A More Dangerous World

The world is more chaotic and dangerous today than one year ago when President Trump held
office. China is rapidly developing its military abilities, launching advanced hypersonic missiles,
and pressuring Taiwan. Russia is readying an invasion of Ukraine while blackmailing the Biden
administration into making dangerous concessions so Putin can gain a sphere of influence over
eastern Europe. The Taliban has taken control of Afghanistan and its vast deposits of rare earth
minerals—making it possibly the richest terrorist organization in the history of the world—while
Americans remain behind enemy lines and our translators are hunted down. Iran is flaunting
Biden’s warnings by enriching uranium at an unprecedented 60%, is closer than ever before to
obtaining a nuclear weapon and supports proxy militias in the region that have grown more
aggressive. Autocrats from Cuba to Venezuela to Syria to Iran have become emboldened,
doubling down on crackdowns against their people.
Just one year ago the Trump administration left us a far more peaceful world. It fostered
American leadership and peace through strength. The Middle East witnessed the birth of the
Abraham Accords, normalizing relations and growing economic ties between Israel and our Arab
partners. China was being held accountable for its unfair trade practices for the first time in
generations. Putin did not dare attempt a major incursion into Ukraine. And Iran was on the
ropes, pulling back its forces from the region, and almost bankrupt as the result of President
Trump’s maximum pressure campaign.
How did we get to where we are today? Simply put, instead of President Trump’s strategy of
peace through strength, President Biden has brought about a reality of war through weakness.
President Trump’s America First foreign policy reoriented our grand strategy towards great
power competition in a way not seen for decades. President Biden’s posture of weakness and
apology has emboldened our adversaries, undermined our allies, escalated conflict throughout
the world, and brought about a world where Americans are less safe. Biden’s lack of leadership
on the world stage has opened the door for China and Russia to emerge as global leaders. Our
allies and partners from Europe to the Middle East to Latin America are hedging their bets and
growing closer to China and Russia, learning from President Biden’s actions that the United
States is no longer a dependable partner.
In the past year, the Republican Study Committee’s National Security and Foreign Affairs Task
Force has probed President Biden’s foreign policy. The Task Force has sent over a dozen letters
to the Biden administration to perform oversight of the administration’s failed foreign policy.1 It
met with numerous experts including former high level national security officials, analysts in the
think tank community, and others. To summarize the results of its investigatory efforts, the Task
Force is publishing this Report Card reviewing President Biden’s foreign policy in his first year
in office, specifically examining its approach to China, Russia, Iran and Afghanistan.

1
These letters can be viewed in full in the Appendix.
China – F
While President Trump boldly confronted China, President Biden clearly does not appreciate the
nature of the China threat and has wishfully worked to engage China. President Trump’s
National Security Strategy and National Defense Strategy reoriented American foreign policy
towards great power competition for the first time in a generation, focusing our efforts on
countering China and Russia.2 Yet the Biden White House’s interim National Security Strategic
Guidance shelved that approach for “strategic competition with China or any other nation,”
noting that “strategic competition does not, and should not, preclude working with China when it
is in our national interest to do so.”3 Only a month later, Deputy Secretary of State Wendy
Sherman even used the phrase “healthy competition” to describe U.S. relations with China,
parroting the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s use of the same phrase in April 2021!4 Biden’s State
Department similarly curtailed use of the terms “malign activities” to refer to China in an effort
to curry favor with Beijing.5 In fact, the Biden administration has prioritized working with
China, especially to confront climate change, over the broader geopolitical competition, calling
climate change “the most important element” of the decade.6 The Biden administration
downplays the China threat, subordinating the exigency of managing the China challenge to its
radical climate agenda. This means conceding to the communist regime on multiple other fronts
for China to work with the Biden administration on its climate objectives.
The lack of accountability begins with China’s role in the COVID-19 pandemic and its coverup.
On his second day in office, President Biden rejoined the World Health Organization (WHO)
without securing a single meaningful reform in the organization to curb China’s malign influence
or hold it accountable for its coverup of the COVID-19 pandemic.7 In the year since, President
Biden has not imposed sanctions on a single entity in China for covering up the COVID-19
pandemic, and has rarely, if ever, called out China for its role in the pandemic’s spread. Biden’s
State Department also ended an inquiry into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic that was
investigating whether the virus stemmed from a leak out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and
did not respond to a letter sent by the RSC National Security Task Force explaining why such
action was taken.8
In addition, Biden has watered down President Trump’s sanctions prohibiting investment in
Chinese Communist Military Companies. Soon after entering into office, Biden suspended the

2
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf
3
Biden’s era of ‘strategic competition’ - POLITICO
4
Sherman aims to show China what healthy competition can look like -U.S. | Reuters and see
https://www.bing.com/newtabredir?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.cgtn.com%2Fnews%2F2021-04-18%2FChina-calls-
for-healthy-competition-and-cooperation-with-U-S--Zyj6OkMA92%2Findex.html
5
State Department Softens Language on China's Misconduct | National Review
6
Working With China on Climate is ‘Most Important Element’ of the Decade, NSC Official Says - Defense One
7
https://www.dw.com/en/biden-halts-us-departure-from-world-health-organization/a-56296867
8
Biden State Department quietly ended team's work probing COVID origin | Fox News
implementation of Trump’s Executive Order 13959 until May 2021.9 In June, after amending
President Trump’s order,10 Biden’s list of sanctioned entities on the new Non-SDN Chinese
Military-Industrial Complex Companies List did not include at least a dozen entities sanctioned
by President Trump, including Sugon, a Chinese supercomputing company involved in China’s
hypersonics program and predictive policing of Uyghur Muslims.11 RSC Chairman Jim Banks
and RSC National Security Task Force Chairman Joe Wilson sent a letter in June about the
Biden administration’s decision to remove the company’s sanctions.12 The administration
refused to respond to the letter, or explain the lifting of sanctions. Although President Biden
reimposed sanctions on Sugon in December,13 a number of Chinese Communist military
companies which originally were sanctioned by President Trump remain delisted, with no
explanation by the Biden administration.
Biden has also gone soft on combatting the Chinese Communist Party’s malign influence in
higher education. On February 8, 2021, President Biden withdrew a rule proposed by President
Trump’s Department of Homeland Security, entitled “Establishing Requirement for Student and
Exchange Visitor Program Certified Schools to Disclose Agreements with Confucius Institutes
and Classrooms,” which would have required American colleges and universities to disclose
their partnerships with Confucius Institutes.14 Also, in response to an inquiry by RSC Chairman
Jim Banks, the Department of Education revealed in June that it only had 15 ongoing
investigations into violations of the Higher Education Act with respect to foreign gifts, a number
equal to the number of investigations which were ongoing during the Trump administration.15
Similarly, Biden has exhibited a weak approach toward countering China’s theft of intellectual
property.. An investigation from House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Michael
McCaul revealed that the Commerce Department issued more than $100 billion worth of export
licenses for semiconductors and other products to suppliers of Huawei and other Chinese
companies on the Entity List including about $61 billion worth of export licenses for Huawei..16
In addition, on September 24th, the Department of Justice (DOJ) allowed Huawei’s CFO Meng
Wanzhou to return to China despite being indicted for criminal sanctions evasion. A letter sent
by RSC Chairman Jim Banks to Attorney General Merrick Garland on September 28th asking for
all documents and communications between the White House and DOJ regarding this case was
ignored.17 There are serious questions regarding whether Meng’s release was part of political
pressure by the White House on DOJ to provide concessions to China.

