FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
DOD, Manufacturer Address Issue with Antidote Autoinjector
By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13, 2013 - Defense Department and interagency officials are working closely with the Maryland-based manufacturer of an autoinjector for deployed troops that contains a two-drug antidote for some kinds of nerve agents, a military official said.
In March the company, Meridian Medical Technologies, a Pfizer Inc. subsidiary, found after an internal inspection that a small number of the autoinjectors -- seven out of 1,000 -- were not completely filled with antidote. The company also notified the Defense Department in March.
Since then, Meridian has been working with the Food and Drug Administration, which licensed the product in 2006, to improve product-quality issues in the manufacturing process, and with government agencies on a priority replacement plan.
There are no plans to recall the equivalent civilian product, called DuoDote, or the military product, called Antidote Treatment Nerve Agent-Autoinjector, or ATNAA, the official said. In the meantime, nothing has changed for service members in the field who are issued the product when a threat looms, the military official said.
With the current ATNAA product, the military official said, "warfighters are protected and there is no operational impact. The FDA has opined that all autoinjectors are safe and effective and can be used under current tactics, techniques and procedures."
The autoinjector is a spring-loaded syringe designed to overcome the hesitation someone might show when self-injecting even a small needle. To user removes a cap on the back, puts the front end on the outer thigh or buttocks, pushes until the device activates, then holds it in place for 10 seconds.
The ATNAA autoinjector has two internal chambers, one on top of the other. The top chamber contains the drug atropine, and the bottom chamber holds pralidoxime chloride. When the injector activates, the drugs flow together through a syringe and into the body.
Nerve agents are fast-working and deadly, andinhibit a range of physiological processes in the nervous system, causing pinpoint pupils, eye pain, sweating, drooling, tearing, vomiting and seizures.
Atropine reduces secretions in the mouth and respiratory passages, relieves respiratory passage constriction and spasms, and may reduce respiratory paralysis caused by toxic agents on the central nervous system.
Pralidoxime chloride relieves paralysis of respiration muscles and is always used with atropine to treat nerve-agent poisoning.
For the Defense Department to date, Meridian has put 1.1 million ATNAA autoinjectors through a process of remediation that includes first a visual examination by trained technicians and then weighing the autoinjectors to make sure they're properly filled with antidote, the military official said, adding that improperly filled devices are being rejected.
The Defense Logistics Agency is working through the contractual details about how Meridian will replace the defective devices, the official added.
"There are two lines of effort: new manufacturing and remediation. We're hopeful the FDA will approve the enhancements to [Meridian's] manufacturing process within the next 12 weeks, and then as soon as DLA works through the details on acceptance of the remediated product, it will be available [to DOD]," the military official said.
In addition to DLA, the Joint Program Executive Office forChemical and Biological Defense is working in close coordination with the FDA, the Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, and the Army Office of the Surgeon General to help resolve the issue.
The military official said Meridian is working closely with regulators from the FDA and internally to make sure a more rigorous quality-control process is in place so the problem won't happen again.
"The company has made a good-faith effort to remediate the issues, both with current product and in the future," Pentagon spokeswoman Jennifer D. Elzea said, "so from the department's perspective, they've been cooperative."
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
U.S. MARSHALS SELLING JESSE JACKSON JR., STUFF
 |
| From: U.S. Marshals Service |
U.S. Marshals Selling Personal Items from Jesse Jackson, Jr., Fraud Case
Washington – The U.S. Marshals Service is selling 12 items from the Jesse Jackson, Jr., fraud conspiracy case via an online auction at www.txauction.com starting Tuesday and ending Sept. 26.
Items for sale include Michael Jackson and Bruce Lee memorabilia and fur coats and capes. Net proceeds from the sale of these assets will be subtracted from the $750,000 money judgment against Jackson that was filed in federal court Aug. 19.
Jackson pleaded guilty in February in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia to conspiring to defraud his re-election campaigns of about $750,000 in funds that were used to pay for personal items and expenses. According to the government’s evidence, Jackson carried out a fraud scheme from 2005 until 2012. Rather than using donated funds for legitimate campaign expenses, he used a substantial portion for personal expenditures. Jackson was sentenced in August to 30 months in prison.
U.S. MILITARY SAYS IT IS READY TO BACK UP DIPLOMACY WITH SYRIA
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Military Assets Ready to Back Up Diplomatic Push With Syria
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2013 - U.S. military assets remain ready to launch attacks if the diplomatic efforts to secure and dismantle the Syrian regime's chemical arms should fail, senior defense officials said here today.
In a Pentagon news conference, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the military role today is limited.
"The current role of the military is to provide some planning assistance to the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons ... who has the lead, and as well as to maintain the credible threat of force, should the diplomatic track fail," Dempsey said.
The chairman said he believes forces loyal to Syrian president Bashar Assad have maintained control of the regime's chemical weapons. The environment inside Syria is "very challenging," he added.
Still, Dempsey said, he believes it is possible for the international community to work in the country.
"So long as [Syrian leaders] agree to the framework, which causes them to be responsible for the security, the movement, the protection of the investigators or the inspectors, then I think that ... it is feasible," Dempsey said. "But we've got to make sure we keep our eye on all of those things."
The chairman acknowledged that disposing of chemical weapons is a complicated task.
"The framework calls for it to be controlled, destroyed or moved," he said. "In some combination, it is feasible, but those details will have to be worked by the OPCW."
Overall, the conflict in Syria ebbs and flows, the chairman said, and rebel groups in the country are concerned that the focus on chemical weapons will detract from the willingness of partners to support them.
"But ... in terms of direct threats to U.S. interests, I think ... that the elimination of the Assad regime's chemical capability is right at the top of our national interests," Dempsey added. "If this process bears fruit and achieves its stated purpose, we will be in a better position."
Military Assets Ready to Back Up Diplomatic Push With Syria
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2013 - U.S. military assets remain ready to launch attacks if the diplomatic efforts to secure and dismantle the Syrian regime's chemical arms should fail, senior defense officials said here today.
In a Pentagon news conference, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the military role today is limited.
"The current role of the military is to provide some planning assistance to the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons ... who has the lead, and as well as to maintain the credible threat of force, should the diplomatic track fail," Dempsey said.
The chairman said he believes forces loyal to Syrian president Bashar Assad have maintained control of the regime's chemical weapons. The environment inside Syria is "very challenging," he added.
Still, Dempsey said, he believes it is possible for the international community to work in the country.
"So long as [Syrian leaders] agree to the framework, which causes them to be responsible for the security, the movement, the protection of the investigators or the inspectors, then I think that ... it is feasible," Dempsey said. "But we've got to make sure we keep our eye on all of those things."
The chairman acknowledged that disposing of chemical weapons is a complicated task.
"The framework calls for it to be controlled, destroyed or moved," he said. "In some combination, it is feasible, but those details will have to be worked by the OPCW."
Overall, the conflict in Syria ebbs and flows, the chairman said, and rebel groups in the country are concerned that the focus on chemical weapons will detract from the willingness of partners to support them.
"But ... in terms of direct threats to U.S. interests, I think ... that the elimination of the Assad regime's chemical capability is right at the top of our national interests," Dempsey added. "If this process bears fruit and achieves its stated purpose, we will be in a better position."
DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY CARTER SAYS PAKISTAN'S ECONOMIC SUCCESS CRITICAL
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Success of India, Pakistan Critical to Region, Carter Says
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service
ABOARD A MILITARY AIRCRAFT, Sept. 18, 2013 - Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter today wrapped up a weeklong overseas trip that included stops in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.
After spending three days in Afghanistan, Carter stopped in Islamabad, Pakistan, for talks with senior defense and government officials. Among the topics discussed was the importance of Pakistan's continued economic development to the security of the region, Carter said today.
The economic development of Pakistan is essential, he said.
"Their neighbor to the east is running away from them economically," Carter noted. To develop its economy, Pakistan first needs peaceful relations with India to begin trading with them, the deputy defense secretary said.
Pakistan is critical to U.S. and regional security, the deputy secretary said.
"Unless it's part of the solution, it becomes part of the problem in Afghanistan," Carter said.
"The government of Pakistan has flirted over time with using terrorism as an instrument of state policy," Carter added. "It is coming to the realization that terrorism is a boomerang, and it comes back on you when you try to use it for your own purposes."
The principal threat to Pakistan is terrorism, he said, not its neighbors.
Carter spent yesterday meeting with senior Indian defense officials in New Delhi, including Defense Secretary Radha Krishna Mathur and Defense Minister A.K. Antony. He also met with U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission Michael Pelletier at the American Embassy.
The U.S. and India are destined to be security partners on the world stage, Carter said. The two countries share common interests, values and outlooks, he added, noting that the multifaceted defense relationship between them is the defining partnership of the 21st century.
A central topic of discussion was the Defense Trade and Technology Initiative, which is intended to increase defense industrial and technology cooperation, Carter said. The agreement isn't just about selling defense equipment to India, the deputy defense secretary noted; it's about fostering joint ventures.
"They don't want to just buy our stuff," Carter said. "They want to build our stuff with us and they want to develop new things with us, and they want to do research with us."
The joint C-130J Super Hercules transport aircraft venture between the Indian multinational conglomerate Tata and Lockheed Martin is a perfect model of co-production, he said.
"India is now part of the supply chain [for the aircraft], and has the economic benefit -- the jobs benefit -- of being part of that," Carter said.
Future defense projects between the two countries will include both co-development and co-production, the deputy defense secretary said.
Today, Carter traveled to Hindon Air Force Station in Ghaziabad, India, the largest air base in Asia and home to No. 77 Squadron, which operates the six C-130J aircraft India acquired in 2008. The aircraft have been used in several humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations throughout the country. In August, a pilot from the squadron set a world record for the highest-altitude landing and takeoff, landing at an airstrip 16,614 feet above sea level.
Hindon also is home to the recently formed No. 81 Squadron. Known as the Skylords, the squadron was formed in September to fly the Indian air force's new C-17 Globemaster III transport jets, which began arriving earlier this year. Three of the heavy-lift aircraft have been delivered so far under the $4 billion deal, and seven more are scheduled to arrive by November 2014.
"We want India to have all the capabilities it needs to meet its security needs, and we want to be a key partner in that effort," Carter said.
"When you look at pictures of the Indian air force's C-130s participating in the recent flood relief efforts in the north, ... that tells us we're on the right track," he added.
Success of India, Pakistan Critical to Region, Carter Says
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service
ABOARD A MILITARY AIRCRAFT, Sept. 18, 2013 - Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter today wrapped up a weeklong overseas trip that included stops in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.
After spending three days in Afghanistan, Carter stopped in Islamabad, Pakistan, for talks with senior defense and government officials. Among the topics discussed was the importance of Pakistan's continued economic development to the security of the region, Carter said today.
The economic development of Pakistan is essential, he said.
"Their neighbor to the east is running away from them economically," Carter noted. To develop its economy, Pakistan first needs peaceful relations with India to begin trading with them, the deputy defense secretary said.
Pakistan is critical to U.S. and regional security, the deputy secretary said.
"Unless it's part of the solution, it becomes part of the problem in Afghanistan," Carter said.
"The government of Pakistan has flirted over time with using terrorism as an instrument of state policy," Carter added. "It is coming to the realization that terrorism is a boomerang, and it comes back on you when you try to use it for your own purposes."
The principal threat to Pakistan is terrorism, he said, not its neighbors.
Carter spent yesterday meeting with senior Indian defense officials in New Delhi, including Defense Secretary Radha Krishna Mathur and Defense Minister A.K. Antony. He also met with U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission Michael Pelletier at the American Embassy.
The U.S. and India are destined to be security partners on the world stage, Carter said. The two countries share common interests, values and outlooks, he added, noting that the multifaceted defense relationship between them is the defining partnership of the 21st century.
A central topic of discussion was the Defense Trade and Technology Initiative, which is intended to increase defense industrial and technology cooperation, Carter said. The agreement isn't just about selling defense equipment to India, the deputy defense secretary noted; it's about fostering joint ventures.
"They don't want to just buy our stuff," Carter said. "They want to build our stuff with us and they want to develop new things with us, and they want to do research with us."
The joint C-130J Super Hercules transport aircraft venture between the Indian multinational conglomerate Tata and Lockheed Martin is a perfect model of co-production, he said.
"India is now part of the supply chain [for the aircraft], and has the economic benefit -- the jobs benefit -- of being part of that," Carter said.
Future defense projects between the two countries will include both co-development and co-production, the deputy defense secretary said.
Today, Carter traveled to Hindon Air Force Station in Ghaziabad, India, the largest air base in Asia and home to No. 77 Squadron, which operates the six C-130J aircraft India acquired in 2008. The aircraft have been used in several humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations throughout the country. In August, a pilot from the squadron set a world record for the highest-altitude landing and takeoff, landing at an airstrip 16,614 feet above sea level.
Hindon also is home to the recently formed No. 81 Squadron. Known as the Skylords, the squadron was formed in September to fly the Indian air force's new C-17 Globemaster III transport jets, which began arriving earlier this year. Three of the heavy-lift aircraft have been delivered so far under the $4 billion deal, and seven more are scheduled to arrive by November 2014.
"We want India to have all the capabilities it needs to meet its security needs, and we want to be a key partner in that effort," Carter said.
"When you look at pictures of the Indian air force's C-130s participating in the recent flood relief efforts in the north, ... that tells us we're on the right track," he added.
DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY CARTER TAKES NOTE OF PROGRESS IN AFGHANISTAN
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Carter Meets With Afghan Officials, Notes Progress
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2013 - Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter has wrapped up a three-day visit to Afghanistan, where he met with senior International Security Assistance Force, coalition and Afghan officials.
In a statement summarizing the visit, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said Carter met in the Afghan capital of Kabul with Defense Minister Bismillah Khan Mohammadi, Interior Minister Umar Daudzai and members of the Afghan Parliament to stress the importance of a timely conclusion to the bilateral security agreement that will spell out the terms of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan once the current mission ends there in December 2014.
Carter also stressed the importance of timely, free and fair elections in Afghanistan next year, the press secretary added.
In addition, he said, the deputy secretary noted the "tremendous progress" made by the Afghan national security forces this fighting season, the first in which they've assumed full lead.
Carter also met with U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan James Cunningham and ISAF Commander Marine Corps Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. to discuss progress made on concluding the bilateral security agreement, supporting the Afghan forces and setting conditions for a stable and secure Afghanistan in 2015 and beyond, Little said.
The deputy secretary also visited ISAF and Afghan forces in Bastion, Shindand, Gardez and Ghazni to commend them on their ongoing efforts and successes, the press secretary said, and he thanked Polish forces at Ghazni and the 203rd Afghan National Army Corps at Gardez.
He also visited Herat to pay tribute to the men and women affected by the Sept. 13 attack on the U.S. consulate there, and to praise Afghan and ISAF forces for their quick and decisive action, Little said.
Carter Meets With Afghan Officials, Notes Progress
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2013 - Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter has wrapped up a three-day visit to Afghanistan, where he met with senior International Security Assistance Force, coalition and Afghan officials.
In a statement summarizing the visit, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said Carter met in the Afghan capital of Kabul with Defense Minister Bismillah Khan Mohammadi, Interior Minister Umar Daudzai and members of the Afghan Parliament to stress the importance of a timely conclusion to the bilateral security agreement that will spell out the terms of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan once the current mission ends there in December 2014.
Carter also stressed the importance of timely, free and fair elections in Afghanistan next year, the press secretary added.
In addition, he said, the deputy secretary noted the "tremendous progress" made by the Afghan national security forces this fighting season, the first in which they've assumed full lead.
Carter also met with U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan James Cunningham and ISAF Commander Marine Corps Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. to discuss progress made on concluding the bilateral security agreement, supporting the Afghan forces and setting conditions for a stable and secure Afghanistan in 2015 and beyond, Little said.
The deputy secretary also visited ISAF and Afghan forces in Bastion, Shindand, Gardez and Ghazni to commend them on their ongoing efforts and successes, the press secretary said, and he thanked Polish forces at Ghazni and the 203rd Afghan National Army Corps at Gardez.
He also visited Herat to pay tribute to the men and women affected by the Sept. 13 attack on the U.S. consulate there, and to praise Afghan and ISAF forces for their quick and decisive action, Little said.
SIGAR INSPECTION LETTER ABOUT AFGHANISTAN'S JUSTICE TRAINING TRANSITION PROGRAM
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Letter Regarding the SIGAR Inspection of INL Justice Training Transition Program
September 11, 2013
John F. Sopko
Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR)
2530 Crystal Drive
Arlington, Virginia 22202
Re: SIGAR Inspection of INL Justice Training Transition Program
Dear Mr. Sopko:
This is in response to your letter about the U.S. Department of State’s partnership with the International Development Law Organization (IDLO) to implement the Justice Training Transition Program (JTTP) in Afghanistan.
