made. We will assure that families visiting disaster sites will have an "ombudsman," in the Commission's terms, to help them. In a major disaster, we will send a high-ranking State officer to the scene to assure that all that can be done is being done. We are also setting up the procedures to institutionalize the idea of sending teams to disasters and to assure that these teams are well trained and equipped.

In Washington we have made major improvements in our task force areas and have developed new computer systems for case tracking. We have installed toll free "800" lines to give families easy access to our case officers. We have re-written our task force manual and are now at work re-writing our regulations to the field. We have strengthened our already existing training courses at FSI and have developed a new course for task force members. We are doing all this in close cooperation with specialists in the field of bereavement. We hope not only to improve training for our consular officers but also of officers in positions of authority at embassies abroad.

-3

Let me assure you as well that the Department believes strongly that American victims of terrorism must be given recognition. Secretary Baker has sent letters of condolence to victims of terrorism and the Department has sent

representatives to funerals after recent terrorist incidents. We are working to develop government-wide procedures for a U.S. role in memorial services and other ceremonies.

RELATED ANTI-TERRORISM EFFORTS

Mr. Chairman, I would also like to make some brief comments about some of the other ways in which we are seeking to strengthen our anti-terrorism effort. They include our Anti-Terrorism Assistance (ATA) program and the National Counterterrorism Research and Development program which is funded in our budget. We have been grateful for support from the Congress and the Presidential Commission.

Anti-Terrorism Assistance. An important element in strengthening international aviation security is providing better training to foreign airport security officials. Under existing law, however, the ATA training has to be conducted within the United States. In some cases it would be much more effective and cost-efficient to train security officials at the airports or harbors abroad where they will actually work rather than at facilities in the U.S. which have very different working and security conditions. An amendment accomplishing this was passed by the House of Representatives in 1989. The amendment could and should be revived.

Research & Development. The Presidential Commission report recognized the need for research and development needed to counter the increasingly sophisticated equipment and tactics used by terrorists. In this regard there is in place now a small but important related interagency R&D program coordinated by the State Department which funds projects not only to help protect airliners travelers.

but also to protect airports and

This National Counterterrorism Research and Development Program fills gaps identified by an inter-agency group of experts in U.S. research efforts. We appreciate that the House Foreign Affairs Committee approved the full authorization for the State Department R&D request for FY 1991, and we hope members can be supportive when the conference committee report on the Commerce, Justice and State Appropriations Bill reaches the floor. A small investment in R&D can potentially pay enormous dividends in protecting lives and aircraft.

-4

Public Service Messages. There is another

terrorism-related publicity effort partially funded out of the State Department's budget. As part of an ongoing effort to assist American citizens traveling or living overseas, the State Department has enlisted the aid of the Advertising Council to produce a public service media campaign with the theme "Americans Abroad Know Before You Go." The Advertising Council is sharing in the costs of the program. The nationwide campaign, which offers a comprehensive brochure for Americans going abroad, is underway.

CONCLUSION

it

Finally Mr. Chairman, I would like to conclude by emphasizing the importance to success in the goals set by the Presidential Commission of the characteristic which is often called "national will." While national will is vitally important, it does not easily lend itself to legislation: is a matter of attitudes, assets, and actions. The U. S. Government has a range of options to use in confronting terrorism from diplomatic pressure, publicity and rewards programs, to political and economic sanctions, up to military action.

Over the years, with the help of Congress, and especially the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the U.S. Government has developed a structure of sanctions and criminal statutes we use against terrorists and their supporters. These pressures are designed to make terrorists and their supporters think twice about their activities, to make them realize their terrorist actions are not cost-free, that the price they and their people pay is disproportionate to whatever dubious benefits they might think they gain from killing and wounding innocent people.

Mr. Chairmen, there are no magic solutions to fighting terrorism. No one approach or procedure is going to defeat international terrorism. The national will also requires the ability to be persistent and apply over the long term the resources needed to confront terrorists even when terrorism is not in the headlines. I think we have the national will and your support is an important part of it. Therefore, we look forward to working with the Congress in general and with your committees in particular as we endeavor, singly and together, to protect the American people and thus accomplish the important goals set for us by the Presidential Commission.

My staff and I are thoseon specific items

ready to answer your questions including related to your proposed bill.

Thank you.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Thank you very much. I appreciate your presentation and abbreviating it. Your full statement, will of course by unanimous consent appear in the record.

I would like first to address the matter of the Commission's recommendation for an Assistant Secretary for Security. I raised the question with Chairwoman McLaughlin. The Commission spent a great deal of time deliberating this issue and recommended that this office be established at the highest level within the Department for a variety of reasons, principally to have higher visibility for security within the Department of Transportation; secondly, to have the function of security at an administrative level that would be comparable with similar positions in the Department of State and the other intelligence agencies of the Federal Government, so that on a policy basis, matters of security can be addressed with dispatch without-how shall I say it-for want of a better term, without the bureaucratic tap dancing that goes on about who should speak to whom at what level, and to assure that there will be accountability.

Now, you've testified that the Secretary has and I commend him for moving quickly on a matter of this kind to establish an Office of Security and Intelligence and I would like to know what is the status of Administration thinking both at the White House, the Office of Management and Budget and within the Department on this issue. What are you thinking for and what are you thinking against this issue, what are the merits of it?

I realize a decision hasn't been taken, but I want to know what is the status of that thought process at this point.

Mr. SHANE. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I might answer that question on behalf of the Department of Transportation.

Certainly all of the objectives in the report, the ones that you cite: the need for higher visibility for the intelligence and security functions; the importance of having someone at an influential level and have that person be accountable, all of those objectives were very much in Secretary Skinner's mind in appointing Admiral Robbins the new Director of the Office of Intelligence and Security of the Department of Transportation and there should be no doubt but that appointment and the creation of that office are specific, direct responses to that recommendation of the Commission.

There is no disputing the need for an office providing those functions in the Office of the Secretary with somebody reporting immediately to the Secretary of Transportation.

So on the substantive content of the recommendation, I think there's absolutely no disagreement at all between the Commission, between the drafters of this legislation and the Administration. On the specific question of whether that person should be an Assistant Secretary of Transportation, it is fair to say that there is not yet a final Administration view.

The Administration has in fact resisted that notion, I think, from the beginning, primarily based largely on administrative considerations having to do with the way the Department of Transportation is organized. The Department of Transportation Act does not list specific functions for Assistant Secretaries with one exception, and that is the Assistant Secretary for Administration, which is a