9
https://www.ft.com/content/d4af927a-8800-4d2d-8b52-2e71339e8827
10
14032.pdf (treasury.gov)
11
Non-SDN Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List (NS-CMIC List) | U.S. Department of the Treasury
and Biden Removes Sketchy Chinese Company from Banned List | National Review
12
Biden Removes Sketchy Chinese Company from Banned List | National Review
13
U.S. to Blacklist DJI and Seven Other China Firms, FT Reports (yahoo.com)
14
OIRA Conclusion of EO 12866 Regulatory Review (reginfo.gov)
15
See Appendix.
16
U.S. Issued $100 Billion in Export Licenses to Suppliers of Huawei, SMIC - WSJ
17
See Appendix.
Finally, Biden has taken a weak approach to stopping China’s genocide of the Uyghur Muslim
population. Early in the Biden administration, mixed signals were sent regarding whether or not
the administration even agreed with the genocide determination made by the Trump
administration, unnecessarily launching a review of the determination.18 While later the
administration did acknowledge the genocide, the administration spent much of its first year
actively lobbying against legislation which would prohibit the import of products of Uyghur
slave labor into the United States, with the Washington Post reporting that Deputy Secretary of
State Sherman even directly reached out to Senator Merkley to slow the bipartisan legislation
down.19 Despite changing its tune as public pressure increased and ultimately signing the bill
into law, the Biden administration has not yet implemented the mandatory sanctions required by
the law. Even worse, it has not issued a single designation required by the Uyghur Human Rights
Policy Act, which was passed into law over a year and a half ago.20
These weak policies on China have opened the door for China’s influence to expand in the
Middle East and Latin America. Our allies and partners in the Gulf have moved closer to China
in the last year—with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in particular inking deals with
Beijing regarding infrastructure, energy, and even arms purchases.21 The situation is even worse
with our adversaries in the Middle East, where China has expanded its Belt and Road Initiative
(BRI) to Syria, and illicitly purchased oil from Iran in violation of U.S. sanctions.22 China’s
growing relationship with Iran was even welcomed by the Biden administration, with Biden’s
Assistant Secretary of State for the Near East Joey Hood saying, “We want Iran and China to
have a good, healthy, productive relationship.”23 China has also worked rapidly to establish a
foothold in our hemisphere, stepping up purchases of Venezuelan oil and investing in Columbia
and Ecuador.24
Last July, the RSC introduced the Countering Communist China Act, a comprehensive bill
which would actually hold China accountable by stopping their intellectual property theft,
pushing back on malign foreign influence in our universities, enhancing our export controls and
economic sanctions, and pursuing a bold deregulatory agenda to unleash the innovation of the
American economy.25

18
Biden administration reviewing China genocide designation | TheHill
19
Opinion | Congress needs to act on Xi Jinping’s genocide now - The Washington Post
20
PUBL145.PS (congress.gov)
21
Biden Pushes Our Gulf Allies Toward China - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
22
Syria Officially Joins China's Belt and Road, Seeking Lifeline to Defy U.S. Sanctions (newsweek.com)
23
RSC on Twitter: "Assistant Secretary Joey Hood just said, “we want Iran and China to have a good healthy
productive relationship.” Is our @StateDept leadership really that naïve? https://t.co/grzYGuHXfl" / Twitter
24
China Is Desperate To Secure Latin American Oil And Coal | Markets Insider (businessinsider.com)
25
RSC Introduces Countering Communist China Act | Republican Study Committee (house.gov)
Russia - F
These days it seems that the last thing that the Democratic Party wants to talk about is Vladimir
Putin. It’s no secret why—President Biden’s foreign policy has been the weakest in a generation,
especially with regard to Russia. Rather than deter Putin, Biden’s weakness has encouraged him
to act more boldly and aggressively than ever before. President Biden began his administration
by caving to Russian demands to renew the New START treaty for 5 years, giving up the
leverage built by the Trump administration to limit Russia’s entire nuclear force, and compel
Russia to limit other weapons, including hypersonics.26 As former Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo stated, under New START “[o]nly 45 percent of Russia’s nuclear arsenal is subject to
numerical limits...[while] that agreement restricts 92 percent of America’s arsenal.”27 Soon after,
last February, President Biden rescinded the Trump administration’s reimposition of the United
Nations arms embargo on Iran, thereby allowing Russia to sell arms to Iran.28
It is clear that early on in the administration, Putin understood that President Biden’s weakness
provided him with a golden opportunity to expand his malign influence in ways he was not able
to even during the Obama administration. Last April, even the Biden administration admitted
that Russia had massed more troops on the border of Ukraine than when it invaded and seized
Crimea seven years ago during the Obama administration.29 Not once during the Trump
administration did Putin attempt a military buildup anywhere near such size and scope. And only
a month later in May, hackers sponsored by Russia shut down the Colonial Pipeline for six days
in a cyberattack which shocked gas prices and created shortages throughout much of the United
States.30 Rather than impose real costs on Russia, President Biden responded by inviting Putin to
a summit where a working group was created to prevent further cyberattacks31 and with weak
sanctions designed to bypass congressional review procedures established by Congress in the
Countering American Adversaries through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).32
The Biden administration gave Putin the biggest gift an American President has ever given the
Russian dictator by enabling their finalization of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline by waiving
sanctions required by Congress.33 Even while admitting that Nord Stream 2 AG and its CEO,
Matthias Warnig, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, engaged in sanctionable activity,