The Department of State respects the role played by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) in safeguarding U.S. taxpayer investment, and we share your goals of implementing programs free from waste, fraud, and abuse. The Department of State will continue to work closely with your office to address questions or concerns with any of our assistance programs associated with reconstruction in Afghanistan. Particularly as we heed Congress’ clear interest in seeing the U.S. government move away from the use of private contractors – and as we gradually reduce the military footprint that ensures security for U.S. government employees implementing assistance and development programs on the ground in Afghanistan – we are, of course, intent on finding responsible implementing partners among international organizations and non-profit, non-governmental organizations.
The Department has carefully reviewed your alert letter of July 22, 2013 and the programs that it discussed. We found that the results of JTTP thus far have been impressive, and the robust oversight and monitoring and evaluation requirements we put into place in our agreement with IDLO are fully functioning and have revealed no deficiencies in program performance or management.
As a public international organization with UN Observer Status, IDLO has its own internal auditing procedures agreed to by its member states, which includes the United States Government. In addition, as the current President of the Assembly of Parties of IDLO, the United States sits on the Standing Committee and has played a leading role in ensuring that IDLO continually improves those procedures. It is important to note that there has been no evidence—nor have allegations been made—of fraud, waste, or mismanagement of JTTP. As we would do with any project implemented by any organization, if waste, fraud, or abuse were to be uncovered, or an allegation thereof, the Department of State would promptly investigate and undertake corrective action or terminate the program. IDLO has already agreed to third-party financial auditing of JTTP. We welcome your views on the appropriate timing of such audits and potential auditors.
My staff and I stand ready to help ensure that you and your staff are able to conduct as accurate a review of JTTP as possible. In that spirit, I offer the following comments to address the various items raised in your letter:
JTTP Promotes the Sustainability of U.S. Investments in Afghanistan
The Department appreciates and concurs with the statement in your letter describing justice programs run by the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) as “central to U.S. efforts to promote the rule of law in Afghanistan.” The Department routinely engages international organizations like IDLO for program implementation in Afghanistan and around the world because they are cost effective, offer unique capabilities and expertise, and enjoy international credibility. As not-for-profit entities that answer not only to us but also to other donors and their own governing structures, they also are subject to multiple layers of oversight.JTTP is a ground-breaking initiative within broader INL justice sector work that is transitioning legal training in Afghanistan from a primarily donor-funded and led effort to a sustainable Afghan government-provided continuing legal education system. Mechanisms like continuing legal education programs help promote stronger rule of law, protect the security of citizens through robust criminal justice capabilities, combat corruption, and create a more welcoming environment for investors in Afghanistan—all contributing to a more stable, prosperous, and secure Afghanistan. JTTP is designed to cement positive changes that have already been made in the justice sector in Afghanistan. The Afghan government has indicated that it both wants and needs the JTTP program, and is strongly vested in IDLO as an organization. As you are likely aware, the Afghan government is also a member state of IDLO.
Why the International Development Law Organization?
The Department of State has been engaged in criminal justice sector training and development projects throughout Afghanistan since 2003. The primary vehicle for training had been the Justice Sector Support Program (JSSP), which began in 2005 and was implemented by for-profit, commercial contractor Pacific Architects and Engineers (PAE). Due to the changing operational and security environment in Afghanistan, INL believed that during and after the security transition, the regional training efforts of JSSP could no longer be adequately implemented by an institutional contract with a private U.S. company. There were two primary reasons. First, during and after military transition, private contractors would no longer be able to utilize regional training centers previously secured by international forces, as these platforms were transferring to Afghan government control. Second, U.S. companies like PAE would not be exempt from President Karzai’s decrees banning private security contractors and creating the Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF), creating an uncertain future for this critical training initiative.
INL examined several options for continuing nationwide justice sector training in Afghanistan. INL ultimately selected IDLO as the best partner, and also the only feasible partner. With eleven years of experience in Afghanistan, IDLO had strong local partnerships and is a respected and known organization to the Government of Afghanistan. IDLO is the only international organization with an exclusive mandate to improve the rule of law in the developing world. As an international organization it enjoys a diplomatic waiver from using APPF for security protection. This factor weighed heavily in IDLO’s favor, as INL recognized the potential to significantly reduce security costs while also increasing freedom of movement in Afghanistan during and after transition. In addition, INL had worked with IDLO on a separate project in Afghanistan since 2010 and was familiar with IDLO’s strong and effective relationships with Afghan government officials, and—as an international organization—IDLO does not generate profit on programs it implements, and accordingly would return unspent funds to the U.S. Government or propose creative ways to use them to advance program objectives.
INL was aware that IDLO was in a period of broad organizational reform and transition when it entered into negotiations regarding JTTP, and thus worked with the organization to stand up a unit within IDLO dedicated solely to the JTTP project. As a result, the implementation unit for JTTP contains special management controls including the establishment of dedicated financial, procurement, human resources, monitoring and evaluation, legal, and program officers to run the program. The Department of State believes that the demonstrated program performance during the first six months of JTTP, including full performance, full reporting, and responsible preparation for future sustainability plans, reinforces the selection of IDLO.
The Nature of the JTTP Agreement
The funding mechanism for this project is a Letter of Agreement with a public international organization. The term used in your letter, “sole source,” is not legally applicable in this circumstance, as the INL agreement with IDLO is not a Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) contract—in fact, it is not a contract at all. It is a Letter of Agreement between the U.S. government and a public international organization to which it belongs. According to State Department Circular 175, the Secretary of State has delegated authority to INL to enter into Letters of Agreement with both foreign governments and also public international organizations, although the terms of those two types of agreements differ in some respects given the different status of sovereign countries versus international organizations with multiple member state parties.
Consistent with this authority, INL obligated funds to IDLO for JTTP through a Letter of Agreement that references two binding attachments: a Program Proposal and a budget. When attached to the Letter of Agreement, the 50-page Program Proposal became the official guiding document for project implementation; this document was provided to SIGAR and contains five pages exclusively addressing monitoring and evaluation and program oversight. The 805 line-item budget along with a 34-page budget justification narrative were developed jointly by IDLO and INL. These documents lay out in detail the financial plan of the program, with the budget narrative explaining and justifying each budget line-item and accounting for every dollar of the $47,759,796 project. SIGAR did not specifically ask IDLO or the Department for the JTTP project budget or budget justification. The Department will provide these documents upon SIGAR’s request.
1999 State Department Action Memorandum
In your alert letter, you referenced language from a 1999 State Department action memo regarding Circular 175, and also referenced a template containing “a ‘required’ provision establishing INL’s ‘monitoring and evaluation’ rights under agreements like the one signed with IDLO. This provision states in pertinent part:
A. Each party shall have the right . . . (2) to inspect and audit any records and accounts with respect to funds, property and contract services furnished by that party under this agreement to determine that such funds, services or property are being utilized in accordance with the terms of this agreement.
* * * *
C. Each party will furnish the other with information necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the project operations under the terms of this agreement. At the termination of the project a completion report shall be issued as an integral part of this process. The completion report will include a summary of United States Government and [the other party’s] project contributions, a record of activities performed, objectives achieved and related basic data.”
Your letter inaccurately characterizes options from the 1999 memo as binding requirements. For example, the 1999 action memorandum states that the template language “could be used for agreements with international organizations” but it is not required. While this language has been used in bilateral agreements with foreign countries, INL has searched its records and found no instance where this language has been used in an agreement with an international organization, including a Letter of Agreement between INL and an international organization signed less than two months after the approval of the 1999 memo you cited.
This precedent suggests that the language proved fundamentally inappropriate for an agreement with an international organization for two reasons: First, the language requires mutual examination of any records relating to funds or services provided by that party. The State Department would not agree to an international organization examining its books or records, should an international organization independently make a monetary or non-monetary contribution to a project; and second, the monitoring and evaluation language cited only requires a completion report. INL went above and beyond the language you cited because we determined that stronger monitoring standards were necessary. INL’s current standard requires quarterly reports in its agreements with all international organizations. Given the importance and cost of the JTTP project, INL set the bar even higher with this IDLO agreement, requiring bi-weekly, monthly, quarterly, mid-project, and end of project reporting. In addition, INL conducts other oversight activities as described below.
Access to IDLO Records
The standard for access to the organizational finances and reports of international organizations is enshrined in U.S. law. Under the International Organizations Immunities Act, 22 U.S.C. § 288, IDLO is a “public international organization” in which the United States participates. Under this status as a public international organization, IDLO has a distinct legal personality and capacity to perform acts required to carry out its core functions. § 288 provides that IDLO “enjoys the same immunity from suit and every form of judicial process as is enjoyed by foreign governments,” and further mandates that IDLO’s property and assets “shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived . . .The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable.” The IDLO Program Proposal further elucidates this distinction in the intellectual property section found on page 2 of the document. It states in relevant part that:
The title to intellectual property in relation to all documents and materials which IDLO develops under the terms of this program shall be vested in INL or its assignee. INL shall grant to IDLO a permanent, irrevocable, non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, adapt and otherwise exploit all such documents and materials developed by IDLO under this program. Notwithstanding the above, IDLO shall retain the intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any documents and materials that pre-existed IDLO’s performance under the Letter of Agreement or that IDLO may develop or acquire independently of its performance under the Letter of Agreement.
Under the agreement with IDLO, INL owns what it paid for and has a right to access it. IDLO is required to furnish to the Department any non-confidential records requested concerning the JTTP project specifically, and under the Letter of Agreement, INL owns and licenses to IDLO all intellectual property produced in furtherance of JTTP. IDLO is not required to release proprietary materials prepared prior to, or outside the scope of, the agreement with INL. These include proprietary training materials being used worldwide, but not on the JTTP program in Afghanistan. IDLO and INL may agree on additional safeguards to permit the conditional disclosure of confidential proprietary information used in the JTTP program in Afghanistan. It is our understanding that the only document IDLO refused to disclose in full (and instead provided excerpts of) was the Training of Trainers manual, which was not produced for JTTP training and is therefore outside SIGAR’s mandate. When informed of IDLO’s concerns for its proprietary information, SIGAR did not offer any terms or conditions to safeguard this information. Training materials or curricula prepared for JTTP in Afghanistan would be furnished if requested; SIGAR has not requested these materials.
On the broader issue of auditing IDLO as an institution, member states do not employ their own mechanisms to audit international organizations. Doing so would duplicate the work of those organizations’ own auditors, constitute an inefficient additional burden on organizations, undermine the organizations’ duty of confidentiality that normally exists in voluntary funding agreements between member states and organizations, and result in additional financial burdens to U.S. taxpayers, since a proportionate share of U.S. contributions to international organizations support the organizations’ international auditing staff. To ensure proper financial processes, international organizations conduct external audits of their financial records and make those audit results available to member states. IDLO has its own internal auditing procedures agreed to by its member states, including the U.S. Government. This includes an annual financial audit conducted by an independent firm to international auditing standards. SIGAR has not requested to review these materials.
Upon receipt of your draft alert letter, INL engaged IDLO to discuss your recommendations. As previously conveyed to SIGAR, IDLO agreed to amend the JTTP Letter of Agreement to explicitly reaffirm INL’s right to inspect IDLO records or accounts related to the JTTP program that are not of a confidential nature, which both we and IDLO believe was already assured by the original language of the Letter of Agreement.
Oversight of the JTTP Program
Although JTTP was not implemented through a contract, it was and is vitally important to the State Department that appropriate oversight provisions were included in the funding document, and that appropriate oversight personnel were assigned to manage the project.
The authority to enter into a bilateral arrangement with IDLO does not stem from the general authority to enter into contracts, but from § 481(a)(4) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, which provides: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President is authorized to furnish assistance to any country or international organization, on such terms and conditions as he may determine, for ... anticrime purposes.” This authority has been delegated by the President to the Secretary of State, and re-delegated to the Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs with prior program approval by the Director of Foreign Assistance.
Your reference to “contracting officer” and “contracting officer representative” are not applicable to bilateral international agreements. Contracting officers and contracting officer representatives are specific legal terms applying to the administration of contracts entered into under authority to contract, and as such are governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulations (see FAR Parts 1.602, 1.603, and 1.604 and definitions 2.101).
Nonetheless, the Department recognizes that program oversight is an essential and vital function to ensure appropriated funds are used for their intended purposes and that programs are effectively and efficiently managed regardless of the type of instrument used to establish obligations. Under the framework of a Letter of Agreement, the oversight functions that a contracting officer's representative would perform for contracts are provided by highly skilled and experienced program officers. INL assigned four program officers (a program officer and a Justice Team Lead in Kabul, and a program officer and a Justice Team Lead in Washington) to have primary oversight responsibility. Program officers have responsibility for frequent management meetings with IDLO, site visits, review of all required reporting, review of financial reporting, and verification of program implementation. Should changing environments or circumstances warrant program adjustments, program officers are permitted to negotiate modifications to the project which are then memorialized as amendments to the Letter of Agreement.
As part of its management of the JTTP program, INL conducts continuous communication via daily oversight of the IDLO program through email, phone calls, and site visits. In addition, every week, INL offices in Kabul and Washington conduct a joint phone call with IDLO headquarters in Rome and its field team in Kabul. To date, IDLO has completed all scheduled reporting required under the JTTP agreement, and has worked closely with INL to ensure that the reporting meets INL’s requirements. IDLO is diligently applying a results-based management approach that tracks the outputs of the programs as well as the outcomes and impact demonstrated in the Afghan justice sector. INL takes seriously its mandate to improve the criminal justice system in Afghanistan and requires implementers like IDLO to demonstrate positive change as a result of INL-funded projects.
Conclusion
The Department of State values independent oversight, including from SIGAR, and is working closely with the oversight community to protect taxpayer resources and enhance and improve the return on our investment. The Department is pleased so far with the results of JTTP and with our partnership with IDLO. We are confident that we have adequate and appropriate oversight mechanisms built into our Letter of Agreement with this public international organization. Because of our collective efforts, we believe that the Government of Afghanistan now has the ability to deploy at least a minimally adequate and functioning system that will effectively support continuing reform past the 2014 military transition. JTTP will cement that ability with a permanent training function inside Afghan government justice institutions. In doing so, it will decidedly advance the national interests of both Afghanistan and the United States.
We stand ready to answer any questions or supply any documents that would help SIGAR complete a more accurate review of the JTTP program. As always, members of the Department remain ready to meet at SIGAR’s convenience to clarify any persisting questions.
Sincerely,
James F. Dobbins
Special Representative for
Afghanistan and Pakistan
William R. Brownfield
Assistant Secretary for
International Narcotics and
Law Enforcement Affairs
Letter Regarding the SIGAR Inspection of INL Justice Training Transition Program
September 11, 2013
John F. Sopko
Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR)
2530 Crystal Drive
Arlington, Virginia 22202
Re: SIGAR Inspection of INL Justice Training Transition Program
Dear Mr. Sopko:
This is in response to your letter about the U.S. Department of State’s partnership with the International Development Law Organization (IDLO) to implement the Justice Training Transition Program (JTTP) in Afghanistan.
The Department of State respects the role played by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) in safeguarding U.S. taxpayer investment, and we share your goals of implementing programs free from waste, fraud, and abuse. The Department of State will continue to work closely with your office to address questions or concerns with any of our assistance programs associated with reconstruction in Afghanistan. Particularly as we heed Congress’ clear interest in seeing the U.S. government move away from the use of private contractors – and as we gradually reduce the military footprint that ensures security for U.S. government employees implementing assistance and development programs on the ground in Afghanistan – we are, of course, intent on finding responsible implementing partners among international organizations and non-profit, non-governmental organizations.
The Department has carefully reviewed your alert letter of July 22, 2013 and the programs that it discussed. We found that the results of JTTP thus far have been impressive, and the robust oversight and monitoring and evaluation requirements we put into place in our agreement with IDLO are fully functioning and have revealed no deficiencies in program performance or management.
As a public international organization with UN Observer Status, IDLO has its own internal auditing procedures agreed to by its member states, which includes the United States Government. In addition, as the current President of the Assembly of Parties of IDLO, the United States sits on the Standing Committee and has played a leading role in ensuring that IDLO continually improves those procedures. It is important to note that there has been no evidence—nor have allegations been made—of fraud, waste, or mismanagement of JTTP. As we would do with any project implemented by any organization, if waste, fraud, or abuse were to be uncovered, or an allegation thereof, the Department of State would promptly investigate and undertake corrective action or terminate the program. IDLO has already agreed to third-party financial auditing of JTTP. We welcome your views on the appropriate timing of such audits and potential auditors.
