Monday, February 17, 2014

REMARKS BY SECRETARY KERRY, INDONESIAN FOREIGN MINISTER NATALEGAWA

Remarks With Indonesian Foreign Minister Raden Mohammad Marty Muliana Natalegawa


Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Jakarta, Indonesia
February 17, 2014


FOREIGN MINISTER NATALEGAWA: I will speak in Bahasa Indonesia first, and then I will also speak a little bit in English as well.

(In Bahasa Indonesia) (Via translation) This morning, I am very happy to have a visit from our friend, his Excellency U.S. Secretary of State, Mr. John Kerry. Secretary Kerry and I have met many times on the sidelines of international meetings. If I am not mistaken, the last time we met was at the meeting on Syria, in Montreux, Switzerland. This time, we are really very happy that you are visiting Jakarta on the occasion of the 4th Joint Ministerial Commission between Indonesia and the United States.

Actually, the talks started last night, in an informal meeting during dinner. We discussed many issues, especially regional and global issues. Without going into great detail about what we discussed yesterday, we discussed, for example, the issues related to the situation in the Asia Pacific, including South East Asia, and East Asia in general. We also discussed the issue of the South China Sea, and also Indonesia’s initiative on the prevention on violence and our preference for resolving issues through diplomacy. In addition, yesterday, we also discussed global issues.

But today, in the meeting, we focused on the bilateral relationship between two countries. We heard in detail reports from various working groups that have been set up to enhance relations between Indonesia and the United States. We need to underline that Indonesia and the United States are the second and third biggest democratic country in the word, have become equal partners, and become partners that cooperate closely to promote relations between the two countries and to advance common interests at the regional and global level.

For this reason, we heard reports from the working group on democracy and civil society, working group on trade and investment, working group on education, on climate change and environment, working group on security, and working group on energy.

After giving guidance to these working groups, we are determined to increase our bilateral relationship to an even higher level.

(In English) Secretary Kerry, it is my tremendous pleasure and honor even to welcome you to Jakarta, on the occasion of this fourth joint ministerial commission. I have mentioned with our colleagues from the media that we have had occasions in the past to meet at the sidelines of other conferences. I recall probably the last time that we would have been in one forum would have been in Montreux, when we met for the Syrian international conference.

But it is, therefore, of singular importance that we are welcoming you today here in Jakarta on the occasion of the Joint Ministerial Commission, because apart – in this forum, apart from discussing issues of common interest of regional and global nature, we can be really focused on promoting the comprehensive partnership that our two countries are – have been developing since 2010.

I must say that the discussion throughout this morning has been especially productive and especially constructive as well. We have been hearing from our colleagues, the chairs of the six working groups promoting bilateral relations between our two countries: democracy and civil society, trade and investment, education, climate and environment, security, energy. We have been able to scorecard or snapshot the current state of Indonesia-U.S. relations. And I must say, the trajectory has been very positive, but we now have the task of consolidating and taking it to a higher level.

Indonesia and United States are partners, partners in promoting democratic values, partners in promoting peace and security in our region, and partners in promoting the better welfare and economic prosperity of peoples in our region. And I’m, therefore, especially pleased that throughout this morning and yesterday evening we were able to cooperate and exchange views on these such issues of common interest.

With that, I’d like to give you the floor now, John, to share your thoughts on our conversation and, if time allows, to also open the floor for some questions from our media colleagues. Please, John.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you very much, Marty, my friend. We have really met many times on the side of different conferences, and we’ve gotten to know each other well. And I think we work effectively together, and I appreciate the – both the friendship and the generosity of his efforts with respect to the partnership between the United States and Indonesia.

Let me start today, if I can, by expressing my condolences on behalf of all Americans and President Obama to the victims of the Mount Sinabung volcano in the Mount Kelud volcanoes. We understand that the families of the 21 people who passed away are obviously suffering a great loss, and the tens of thousands of people who have been uprooted from their homes is a humanitarian challenge. And we stand ready to help in any way that Indonesia might need or want. And we certainly express our condolences to the families for those lost and to all of Indonesia.