26
https://www.vox.com/2021/1/21/22242638/start-nuclear-treaty-extension-biden-russia-putin
27
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2021/03/03/disarming_amid_an_arms_race_766515.html
28
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-un/u-s-rescinds-trump-white-house-claim-that-all-u-n-
sanctions-had-been-reimposed-on-iran-idUSKBN2AI2Y9
29
https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_bigger-2014-us-calls-out-russian-military-buildup-along-ukraine-
border/6204799.html
30
https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/15/22437730/colonial-pipeline-normal-ransomware-attack-fuel
31
https://www.state.gov/joint-statement-on-the-outcomes-of-the-u-s-russia-strategic-stability-dialogue-in-
geneva-on-september-30/
32
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2021/05/29/biden-congressional-review-russia-sanctions/
33
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-waive-sanctions-firm-ceo-behind-russias-nord-stream-2-pipeline-
source-2021-05-19/
Secretary of State Tony Blinken claimed that it was in the national interest to waive such
sanctions consistent with the President’s pledge to rebuild relationships with our allies and
partners in Europe.34 After the House of Representatives, on a bipartisan basis, passed a number
of provisions requiring sanctions on Nord Stream 2 and other sanctions on Russia (some even
sponsored by Democrats), the Biden administration quickly lobbied Congress to quash the
sanctions.35 The Biden administration has absurdly argued that sanctions on Russia should be
imposed only after an invasion of Ukraine—thereby giving Putin even more leverage against the
U.S. and its allies by making Europe reliant on Russian energy. President Biden also cancelled
the Nuclear Sea Launched Cruise Missile (SLCM-N) program and proposed a defense budget
that did not even keep up with inflation.36
Biden’s concessions and appeasement only further encouraged Russian aggression and have led
to a crisis creating the real possibility of a new war in Ukraine. Russian forces continue to amass
forces in an unprecedented way on Ukraine’s borders.37 In response, the Biden administration is
doubling down on its war through weakness approach. In December, President Biden held back
$200 million in additional military aid to Ukraine to defuse tensions with Russia.38 Moreover, in
talks on January 10th, Russian officials in Geneva, Biden officials reportedly have floated
pulling back missile defense deployments in Europe, limiting the size and scope of military
exercises, and even re-entering the failed Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty which was
violated by Russia and which was withdrawn from by President Trump.39
Democrats falsely claimed that President Trump colluded with Russia. The evidence shows that
Biden’s weakness is the Real Russia Collusion. In response, the RSC has put together
legislation—the Putin Accountability Act—to impose real costs on Putin and deter his
aggression. The Putin Accountability Act would impose the toughest sanctions on Russia ever
proposed by Congress by kicking Russia out of the International Society for Worldwide
Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) code system, designating it as a State Sponsor
of Terrorism, and imposing sanctions on Russian sovereign debt in secondary markets.

34
Ibid.
35
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/11/24/biden-aims-to-quash-nord-stream-2-sanctions-in-defense-bill/ and
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/12/russia-hawks-outmaneuvered-by-the-white-house-on-defense-bill/
36
https://www.exchangemonitor.com/top-pentagon-brass-hadnt-seen-acting-navsec-memo-calling-cancellation-
slcm-n/
37
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/12/russia-is-risking-all-out-war-to-prevent-ukraine-from-joining-nato.html
38
Despite appeals from Ukraine, Biden admin holds back additional military aid to Kyiv amid diplomatic push
(nbcnews.com)
39
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/prospects-dim-us-russia-start-tense-talks-over-ukraine-crisis-2022-01-
10/ and Briefing with Deputy Secretary Sherman on the SSD - U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Geneva
(usmission.gov)
Iran and the Middle East - F
President Biden chose early on to abandon President Trump’s successful maximum pressure
campaign on Iran.40 Iran is richer, stronger, and closer to a nuclear weapon today than when
President Trump left office. Specifically on the nuclear front, Iran recognized early, after the
election of Joe Biden, that a more conciliatory Iran policy was coming and began a series of
nuclear moves that experts consider “irreversible” in terms of the knowledge needed to move
closer to a nuclear weapons threshold capability.41
In January 2021, Iran resumed enrichment of uranium to 20%, something it had suspended for
years.42 In April 2021, it escalated to the unprecedented level of 60%.43 It also produced uranium
metal using 20% enriched uranium, as described by the UN nuclear watchdog, the IAEA.44
Throughout 2021, the Biden administration failed to have the back of these nuclear inspectors as
Tehran increasingly diminished monitoring, limited access,45 and harassed female inspectors.46
Still, Iran was not diplomatically censured by the Biden administration and America’s European
partners at IAEA meetings.47
Despite repeatedly stating that no sanctions relief would be provided to Iran until Iran returned to
the failed Iran nuclear agreement, the Biden administration has reneged on that promise by not
vigorously enforcing existing penalties,48 and, in some cases, abusing waiver and license
authorities directly benefitting the Iranian regime and its affiliates.49 The RSC National Security
and Foreign Affairs Task Force sent over a dozen letters in the last year to the Biden
administration asking for information regarding the lack of sanctions enforcement in the last
year, yet unfortunately did not receive a satisfactory response.50 Task Force member Rep. Bryan