My staff and I stand ready to help ensure that you and your staff are able to conduct as accurate a review of JTTP as possible. In that spirit, I offer the following comments to address the various items raised in your letter:
JTTP Promotes the Sustainability of U.S. Investments in Afghanistan
The Department appreciates and concurs with the statement in your letter describing justice programs run by the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) as “central to U.S. efforts to promote the rule of law in Afghanistan.” The Department routinely engages international organizations like IDLO for program implementation in Afghanistan and around the world because they are cost effective, offer unique capabilities and expertise, and enjoy international credibility. As not-for-profit entities that answer not only to us but also to other donors and their own governing structures, they also are subject to multiple layers of oversight.JTTP is a ground-breaking initiative within broader INL justice sector work that is transitioning legal training in Afghanistan from a primarily donor-funded and led effort to a sustainable Afghan government-provided continuing legal education system. Mechanisms like continuing legal education programs help promote stronger rule of law, protect the security of citizens through robust criminal justice capabilities, combat corruption, and create a more welcoming environment for investors in Afghanistan—all contributing to a more stable, prosperous, and secure Afghanistan. JTTP is designed to cement positive changes that have already been made in the justice sector in Afghanistan. The Afghan government has indicated that it both wants and needs the JTTP program, and is strongly vested in IDLO as an organization. As you are likely aware, the Afghan government is also a member state of IDLO.
Why the International Development Law Organization?
The Department of State has been engaged in criminal justice sector training and development projects throughout Afghanistan since 2003. The primary vehicle for training had been the Justice Sector Support Program (JSSP), which began in 2005 and was implemented by for-profit, commercial contractor Pacific Architects and Engineers (PAE). Due to the changing operational and security environment in Afghanistan, INL believed that during and after the security transition, the regional training efforts of JSSP could no longer be adequately implemented by an institutional contract with a private U.S. company. There were two primary reasons. First, during and after military transition, private contractors would no longer be able to utilize regional training centers previously secured by international forces, as these platforms were transferring to Afghan government control. Second, U.S. companies like PAE would not be exempt from President Karzai’s decrees banning private security contractors and creating the Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF), creating an uncertain future for this critical training initiative.
INL examined several options for continuing nationwide justice sector training in Afghanistan. INL ultimately selected IDLO as the best partner, and also the only feasible partner. With eleven years of experience in Afghanistan, IDLO had strong local partnerships and is a respected and known organization to the Government of Afghanistan. IDLO is the only international organization with an exclusive mandate to improve the rule of law in the developing world. As an international organization it enjoys a diplomatic waiver from using APPF for security protection. This factor weighed heavily in IDLO’s favor, as INL recognized the potential to significantly reduce security costs while also increasing freedom of movement in Afghanistan during and after transition. In addition, INL had worked with IDLO on a separate project in Afghanistan since 2010 and was familiar with IDLO’s strong and effective relationships with Afghan government officials, and—as an international organization—IDLO does not generate profit on programs it implements, and accordingly would return unspent funds to the U.S. Government or propose creative ways to use them to advance program objectives.
INL was aware that IDLO was in a period of broad organizational reform and transition when it entered into negotiations regarding JTTP, and thus worked with the organization to stand up a unit within IDLO dedicated solely to the JTTP project. As a result, the implementation unit for JTTP contains special management controls including the establishment of dedicated financial, procurement, human resources, monitoring and evaluation, legal, and program officers to run the program. The Department of State believes that the demonstrated program performance during the first six months of JTTP, including full performance, full reporting, and responsible preparation for future sustainability plans, reinforces the selection of IDLO.
The Nature of the JTTP Agreement
The funding mechanism for this project is a Letter of Agreement with a public international organization. The term used in your letter, “sole source,” is not legally applicable in this circumstance, as the INL agreement with IDLO is not a Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) contract—in fact, it is not a contract at all. It is a Letter of Agreement between the U.S. government and a public international organization to which it belongs. According to State Department Circular 175, the Secretary of State has delegated authority to INL to enter into Letters of Agreement with both foreign governments and also public international organizations, although the terms of those two types of agreements differ in some respects given the different status of sovereign countries versus international organizations with multiple member state parties.
Consistent with this authority, INL obligated funds to IDLO for JTTP through a Letter of Agreement that references two binding attachments: a Program Proposal and a budget. When attached to the Letter of Agreement, the 50-page Program Proposal became the official guiding document for project implementation; this document was provided to SIGAR and contains five pages exclusively addressing monitoring and evaluation and program oversight. The 805 line-item budget along with a 34-page budget justification narrative were developed jointly by IDLO and INL. These documents lay out in detail the financial plan of the program, with the budget narrative explaining and justifying each budget line-item and accounting for every dollar of the $47,759,796 project. SIGAR did not specifically ask IDLO or the Department for the JTTP project budget or budget justification. The Department will provide these documents upon SIGAR’s request.
1999 State Department Action Memorandum
In your alert letter, you referenced language from a 1999 State Department action memo regarding Circular 175, and also referenced a template containing “a ‘required’ provision establishing INL’s ‘monitoring and evaluation’ rights under agreements like the one signed with IDLO. This provision states in pertinent part:
A. Each party shall have the right . . . (2) to inspect and audit any records and accounts with respect to funds, property and contract services furnished by that party under this agreement to determine that such funds, services or property are being utilized in accordance with the terms of this agreement.
* * * *
C. Each party will furnish the other with information necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the project operations under the terms of this agreement. At the termination of the project a completion report shall be issued as an integral part of this process. The completion report will include a summary of United States Government and [the other party’s] project contributions, a record of activities performed, objectives achieved and related basic data.”
Your letter inaccurately characterizes options from the 1999 memo as binding requirements. For example, the 1999 action memorandum states that the template language “could be used for agreements with international organizations” but it is not required. While this language has been used in bilateral agreements with foreign countries, INL has searched its records and found no instance where this language has been used in an agreement with an international organization, including a Letter of Agreement between INL and an international organization signed less than two months after the approval of the 1999 memo you cited.
This precedent suggests that the language proved fundamentally inappropriate for an agreement with an international organization for two reasons: First, the language requires mutual examination of any records relating to funds or services provided by that party. The State Department would not agree to an international organization examining its books or records, should an international organization independently make a monetary or non-monetary contribution to a project; and second, the monitoring and evaluation language cited only requires a completion report. INL went above and beyond the language you cited because we determined that stronger monitoring standards were necessary. INL’s current standard requires quarterly reports in its agreements with all international organizations. Given the importance and cost of the JTTP project, INL set the bar even higher with this IDLO agreement, requiring bi-weekly, monthly, quarterly, mid-project, and end of project reporting. In addition, INL conducts other oversight activities as described below.
Access to IDLO Records
The standard for access to the organizational finances and reports of international organizations is enshrined in U.S. law. Under the International Organizations Immunities Act, 22 U.S.C. § 288, IDLO is a “public international organization” in which the United States participates. Under this status as a public international organization, IDLO has a distinct legal personality and capacity to perform acts required to carry out its core functions. § 288 provides that IDLO “enjoys the same immunity from suit and every form of judicial process as is enjoyed by foreign governments,” and further mandates that IDLO’s property and assets “shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived . . .The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable.” The IDLO Program Proposal further elucidates this distinction in the intellectual property section found on page 2 of the document. It states in relevant part that:
The title to intellectual property in relation to all documents and materials which IDLO develops under the terms of this program shall be vested in INL or its assignee. INL shall grant to IDLO a permanent, irrevocable, non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, adapt and otherwise exploit all such documents and materials developed by IDLO under this program. Notwithstanding the above, IDLO shall retain the intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any documents and materials that pre-existed IDLO’s performance under the Letter of Agreement or that IDLO may develop or acquire independently of its performance under the Letter of Agreement.
Under the agreement with IDLO, INL owns what it paid for and has a right to access it. IDLO is required to furnish to the Department any non-confidential records requested concerning the JTTP project specifically, and under the Letter of Agreement, INL owns and licenses to IDLO all intellectual property produced in furtherance of JTTP. IDLO is not required to release proprietary materials prepared prior to, or outside the scope of, the agreement with INL. These include proprietary training materials being used worldwide, but not on the JTTP program in Afghanistan. IDLO and INL may agree on additional safeguards to permit the conditional disclosure of confidential proprietary information used in the JTTP program in Afghanistan. It is our understanding that the only document IDLO refused to disclose in full (and instead provided excerpts of) was the Training of Trainers manual, which was not produced for JTTP training and is therefore outside SIGAR’s mandate. When informed of IDLO’s concerns for its proprietary information, SIGAR did not offer any terms or conditions to safeguard this information. Training materials or curricula prepared for JTTP in Afghanistan would be furnished if requested; SIGAR has not requested these materials.
On the broader issue of auditing IDLO as an institution, member states do not employ their own mechanisms to audit international organizations. Doing so would duplicate the work of those organizations’ own auditors, constitute an inefficient additional burden on organizations, undermine the organizations’ duty of confidentiality that normally exists in voluntary funding agreements between member states and organizations, and result in additional financial burdens to U.S. taxpayers, since a proportionate share of U.S. contributions to international organizations support the organizations’ international auditing staff. To ensure proper financial processes, international organizations conduct external audits of their financial records and make those audit results available to member states. IDLO has its own internal auditing procedures agreed to by its member states, including the U.S. Government. This includes an annual financial audit conducted by an independent firm to international auditing standards. SIGAR has not requested to review these materials.
Upon receipt of your draft alert letter, INL engaged IDLO to discuss your recommendations. As previously conveyed to SIGAR, IDLO agreed to amend the JTTP Letter of Agreement to explicitly reaffirm INL’s right to inspect IDLO records or accounts related to the JTTP program that are not of a confidential nature, which both we and IDLO believe was already assured by the original language of the Letter of Agreement.
Oversight of the JTTP Program
Although JTTP was not implemented through a contract, it was and is vitally important to the State Department that appropriate oversight provisions were included in the funding document, and that appropriate oversight personnel were assigned to manage the project.
The authority to enter into a bilateral arrangement with IDLO does not stem from the general authority to enter into contracts, but from § 481(a)(4) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, which provides: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President is authorized to furnish assistance to any country or international organization, on such terms and conditions as he may determine, for ... anticrime purposes.” This authority has been delegated by the President to the Secretary of State, and re-delegated to the Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs with prior program approval by the Director of Foreign Assistance.
Your reference to “contracting officer” and “contracting officer representative” are not applicable to bilateral international agreements. Contracting officers and contracting officer representatives are specific legal terms applying to the administration of contracts entered into under authority to contract, and as such are governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulations (see FAR Parts 1.602, 1.603, and 1.604 and definitions 2.101).
Nonetheless, the Department recognizes that program oversight is an essential and vital function to ensure appropriated funds are used for their intended purposes and that programs are effectively and efficiently managed regardless of the type of instrument used to establish obligations. Under the framework of a Letter of Agreement, the oversight functions that a contracting officer's representative would perform for contracts are provided by highly skilled and experienced program officers. INL assigned four program officers (a program officer and a Justice Team Lead in Kabul, and a program officer and a Justice Team Lead in Washington) to have primary oversight responsibility. Program officers have responsibility for frequent management meetings with IDLO, site visits, review of all required reporting, review of financial reporting, and verification of program implementation. Should changing environments or circumstances warrant program adjustments, program officers are permitted to negotiate modifications to the project which are then memorialized as amendments to the Letter of Agreement.
As part of its management of the JTTP program, INL conducts continuous communication via daily oversight of the IDLO program through email, phone calls, and site visits. In addition, every week, INL offices in Kabul and Washington conduct a joint phone call with IDLO headquarters in Rome and its field team in Kabul. To date, IDLO has completed all scheduled reporting required under the JTTP agreement, and has worked closely with INL to ensure that the reporting meets INL’s requirements. IDLO is diligently applying a results-based management approach that tracks the outputs of the programs as well as the outcomes and impact demonstrated in the Afghan justice sector. INL takes seriously its mandate to improve the criminal justice system in Afghanistan and requires implementers like IDLO to demonstrate positive change as a result of INL-funded projects.
Conclusion
The Department of State values independent oversight, including from SIGAR, and is working closely with the oversight community to protect taxpayer resources and enhance and improve the return on our investment. The Department is pleased so far with the results of JTTP and with our partnership with IDLO. We are confident that we have adequate and appropriate oversight mechanisms built into our Letter of Agreement with this public international organization. Because of our collective efforts, we believe that the Government of Afghanistan now has the ability to deploy at least a minimally adequate and functioning system that will effectively support continuing reform past the 2014 military transition. JTTP will cement that ability with a permanent training function inside Afghan government justice institutions. In doing so, it will decidedly advance the national interests of both Afghanistan and the United States.
We stand ready to answer any questions or supply any documents that would help SIGAR complete a more accurate review of the JTTP program. As always, members of the Department remain ready to meet at SIGAR’s convenience to clarify any persisting questions.
Sincerely,
James F. Dobbins
Special Representative for
Afghanistan and Pakistan
William R. Brownfield
Assistant Secretary for
International Narcotics and
Law Enforcement Affairs
SCIENTISTS LOOKING AT MOUTH GERM CAUSING COLON CANCER
FROM: U.S. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Mouth germs and cancer
From the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, I’m Ira Dreyfuss with HHS HealthBeat.
Researchers suspect a germ in the mouth could raise the risk of colon cancer. Scientists at Case Western Reserve University School of Dental Medicine in Cleveland say it’s the bacterium known as Fn, which lives in the mouth and can be carried to other body sites. The researchers say Fn attaches to a cell receptor in the colon. The process can spur cancer cell growth.
So researcher Yiping Han created a substance that blocks the process experimentally. She can’t tell whether it will lead to a treatment. So she advises people to control mouth microbes the way we know:
“Practice good oral hygiene and keep the gum healthy because the mouth is the gateway to our health.”
The study in the journal Cell Host and Microbe was supported by the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more at healthfinder.gov.
HHS HealthBeat is a production of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. I’m Ira Dreyfuss.
Mouth germs and cancer
From the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, I’m Ira Dreyfuss with HHS HealthBeat.
Researchers suspect a germ in the mouth could raise the risk of colon cancer. Scientists at Case Western Reserve University School of Dental Medicine in Cleveland say it’s the bacterium known as Fn, which lives in the mouth and can be carried to other body sites. The researchers say Fn attaches to a cell receptor in the colon. The process can spur cancer cell growth.
So researcher Yiping Han created a substance that blocks the process experimentally. She can’t tell whether it will lead to a treatment. So she advises people to control mouth microbes the way we know:
“Practice good oral hygiene and keep the gum healthy because the mouth is the gateway to our health.”
The study in the journal Cell Host and Microbe was supported by the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more at healthfinder.gov.
HHS HealthBeat is a production of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. I’m Ira Dreyfuss.
8 PLEAD GUILTY IN THE CASE OF THE ARMENIAN POWER GANG
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Eight Defendants Plead Guilty in Los Angeles in Armenian Power Gang Case
Four members and associates of the Armenian Power gang and four other individuals pleaded guilty late yesterday to charges relating to the activities of the Armenian Power criminal enterprise, including racketeering conspiracy, bank fraud, aggravated identity theft, drug-trafficking and illegal possession of firearms.
The guilty pleas were announced today by Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. of the Central District of California and Assistant Director in Charge Bill L. Lewis of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office.
The following defendants pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Dean D. Pregerson in the Central District of California:
• Karo Yerkanyan, aka “Guilty,” 32, of Tujunga, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy, bank fraud, aggravated identity theft, conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana and felon-in-possession of a firearm;
• Arman Tangabekyan, aka “Spito” and “Thick Neck,” 34, of Encino, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy, bank fraud and aggravated identity theft;
• Artur Pembejian, aka “Cham,” 36, of Burbank, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy;
• Raymond Tarverdyan, aka “Rye,” 35, of Montrose, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy and bank fraud;
• Simon Antonyan, aka “Simo,” 38, of Hollywood, Calif., pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft;
• Khachatur Arakelyan, aka “Khecho,” 39, of Glendale, Calif., pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft;
• Vartenie Ananian, 29, of Tujunga, pleaded guilty to bank fraud; and
• Adam Davoodian, 32, of Glendale, Calif., pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana.
The defendants who pleaded guilty yesterday were among 70 individuals charged in a 140-count indictment in July 2011 for criminal activities associated with the Armenian Power gang. The indictment accused 29 defendants, including four of those who pleaded guilty yesterday, of participation in the Armenian Power RICO conspiracy. The RICO conspiracy charge alleges a host of illegal activities, many of which involved sophisticated fraudulent schemes of identity theft, bank fraud, credit card skimming, manufacturing counterfeit checks and laundering criminal proceeds, often electronically. In addition, defendants were involved in a variety of violent crimes, such as extortion, kidnapping and firearms offenses. Among the schemes charged in the racketeering indictment is a bank fraud and identity theft scheme that victimized hundreds of customers of 99 Cents Only Stores throughout Southern California. Through the scheme, defendants caused more than $2 million in losses when they secretly installed sophisticated “skimming” devices to steal customer debit card account information at cash registers, and then used the skimmed information to create counterfeit debit cards to steal money from victims’ bank accounts.