Very special for me to be able to be back in Jakarta. I came here a number of times as a senator, and my sister lived here in Jakarta and taught at the International School for quite a few years. So I have, for many years, heard her stories of her years here and her enjoyment of both the people and the country, and so it’s nice for me to be able to be back here.
This is an amazingly dynamic city. Yesterday, I had the privilege of going to the Istiqlal mosque. And it’s my pleasure to not only say good morning to everybody here, but as-salam alaykum. It’s my honor to be a guest at this remarkable house of worship, the third largest mosque in the world, the largest in the region, in Asia, and really an incredible monument to faith and to the power of worship and the ability of people to come together and worship.

And what is really important, I thought, was to see just a short distance away the spires of the cathedral, which really is a symbol together of the tolerance that exists here in Indonesia, a very, very critical asset and one that we admire Indonesians for embracing. Much of the world could learn a great deal from your tradition of religious tolerance and pluralism, which is so clearly embedded in the DNA of Indonesian people.

This morning, as the Foreign Minister mentioned, we were both very pleased to join in the fourth convening of the meeting of the U.S-Indonesia Comprehensive Partnership Joint Commission. Comprehensive partnership defines the work that we are doing. And I mentioned at the end of our meeting how impressed I was with the ideas that were exchanged, because we have these working groups that had been sitting down with each other when we’re not here, to listen to them, as we were today, in order to press the agenda between Indonesia and the United States.

In the few short years since our governments established this comprehensive partnership, we have together been far better equipped to be able to address shared challenges and to identify shared opportunities. And as Marty mentioned, we targeted today trade and investment, climate change and energy, issues of education, and other challenges in our relationship that we believe are opportunities. And we intend to try to make the most of those opportunities. And we talked about ways we could even improve this joint commission partnership, and we’re going to work on them. The fact is that, as a result of these meetings, our bilateral relationship is growing in a wide range of areas, and it’s growing faster, I can assure you, than it would be if we did not have this kind of partnership effort.

You saw just a few minutes ago we signed two new memorandum of understanding. Those came out of this commission – one to build on the work that we do to protect against wildlife trafficking, which is a threat to the ecosystem, a threat to species, a threat to our conscience, and really summons an obligation by all of us to try to do better, and also the responsibility to preserve the remarkably rich biodiversity that exists, both marine diversity and land-based biodiversity that exists in Indonesia, richest in the world, and it’s important to preserve it.
We also signed a memorandum to increase our joint development assistance to support human rights, regional integration, democracy, peace, and stability in third countries. And there are many countries that could benefit from the joint effort of the United States and Indonesia, and we intend to continue to do that.

I respect Mr. Natalegawa’s commitment as a leader to ASEAN and the work that has been done, which is critical to advancing our efforts to promote peace and prosperity in the region. I was in Beijing just two days ago, where I discussed the United States growing concerns over a pattern of behavior in which maritime claims are being asserted in the East China and South China Sea, from restrictions on access to the Scarborough Shoals, the Scarborough Reef, to China’s establishment of an ADIZ in the East China Sea, to the issuance of revised regulations restricting fishing in disputed areas of the South China Sea.

We believe very strongly that international law applies to all countries, big countries, small countries. And we live, even though we are not – even though the United States has not ratified the Law of the Sea, we live by the Law of the Sea. We are pledged to stick with the rules of the Law of the Sea. And we think it’s important for all countries to do that. It is imperative for all claimants to any location in these seas to base their maritime claims on the definitions of international law and to be able to resolve them peacefully within that framework.

The United States is very grateful for the leadership and the role that Indonesia has played in advancing China-ASEAN negotiations on a code of conduct in the South China Sea. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the region’s future stability will depend, in part, on the success and the timeliness of the effort to produce a code of conduct. The longer the process takes, the longer tensions will simmer, and the greater the chance of a miscalculation by somebody that could trigger a conflict. That is in nobody’s interest. So I commend Foreign Minister Natalegawa for his focus on this issue. And I urge all of the parties to follow his lead and accelerate the negotiations.