40
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/biden-squanders-leverage-trump-stockpiled-iran-pursuit-defective-
nuclear-deal-ncna1258577?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma
41
See: https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/detail/irans-recent-irreversible-nuclear-advances and
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2021/12/16/exploiting-americas-declining-pressure-irans-nuclear-escalation-over-
time/
42
https://apnews.com/article/iran-uranium-enrichment-20-percent-ab0930064c446114506b8d085941cf84
43
https://apnews.com/article/iran-uranium-enrichment-60-percent-ed89e322595004fddc65fd4e31c1131b
44
https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-enriched-uranium-jcpoa/31415832.html
45
See, for example: https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-n-nuclear-chief-leaves-iran-without-deal-on-access-to-
nuclear-plant-diplomats-say-11637748096, https://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-blocking-u-n-atomic-agency-access-
to-nuclear-related-sites-iaea-says-11631033269, https://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-u-n-inspectors-find-
radioactive-traces-raising-fresh-concerns-11612567304, https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/iran-denies-
access-to-nuclear-site-for-centrifuge-assembly-report-680368
46
https://www.wsj.com/articles/iranian-guards-physically-harassed-female-u-n-nuclear-inspectors-diplomats-say-
11631626649
47
https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/558240-in-the-iran-nuclear-crisis-the-iaea-stands-alone.
48
See references to a willingness to explore tightening sanctions in these instances but failing to do so.
49
See the case of South Korea: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/iran-regains-un-vote-after-us-enables-
un-payment-2021-06-11/, https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20210203010500325,
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210714-us-lets-iran-use-frozen-funds-to-pay-back-japan-s-korea, and
https://www.jpost.com/international/article-692328
50
See Appendix.
Steil, a member of the House Financial Services Committee, sent a number of letters
investigating the abuse of license and waiver authorities by the Biden administration in
particular. It is clear that the Biden administration, while not technically lifting many of
President Trump’s sanctions on Iran, is tacitly providing sanctions relief through lack of
enforcement, to coax the Iranians to re-enter the failed Iran nuclear deal.51 Unfortunate such a
tactic only hardened Iran’s will to stall in negotiations and step up provocation. In addition to
escalating nuclear violation, Iran’s proxies in Syria and Iraq have repeatedly attacked US and
coalition forces as well as US diplomatic establishments.
President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign pushed the Iranian regime to the brink of
financial collapse, severely curtailed the regime’s ability to finance overseas destabilizing
activities. Only $4 billion in accessible foreign exchange reserves remained in Iran’s possession
at the end of 2020, down from over $120 billion it held prior to President Trump’s decision to
exit the JCPOA,52 in contrast in the last year, Iran’s foreign currency reserves have reportedly
increased by more than 750%.53 Iranian oil exports have increased by 123 million barrels,
reportedly jumping 40% in 2021. China and the brutal Assad regime in Syria are now the top
importers of Iranian crude due to lax sanctions enforcement by the Biden administration.54

In addition to easing the pressure on Iran through lax enforcement, the administration has
removed some Iranian entities from its sanctions list.55 The administration has also reduced the
pressure on Iran’s proxies in the region—namely the Houthis in Yemen and the brutal Assad
regime in Syria. Only weeks into entering office, Biden’s State Department revoked President
Trump’s designation of the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO),56 empowering
the Houthis in Yemen and prolonging the conflict in Yemen and launch an unprecedented
barrage of missile attacks on our Gulf Arab partners. In addition, despite sanctions required by
the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019, the Biden administration has greenlighted the
Arab Gas Pipeline, a gas pipeline from Egypt to Syria and Lebanon, which would provide gas,
and possibly transit fees, to the brutal Assad regime in Syria.57 Unlike the Trump administration,
Biden’s State Department no longer supports the policy objective of pushing Iran to withdraw
from Syria,58 and has turned a blind eye as Arab states have normalized with the Assad regime.59

The Biden administration has turned a blind eye to Iran’s expansion in the region and is
replicating the mistakes of the Obama administration, which sacrificed U.S. and partner interests
in the Middle East on the altar of attaining and sustaining a deal with Iran. For example, rather
than pushing Saudi Arabia to work closer with Israel to contain Iran, the Biden administration

51
Noted here: https://www.newsweek.com/biden-giving-powerful-us-financial-sanctions-iran-opinion-1618887
52
https://freebeacon.com/national-security/us-sanctions-pushed-iran-to-brink-of-bankruptcy/
53
https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/irans-cash-reserves-soar-under-biden/
54
https://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/blog/december-2021-iran-tanker-tracking-and-year-review
55
https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/gop-lawmakers-concerned-biden-removed-sanctions-to-appease-
iran/ and https://www.wsj.com/articles/iranian-oil-executive-removed-from-u-s-sanctions-list-remains-active-in-
sector-11626091200
56
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/biden-administration-remove-houthis-terrorist-list-reversing-
another-trump-policy-n1256923
57
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/12/23/biden-syria-policy-assad-middle-east/
58
https://english.aawsat.com/home/article/3301586/washingtons-priorities-syria-dont-include-irans-withdrawal
59
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/10/08/biden-syria-policy-assad-war-crimes/
has worked to press Saudi Arabia to reconcile with Iran, while Iran is encroaching on Saudi
interest in the region as emboldened by the Biden administration’s appeasement.60 President
Biden’s Special Envoy to Iran Rob Malley has even openly stated that the administration’s
policy is to bring in Iran, rather than counter its influence by claiming that “most of the region’s
dysfunction has roots in Iran’s exclusion.”61

President Biden also appears set on providing concessions to Israel’s enemies than standing with
the Jewish state. In particular, President Biden’s resumption of providing funding to the United
Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) has been especially disturbing, given that the
organization and many in its leadership continue to promote hateful anti-Semitic textbooks, and
have even praised Hamas.62 During the Trump administration, Israel and its neighbors witnessed
unprecedented peace and normalization through the Abraham Accords. Yet only a few months
into Biden’s administration, Israel was attacked by Hamas launching the first war in Gaza since
2014.63

Biden’s policy of maximum concessions has only made Iran more aggressive in the region. In
November, militias backed by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Forces
engaged in an assassination attempt of the Prime Minister of Iraq.64 These Iranian-backed
militias have stepped up their attacks on U.S. positions in Iraq in 2022 despite the change in
force mission there.65 Houthi rebels in Yemen doubled their missile and drone attacks in Saudi
Arabia in 2021, including on civilian targets, have expanded their territorial gains,66 and besieged
the city of Marib.67 Iranian militias have also stepped up drone and rocket attacks at an American
military outpost, Al-Tanf, in south-eastern Syria.68 Throughout 2021, Iran continued attacking
tankers and their crews hostage.69 According to reports, sanctioned Iranian cargo aircraft have
been conducting illicit shipments, including shipment of arms, to the illegitimate Maduro regime
in Venezuela.70 Worst of all, Iran is now calling for Americans to engage in domestic terrorism
against one another to avenge the killing of Iran’s chief terrorist mastermind, Qassem Soleimani,
who President Trump ordered to be removed from the battlefield in January 2020.71 On January
13th, the office of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamanei even released a video