The eight defendants who pleaded guilty yesterday played various roles in the activities of the Armenian Power gang, including participating in bank fraud, drug distribution, access device fraud, identity theft and illegal firearm possession.
Yerkanyan, a member of the Armenian Power conspiracy, participated in a bank fraud scheme that obtained the personal identifying information and account information of victims. He and his co-conspirators used the information to open fraudulent bank accounts, loans and lines of credit at HSBC Bank and Bank of America without the knowledge of the victims. Tangabekyan, a member of the Armenian Power conspiracy, participated in a bank fraud scheme by obtaining personal information and account information for victims and then obtaining or transferring over $475,000 in funds.
Yerkanyan also participated, along with Davoodian, in a scheme to steal approximately 207 pounds of marijuana, worth approximately $450,000, from another drug distributor.
Pembejian, a member of the Armenian Power conspiracy, abetted the illegal possession of a firearm by a leader of the Armenian Power gang, Mher Darbinyan.
Tarverdyan, an Armenian Power member, and Antonyan, Arakelyan and Ananian participated in the scheme to install secret “skimming” devices at the 99 Cents Only Stores in order to obtain victims’ account information.
According to court documents, the Armenian Power street gang formed in the East Hollywood district of Los Angeles in the 1980s. The gang’s membership consisted primarily of individuals of Armenian descent, as well as of other countries within the former Soviet bloc. The Armenian Power has been designated under California state law as a criminal street gang and is believed to have over 250 documented members, as well as hundreds of associates. According to court documents, Armenian Power members and associates regularly carry out violent criminal acts, including murders, attempted murders, kidnappings, robberies, extortions, and witness intimidation in order to enrich its members and associates and preserve and enhance the power of the criminal enterprise.
The defendants are scheduled to be sentenced beginning on Nov. 25, 2013. Yerkanyan faces a maximum penalty of 102 years in prison. Tangabekyan faces a maximum penalty of 52 years in prison. Tarverdyan faces a maximum penalty of 50 years in prison. Ananian faces a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison. Pembejian and Davoodian each face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. And Antonyan and Arakelyan each face a maximum penalty of two years in prison.
Fifty-one defendants have previously pleaded guilty for their roles in the activities of the Armenian Power gang.
The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Martin Estrada, Elizabeth Yang and Stephen Wolfe of the Central District of California and Trial Attorney Andrew Creighton of the Criminal Division’s Organized Crime and Gang Section. The case was investigated by the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force, which is comprised of the FBI, the U.S. Secret Service, the Los Angeles Police Department, the Glendale Police Department, the Burbank Police Department, the Internal Revenue Service and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Homeland Security Investigations.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Eight Defendants Plead Guilty in Los Angeles in Armenian Power Gang Case
Four members and associates of the Armenian Power gang and four other individuals pleaded guilty late yesterday to charges relating to the activities of the Armenian Power criminal enterprise, including racketeering conspiracy, bank fraud, aggravated identity theft, drug-trafficking and illegal possession of firearms.
The guilty pleas were announced today by Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. of the Central District of California and Assistant Director in Charge Bill L. Lewis of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office.
The following defendants pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Dean D. Pregerson in the Central District of California:
• Karo Yerkanyan, aka “Guilty,” 32, of Tujunga, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy, bank fraud, aggravated identity theft, conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana and felon-in-possession of a firearm;
• Arman Tangabekyan, aka “Spito” and “Thick Neck,” 34, of Encino, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy, bank fraud and aggravated identity theft;
• Artur Pembejian, aka “Cham,” 36, of Burbank, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy;
• Raymond Tarverdyan, aka “Rye,” 35, of Montrose, Calif., pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy and bank fraud;
• Simon Antonyan, aka “Simo,” 38, of Hollywood, Calif., pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft;
• Khachatur Arakelyan, aka “Khecho,” 39, of Glendale, Calif., pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft;
• Vartenie Ananian, 29, of Tujunga, pleaded guilty to bank fraud; and
• Adam Davoodian, 32, of Glendale, Calif., pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana.
The defendants who pleaded guilty yesterday were among 70 individuals charged in a 140-count indictment in July 2011 for criminal activities associated with the Armenian Power gang. The indictment accused 29 defendants, including four of those who pleaded guilty yesterday, of participation in the Armenian Power RICO conspiracy. The RICO conspiracy charge alleges a host of illegal activities, many of which involved sophisticated fraudulent schemes of identity theft, bank fraud, credit card skimming, manufacturing counterfeit checks and laundering criminal proceeds, often electronically. In addition, defendants were involved in a variety of violent crimes, such as extortion, kidnapping and firearms offenses. Among the schemes charged in the racketeering indictment is a bank fraud and identity theft scheme that victimized hundreds of customers of 99 Cents Only Stores throughout Southern California. Through the scheme, defendants caused more than $2 million in losses when they secretly installed sophisticated “skimming” devices to steal customer debit card account information at cash registers, and then used the skimmed information to create counterfeit debit cards to steal money from victims’ bank accounts.
The eight defendants who pleaded guilty yesterday played various roles in the activities of the Armenian Power gang, including participating in bank fraud, drug distribution, access device fraud, identity theft and illegal firearm possession.
Yerkanyan, a member of the Armenian Power conspiracy, participated in a bank fraud scheme that obtained the personal identifying information and account information of victims. He and his co-conspirators used the information to open fraudulent bank accounts, loans and lines of credit at HSBC Bank and Bank of America without the knowledge of the victims. Tangabekyan, a member of the Armenian Power conspiracy, participated in a bank fraud scheme by obtaining personal information and account information for victims and then obtaining or transferring over $475,000 in funds.
Yerkanyan also participated, along with Davoodian, in a scheme to steal approximately 207 pounds of marijuana, worth approximately $450,000, from another drug distributor.
Pembejian, a member of the Armenian Power conspiracy, abetted the illegal possession of a firearm by a leader of the Armenian Power gang, Mher Darbinyan.
Tarverdyan, an Armenian Power member, and Antonyan, Arakelyan and Ananian participated in the scheme to install secret “skimming” devices at the 99 Cents Only Stores in order to obtain victims’ account information.
According to court documents, the Armenian Power street gang formed in the East Hollywood district of Los Angeles in the 1980s. The gang’s membership consisted primarily of individuals of Armenian descent, as well as of other countries within the former Soviet bloc. The Armenian Power has been designated under California state law as a criminal street gang and is believed to have over 250 documented members, as well as hundreds of associates. According to court documents, Armenian Power members and associates regularly carry out violent criminal acts, including murders, attempted murders, kidnappings, robberies, extortions, and witness intimidation in order to enrich its members and associates and preserve and enhance the power of the criminal enterprise.
The defendants are scheduled to be sentenced beginning on Nov. 25, 2013. Yerkanyan faces a maximum penalty of 102 years in prison. Tangabekyan faces a maximum penalty of 52 years in prison. Tarverdyan faces a maximum penalty of 50 years in prison. Ananian faces a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison. Pembejian and Davoodian each face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. And Antonyan and Arakelyan each face a maximum penalty of two years in prison.
Fifty-one defendants have previously pleaded guilty for their roles in the activities of the Armenian Power gang.
The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Martin Estrada, Elizabeth Yang and Stephen Wolfe of the Central District of California and Trial Attorney Andrew Creighton of the Criminal Division’s Organized Crime and Gang Section. The case was investigated by the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force, which is comprised of the FBI, the U.S. Secret Service, the Los Angeles Police Department, the Glendale Police Department, the Burbank Police Department, the Internal Revenue Service and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Homeland Security Investigations.
BOLD QUEST
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Bold Quest Promotes Coalition Interoperability
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13, 2013 - Representatives from every U.S. military service and 11 other nations are taking part in a coalition capability demonstration designed to increase combat effectiveness and interoperability while minimizing the risk of fratricide.
Bold Quest 13.2, officially kicked off Sept. 2 at Camp Atterbury, Ind., with testing commencing earlier this week.
The Joint Staff-sponsored exercise includes about 800 participants from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and U.S. Special Operations Command, as well as Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Finland, France, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, John Miller, joint operational manager for the exercise, told reporters yesterday.
In addition, members of NATO's Airborne Early Warning and Control program are taking part in the demonstration.
Bold Quest 13.2 is the latest in a unique problem-solving cooperative aimed at promoting interoperability and testing out systems and concepts to support the future force, Joint Force 2020. Warfighters, developers and analysts are working together at Camp Atterbury's Muscatuck Urban Training Complex, where they are testing not only their different technologies, but also their tactics, techniques and procedures to ensure they're interoperable, Miller explained.
Among the technologies being demonstrated are radios, tactical data links and network equipment used to support joint forces, joint terminal attack control, personnel recovery and other missions.
The demonstration provides a forum for participants to assess the integration of joint fires, maneuver and cyber in a live-virtual environment, Miller said. The lessons, he told reporters via teleconference, will help to enhance combat effectiveness, reduce fratricide and improve situational awareness.
"Our primary objective in Bold Quest 13.2 is to assess the interoperability and integration of integrated systems, both lethal and nonlethal," he said. "Bold Quest remains focused on the need to develop and assess tools that make warfighters more effective in engaging their targets within a coalition context."
The premise, Miller said, is that coalition members that operate together need to develop and test their capabilities together before they employ them in combat.
Bold Quest 13.2 is the eighth in the Bold Quest series, created in 2003 to provide realistic conditions for the services and international partners to test their combat identification systems and the techniques and procedures they use to engage them, he said.
Historically, Bold Quest has focused on ground-to-ground and air-to-ground initiatives. But Bold Quest 13.1, conducted in June, represented a new step in the demonstration's 10-year evolution. It focused for the first time on the air-to-air and surface-to-air combat domains, an effort to address gaps that could impact future operations, Miller said.
Miller said enthusiasm for the exercise, particularly during a period of budgetary constraints, reflects the effectiveness of Bold Quest as a collaborative technological test bed that informs all participating nations' acquisition processes.
"An event like this enables U.S. and coalition partners to collectively assess solutions and share information," he said. And because every service and participating nation brings its own aircraft, ground units, systems and other technologies to the exercise, they share the cost of the demonstration.
After Bold Quest 13.2 concludes Sept. 24, analysts will collect technical data on the systems and feedback from service members using them and compile it in a report to be released later this year.
Bold Quest Promotes Coalition Interoperability
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13, 2013 - Representatives from every U.S. military service and 11 other nations are taking part in a coalition capability demonstration designed to increase combat effectiveness and interoperability while minimizing the risk of fratricide.
Bold Quest 13.2, officially kicked off Sept. 2 at Camp Atterbury, Ind., with testing commencing earlier this week.
The Joint Staff-sponsored exercise includes about 800 participants from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and U.S. Special Operations Command, as well as Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Finland, France, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, John Miller, joint operational manager for the exercise, told reporters yesterday.
In addition, members of NATO's Airborne Early Warning and Control program are taking part in the demonstration.
Bold Quest 13.2 is the latest in a unique problem-solving cooperative aimed at promoting interoperability and testing out systems and concepts to support the future force, Joint Force 2020. Warfighters, developers and analysts are working together at Camp Atterbury's Muscatuck Urban Training Complex, where they are testing not only their different technologies, but also their tactics, techniques and procedures to ensure they're interoperable, Miller explained.
Among the technologies being demonstrated are radios, tactical data links and network equipment used to support joint forces, joint terminal attack control, personnel recovery and other missions.
The demonstration provides a forum for participants to assess the integration of joint fires, maneuver and cyber in a live-virtual environment, Miller said. The lessons, he told reporters via teleconference, will help to enhance combat effectiveness, reduce fratricide and improve situational awareness.
"Our primary objective in Bold Quest 13.2 is to assess the interoperability and integration of integrated systems, both lethal and nonlethal," he said. "Bold Quest remains focused on the need to develop and assess tools that make warfighters more effective in engaging their targets within a coalition context."
The premise, Miller said, is that coalition members that operate together need to develop and test their capabilities together before they employ them in combat.
Bold Quest 13.2 is the eighth in the Bold Quest series, created in 2003 to provide realistic conditions for the services and international partners to test their combat identification systems and the techniques and procedures they use to engage them, he said.
Historically, Bold Quest has focused on ground-to-ground and air-to-ground initiatives. But Bold Quest 13.1, conducted in June, represented a new step in the demonstration's 10-year evolution. It focused for the first time on the air-to-air and surface-to-air combat domains, an effort to address gaps that could impact future operations, Miller said.
Miller said enthusiasm for the exercise, particularly during a period of budgetary constraints, reflects the effectiveness of Bold Quest as a collaborative technological test bed that informs all participating nations' acquisition processes.
"An event like this enables U.S. and coalition partners to collectively assess solutions and share information," he said. And because every service and participating nation brings its own aircraft, ground units, systems and other technologies to the exercise, they share the cost of the demonstration.
After Bold Quest 13.2 concludes Sept. 24, analysts will collect technical data on the systems and feedback from service members using them and compile it in a report to be released later this year.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL LAYS WREATH TO HONOR NAVY YARD SHOOTING VICTIMS
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Hagel to Lay Wreath at Navy Memorial to Honor Shooting Victims
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 17, 2013 - Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and other senior Defense Department leaders will lay a wreath at the U.S. Navy Memorial plaza at 10 a.m. today to honor the victims of yesterday's shooting rampage at the Washington Navy Yard.
The wreath will be placed adjacent to "The Lone Sailor," who represents "all people who have ever served, are serving now, or are yet to serve in the United States Navy," Pentagon officials said.
Meanwhile, President Barack Obama has ordered that U.S. flags be flown at half-staff through sundown Sept. 20 to honor the victims.
Hagel issued a statement yesterday in the aftermath of the shooting spree that authorities said killed 12 people and wounded at least eight others. The suspected shooter was killed in an encounter with security personnel, officials said.
"I have been receiving regular updates on the shooting at the Washington Navy Yard, and continue to monitor the situation closely," Hagel said in his statement. "This is a tragic day for the Department of Defense, the national capital area, and the nation. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this outrageous act of violence, their families, and all those affected by today's events.
"I am grateful for the swift response of federal and local law enforcement, and for the professionalism of DOD personnel at the Navy Yard complex," the secretary continued. "The Department of Defense will continue to offer its full assistance in the investigation of this terrible and senseless violence."
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said he was "deeply shocked and saddened" by the shooting.
"Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families," he said. "I have complete confidence in our first responders, and I continue to be completely focused on this very difficult situation."
Mabus pledged his support in a video message to those affected by the shooting. Earlier in the day, during a news conference at MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Mabus announced he had conferred "SECNAV Designee" status on injured personnel. The Secretary of the Navy Designee Program provides special eligibility for medical and dental care from naval medical facilities for patients affected by the shooting.
The Navy's top military officer also expressed condolences to the victims and their families on behalf of himself and his wife, Darleen.
"Our team of sailors and Navy civilians at the Navy Yard deserve our care and concern at this time," Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert said. "I applaud the efforts of all who immediately responded to this course of events in order to care for the injured victims and ensure the safety of our personnel."
Navy officials have established an emergency family support task force to assist victims, workers and families with related issues. The task force is led by Navy Vice. Adm. William D. French, commander of the Navy's Installations Command.
Hagel to Lay Wreath at Navy Memorial to Honor Shooting Victims
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 17, 2013 - Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and other senior Defense Department leaders will lay a wreath at the U.S. Navy Memorial plaza at 10 a.m. today to honor the victims of yesterday's shooting rampage at the Washington Navy Yard.
The wreath will be placed adjacent to "The Lone Sailor," who represents "all people who have ever served, are serving now, or are yet to serve in the United States Navy," Pentagon officials said.
Meanwhile, President Barack Obama has ordered that U.S. flags be flown at half-staff through sundown Sept. 20 to honor the victims.
Hagel issued a statement yesterday in the aftermath of the shooting spree that authorities said killed 12 people and wounded at least eight others. The suspected shooter was killed in an encounter with security personnel, officials said.
"I have been receiving regular updates on the shooting at the Washington Navy Yard, and continue to monitor the situation closely," Hagel said in his statement. "This is a tragic day for the Department of Defense, the national capital area, and the nation. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this outrageous act of violence, their families, and all those affected by today's events.
"I am grateful for the swift response of federal and local law enforcement, and for the professionalism of DOD personnel at the Navy Yard complex," the secretary continued. "The Department of Defense will continue to offer its full assistance in the investigation of this terrible and senseless violence."
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said he was "deeply shocked and saddened" by the shooting.
"Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families," he said. "I have complete confidence in our first responders, and I continue to be completely focused on this very difficult situation."
Mabus pledged his support in a video message to those affected by the shooting. Earlier in the day, during a news conference at MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Mabus announced he had conferred "SECNAV Designee" status on injured personnel. The Secretary of the Navy Designee Program provides special eligibility for medical and dental care from naval medical facilities for patients affected by the shooting.