Indonesia – it should be clear from today’s meeting and from the things that we have talked about and the things that we are accomplishing – is increasingly becoming a major U.S. partner, not just on regional challenges, but on global challenges like climate change and counterterrorism. That includes on Syria, where we are working hard to together to finally bring about a political solution to this horrible war. And I am very grateful to Foreign Minister Natalegawa for coming to Montreux to join us as one of 40 nations to help to make it clear how important it is to adhere to the standards of the Geneva I communique.
Yesterday, here in Jakarta, at the @america forum, I had the privilege of being able to talk about the challenge of climate change. You really only have to look at the extensive science to understand that climate change is one of the one, two, or three biggest challenges facing this planet. That’s why I raise the issue in nearly every single country that I visit as Secretary of State.

If we are going to prevent the worst consequences of climate change then, especially in places like Indonesia, which are on the frontlines of this threat, then we need everybody engaged. No one nation can solve this problem by itself. We need the United States, Indonesia, and every other country on earth doing everything that they can do to make the right choices in order to meet this challenge head-on. This is the most quintessentially global challenge that we have ever faced. It really demands a global solution. There’s no way to solve it. So we look forward to working with our partner, Indonesia, on that, as well as others.

As the world’s second and third largest democracies, we stand here today firmly with the belief, which both our presidents share, that our nations will benefit greatly from stronger ties and deeper levels of cooperation. I am not only talking about strengthening the ties between governments, we’re also talking about strengthening the ties between our peoples.
In the past few years alone, we have made terrific progress in the area of people-to-people relationships. I’m proud to say that the number of Americans studying in Indonesia has increased nearly 70 percent since 2010. And the number of Indonesians studying in the United States has grown substantially as well. And with the joint commission’s focusing on strengthening university partnerships and increasing the quality of education, we are absolutely confident the number of students going in both directions is going to increase. I look forward to seeing that.

So thank you, Indonesia, for your friendship. Thank you for the partnership. We respect the serious way in which we work out differences, and we appreciate enormously the fact that we have found common ground on such important issues. And through this joint commission, we are building our relationship even more so. Thank you very much, Marty.

FOREIGN MINISTER NATALEGAWA: Thanks very much.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you.

MODERATOR: We will now begin the (inaudible). I will give the first opportunity to our guest from the U.S. media.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. Minister Natalegawa, what is your response to the report that the NSA, with the help of the Australians, spied on an American law firm that represented your government in trade talks with the United States? And did you raise this issue in your talks with Secretary Kerry?

And Secretary Kerry, if the issued was raised, could I ask you what your response was? And more broadly, moving onto the TPP negotiations, how much of a handicap is it that even your own Democrats are balking at giving President Obama trade promotion authority? How can you expect Asian countries to start providing access to their markets if there’s a perceived lack of support for this in Congress? Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER NATALEGAWA: Thank you very much for that question. The entire portfolio of extraterritorial surveillance has been obtaining a great deal of attention, not only here in Jakarta, but, as I understand it, as well in Washington and many capitals in Europe as well. I am aware that the U.S. administration recently – President Obama – had gone through, undertaken a review of the type of activities and the type of work that the various U.S. intelligence agencies are conducting, its impact, its relevance within United States, and as well in its international relations.

Our understanding is that the kind of review, the kind of amendments and approach that had been signaled by United States sides will be also forthcoming, will also be relevant in its conduct of its relations with Indonesia, given the nature of our relationship between the two countries. That is as far as the broad subject of extraterritorial surveillance.
As I said before, this is a subject that is obtaining a great deal of attention in many a capital. And United States is one of those that had actually taken a very comprehensive and thought-through review. And what I am now anticipating and what I am now understanding is that the kind of refinement and approach and refinement in outlook and practice would be a relevant to a country like Indonesia as a partner of the United States.

On the specific issue – I’m sorry if I have to speak of this at this forum, because this doesn’t impact on United States directly. But on the alleged information about the sharing of information by one intelligence agency, namely the Australian, signals directed on matters to do with the then-pending issue of – between United States and Indonesia to do with cloves and to do with shrimps. I have come across a statement by our good partner Australia on this issue and the reference that Australia collect intelligence to save Australian lives, to save the lives of other people, to promote Australian values, that those are well understood as our general outlook.
But I must say, that is why I chose not to respond immediately yesterday, this weekend. I find it a bit mind-boggling, a little bit difficult, how I can connect or reconcile discussions about shrimps and how it impact on Australia security. This is a very technical, bilateral Indonesia-U.S. issue, which is thankfully now behind us. But to suggest as if the future of shrimps export by Indonesia to United States has an impact on Australian security is a little bit too much and begs some kind of a serious question about what it is all about.