60
https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2021/oct/14/robert-malley-state-nuclear-diplomacy
61
https://www.jns.org/opinion/bidens-build-back-better-message-to-iran-israel-and-the-arabs/
62
UNRWA, which Biden is funding again, is cozying up to Hamas (again) (nypost.com)
63
Biden Voices Support for Cease-Fire in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
64
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-backed-militia-behind-attack-iraqi-pm-sources-2021-11-08/
65
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/drones-attack-us-troops-iraq-syria/
66
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/saudi-led-coalition-foils-missile-attack-oil-region-tv-2021-09-04/
67
https://www.state.gov/the-houthis-must-cease-the-assault-on-marib/ and https://www.state.gov/condemning-
the-houthis-disregard-for-civilian-protection-and-humanitarian-access-in-abdiya-yemen/
68
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/iran-militias-tanf-us-forces/2021/10/26/8c75ad98-35c1-11ec-9662-
399cfa75efee_story.html
69
https://news.usni.org/2021/11/10/iran-releases-tanker-sothys-after-offloading-oil-questions-remain-over-
seizure and https://apnews.com/article/business-dubai-gulf-of-oman-iran-united-arab-emirates-
cd153109127604c6a250f5dd1e75a3a1
70
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/andres-oppenheimer/article255155672.html.
71
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/white-house-worried-iran-is-plotting-
assassination-attempts-against-trump-administration-officials
threatening to assassinate former President Trump in a drone strike.72 Iran also attempted to
kidnap and kill an American citizen Masih Alinejad73 from her home on U.S. soil and has
continually threatened violence against former U.S. officials.74

The RSC has led the fight against Biden’s attempts to re-enter the failed nuclear agreement. In
February, the RSC Steering Committee issued an official position pledging to fight to reimpose
any and all sanctions lifted by the Biden administration on Iran unless Iran fulfilled all 12 points
laid out by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo as part of the maximum pressure campaign.75
Later on in April, working with former Secretary Pompeo, the RSC unveiled the Maximum
Pressure Act, the toughest sanctions package on Iran ever proposed by Congress, which is now
supported by over 110 Republican members, the majority of the GOP conference.76

Afghanistan - F-
There was perhaps no greater example of the failure of President Biden’s foreign policy
approach more than the disastrous fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban. President Biden inherited
an agreement negotiated by the Trump administration with the Taliban in Doha which
established a conditions-based withdrawal in Afghanistan.77 The agreement stated that among
other things, the U.S. would withdraw from Afghanistan by May 2021, and that the Taliban
would “prevent any group or individual, including al-Qa’ida, from using the soil of Afghanistan
to threaten the security of the United States and its allies.”78 Despite the conditions negotiated in
this agreement, the Biden administration quickly decided on a policy of setting a hard date of
leaving by September 11th 2021.79 As even Zalmay Khalilzad, the Special Envoy for Afghanistan
under both Trump and Biden who negotiated the Doha agreement described it, Trump’s deal was
“conditions based” while Biden’s was “calendar based.”80
Despite claims by the Biden administration, and some in the Trump administration such as
Khalilzad, the Taliban has never severed ties with al-Qa’ida. Ayman al-Zawhiri, the leader of al-
Qa’ida, has sworn a pledge of allegiance to every single recent leader of the Taliban.81 Siraj al-
Din Haqqani, the Taliban’s Deputy Leader, and current Interior Minister, is a senior leader of the

72
Animated video of drone strike on former President Donald Trump appears on Iran leader's website - UPI.com
73
Masih Alinejad Discusses Foiled Iranian Plot To Kidnap Her : NPR
74
Princeton scholar under fire for boasting about Iran threat against US over Soleimani | Al Arabiya English
75
117th Congress Official Positions | Republican Study Committee (house.gov)
76
maximum_pressure_act_section_by_section_summary.pdf (house.gov)
77
78
Microsoft Word - 10_v1-T_Draft Text [English - 20200229] - Edited (For State).docx
79
Biden announces troops will leave Afghanistan by September 11: 'It's time to end America's longest war' -
CNNPolitics
80
Ex-Envoy: ‘Conditions-Based’ Deal With Taliban Gave Way to a ‘Calendar-Based’ Approach | CNSNews
81
Ayman al Zawahiri swears allegiance to the Taliban’s new leader | FDD's Long War Journal
Haqqani Network, which maintains close ties with al-Qa’ida.82 The U.N. Security Council’s
Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team stated as recently as last June that Haqqani
“is also assessed to be a member of the wider al Qaeda leadership” and noted that the Taliban
and al-Qa’ida “remain closely aligned and show no indication of breaking ties.” Moreover, it
concluded there has been “no material change to this relationship, which has grown deeper as a
consequence of personal bonds of marriage and shared partnership in struggle, now cemented
through second generational ties.”83
Nevertheless, President Biden stubbornly carried on with plans for a calendar-based withdrawal.
Last July, President Biden infamously stated that there was no similarity whatsoever with respect
to his withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the humiliating fall of Saigon during the War in
Vietnam.84 This assertion was repeated by his Secretary of State Tony Blinken in mid-August
who had the audacity to say “this is manifestly not Saigon” in the midst of the Taliban’s takeover
of the country.85 The scenes of American diplomats being airlifted from the rooftop of the
Embassy in Kabul, in a near facsimile reproduction of what happened in Saigon in 1975 was
exactly what Biden promised would not happen. The American image and credibility will remain
tarnished as a result of that for decades to come.86 Worst of all, 13 U.S. servicemembers were
killed in an ISIS-K terrorist attack at Kabul airport in the deadliest day for American troops in
over a decade, and the deadliest ISIS attack on U.S. forces in history.87 To top it off the Biden
administration left Americans behind in Afghanistan where they remain to this day. The State
Department admitted last month that 479 American Citizens and 450 lawful permanent residents
were evacuated from Afghanistan after the August 31st deadline that the Taliban had set for a
U.S. departure,88 and the case of American contractor Mark Frerichs, who was abducted by the
Taliban-affiliated Haqqani Network remains unresolved to this day.89
The U.S. has left behind billions of dollars in weapons in Afghanistan. Watchdog organization
Open the Books estimated that 650,000 weapons, including 350,000 M4 and M16 rifles, 65,000
machine guns, 25,000 grenade launchers, and 2,500 mortars and howitzers are now in the
Taliban’s hands, and possibly including 600,000 assault rifles, some 2,000 armored vehicles, and
40 aircraft, including Black Hawks, according to other reports.90
The Biden administration’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan has also given the Taliban
control of one of the largest deposits of rare earth minerals in the world. Afghanistan’s rare earth
minerals have been estimated to be worth $1-3 trillion dollars. As the RSC illustrated in a
previous memorandum, the Taliban’s control of these minerals likely now makes it the