The Navy's top military officer also expressed condolences to the victims and their families on behalf of himself and his wife, Darleen.
"Our team of sailors and Navy civilians at the Navy Yard deserve our care and concern at this time," Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert said. "I applaud the efforts of all who immediately responded to this course of events in order to care for the injured victims and ensure the safety of our personnel."
Navy officials have established an emergency family support task force to assist victims, workers and families with related issues. The task force is led by Navy Vice. Adm. William D. French, commander of the Navy's Installations Command.
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY DIRECTOR HIGHLIGHTS FUTURE TRENDS
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Intelligence Agency Director Discusses Roadmap for Future
By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2013 - In a global environment where crises such as the one occurring in Syria become sudden priorities and where fiscal, cyber and geopolitical disasters simmer on the world's back burners, intelligence is a critical guarantor of U.S. national security, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency said here last week.
Army Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn spoke to those attending a panel on intelligence community challenges and priorities at the Intelligence and National Security Alliance Summit. INSA is a nonprofit public-private organization whose members include current and former high-ranking intelligence, military and government agency leaders, analysts and experts.
"In light of future trends ... and in light of the absolutely critical role of intelligence for our national security, we must do the following," Flynn said. "We must adjust our operating model to refocus on our mission and our unique strengths. We must continually emphasize burden sharing, partnerships and integration. And we must instill flexibility and agility to respond to crises. That is our new normal."
Flynn said these undertakings must be woven into the fabric and culture of DIA and everything it does.
"At DIA," he said, "we have already laid the groundwork for that future."
The agency recently reorganized into a centers-based model that networks and integrates talent from across the agency -- analysts, collectors, collections managers, technicians, technical experts, targeteers -- and brings them together as one team to solve critical problems, Flynn said, describing the model as a "critical personal lesson that I learned from the past decade of war."
At the core of the centers are the following three qualities, the general explained.
-- A fusion of analysis and collection, which, based on experience from Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, is the most successful model for intelligence production and support;
-- Flexibility, so team members no longer have to contend with organizational boundaries; and
-- Integration, as each center has interagency embeds from across the intelligence community and tight relationships with combatant commands and service intelligence centers.
"That's not the model that we had coming into the last decade of war," he said.
Today, Flynn said, DIA's Middle East-Africa Regional Center, in close coordination with U.S. Central Command, the Joint Staff, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the White House, is handling the DIA assessments of the Syria crisis.
"And I have the utmost faith that they have the right talent, the right tools and the right resources to get the job done," he said.
The agency also has pushed more of its intelligence professionals -- collectors and analysts -- into the field to "thicken the edges," the general said, ensuring that they and the agency have an appreciation and working understanding of developments across the globe.
"My constant drumbeat is to make the edge the center," Flynn said. "The unique perspective of these officers in the field often made the crucial difference in our support to policymakers during the [al-Qaida] threats in Yemen, operations in Mali, instability in Egypt and certainly growing unrest in Syria."
Recently, he added, feedback from an intelligence officer in a particular country went directly to the secretary of defense in advance of his talks to allies about instability in the Middle East.
As the United States finds itself with new national security crossroads to navigate, the general observed, DIA is focused on being in the right place at the right time.
Flynn said DIA's role in the U.S. government's response to the crisis in Syria has been intense and continuous from the beginning.
"In our agency we have over 6,000 civilians who have served in a combat environment in the last decade," he said. "That's pretty extraordinary. Those that served in Iraq and focused on ... al-Qaida, ... but certainly on the Middle East militaries and the kinds of capabilities they have. They're worth their weight in gold right now."
The Defense Intelligence Agency is deeply involved as a member of the community, the general added. DIA, he said, is part of "an integrated team supporting Central Command, European Command, Africa Command, certainly Cyber Command. And we also support the military planning that's going on at every level up to and including the Joint Staff."
DIA also is involved on the policy side, he said.
"We have provided what I would call the nation's experts on chemical warfare to the State Department. They are today helping Secretary [John F.] Kerry negotiate that issue. They were called on a dime, and the individual I'm thinking about in this case absolutely jumped right into it," Flynn said.
The crisis in Syria shows how rapidly a challenge from the list of global threats can bubble up to the surface and completely change the nation's course and commitment of resources, the general said.
Another such issue on the horizon, he noted, could be the tactical use of cyberattacks for strategic purposes.
"We are all aware of the cyber threat," Flynn said.
Summit attendees spent a significant part of the afternoon talking about a range of cybersecurity topics, he said, from rogue hackers to insider threats to state-sponsored actors.
In May, the general added, appropriately at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in no uncertain terms that the destructive potential of cyberattacks has become the national security challenge of the age.
"While we grow ever more worried about threats to infrastructure in our increasingly wired society, DIA is increasingly focused on threats that can degrade our military capabilities," Flynn said.
Militarized cyber weapons are a new world for DIA, he added, one in which the agency needs to understand the doctrine and intent of cyber foes to best manage the risk such enemies pose to the nation.
"DIA has been the all-source leader on enemy doctrine and discipline, order-of-battle research and offensive capabilities for more than 50 years," Flynn said.
The agency is working hard with its intelligence community partners, he added, "to understand the security challenges that we face in our era."
Intelligence Agency Director Discusses Roadmap for Future
By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2013 - In a global environment where crises such as the one occurring in Syria become sudden priorities and where fiscal, cyber and geopolitical disasters simmer on the world's back burners, intelligence is a critical guarantor of U.S. national security, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency said here last week.
Army Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn spoke to those attending a panel on intelligence community challenges and priorities at the Intelligence and National Security Alliance Summit. INSA is a nonprofit public-private organization whose members include current and former high-ranking intelligence, military and government agency leaders, analysts and experts.
"In light of future trends ... and in light of the absolutely critical role of intelligence for our national security, we must do the following," Flynn said. "We must adjust our operating model to refocus on our mission and our unique strengths. We must continually emphasize burden sharing, partnerships and integration. And we must instill flexibility and agility to respond to crises. That is our new normal."
Flynn said these undertakings must be woven into the fabric and culture of DIA and everything it does.
"At DIA," he said, "we have already laid the groundwork for that future."
The agency recently reorganized into a centers-based model that networks and integrates talent from across the agency -- analysts, collectors, collections managers, technicians, technical experts, targeteers -- and brings them together as one team to solve critical problems, Flynn said, describing the model as a "critical personal lesson that I learned from the past decade of war."
At the core of the centers are the following three qualities, the general explained.
-- A fusion of analysis and collection, which, based on experience from Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, is the most successful model for intelligence production and support;
-- Flexibility, so team members no longer have to contend with organizational boundaries; and
-- Integration, as each center has interagency embeds from across the intelligence community and tight relationships with combatant commands and service intelligence centers.
"That's not the model that we had coming into the last decade of war," he said.
Today, Flynn said, DIA's Middle East-Africa Regional Center, in close coordination with U.S. Central Command, the Joint Staff, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the White House, is handling the DIA assessments of the Syria crisis.
"And I have the utmost faith that they have the right talent, the right tools and the right resources to get the job done," he said.
The agency also has pushed more of its intelligence professionals -- collectors and analysts -- into the field to "thicken the edges," the general said, ensuring that they and the agency have an appreciation and working understanding of developments across the globe.
"My constant drumbeat is to make the edge the center," Flynn said. "The unique perspective of these officers in the field often made the crucial difference in our support to policymakers during the [al-Qaida] threats in Yemen, operations in Mali, instability in Egypt and certainly growing unrest in Syria."
Recently, he added, feedback from an intelligence officer in a particular country went directly to the secretary of defense in advance of his talks to allies about instability in the Middle East.
As the United States finds itself with new national security crossroads to navigate, the general observed, DIA is focused on being in the right place at the right time.
Flynn said DIA's role in the U.S. government's response to the crisis in Syria has been intense and continuous from the beginning.
"In our agency we have over 6,000 civilians who have served in a combat environment in the last decade," he said. "That's pretty extraordinary. Those that served in Iraq and focused on ... al-Qaida, ... but certainly on the Middle East militaries and the kinds of capabilities they have. They're worth their weight in gold right now."
The Defense Intelligence Agency is deeply involved as a member of the community, the general added. DIA, he said, is part of "an integrated team supporting Central Command, European Command, Africa Command, certainly Cyber Command. And we also support the military planning that's going on at every level up to and including the Joint Staff."
DIA also is involved on the policy side, he said.
"We have provided what I would call the nation's experts on chemical warfare to the State Department. They are today helping Secretary [John F.] Kerry negotiate that issue. They were called on a dime, and the individual I'm thinking about in this case absolutely jumped right into it," Flynn said.
The crisis in Syria shows how rapidly a challenge from the list of global threats can bubble up to the surface and completely change the nation's course and commitment of resources, the general said.
Another such issue on the horizon, he noted, could be the tactical use of cyberattacks for strategic purposes.
"We are all aware of the cyber threat," Flynn said.
Summit attendees spent a significant part of the afternoon talking about a range of cybersecurity topics, he said, from rogue hackers to insider threats to state-sponsored actors.
In May, the general added, appropriately at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in no uncertain terms that the destructive potential of cyberattacks has become the national security challenge of the age.
"While we grow ever more worried about threats to infrastructure in our increasingly wired society, DIA is increasingly focused on threats that can degrade our military capabilities," Flynn said.
Militarized cyber weapons are a new world for DIA, he added, one in which the agency needs to understand the doctrine and intent of cyber foes to best manage the risk such enemies pose to the nation.
"DIA has been the all-source leader on enemy doctrine and discipline, order-of-battle research and offensive capabilities for more than 50 years," Flynn said.
The agency is working hard with its intelligence community partners, he added, "to understand the security challenges that we face in our era."
HISPANIC HERITAGE MONTH
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Hispanic Heritage Month an Opportunity to Explore Contributions
By Terri Moon Cronk
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2013 - Hispanic Heritage Month, which began Sept. 15, marks a time to showcase the many contributions Hispanic Americans have made to the Defense Department, the Deputy Director of DOD's Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity said.
Continuing through Oct. 15, the month-long observance gives people the opportunity to explore the Hispanic culture, F. Michael Sena said in a recent interview with American Forces Press Service and the Pentagon Channel, though Hispanic heritage is not for a specific demographic group.
"It's for everyone," he added. "It's our history."
The department's Hispanic-American population of service members and civilian employees is increasing, Sena said.
"Military and civilians throughout the world are in critical roles in DOD," he said. "Hispanic-Americans have a deep, profound impact on DOD, and it's through that impact that their commitment to family, faith, hard work and public service has influenced and enhanced our national culture through multicultural and multiethnic traditions. You can see that in everyday life through our food, language and art."
About 11.5 percent of DOD's military total force is Hispanic, and about 5.5 percent of that comprises officers, Sena said. The greatest strides are being made in Hispanic women, or Latinas, and Latina officers in particular, whose numbers have nearly doubled to 2,000 in the military in recent years, he said.
"[Latina officers] are fantastic role models to our folks throughout the country," he said, adding that of the estimated 800,000 civilians who work for DOD worldwide, Hispanics make up about 6.5 percent.
Still, he said, Pentagon officials hope to recruit more Hispanic service members. "DOD still needs to do a lot of work to increase our numbers to be reflective of the nation," he acknowledged.
DOD's major strategies to increase the Hispanic population in its ranks include having a robust outreach and recruitment program, working on educational and developmental programs for future employees, and developmental programs for existing employees to refresh their skills and make them more competitive in their occupations, Sena said.
While strides have been made, he added, more progress also is needed within the realm of civilian DOD employment.
"DOD is committed to increasing its diversity and inclusion numbers," he said, adding that diversity represents more than demographics. "We're talking about individuals who have skills, knowledge and abilities that bring different perspectives -- diversity is key to our readiness."
To spread the word among Hispanics that DOD is a model employer, the department engages with affinity groups, such as Latina Style, the National Organization of Mexican American Rights and the League of United Latin American Citizens to reach out to Hispanic Americans, Sena said. The department also is pursuing opportunities for Hispanics in the science, technology, engineering and math fields -- also known as STEM -- by working with students, parents and teachers.
STEM investments in individuals such as Hispanic-Americans leads to innovation, Sena noted.
"Innovation requires individuals who are creative [and] have diverse thoughts and ideas to make our lives better," he said. "It increases quality of life, which leads to a better economy, and a better economy is a pillar of our national security."
Hispanic Heritage Month an Opportunity to Explore Contributions
By Terri Moon Cronk
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2013 - Hispanic Heritage Month, which began Sept. 15, marks a time to showcase the many contributions Hispanic Americans have made to the Defense Department, the Deputy Director of DOD's Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity said.
Continuing through Oct. 15, the month-long observance gives people the opportunity to explore the Hispanic culture, F. Michael Sena said in a recent interview with American Forces Press Service and the Pentagon Channel, though Hispanic heritage is not for a specific demographic group.
"It's for everyone," he added. "It's our history."
The department's Hispanic-American population of service members and civilian employees is increasing, Sena said.
"Military and civilians throughout the world are in critical roles in DOD," he said. "Hispanic-Americans have a deep, profound impact on DOD, and it's through that impact that their commitment to family, faith, hard work and public service has influenced and enhanced our national culture through multicultural and multiethnic traditions. You can see that in everyday life through our food, language and art."
About 11.5 percent of DOD's military total force is Hispanic, and about 5.5 percent of that comprises officers, Sena said. The greatest strides are being made in Hispanic women, or Latinas, and Latina officers in particular, whose numbers have nearly doubled to 2,000 in the military in recent years, he said.
"[Latina officers] are fantastic role models to our folks throughout the country," he said, adding that of the estimated 800,000 civilians who work for DOD worldwide, Hispanics make up about 6.5 percent.
Still, he said, Pentagon officials hope to recruit more Hispanic service members. "DOD still needs to do a lot of work to increase our numbers to be reflective of the nation," he acknowledged.
DOD's major strategies to increase the Hispanic population in its ranks include having a robust outreach and recruitment program, working on educational and developmental programs for future employees, and developmental programs for existing employees to refresh their skills and make them more competitive in their occupations, Sena said.
While strides have been made, he added, more progress also is needed within the realm of civilian DOD employment.
"DOD is committed to increasing its diversity and inclusion numbers," he said, adding that diversity represents more than demographics. "We're talking about individuals who have skills, knowledge and abilities that bring different perspectives -- diversity is key to our readiness."
To spread the word among Hispanics that DOD is a model employer, the department engages with affinity groups, such as Latina Style, the National Organization of Mexican American Rights and the League of United Latin American Citizens to reach out to Hispanic Americans, Sena said. The department also is pursuing opportunities for Hispanics in the science, technology, engineering and math fields -- also known as STEM -- by working with students, parents and teachers.
STEM investments in individuals such as Hispanic-Americans leads to innovation, Sena noted.
"Innovation requires individuals who are creative [and] have diverse thoughts and ideas to make our lives better," he said. "It increases quality of life, which leads to a better economy, and a better economy is a pillar of our national security."
GUARDSMEN RESUME MISSION AFTER BEING STRANDED
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Guardsmen Stranded by Rising Waters Resume Their Mission
From a Colorado National Guard News Release
CENTENNIAL, Colo., Sept. 17, 2013 - Sixteen Colorado National Guard members and first responders who were unable to evacuate themselves after they were stopped by rising flood waters Sept. 15 have resumed their regularly scheduled mission.
A mix of 51 Colorado National Guard members, Urban Search and Rescue personnel and civilians, along with five pets and six high-mobility military trucks, were reported to be stopped by rising waters in Lyons, Colo.
Fort Carson aviators piloting two helicopters evacuated all 10 civilians and their pets, along with a number of Guard members and Army Reserve personnel, before weather took another bad turn and aviation operations were suspended for the night. Flights were limited for most of the day, as heavy rain and low ceilings hampered visibility, causing flight safety issues.
Rather than wait out the storm, the remaining 16 service members -- seven Colorado Guard members and nine Army Reserve soldiers -- spent several hours going door to door in the flood area, looking for anyone else who may have needed help. As the stranded rescuers were knocking, a family offered the group a warm place to stay overnight.
The group headed back out early yesterday to search for more people in distress. Later, they teamed up with Colorado Department of Transportation and Boulder County professionals to build a makeshift bridge that would allow the Guard and Army reserve members to leave the area, along with one evacuee.
As of 5:45 p.m. MDT yesterday, more than 700 military members in tactical trucks and helicopters had rescued more than 2,400 people and hundreds of pets displaced by flooding in Colorado, and all 21 military helicopters scheduled to perform evacuation operations were in service.
In addition to ground and aerial evacuation operations, Colorado National Guard members also are manning more than 40 traffic control points in several affected counties to ensure public safety and protect property.
The Colorado National Guard, Wyoming National Guard, and the Army's 4th Combat Aviation Brigade from Fort Carson are working in direct support of civilian authorities, officials said.
Lance Blyth, U.S. Northern Command historian, said the military response to the Colorado floods, dubbed "Operation Centennial Raging Waters," likely is the biggest rotary-wing airlift mission since the 2005 Hurricane Katrina response.
Guardsmen Stranded by Rising Waters Resume Their Mission
From a Colorado National Guard News Release
CENTENNIAL, Colo., Sept. 17, 2013 - Sixteen Colorado National Guard members and first responders who were unable to evacuate themselves after they were stopped by rising flood waters Sept. 15 have resumed their regularly scheduled mission.
A mix of 51 Colorado National Guard members, Urban Search and Rescue personnel and civilians, along with five pets and six high-mobility military trucks, were reported to be stopped by rising waters in Lyons, Colo.
Fort Carson aviators piloting two helicopters evacuated all 10 civilians and their pets, along with a number of Guard members and Army Reserve personnel, before weather took another bad turn and aviation operations were suspended for the night. Flights were limited for most of the day, as heavy rain and low ceilings hampered visibility, causing flight safety issues.
Rather than wait out the storm, the remaining 16 service members -- seven Colorado Guard members and nine Army Reserve soldiers -- spent several hours going door to door in the flood area, looking for anyone else who may have needed help. As the stranded rescuers were knocking, a family offered the group a warm place to stay overnight.
The group headed back out early yesterday to search for more people in distress. Later, they teamed up with Colorado Department of Transportation and Boulder County professionals to build a makeshift bridge that would allow the Guard and Army reserve members to leave the area, along with one evacuee.
As of 5:45 p.m. MDT yesterday, more than 700 military members in tactical trucks and helicopters had rescued more than 2,400 people and hundreds of pets displaced by flooding in Colorado, and all 21 military helicopters scheduled to perform evacuation operations were in service.
In addition to ground and aerial evacuation operations, Colorado National Guard members also are manning more than 40 traffic control points in several affected counties to ensure public safety and protect property.
The Colorado National Guard, Wyoming National Guard, and the Army's 4th Combat Aviation Brigade from Fort Carson are working in direct support of civilian authorities, officials said.
Lance Blyth, U.S. Northern Command historian, said the military response to the Colorado floods, dubbed "Operation Centennial Raging Waters," likely is the biggest rotary-wing airlift mission since the 2005 Hurricane Katrina response.
REMARKS BY SEC. KERRY, FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS AND UK FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and UK Foreign Secretary William Hague
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Quai d'Orsay
Paris, France
September 16, 2013
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (Via interpreter) (In progress) discuss the situation in Syria as well as the decisions to be taken over the next few days. And further to that meeting at the Elysee Palace, we held the first working meeting with my two colleagues. And we will be meeting in a minute after this press conference our colleague, the Mr. Davutoglu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey, and we will also consider with him what should be done.
The purpose of that meeting is twofold: First of all, it is about preparing for the concrete and fast implementation of the agreement on eliminating the chemical weapons (inaudible) that was found in Geneva. It is also about reviving the political process, which is the only way to put an end to the tragedy that’s been affecting Syria for two and a half years now. As I’ve said before, the Geneva agreement is a major step forward.
Since the chemical massacre that took place on the 21st of August, our position has been clear and constant, and I summarized it by saying it was about sanctioning and deterring. This kind of firmness which is ours, the countries represented here, has been fruitful. The Syrian regime has no alternative but to commit to eliminating these chemical weapons. And let me remind you that only a couple of days ago, the regime was denying the existence of these very same weapons, weapons that will be – the report to be published by the inspectors of the United Nations later on today will probably confirm that these weapons were used on the 21st of August. But what matters is that this agreement can be quickly implemented in order to eliminate once and for all the threat of a chemical attack by the Syrian regime against its own population and its neighbors. So we want very quickly to undertake some concrete and verifiable actions, and keep in mind that all the options remain on the table if these statements were not followed by concrete actions on the field.
So this is the reason why the P-3 – France, the United States, and the United Kingdom – want to obtain from the Security Council of the United Nations over the coming days a strong resolution, a resolution that will support the plan for chemical disarmament with all the authority of the Council. And there will be serious consequences provided in the resolution if the plan was not to be implemented. And the resolution shall also say that those responsible for the massacre of the 21st of August will be clearly held accountable if their responsibility is proven. So we will be working on that in order to agree on the wording within the P-3 and then at the level of the Security Council.
Ladies and gentlemen, the chemical weapons are only one aspect, the horrific – the particularly horrific aspect of the Syrian tragedy. It is only one of the means used by the regime in order to repress its people and to do so in blood. Fighting continues, and we know there is no military solution to that conflict. The solution is political.
In Geneva, some 18 months ago, we agreed upon a number of clear principles in order to organize the political transition in Syria, to organize in particular – that was what was agreed upon – the transfer of all executive powers, including control over the army and the security services to a transition authority. But so far, the regime in (inaudible) did not want to implement that agreement. And as Bashar al-Assad said recently, he preferred to eradicate the opposition. So we have to make sure that he understands that there is no alternative to the table of negotiations.
We will continue our efforts over the coming days in order to build a political solution and work together with all the countries that support the principles agreed upon in Geneva. We know that in order to negotiate a political solution, we need a stronger position. We therefore intend to strengthen our support to the Syrian National Coalition. And in that spirit, in New York, on the occasion of the General Assembly of the UN, the major international event will be organized around the Syrian National Coalition.
Ladies and gentlemen, these are the decisions and the mindset which are ours. I will leave the floor to my two colleagues and friends, but before that, let me insist upon the fact that, as we said yesterday, it is decisive that today and tomorrow, the three countries represented here stand united.
SECRETARY KERRY: (Off-mike.)
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Okay.
Good morning. Thank you, Laurent. I’m pleased to be here with my colleagues where, as you will have gathered, as you’ve heard from Laurent Fabius, we’ve been discussing urgent steps to implement the U.S.-Russia agreement on the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons. And I pay tribute to Secretary Kerry for the work that he has done with Foreign Minister Lavrov on this. We are in close accord about this as allies, including about the part that the credible threat of military force has played in bringing about this opening, this new possibility. And our first priority is to secure prompt action at the United Nations Security Council that enshrines in a Security Council resolution the Syrian regime’s responsibility to hand over its chemical weapons stocks. A resolution, in our view, should create a binding commitment for the regime to give up its chemical weapons within a specific timeframe and to credibly, reliably, and promptly place them under international control for destruction.
It is the Assad regime that has stockpiled these weapons and that has used them repeatedly against the Syrian people. So the pressure is on them to comply with this agreement in full. The world must be prepared to hold them to account if they don’t, and our three countries are certainly determined to do so. We’ve agreed on the vital importance of accountability for those responsible for using chemical weapons in Syria, and we’ll consult in the future about how that can be achieved in the light of the UN inspectors’ report in New York later today.
And third, we’re determined to do everything we can, as you have heard, to stop the bloodshed in Syria, to support the moderate opposition, and to alleviate humanitarian suffering. Our goal remains to convene a second Geneva conference to bring all sides together to agree a political solution to the conflict, and we will work with Russia on bringing that about as soon as possible. In that regard, I welcome the National Coalition’s decision to appoint an interim Prime Minister, Ahmad Toameh. There can be no peaceful settlement in Syria without the legitimate Syrian opposition.
So the task ahead is very difficult and complex, but our three countries are united and determined to use our full weight as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as each other’s close allies, to implement the agreement on Syria’s chemical weapons, to maintain the pressure on the Assad regime, and to bring about a peaceful end to this appalling conflict.
Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you Laurent. I would like to thank President Hollande and Foreign Minister Fabius for their extraordinarily warm hospitality. We’re very grateful to the President of France for his welcome here today and grateful to our colleague, Laurent Fabius, for his leadership and for his welcome back to Paris so soon, but for very important discussion with an important turn of events since I was last here.
A week ago, the Syrian regime did not admit that it even had chemical weapons. Today, that regime has agreed, at least through the Russians and in some statements publicly, to rid itself of those weapons, to be accountable to the world and its standards, and to sign up to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Cleary, nothing can be accepted at face value or in words alone, and that is why our meeting and the efforts of the international community to go to the United Nations in these next days is so critical. It is significant that three permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are standing here together – three partners – all joined in unity of purpose and of understanding of what needs to be done, and I want to thank Foreign Minister Fabius and Foreign Secretary Hague for their constant collaboration in these last days as we have worked towards this unique initiative to secure Syria’s chemical weapons. And I know that I speak for President Obama when I say we are very grateful in the United States to have such able and willing partners.
As I said in Jerusalem yesterday, we’re now moving to translate into a broader international effort what was achieved in Geneva with the cooperation of the Russians, with the efforts of President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov. But each of us here today are here to emphasize the same thing: that what we achieve in this agreement, as we translate Geneva agreement into a United Nations resolution, has to be strong, and it has to be forceful, it has to be real, it has to be accountable, it has to be transparent, it has to be timely. All of those things are critical and it has to be enforced. If the Assad regime believes that this is not enforceable and that we are not serious, they will play games. And we know that even the UN inspectors, who were there recently, had difficulties getting access in some places. That is why in Geneva, the Russians agreed with us that there should be unfettered, unrestricted access to sites in order to make certain we do this as rapidly as is possible.
What we’re talking about here is a effective action, and every one of us understands that our standing here today and the announcement we waited to make in Geneva will not have meaning until this is ratified at the United Nations in the strongest, most forceful terms possible, and until it is implemented and complied with by the Assad regime. So that’s why we have insisted on this unique, very special structure of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons through the Convention on Chemical Weapons to be able to move as rapidly as is necessary.
I can speak for all of us here, and I think for our presidents and prime minister, we will not tolerate avoidance or anything less than full compliance by the Assad regime to the core principles of what has been achieved here. If Assad fails to comply with the terms of this framework, make no mistake, we are all agreed – and that includes Russia – that there will be consequences. The framework fully commits the United States and Russia to impose measures under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter in the event of noncompliance. And President Obama – and I have repeated his statement – has warned that should diplomacy fail, the military option is still on the table.
So we also want to emphasize something else of great importance here. Removal of the chemical weapons takes away from Assad one of the tools that he has been using against the opposition, against the people of his country, to subjugate, oppress their aspirations for freedom and for opportunity and for a role in the governance of their country. That will be taken away from them and that will, therefore, make the opposition safer.
But nothing in what we have done is meant to offer any notion to Assad that there’s some legitimacy to his process, that he has some extended period as a leader, so-called. We make it clear that Assad has lost all legitimacy to be possible to govern this country, and we remain committed to the opposition and committed to the Geneva process which calls for a transition government with full executive authority by mutual consent of the parties that will lay out the structure for the new Syria. That’s our end strategic goal here, and all of us remain committed to that goal and committed to ending the violence as soon as possible.
We understand that removing the chemical weapons still leaves him with artillery and airplanes and he uses them indiscriminately against his people, and we are going to do everything in our power to continue to push towards the political resolution that is so critical to ending that violence. And we will all be in New York. We will be working with our colleagues there. We will meet with Lakhdar Brahimi on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly meetings, and we will do everything in our power to help the people of Syria to get out from under this chaos and violence that is creating such a human catastrophe for all of us not only to witness but to have to deal with.
Thank you, Laurent.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (Via interpreter) Thank you, John. We shall be taking two questions for each of us, if you would agree.
Sir, please. Please wait until you have a microphone.
QUESTION: (In French.) Secretary Kerry, you spoke about a strategic goal. That’s quite interesting. In your strategy, are you thinking of the Christians of Syria and Lebanon? The result – one of the main results, unfortunately, of seven years of American and English occupation of Iraq is the decimation and exile of most Christians in Iraq. Do you – we all remember Mr. Kissinger thinking of transporting in ’75 the Christians of Lebanon to Canada. Do you have a plan, a strategic goal how to protect the Christians in Syria? There is two bishops of Aleppo who were kidnapped today. Maaloula, an all-Christian city without any strategic interest, has been invaded by Islamist rebels. They killed people and they looted the churches. Do you have a plan, a strategic plan, for the Christians in Syria?
SECRETARY KERRY: The answer is yes, but I don’t agree with your premise that the Christian – what has happened to the Christians is the consequence of what happened by the events in Iraq. And making clear there are lots of problems as a consequence of the war in Iraq and we understand that, and many of them negative, but that is, I do not believe, one of the direct roles.
What we have is with a rise of radical Islam and religious extremism and ideological extremism in many parts of not just that region but elsewhere in the world there is an effort to impose a unity of belief on people – Taliban, Afghanistan, many other places – where there is not room for what we share as a matter of common values is tolerance and acceptance of people of different faiths and different beliefs and many other things. Regrettably, it is not just the Christians who have been impacted. It is the Druze, it is the Ismaili, it is all of the minorities. And the irony is the Alawi themselves are a minority doing this to these other people for control, for Assad’s control.
So the fact is that the vision of Geneva 1 is a transition to a government that will embrace all of these minorities and protect all of these minorities and allow for a new Syria that is diverse and secular and creates a governance process that will protect all of the minorities as well as establish rights by which people will know they can live and participate in the governance of their country. That’s the new Syria. And the opposition has put out a very clear set of declarations and principles – which they did, I believe, in Amman as well as in Ankara, as well as in Istanbul – that make clear their commitment to this embrace of tolerance, diversity, protection of minorities, and full declaration of rights. So that’s the distinction here. And I hate to say it; it’s not just in Syria, but it’s in parts of the Maghreb, in the Sahel, in Mali, elsewhere, that we see this struggle between this extremist religious advance against modernity and pluralism and the values that we hold dear. It’s our hope that we can prove to people in a new Syria, that people could live alongside each other and that there are a different set of principles by which the world can organize itself. And we’ve been fighting on these kinds of things for a long period of time. Doesn’t make them any less valuable today.
QUESTION: (In French.)
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: Merci, (inaudible).
QUESTION: Question for the three of you. It seems that Russian President Putin and Mr. Lavrov, his Secretary of Foreign Affairs, already reluctant to any use of force in case the agreement is not respected by Bashar al-Assad. So aren’t we already going to a kind of veto by the Russians and the Chinese at the UN Security Council?
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: (Via interpreter) Well, let me answer in French and then in question ask in English. We explained the circumstances in which all of that should be undertaken. There is an agreement that is a very major step, an agreement which – in Geneva, and we shall build, thank, and congratulate John Kerry for the work he has done together with them and Sergey Lavrov.
Now all of that has to be turned into a resolution on the Security Council. We’ve been working on it already and later on today we’ll be getting access to the report by the inspectors of the UN. It will provide some more information regarding the massacre on the 21st of August. Then we’ll again discuss that within the P-3 and with our other colleagues afterwards and we’ll put a resolution – we’ll table a resolution. That resolution will cover, once again, what’s been agreed upon in Geneva so that it is turned into international law – positive law. And obviously, as it was said in Geneva, this resolution will provide what should happen in case the Syrian would not comply with the commitments.
In any resolution, you should have sanctions. You should have a concrete – some concrete measures and this is the spirit in which we’re working.
QUESTION: (Via interpreter) Mr. Minister, Secretary Kerry.
I would mention in this resolution that is not completely written --
(Via interpreter) Will you mention Chapter 7 in the resolution, in the event there will be noncompliance by the Assad regime with their commitments?
Mr. Kerry, Minister Fabius, do you trust Vladimir Putin for complying with this agreement?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, it’s not a matter of confidence. It’s a matter of verifying them. It’s a matter of specificity in what we do in this resolution and in the enforcement of the resolution. As I said in Geneva, there was an old saying from Gorbachev and President Reagan of “Trust but verify.” We’re talking about verify and verify; it’s not a matter of trust. So we’re going to work hard to have a resolution that is as strong and forceful as possible.
Now, Russia did agree in Geneva that Chapter 7 is mentioned specifically as the route for compliance if there is noncompliance or any use of chemical weapons by anyone in Syria. Under both of those circumstances, use of weapons or noncompliance, you’re already automatically at Chapter 7 according to the agreement we came out of Geneva with. So that mention is there.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: Thank you. Maybe a question from a foreign journalist.
QUESTION: Minister, thank you. Michael Gordon from the New York Times. A question for the French Foreign Minister, the British Foreign Secretary, Mr. Kerry. In articulating a plan to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons, are you not pursuing your short-term goal at the expense of the ultimate objective of pressing Bashar al-Assad to leave power, especially since eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons on such an ambitious schedule – by the middle of 2014 – depends critically on the cooperation of the Assad government over the ensuing months? And how are you going to guard against the sort of scenario that we saw in Iraq in the ’90s, where there were years of prolonged discussions, allegations of cheating, evasions on the part of the Iraqis, and deliberations over what to do about it? How are you going to prevent this from really dragging on for an extended period of time?