82
Who is Sirajuddin Haqqani, Taliban deputy leader and wanted terrorist? | Fox News
83
U.N. report cites new intelligence on Haqqanis’ close ties to al Qaeda | FDD's Long War Journal
84
Remarks by President Biden on the Drawdown of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan | The White House
85
‘This is manifestly not Saigon’: Blinken defends US mission in Afghanistan | Biden administration | The Guardian
86
Speculation about Saigon rooftop replay in Kabul despite Biden assertion it couldn't happen | Fox News
87
Thursday Attack in Kabul Deadliest Day for U.S. Troops Since August 2011 (newsweek.com)
88
Afghanistan Relocation and Resettlement Update - United States Department of State
89
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-mark-frerichs-lombard-captive-afghanistan-20210909-
nt4pr6u6pfd4jcn6lnjuj5mhk4-story.html
90
Billions in US weaponry seized by Taliban | TheHill
wealthiest terrorist organization in the world.91 RSC Task Force Member Greg Steube attempted
to attach legislation to the National Defense Authorization Act in September which would have
closed loopholes in our sanctions laws and prohibited the Taliban from selling these minerals to
China, only to be blocked by the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Greg
Meeks.92 China has already announced that it will work with the Taliban to develop
Afghanistan’s rare earth minerals.93 Since Democrats won’t work to change the law, RSC
Member Madison Cawthorn is leading a corporate responsibility campaign with RSC Chairman
Jim Banks to push American companies to pledge not to use rare earth minerals from
Afghanistan.94
Rather than learning the mistakes of a failed withdrawal, the Biden administration is quickly
working to legitimize the Taliban. The Biden administration announced in September that it was
giving $64 million in humanitarian aid to Afghanistan without explaining to Congress what
oversight mechanisms and guardrails would be put in place to ensure the money would not end
up in the Taliban’s hands.95 In September, RSC member Tracey Mann along with RSC Chairman
Banks led a letter to the State Department asking whether or not the administration had offered
the unfreezing of assets of the previous Afghan government, sanctions relief, or any financial
assistance in exchange of the Taliban providing safe passage for American citizens out of
Afghanistan.96 The State Department never responded to the letter. In September and December,
the Department of the Treasury announced a number of new General Licenses lifting sanctions
on Afghanistan for the stated purpose of facilitating humanitarian aid.97 The RSC has worked to
push back on Biden’s failed Afghanistan policy by organizing a legislative blitz during the
consideration of the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act and offering a number of
amendments aimed at preventing the administration from normalizing the Taliban.98
Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, only a few of these amendments made it into the final text.

Conclusion: A Return to Leading from Behind

In July, the Biden State Department invited E. Tendayi Achiume the U.N. Special Rapporteur on
contemporary forms of racism to investigate human rights abuses in the U.S. Achiume is a
professor at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and a proponent of Critical
Race Theory (CRT). The invitation was a clear example of the roots of the Biden
administration’s worldview. It sees America as the problem and therefore disengagement as
good. Former General H.R. McMaster described Biden’s approach as “far-left self loathing” that
is often perpetuated in our university system and in the far-left media.99 The United States has

91
Rare-Earth-Mineral-Memo.pdf (freebeacon.com)
92
Democrats Block Bill to Sanction Trillion Dollar Trade Between China and the Taliban (freebeacon.com)
93
Rare-Earth-Mineral-Memo.pdf (freebeacon.com)
94
Lawmakers Launch Corporate Responsibility Campaign On Taliban ‘Terror Minerals’ | National Review
95
House Republicans Seek Inquiry Into Biden WH Aid to Taliban as 'Ransom' | Newsmax.com
96
FINAL_RSC_BLINKEN_AFGH.pdf (freebeacon.com)
97
Treasury Issues General Licenses and Guidance to Facilitate Humanitarian Assistance in Afghanistan | U.S.
Department of the Treasury
98
House Republicans to pressure Democrats against Taliban recognition - Axios
99
H.R. McMaster on Afghanistan withdrawal, Biden’s leadership and China - Deseret News
been the dominant power on the world stage since the end of the Cold War and we have
fundamentally used our global leadership for good, establishing and maintaining an international
order based in freedom, free markets using our example and the strength of our moral character.
Yet President Biden’s first year in office has become a textbook example of the dangers of
pulling back American power. President Biden’s foreign policy so far has only undermined
American power on the global stage allowing our adversaries to expand their influence at the
expenses of the United States and its allies. The world is now a far more dangerous place than
just one year ago. From China to Iran, from the Taliban to Putin, President Biden has empowered
our authoritarian and despotic adversaries while abandoning our own interests and security.
 Appendix
Letters sent demanding information from the Biden administration by the RSC National
Security and Foreign Affairs Task Force.
 May 26, 2021
The Honorable Janet Yellen The Honorable Antony Blinken
Secretary Secretary
U.S. Treasury Department U.S. Department of State
1500 Pennsylvania Ave, NW 2201 C Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220 Washington, D.C. 20220
Dear Secretary Yellen and Secretary Blinken,
We write to express our concerns regarding the failure to enforce sanctions on the brutal Assad regime in Syria, Iran’s top ally in
the Middle East, while the administration negotiates with Iran regarding a return to the failed Iran nuclear agreement.
Last month, Fox News reported that Iran has been violating U.S. sanctions by sending four vessels carrying more than 3 million
barrels of Iranian oil to the Banyas oil refinery in Syria.1 As you are aware, such actions would be a clear violation of U.S. sanctions
on both Iran and Syria. Furthermore, in 2019, Congress passed the bipartisan Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act to impose
mandatory sanctions on the Assad regime and its backers, including Iran, which went into effect in June 2020. The Trump
administration immediately utilized the Caesar Act to impose a total of six different sanctions packages on the Assad regime and
its backers. We are deeply concerned that after over 100 days of being in office, the administration has refused to impose any
sanctions under the Caesar Act.
During the Obama administration, the U.S. lifted the pressure on the brutal Assad regime in the run up to the JCPOA, and after
entering the deal, Iran extended unprecedented credit lines to the Assad regime and surged its forces in the country carrying out
massive atrocities. History may be repeating itself. We are concerned that your administration is failing to enforce U.S. sanctions
law on one of the worst human rights violators in the world, which has killed half a million people, as a concession to Iran to re-
enter the failed Iran nuclear deal.
I and my colleagues of the Republican Study Committee are committed to investigating and uncovering any sanctions relief
provided to Iran and its allies as part of your efforts to re-enter the JCPOA. Can you answer the following questions:
1. Do you consider the delivery of oil to Syria as sanctionable activity? If not, why not?
2. Why has the administration refused to impose a single designation under the Caesar Act?
3. Is the administration refusing to enforce sanctions one the worlds worst human rights violators, Assad, as a concession
to the Iranians as part of rejoining the JCPOA?
4. Has the administration engaged in any talks or made any plans to lift sanctions or to offered to lift sanctions, including
through waivers and licenses, on the Assad regime?
Thank you and we look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