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Well, this is a – it’s extremely important of course that there are no evasions and there is no cat and mouse game going on about these weapons. That’s the importance of the agreement that Secretary Kerry has made with Russia, and the importance of the Assad regime saying that it will sign up to international obligations on chemical weapons. We now have to have a resolution which crystallizes a binding commitment and which makes sure that this is dealt with credibly, reliably, and promptly as well. So it’s a very important aspect of what we’re talking about now, that there are specific time frames, and that there will be means of holding the Assad regime to account on this.
I don’t agree, and I suspect my colleagues wouldn’t agree, that there is any incompatibility over this and all of our other goals on Syria. It’s very important to deal with the use of chemical weapons, which we have seen on August 21st and in previous instances, that dealing with that is not incompatible at all – far from it – with also pursuing our goal of a political solution to end the conflict, and indeed our other goal in parallel, which is to alleviate humanitarian suffering, on which our countries are working so hard.
So I don’t think there is any conflict at all between those things, but my colleagues can expand on that.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: There is no contradiction at all between the two elements. I mean, the military action or the things about dealing with chemical weapons and what you called the strategy perspective. On the contrary, it’s not incompatible, it’s part and parcel of the same process. First, if Bashar has changed his position, it’s because we have been always very firm. And it will be a weakening of his position not to be able to take hold of the chemical weapons, because without chemical weapons, he cannot use them against certain people and against the neighbors, therefore, he will be weakened.
And he must understand that there is no military victory, no possible military victory for him. The regime has to come to the table of negotiation and they have to understand there is no military solution for them and that it is only a political solution. And it’s the reason why it’s not incompatible, but on the contrary, it’s the same process dealing with chemical weapons and dealing with what you call strategic perspective.
SECRETARY KERRY: Michael, in Iraq, in Iraq, inspectors were looking for weapons that they didn’t know existed. Here, we know they exist, we have agreed on the amount – almost, somewhere between 1,000 to 1,200, 1,300 metric tons, we’ve agreed. We’ve agreed on the types of weapons. We’re not looking for something that we don’t know exists. We’re looking for something that’s been used and that the regime itself has admitted it has. So this is entirely different from Iraq, which is why we believe we can contain this in a short period of time.
Secondly, Assad has taken pains to control these weapons so they don’t fall into the hands of the opposition. And we know, because they’re in the areas that he most controls there’s the least fighting. And we will, obviously, work with the opposition, whom we support, because they have an interest in making sure that you get into those areas. So there ought to not be a problem if Assad is indeed going to comply.
Secondly – thirdly, excuse me, we’re taking a weapon away from him that he has been using against his people. How can the opposition be worse off when we know they were preparing an offensive in Damascus and they were afraid of that offensive, which is why they used these weapons in the first place and indiscriminately killed people but stopped the offensive? This deprives Assad of a weapon. They were using the airplanes anyway. They were using the artillery anyway. And yes, that continues to be a problem. And that’s exactly what the three of us and others are going to continue to focus on – pushing for Geneva, pushing for the political settlement, because the opposition and everyone else need to understand the best way to win the victory for the future of Syria is to have the Syrian people choose that future without Assad. And that will happen through a negotiated process, not through the destruction of the entire state and the creation of millions of more refugees and turmoil for the region.
That’s why this is such an important moment. If you can translate this into that kind of negotiated settlement, you can actually win a peace, not a protracted war. And that’s why I agree with my colleagues there is nothing incompatible or contradictory here.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (Via interpreter) One final word, if you’ll allow me. What was underlying all of your questions and our answers is the importance of strengthening the moderate opposition. Everything is happening as if indeed Bashar al-Assad on the one side and extremist terrorists were fighting against each other in appearance, but as a matter of fact, would be strengthening each other.
What is supporting Bashar al-Assad is the fact that many communities were mentioned – the Christians, but there are many others – who are saying: Well, he indeed is a dictator, but what will happen if he goes away? And on behalf of – on the terrorists’ side, it is in their interest to say that there is no alternative, there is either Bashar al-Assad or themselves, so that everyone against Bashar al-Assad would be forced to support the terrorists. But this, of course, is absolutely wrong. If you both want to change the Assad regime without falling in the hands of the terrorists, you have to support the moderate opposition, the opposition that indeed acknowledges the rights of the minorities, the principles upon which we want to act.
It will be for the Syrians to decide, but it’s very important to note that it’s not just either Bashar al-Assad or the terrorists, but that the solution, the political solution, goes through an agreement with the representatives of the regime, some of them, and those of the moderate opposition. And I believe that is not sufficiently acknowledged by the public opinion and was worth reminding you of. Thank you.
Remarks With French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and UK Foreign Secretary William Hague
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Quai d'Orsay
Paris, France
September 16, 2013
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (Via interpreter) (In progress) discuss the situation in Syria as well as the decisions to be taken over the next few days. And further to that meeting at the Elysee Palace, we held the first working meeting with my two colleagues. And we will be meeting in a minute after this press conference our colleague, the Mr. Davutoglu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey, and we will also consider with him what should be done.
The purpose of that meeting is twofold: First of all, it is about preparing for the concrete and fast implementation of the agreement on eliminating the chemical weapons (inaudible) that was found in Geneva. It is also about reviving the political process, which is the only way to put an end to the tragedy that’s been affecting Syria for two and a half years now. As I’ve said before, the Geneva agreement is a major step forward.
Since the chemical massacre that took place on the 21st of August, our position has been clear and constant, and I summarized it by saying it was about sanctioning and deterring. This kind of firmness which is ours, the countries represented here, has been fruitful. The Syrian regime has no alternative but to commit to eliminating these chemical weapons. And let me remind you that only a couple of days ago, the regime was denying the existence of these very same weapons, weapons that will be – the report to be published by the inspectors of the United Nations later on today will probably confirm that these weapons were used on the 21st of August. But what matters is that this agreement can be quickly implemented in order to eliminate once and for all the threat of a chemical attack by the Syrian regime against its own population and its neighbors. So we want very quickly to undertake some concrete and verifiable actions, and keep in mind that all the options remain on the table if these statements were not followed by concrete actions on the field.
So this is the reason why the P-3 – France, the United States, and the United Kingdom – want to obtain from the Security Council of the United Nations over the coming days a strong resolution, a resolution that will support the plan for chemical disarmament with all the authority of the Council. And there will be serious consequences provided in the resolution if the plan was not to be implemented. And the resolution shall also say that those responsible for the massacre of the 21st of August will be clearly held accountable if their responsibility is proven. So we will be working on that in order to agree on the wording within the P-3 and then at the level of the Security Council.
Ladies and gentlemen, the chemical weapons are only one aspect, the horrific – the particularly horrific aspect of the Syrian tragedy. It is only one of the means used by the regime in order to repress its people and to do so in blood. Fighting continues, and we know there is no military solution to that conflict. The solution is political.
In Geneva, some 18 months ago, we agreed upon a number of clear principles in order to organize the political transition in Syria, to organize in particular – that was what was agreed upon – the transfer of all executive powers, including control over the army and the security services to a transition authority. But so far, the regime in (inaudible) did not want to implement that agreement. And as Bashar al-Assad said recently, he preferred to eradicate the opposition. So we have to make sure that he understands that there is no alternative to the table of negotiations.
We will continue our efforts over the coming days in order to build a political solution and work together with all the countries that support the principles agreed upon in Geneva. We know that in order to negotiate a political solution, we need a stronger position. We therefore intend to strengthen our support to the Syrian National Coalition. And in that spirit, in New York, on the occasion of the General Assembly of the UN, the major international event will be organized around the Syrian National Coalition.
Ladies and gentlemen, these are the decisions and the mindset which are ours. I will leave the floor to my two colleagues and friends, but before that, let me insist upon the fact that, as we said yesterday, it is decisive that today and tomorrow, the three countries represented here stand united.
SECRETARY KERRY: (Off-mike.)
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Okay.
Good morning. Thank you, Laurent. I’m pleased to be here with my colleagues where, as you will have gathered, as you’ve heard from Laurent Fabius, we’ve been discussing urgent steps to implement the U.S.-Russia agreement on the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons. And I pay tribute to Secretary Kerry for the work that he has done with Foreign Minister Lavrov on this. We are in close accord about this as allies, including about the part that the credible threat of military force has played in bringing about this opening, this new possibility. And our first priority is to secure prompt action at the United Nations Security Council that enshrines in a Security Council resolution the Syrian regime’s responsibility to hand over its chemical weapons stocks. A resolution, in our view, should create a binding commitment for the regime to give up its chemical weapons within a specific timeframe and to credibly, reliably, and promptly place them under international control for destruction.
It is the Assad regime that has stockpiled these weapons and that has used them repeatedly against the Syrian people. So the pressure is on them to comply with this agreement in full. The world must be prepared to hold them to account if they don’t, and our three countries are certainly determined to do so. We’ve agreed on the vital importance of accountability for those responsible for using chemical weapons in Syria, and we’ll consult in the future about how that can be achieved in the light of the UN inspectors’ report in New York later today.
And third, we’re determined to do everything we can, as you have heard, to stop the bloodshed in Syria, to support the moderate opposition, and to alleviate humanitarian suffering. Our goal remains to convene a second Geneva conference to bring all sides together to agree a political solution to the conflict, and we will work with Russia on bringing that about as soon as possible. In that regard, I welcome the National Coalition’s decision to appoint an interim Prime Minister, Ahmad Toameh. There can be no peaceful settlement in Syria without the legitimate Syrian opposition.
So the task ahead is very difficult and complex, but our three countries are united and determined to use our full weight as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as each other’s close allies, to implement the agreement on Syria’s chemical weapons, to maintain the pressure on the Assad regime, and to bring about a peaceful end to this appalling conflict.
Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you Laurent. I would like to thank President Hollande and Foreign Minister Fabius for their extraordinarily warm hospitality. We’re very grateful to the President of France for his welcome here today and grateful to our colleague, Laurent Fabius, for his leadership and for his welcome back to Paris so soon, but for very important discussion with an important turn of events since I was last here.
A week ago, the Syrian regime did not admit that it even had chemical weapons. Today, that regime has agreed, at least through the Russians and in some statements publicly, to rid itself of those weapons, to be accountable to the world and its standards, and to sign up to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Cleary, nothing can be accepted at face value or in words alone, and that is why our meeting and the efforts of the international community to go to the United Nations in these next days is so critical. It is significant that three permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are standing here together – three partners – all joined in unity of purpose and of understanding of what needs to be done, and I want to thank Foreign Minister Fabius and Foreign Secretary Hague for their constant collaboration in these last days as we have worked towards this unique initiative to secure Syria’s chemical weapons. And I know that I speak for President Obama when I say we are very grateful in the United States to have such able and willing partners.
As I said in Jerusalem yesterday, we’re now moving to translate into a broader international effort what was achieved in Geneva with the cooperation of the Russians, with the efforts of President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov. But each of us here today are here to emphasize the same thing: that what we achieve in this agreement, as we translate Geneva agreement into a United Nations resolution, has to be strong, and it has to be forceful, it has to be real, it has to be accountable, it has to be transparent, it has to be timely. All of those things are critical and it has to be enforced. If the Assad regime believes that this is not enforceable and that we are not serious, they will play games. And we know that even the UN inspectors, who were there recently, had difficulties getting access in some places. That is why in Geneva, the Russians agreed with us that there should be unfettered, unrestricted access to sites in order to make certain we do this as rapidly as is possible.
What we’re talking about here is a effective action, and every one of us understands that our standing here today and the announcement we waited to make in Geneva will not have meaning until this is ratified at the United Nations in the strongest, most forceful terms possible, and until it is implemented and complied with by the Assad regime. So that’s why we have insisted on this unique, very special structure of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons through the Convention on Chemical Weapons to be able to move as rapidly as is necessary.
I can speak for all of us here, and I think for our presidents and prime minister, we will not tolerate avoidance or anything less than full compliance by the Assad regime to the core principles of what has been achieved here. If Assad fails to comply with the terms of this framework, make no mistake, we are all agreed – and that includes Russia – that there will be consequences. The framework fully commits the United States and Russia to impose measures under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter in the event of noncompliance. And President Obama – and I have repeated his statement – has warned that should diplomacy fail, the military option is still on the table.
So we also want to emphasize something else of great importance here. Removal of the chemical weapons takes away from Assad one of the tools that he has been using against the opposition, against the people of his country, to subjugate, oppress their aspirations for freedom and for opportunity and for a role in the governance of their country. That will be taken away from them and that will, therefore, make the opposition safer.
But nothing in what we have done is meant to offer any notion to Assad that there’s some legitimacy to his process, that he has some extended period as a leader, so-called. We make it clear that Assad has lost all legitimacy to be possible to govern this country, and we remain committed to the opposition and committed to the Geneva process which calls for a transition government with full executive authority by mutual consent of the parties that will lay out the structure for the new Syria. That’s our end strategic goal here, and all of us remain committed to that goal and committed to ending the violence as soon as possible.
We understand that removing the chemical weapons still leaves him with artillery and airplanes and he uses them indiscriminately against his people, and we are going to do everything in our power to continue to push towards the political resolution that is so critical to ending that violence. And we will all be in New York. We will be working with our colleagues there. We will meet with Lakhdar Brahimi on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly meetings, and we will do everything in our power to help the people of Syria to get out from under this chaos and violence that is creating such a human catastrophe for all of us not only to witness but to have to deal with.
Thank you, Laurent.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (Via interpreter) Thank you, John. We shall be taking two questions for each of us, if you would agree.
Sir, please. Please wait until you have a microphone.
QUESTION: (In French.) Secretary Kerry, you spoke about a strategic goal. That’s quite interesting. In your strategy, are you thinking of the Christians of Syria and Lebanon? The result – one of the main results, unfortunately, of seven years of American and English occupation of Iraq is the decimation and exile of most Christians in Iraq. Do you – we all remember Mr. Kissinger thinking of transporting in ’75 the Christians of Lebanon to Canada. Do you have a plan, a strategic goal how to protect the Christians in Syria? There is two bishops of Aleppo who were kidnapped today. Maaloula, an all-Christian city without any strategic interest, has been invaded by Islamist rebels. They killed people and they looted the churches. Do you have a plan, a strategic plan, for the Christians in Syria?
SECRETARY KERRY: The answer is yes, but I don’t agree with your premise that the Christian – what has happened to the Christians is the consequence of what happened by the events in Iraq. And making clear there are lots of problems as a consequence of the war in Iraq and we understand that, and many of them negative, but that is, I do not believe, one of the direct roles.
What we have is with a rise of radical Islam and religious extremism and ideological extremism in many parts of not just that region but elsewhere in the world there is an effort to impose a unity of belief on people – Taliban, Afghanistan, many other places – where there is not room for what we share as a matter of common values is tolerance and acceptance of people of different faiths and different beliefs and many other things. Regrettably, it is not just the Christians who have been impacted. It is the Druze, it is the Ismaili, it is all of the minorities. And the irony is the Alawi themselves are a minority doing this to these other people for control, for Assad’s control.
So the fact is that the vision of Geneva 1 is a transition to a government that will embrace all of these minorities and protect all of these minorities and allow for a new Syria that is diverse and secular and creates a governance process that will protect all of the minorities as well as establish rights by which people will know they can live and participate in the governance of their country. That’s the new Syria. And the opposition has put out a very clear set of declarations and principles – which they did, I believe, in Amman as well as in Ankara, as well as in Istanbul – that make clear their commitment to this embrace of tolerance, diversity, protection of minorities, and full declaration of rights. So that’s the distinction here. And I hate to say it; it’s not just in Syria, but it’s in parts of the Maghreb, in the Sahel, in Mali, elsewhere, that we see this struggle between this extremist religious advance against modernity and pluralism and the values that we hold dear. It’s our hope that we can prove to people in a new Syria, that people could live alongside each other and that there are a different set of principles by which the world can organize itself. And we’ve been fighting on these kinds of things for a long period of time. Doesn’t make them any less valuable today.
QUESTION: (In French.)
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: Merci, (inaudible).
QUESTION: Question for the three of you. It seems that Russian President Putin and Mr. Lavrov, his Secretary of Foreign Affairs, already reluctant to any use of force in case the agreement is not respected by Bashar al-Assad. So aren’t we already going to a kind of veto by the Russians and the Chinese at the UN Security Council?
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: (Via interpreter) Well, let me answer in French and then in question ask in English. We explained the circumstances in which all of that should be undertaken. There is an agreement that is a very major step, an agreement which – in Geneva, and we shall build, thank, and congratulate John Kerry for the work he has done together with them and Sergey Lavrov.
Now all of that has to be turned into a resolution on the Security Council. We’ve been working on it already and later on today we’ll be getting access to the report by the inspectors of the UN. It will provide some more information regarding the massacre on the 21st of August. Then we’ll again discuss that within the P-3 and with our other colleagues afterwards and we’ll put a resolution – we’ll table a resolution. That resolution will cover, once again, what’s been agreed upon in Geneva so that it is turned into international law – positive law. And obviously, as it was said in Geneva, this resolution will provide what should happen in case the Syrian would not comply with the commitments.