BRYAN STEIL JIM BANKS

Member of Congress Member of Congress

JOE WILSON
Member of Congress

1
Yonat Friling. Iran tankers with 3M barrels of crude oil head to Syria, defying US sanctions. April 6, 2021. https://www.foxnews.com/world/iran-tankers-head-to-syria-
defying-us-sanctions
 FULL COMMITTEE HEARING
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Questions for the Record
Representative W. Gregory Steube
May 12, 2021

Several reputable media outlets revealed a three-hour audio tape on April 25 that it obtained
from Iran, in which Iranian Foreign Minister Javid Zarif mentions that you have been passing
classified information regarding Israeli military activity, specifically regarding 200 Israeli
airstrikes in Syria, and that he was astonished you shared this information.
I signed on to a letter to President Biden raising this concern and to order Attorney General
Merrick Garland to open an investigation into this allegation – before more classified
information with more adversaries like China or Russia is shared.
In response to Mr. Zeldin’s questions, you stated that you had met with Iranian Foreign
Minister Javid Zarif 4 (four) times during the Trump administration.
What were those meetings regarding?
Where did those meetings take place?
Who else was present at these meetings?
Did you or anyone in your family receive any compensation or expect to receive any
compensation from any party for your meeting with Zarif? If so, please detail the terms of the
compensation.
Did you or anyone in your family receive any personal financial benefit or expect to receive any
personal financial benefit from your meetings with Zarif? If so, please describe in detail.
Did you discuss any corporation or entity in which you have a financial interest with Zarif? If so,
please detail.
During the period of 2017-2021, were you ever compensated by any entity to lobby or
influence foreign governments?
Outside of expected or received compensation or financial benefits, what were your
motivations for meeting with Zarif?
Do you believe your meeting with Zarif resulted in a strengthened relationship between the
United States and Israel? If so, please detail including specific examples.
Do you believe your meeting with Zarif resulted in a strengthened relationship between the
United States and Iran? If so, please detail including specific examples.
What other foreign leaders did you meet with during the Trump administration and when did
those occur and what was discussed?
Is it appropriate for a former Secretary of State to meet with the foreign minister of the leading
state sponsor of terrorism?
Would you like it if Pompeo went and talked to China in the middle of your negotiations with
them?
Did you ever discuss President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign with Zarif? Did you ever
imply that if a Democrat was elected president that you would reenter the JCPOA, thus
weakening the Trump maximum pressure campaign?
This inappropriateness in your communications with Zarif was sabotaging the Trump/Pompeo
diplomacy. Why do you have any credibility in negotiating with our adversaries or representing
the U.S. interests?
 FULL COMMITTEE HEARING
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Questions for the Record
Representative W. Gregory Steube
July 14, 2021

Question 1:
Every year, millions upon millions of dollars that your agency doles out in taxpayer funded
foreign aid, is diverted to terrorist organizations, dictatorships, and other corrupt networks who
hate us, rather than reaching the people who are truly in need.

It is hard to convince constituents in my district of the need to provide foreign aid around the
world, when so much of that aid does not actually go to humanitarian projects to people in need.
And yet year after year, we continue to make the same mistakes while putting out the same
empty rhetoric about so-called reforms and oversight mechanisms that don’t seem to be working.

I would just like to provide a few specific examples of some of the programs your agency,
USAID, has been engaged in, and ask you to explain how you can justify such programs to the
American people?

• In Syria, according to the United Nations Procurement Reports, United Nations programs
in regime held areas have gone directly to Assad regime, including into the hands of the
same Syrian military that is dropping barrel bombs and chemical weapons on civilians. A
2016 study of the UN Report of Procurement showed that UN operations in Syria
delivered $4 million to Syria’s state-owned fuel industry, $5 million to blood banks
operated by the Syrian Arab Army for the benefit of its troops, and $8.5 million to
charities co-opted by members of the Assad family. Even former Obama administration
officials like former U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford have called for cutting off o f
all aid going to the UN in regime held areas, saying on February 12, 2018, former U.S.
Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford wrote of UN aid in Syria that “it is clear the aid is not
neutral and is being used as a weapon by the Syrian government.” What purpose could
taxpayer funded assistance going directly to the brutal Assad regime have?
• In Yemen, millions in taxpayer dollars have been diverted by the Iranian backed Houthi
rebels, whose slogan is “Death to America, Death to Israel,” and who regularly launch
missile attacks into the Saudi Arabia. The Houthis do not allow aid to go to civilian areas
unless they take a percentage, which they then use to continue to further perpetuate the
war and make life hell for civilians.
• In the Palestinian territories, the U.S. has funded schools run by the Palestinian Authority
who continue to teach violence and hate against the U.S. and Israel. The Palestinian
Authority also continues to provide stipends for the families of suicide bombers.
 • USAID has been operating in Pakistan for nearly a decade, distributing billions of
dollars, and was criticized for having made “minimal impact on the ground”, according to
past New York Times article. Critics accused USAID of taking up projects with little
consideration for local concerns and being needlessly reliant on American contractors
with “little development experience.”
• USAID awarded $1.1 million in Obama-era taxpayer funding funneled to the Wuhan
Institute of Virology – a Chinese Communist Party lab with potential ties to the COVID-
19 pandemic.

Question 2:
USAID announced that it is providing $75 million in assistance to communities in the West
Bank and Gaza. USAID is also providing $10 million for peacebuilding programs to support a
two-state solution. This assistance follows USAID’s earlier announcement of $15 million in
humanitarian assistance funding to support the West Bank and Gaza’s vulnerable communities.
Hamas controls Gaza through its security forces and obtains resources from smuggling, informal
“taxes,” and reported external assistance from some Arab sources and Iran.
1. How do you plan on ensuring that Hamas does not benefit from U.S. assistance?
2. The U.S. legal framework designates Hamas as a terrorist origination, and limits what
funding can be offered to the Palestinian Authority. How closely are you following
the legal framework with these assistances?
3. How do you ensure the PA is not collaborating or providing funding to Iran?
a. It is also worth noting that in the past, Iran has funded Hamas and supplied them
with military weapons, rockets, and drones.
Question 3:
The Biden administration’s budget request lays out plans to fund the United Nations Population
Fund (UNFPA) with millions in taxpayer dollars, which is supported by USAID.

As you may be aware, in 2001, the U.S. cut funding to UNFPA because an investigation, headed
by then–Secretary of State Colin Powell, found that UNFPA was complicit in the coercive
implementation of China’s one-child policy. It was for this reason, and the fact that UNFPA
publicly praises and is involved in China’s abusive population control programs directed at
Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang province, that the Trump administration pulled all funding from
UNFPA. The administration says that it strongly opposes forced sterilizations, and forced
abortions, but money is fungible and any funding provided to UNFPA for one purpose frees up
money that can be used to further China’s genocide. How does the Biden administration intend
to ensure that money given to UNFPA does not free up resources for the agency to help support
China’s population control policies?
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY

July 19, 2021

The Honorable Jim Banks

Chairman
Republican Study Committee
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Banks:

Thank you for your letter dated June 16, 2021, to Secretary Cardona requesting information
regarding the U.S. Department of Education’s (the Department’s) administration of Section 117
of the Higher Education Act (HEA), as amended (Section 117). Your letter was referred to me,
and I am pleased to respond on behalf of Secretary Cardona. Please note that an identical
response has been provided to the co-signer of your letter.

Under Section 117, institutions of higher education (IHEs) must report to the Department
statutorily defined gifts, contracts, and/or restricted and conditional gifts or contracts from or
with a statutorily defined foreign source. See 20 U.S.C. § 1011f. This disclosure requirement is
an important measure in ensuring transparency and preventing foreign malign influence in U.S.
higher education.

Under the Biden Administration, the Department has continued to carry out its statutory duties,
including collecting disclosure reports that IHEs are required to file, making certain data publicly
available, and monitoring institutions’ compliance with disclosure requirements. The
Department’s administration of Section 117 is handled primarily by career staff in the
Department’s office of Federal Student Aid and Office of the General Counsel.

The Department’s career staffing on Section 117 matters has not changed since January 2021.
The Department is aware that Congress is considering legislation that could affect the
requirements of Section 117. If such legislation is enacted, the Department would examine the
implications of those changes on its staffing and implementation of Section 117.

On July 1, 2021, the Department made publicly available additional data reported by IHEs.
These data reflect foreign gifts and contracts that IHEs reported to the Department through
June 1, 2021. Between September 23, 2020, and June 1, 2021, 1 IHEs submitted 12,908

1
Several questions in your letter referred to the “January 31, 2021, reporting period.” However, Section 117
contains two reporting deadlines (January 31 and July 31) rather than a reporting period. As a result, the
Department accepts—and IHEs submit—disclosure reports throughout the year. For this reason, and to provide you
disclosure reports valued at $4,618,889,386. During this same period, and included among those
nearly 13,000 reports, were disclosure reports submitted by 46 IHEs that had not previously
submitted a report pursuant to Section 117. 2 More detailed data are currently accessible on the
Department’s website at https://sites.ed.gov/foreigngifts. 3

Your letter requests information specifically on open university investigations related to Section
117 compliance. At present, the Department has 15 open investigations into compliance with
Section 117 requirements. While we appreciate your interest, the Department does not comment
on open investigations. The Department may make observations from its investigations publicly
available once these investigations have been completed.

In the Department’s experience, IHEs are seeking to comply with the disclosure requirements of
Section 117, and the Department continues to aid individual institutions in understanding and
meeting those reporting requirements. The Department may consider pursuing a number of
remedies to enforce, and ensure compliance with, Section 117. Under 20 U.S.C. §1011f(f), the
Secretary of Education may request that the Attorney General bring a civil action against an IHE
if it appears the IHE has failed to comply with the Section 117 requirements. The Department
(through the U.S. Department of Justice) may also request a federal district court to compel
compliance with Section 117. If an IHE knowingly or willfully fails to comply with Section 117,
it may also be required to reimburse the government for the full costs of obtaining compliance,
including associated costs of investigation and enforcement.

The Department has engaged, and will continue to engage, with other federal agencies that have
as their primary mission responding to potential national security threats. As an example of
ongoing interagency coordination, the Department is a member of the Joint Committee on the
Research Environment’s (JCORE) Subcommittee on Research Security, which is an interagency
group organized under the National Science and Technology Council and White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy. JCORE’s work includes coordinating outreach and engagement
with academic research institutions, including providing information regarding Section 117
disclosure requirements, and developing best practices for those institutions in addressing the
challenges in research security.

As another example of interagency coordination, the Department also participates in the Foreign
Malign Influence Interagency Policy Committee organized by the National Security Council. In
support of law enforcement efforts, the Department has information-sharing agreements with
components of the U.S. Department of Justice and the National Science Foundation’s Office of
the Inspector General. The Department continues to assess additional ways in which it can
leverage interagency coordination to address foreign malign influence in higher education.

with data we believed would best respond to your questions, the Department’s responses to those questions referring
to the “January 31, 2021, reporting period” are based on an analysis of the disclosure reports filed by IHEs between
September 23, 2020, and June 1, 2021.
2
Occasionally, the Department receives a submission from an IHE indicating that the institution did not receive a
gift from, or enter into a contract with, a foreign source. Such submissions are not reflected in the publicly available
data. As a result, the publicly available data only reflects 25 “new filer” IHEs (i.e., 21 of the 46 IHEs submitted
“blank” disclosure reports).
3
The numbers provided in this paragraph reflect the most recently available data.
Thank you again for your letter. If you need any additional information, please contact the
Department’s Office of Legislation and Congressional Affairs at (202) 401-0020.

Sincerely,

Julie Margetta Morgan

Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary
Delegated the Authority to Perform the
Functions and Duties of the Under Secretary