In any resolution, you should have sanctions. You should have a concrete – some concrete measures and this is the spirit in which we’re working.
QUESTION: (Via interpreter) Mr. Minister, Secretary Kerry.
I would mention in this resolution that is not completely written --
(Via interpreter) Will you mention Chapter 7 in the resolution, in the event there will be noncompliance by the Assad regime with their commitments?
Mr. Kerry, Minister Fabius, do you trust Vladimir Putin for complying with this agreement?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, it’s not a matter of confidence. It’s a matter of verifying them. It’s a matter of specificity in what we do in this resolution and in the enforcement of the resolution. As I said in Geneva, there was an old saying from Gorbachev and President Reagan of “Trust but verify.” We’re talking about verify and verify; it’s not a matter of trust. So we’re going to work hard to have a resolution that is as strong and forceful as possible.
Now, Russia did agree in Geneva that Chapter 7 is mentioned specifically as the route for compliance if there is noncompliance or any use of chemical weapons by anyone in Syria. Under both of those circumstances, use of weapons or noncompliance, you’re already automatically at Chapter 7 according to the agreement we came out of Geneva with. So that mention is there.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: Thank you. Maybe a question from a foreign journalist.
QUESTION: Minister, thank you. Michael Gordon from the New York Times. A question for the French Foreign Minister, the British Foreign Secretary, Mr. Kerry. In articulating a plan to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons, are you not pursuing your short-term goal at the expense of the ultimate objective of pressing Bashar al-Assad to leave power, especially since eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons on such an ambitious schedule – by the middle of 2014 – depends critically on the cooperation of the Assad government over the ensuing months? And how are you going to guard against the sort of scenario that we saw in Iraq in the ’90s, where there were years of prolonged discussions, allegations of cheating, evasions on the part of the Iraqis, and deliberations over what to do about it? How are you going to prevent this from really dragging on for an extended period of time?
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Well, this is a – it’s extremely important of course that there are no evasions and there is no cat and mouse game going on about these weapons. That’s the importance of the agreement that Secretary Kerry has made with Russia, and the importance of the Assad regime saying that it will sign up to international obligations on chemical weapons. We now have to have a resolution which crystallizes a binding commitment and which makes sure that this is dealt with credibly, reliably, and promptly as well. So it’s a very important aspect of what we’re talking about now, that there are specific time frames, and that there will be means of holding the Assad regime to account on this.
I don’t agree, and I suspect my colleagues wouldn’t agree, that there is any incompatibility over this and all of our other goals on Syria. It’s very important to deal with the use of chemical weapons, which we have seen on August 21st and in previous instances, that dealing with that is not incompatible at all – far from it – with also pursuing our goal of a political solution to end the conflict, and indeed our other goal in parallel, which is to alleviate humanitarian suffering, on which our countries are working so hard.
So I don’t think there is any conflict at all between those things, but my colleagues can expand on that.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: There is no contradiction at all between the two elements. I mean, the military action or the things about dealing with chemical weapons and what you called the strategy perspective. On the contrary, it’s not incompatible, it’s part and parcel of the same process. First, if Bashar has changed his position, it’s because we have been always very firm. And it will be a weakening of his position not to be able to take hold of the chemical weapons, because without chemical weapons, he cannot use them against certain people and against the neighbors, therefore, he will be weakened.
And he must understand that there is no military victory, no possible military victory for him. The regime has to come to the table of negotiation and they have to understand there is no military solution for them and that it is only a political solution. And it’s the reason why it’s not incompatible, but on the contrary, it’s the same process dealing with chemical weapons and dealing with what you call strategic perspective.
SECRETARY KERRY: Michael, in Iraq, in Iraq, inspectors were looking for weapons that they didn’t know existed. Here, we know they exist, we have agreed on the amount – almost, somewhere between 1,000 to 1,200, 1,300 metric tons, we’ve agreed. We’ve agreed on the types of weapons. We’re not looking for something that we don’t know exists. We’re looking for something that’s been used and that the regime itself has admitted it has. So this is entirely different from Iraq, which is why we believe we can contain this in a short period of time.
Secondly, Assad has taken pains to control these weapons so they don’t fall into the hands of the opposition. And we know, because they’re in the areas that he most controls there’s the least fighting. And we will, obviously, work with the opposition, whom we support, because they have an interest in making sure that you get into those areas. So there ought to not be a problem if Assad is indeed going to comply.
Secondly – thirdly, excuse me, we’re taking a weapon away from him that he has been using against his people. How can the opposition be worse off when we know they were preparing an offensive in Damascus and they were afraid of that offensive, which is why they used these weapons in the first place and indiscriminately killed people but stopped the offensive? This deprives Assad of a weapon. They were using the airplanes anyway. They were using the artillery anyway. And yes, that continues to be a problem. And that’s exactly what the three of us and others are going to continue to focus on – pushing for Geneva, pushing for the political settlement, because the opposition and everyone else need to understand the best way to win the victory for the future of Syria is to have the Syrian people choose that future without Assad. And that will happen through a negotiated process, not through the destruction of the entire state and the creation of millions of more refugees and turmoil for the region.
That’s why this is such an important moment. If you can translate this into that kind of negotiated settlement, you can actually win a peace, not a protracted war. And that’s why I agree with my colleagues there is nothing incompatible or contradictory here.
FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (Via interpreter) One final word, if you’ll allow me. What was underlying all of your questions and our answers is the importance of strengthening the moderate opposition. Everything is happening as if indeed Bashar al-Assad on the one side and extremist terrorists were fighting against each other in appearance, but as a matter of fact, would be strengthening each other.
What is supporting Bashar al-Assad is the fact that many communities were mentioned – the Christians, but there are many others – who are saying: Well, he indeed is a dictator, but what will happen if he goes away? And on behalf of – on the terrorists’ side, it is in their interest to say that there is no alternative, there is either Bashar al-Assad or themselves, so that everyone against Bashar al-Assad would be forced to support the terrorists. But this, of course, is absolutely wrong. If you both want to change the Assad regime without falling in the hands of the terrorists, you have to support the moderate opposition, the opposition that indeed acknowledges the rights of the minorities, the principles upon which we want to act.
It will be for the Syrians to decide, but it’s very important to note that it’s not just either Bashar al-Assad or the terrorists, but that the solution, the political solution, goes through an agreement with the representatives of the regime, some of them, and those of the moderate opposition. And I believe that is not sufficiently acknowledged by the public opinion and was worth reminding you of. Thank you.
FDA EVALUATES TECHNOLOGIES TO MAKE BLOOD SUPPLY SAFER
FROM: U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
Every two seconds in the U.S., someone needs a blood transfusion or blood product—people of all ages who are injured, need surgery or who are suffering from illness. The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) primary responsibility with regard to blood and blood products is to assure the safety of patients who receive these life-saving products. FDA is at the forefront of evaluating and encouraging innovative technologies designed to identify and minimize the risks to people who receive transfusions, such as the transmission of infectious disease, while maintaining a safe and adequate supply.
Richard Davey, M.D., is director of the Division of Blood Applications, Office of Blood Research and Review, at FDA. He discusses advances in the field, contingency plans during disasters and why—and when—to give blood.
Q: There have been many improvements in transfusion practice since the modern era of blood transfusion began in 1900. What's on the horizon?
A: We're excited about many developments, including a new red blood cell testing technology aimed at patients with illnesses that require frequent transfusions, for example sickle cell anemia. These patients sometimes develop antibodies that complicate finding compatible blood for transfusion.
A new FDA laboratory is evaluating this new technology which identifies the genetic characteristics of a patient's red blood cells so they can be more precisely matched to a donor. FDA is encouraging submissions from industry for these molecular test kits. It's an important breakthrough.
Exciting research is also progressing on technologies that will significantly reduce any bacteria, viruses and parasites that may be in blood. These technologies would complement existing tests for these infectious agents, thus making a safe blood supply even safer.
Q: Isn't the blood supply already safe?
A: The United States is recognized as having one of the safest blood supplies in the world, but assuring the safety and availability of blood products still poses challenges. The HIV risk to recipients is now only about 1 in every 2 million units of blood transfused in the USA, but it's still not zero. We test all blood for HIV, hepatitis B and C, West Nile virus and the parasite that causes Chagas disease, among other infectious agents. Blood found to contain any of these pathogens is discarded and, in most cases, the individual is notified and deferred from further donation.
Q: Is artificial blood possible?
A: Companies are working to develop oxygen carriers that could substitute for red blood cells. We're working with these companies and remain hopeful that one or more of these technologies eventually will prove to be safe and effective.
Q: How much blood is needed in the U.S.?
A: About 15 million units of red blood cells are drawn every year for transfusion to about five million recipients. In recent years, the demand for red blood cells has declined, primarily because doctors are learning to transfuse more scientifically and use blood only when necessary. However, challenges remain. In June, for example, the American Red Cross had almost 50,000 fewer donors than expected. Type O negative red cells, which can be transfused to people of all blood types, is the blood type most likely to be in short supply, but there is a need for donors of all blood types, all the time.
The American Red Cross and independent blood centers affiliated with America's Blood Centers each collect about 45% of the blood supply, with the remainder collected by hospital blood banks.
Q: At the Boston Marathon, 264 people were injured, creating an unexpected demand for blood. Did that cause a supply problem?
A: Boston has an excellent triage system so casualties were spread among several hospitals, which also spread the need for blood. In case of a disaster such as the marathon bombing, an interagency task force mobilizes to move blood to where it is needed.
Q: During disasters, many people volunteer to donate blood. Is that helpful?
A: It's a good and noble response, but we need donors every day to meet ongoing requirements for blood. It takes two to three days to fully test and qualify blood for transfusion. Therefore, it is the blood that is fully tested and available for transfusion that is used at the time of an emergency. The people donating today will be the heroes if a disaster occurs next week.
After 9/11, for example, many people donated. However, little of the additional blood was needed, and some of the donated blood expired and had to be discarded. The best response during a major disaster is to have already qualified as a regular blood donor and to have records on file at the blood center. Then the blood center can call you when your blood type is most needed. And, as mentioned above, become a regular blood donor for everyday patient needs and to have your blood available if an emergency occurs.
Q. What are the different components of blood, and how are they used?
A. Whole blood can be divided into several components, each of which can be important to a patient in need. Red blood cells carry oxygen, and are important to correct bleeding or to compensate for inadequate production of these cells. Blood platelets are small particles that are important for normal blood clotting to occur. They are often used in cancer patients, when the disease or the treatment interferes with the normal production of these elements. Blood plasma is the yellow fluid that remains when the red cells and other particles are removed. Plasma is also important for normal blood clotting to occur. It can be transfused without modification, or further processed into important products such as gamma globulin or albumin.
Q: How long does blood last?
A: It's different for each of the blood components. Red blood cells can be stored for six weeks as a liquid. Blood platelets can be stored only for five days. Blood plasma can be frozen for use up to one year. New additives, preservatives and storage techniques are being developed to help extend expiration dates.
Q: Of those eligible to donate, how many do so?
A: We estimate that about 45% of the population is eligible to donate blood. However, only about 4% actually do so, and 75% of those are repeat donors.
Donating blood is extremely safe for donors, with each needle and blood bag used only once. About one pint of whole blood is collected in a standard donation, which is about 10% of an average adult's total blood volume. Alternatively, most blood centers have instruments that allow a donor to specifically donate red cells, platelets and/or plasma, according to current needs. The body replaces the donated blood within a short time. Donors get a "mini-physical" and cookies. Most importantly, they know that their donation can help several patients who require these life-saving products. They truly are giving the "gift of life."
This article appears on FDA's Consumer Updates page, which features the latest on all FDA-regulated products.
Sept 16, 2013
Every two seconds in the U.S., someone needs a blood transfusion or blood product—people of all ages who are injured, need surgery or who are suffering from illness. The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) primary responsibility with regard to blood and blood products is to assure the safety of patients who receive these life-saving products. FDA is at the forefront of evaluating and encouraging innovative technologies designed to identify and minimize the risks to people who receive transfusions, such as the transmission of infectious disease, while maintaining a safe and adequate supply.
Richard Davey, M.D., is director of the Division of Blood Applications, Office of Blood Research and Review, at FDA. He discusses advances in the field, contingency plans during disasters and why—and when—to give blood.
Q: There have been many improvements in transfusion practice since the modern era of blood transfusion began in 1900. What's on the horizon?
A: We're excited about many developments, including a new red blood cell testing technology aimed at patients with illnesses that require frequent transfusions, for example sickle cell anemia. These patients sometimes develop antibodies that complicate finding compatible blood for transfusion.
A new FDA laboratory is evaluating this new technology which identifies the genetic characteristics of a patient's red blood cells so they can be more precisely matched to a donor. FDA is encouraging submissions from industry for these molecular test kits. It's an important breakthrough.
Exciting research is also progressing on technologies that will significantly reduce any bacteria, viruses and parasites that may be in blood. These technologies would complement existing tests for these infectious agents, thus making a safe blood supply even safer.
Q: Isn't the blood supply already safe?
A: The United States is recognized as having one of the safest blood supplies in the world, but assuring the safety and availability of blood products still poses challenges. The HIV risk to recipients is now only about 1 in every 2 million units of blood transfused in the USA, but it's still not zero. We test all blood for HIV, hepatitis B and C, West Nile virus and the parasite that causes Chagas disease, among other infectious agents. Blood found to contain any of these pathogens is discarded and, in most cases, the individual is notified and deferred from further donation.
Q: Is artificial blood possible?
A: Companies are working to develop oxygen carriers that could substitute for red blood cells. We're working with these companies and remain hopeful that one or more of these technologies eventually will prove to be safe and effective.
Q: How much blood is needed in the U.S.?
A: About 15 million units of red blood cells are drawn every year for transfusion to about five million recipients. In recent years, the demand for red blood cells has declined, primarily because doctors are learning to transfuse more scientifically and use blood only when necessary. However, challenges remain. In June, for example, the American Red Cross had almost 50,000 fewer donors than expected. Type O negative red cells, which can be transfused to people of all blood types, is the blood type most likely to be in short supply, but there is a need for donors of all blood types, all the time.
The American Red Cross and independent blood centers affiliated with America's Blood Centers each collect about 45% of the blood supply, with the remainder collected by hospital blood banks.
Q: At the Boston Marathon, 264 people were injured, creating an unexpected demand for blood. Did that cause a supply problem?
A: Boston has an excellent triage system so casualties were spread among several hospitals, which also spread the need for blood. In case of a disaster such as the marathon bombing, an interagency task force mobilizes to move blood to where it is needed.
Q: During disasters, many people volunteer to donate blood. Is that helpful?
A: It's a good and noble response, but we need donors every day to meet ongoing requirements for blood. It takes two to three days to fully test and qualify blood for transfusion. Therefore, it is the blood that is fully tested and available for transfusion that is used at the time of an emergency. The people donating today will be the heroes if a disaster occurs next week.
After 9/11, for example, many people donated. However, little of the additional blood was needed, and some of the donated blood expired and had to be discarded. The best response during a major disaster is to have already qualified as a regular blood donor and to have records on file at the blood center. Then the blood center can call you when your blood type is most needed. And, as mentioned above, become a regular blood donor for everyday patient needs and to have your blood available if an emergency occurs.
Q. What are the different components of blood, and how are they used?
A. Whole blood can be divided into several components, each of which can be important to a patient in need. Red blood cells carry oxygen, and are important to correct bleeding or to compensate for inadequate production of these cells. Blood platelets are small particles that are important for normal blood clotting to occur. They are often used in cancer patients, when the disease or the treatment interferes with the normal production of these elements. Blood plasma is the yellow fluid that remains when the red cells and other particles are removed. Plasma is also important for normal blood clotting to occur. It can be transfused without modification, or further processed into important products such as gamma globulin or albumin.
Q: How long does blood last?
A: It's different for each of the blood components. Red blood cells can be stored for six weeks as a liquid. Blood platelets can be stored only for five days. Blood plasma can be frozen for use up to one year. New additives, preservatives and storage techniques are being developed to help extend expiration dates.
Q: Of those eligible to donate, how many do so?
A: We estimate that about 45% of the population is eligible to donate blood. However, only about 4% actually do so, and 75% of those are repeat donors.
Donating blood is extremely safe for donors, with each needle and blood bag used only once. About one pint of whole blood is collected in a standard donation, which is about 10% of an average adult's total blood volume. Alternatively, most blood centers have instruments that allow a donor to specifically donate red cells, platelets and/or plasma, according to current needs. The body replaces the donated blood within a short time. Donors get a "mini-physical" and cookies. Most importantly, they know that their donation can help several patients who require these life-saving products. They truly are giving the "gift of life."
This article appears on FDA's Consumer Updates page, which features the latest on all FDA-regulated products.
Sept 16, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)