Again, my apologies for taking – using this opportunity, but in my view, in our view, neighbors, like Indonesia and Australia are, we should be looking out for each other, not turning against one another. We should be listening to one another and not to listen-in. And I think there is a very important and fine distinction between to listen to one another and to listen-in. And I think the recent revelations indicate that we are where we are just now.
But on the United States, I’m quite comfortable to hear the U.S. views on this, but my understanding is as I had just now described. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Marty, thank you very, very much. Let me deal with the question that Marty was just answering first, and then I’ll come to the other on the TPP. I really appreciate and respect what Marty has just said, and I completely understand, as we do in the United States, how there are concerns in various parts of the world regarding this issue, which is a challenge for all of us.

We take this issue very seriously, which is why President Obama laid out a series of concrete and substantial reforms that we believe should give greater confidence to people everywhere about privacy and civil liberties and that they are being protected and, at the same time, preserving very important tools with respect to keeping us safe in an age of major threats and of terrorism and that addresses significant questions.

I’d just make to very clear to everybody: As the President said in his speech on this subject, the United States does not collect intelligence to afford a competitive advantage to U.S. companies or U.S. commercial sectors. And with the reforms that we put in place, we believe we have a transparency and an accountability that should address everybody’s concerns.
With respect to TPP, I spent 29 years in the United States Senate. And I have voted on many trade agreements, including way back in the beginning, NAFTA, all the way through to our most recent agreements with Colombia and Korea and so forth. There is always opposition. We’ve never known there not to be opposition. That’s part of political life.

But we are living in a very different world today. Because of globalization, no country can think about growing and providing greater prosperity and opportunity to its people and a rising income without the ability to be able to trade in goods and services on a global basis. That’s the world we live in. No political leader can put that genie back in the bottle. You can’t do it. So what you need to do is, through good government and good leadership, tame the worst outcomes that might stare at you if you don’t address them.

In the very beginning, when the first trade agreements were created, there weren’t appropriate applications of law on labor standards or on environment standards or on other kinds of things. But the fact is that, over a period of time, we have developed those things. And modern trade agreements encompass a balance so that we address some of the things that we’ve learned through experience can occur in economies that people have opposed.

So I will urge my colleagues – my former colleagues in the United States Senate and the Congress – to look very carefully and to measure this and not to jump ahead of time with a decision that so seriously affects our economic future and the future of how countries behave in trade relationships around the world. It is very important for us to be able to be part of the fastest growing region in the world and to make sure that everybody is engaged in a race to the top, not a race to bottom.

So I will continue to speak, as President Obama will and the rest of the Administration, to the United States Congress and to the world about importance of these agreements. We will continue to negotiate and continue to work for the TPP, because we believe that is a critical component of prosperity and growth for the regions, as well as the way in which we will build greater stability on a global basis. So we look forward to doing what we’ve always done, which is testifying, speaking one-on-one, talking to people, advocating, demonstrating how this benefits the United States and Asia at the same time. And in the end, I believe people will come to the appropriate judgment.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Next question is from (inaudible).

QUESTION: Good morning, Excellencies. My name’s Grace Manjutak. My first question: How would you comment on the upcoming Indonesian elections and the struggle for democracy, as some of the presidential candidates were accused of human rights violations? What do you expect from the next leader of Indonesia?

And secondly, why is the U.S. actively campaigning for solution of climate change while you refuse to comply with international protocol on climate change, the Kyoto Protocol, for example? The U.S. also refuses to ratify a number of international protocol, including the Rome Statute and CTBT. Can you please comment on this? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Was the election question to me, too? Oh, okay. (Laughter.)

MINISTER NATALEGAWA: It’s especially to you. (Laughter.)

SECRETARY KERRY: How lucky can I be? (Laughter.) That’s what I want to do, is be the Secretary of State who comes and comments on someone else’s election before it takes place. (Laughter.)

Well, look, let me just say to you very, very clearly the United States, as I said earlier in my comments, has huge respect for the fact that Indonesia is a leading democracy and a very important partner to the United States. But it’s up to the Indonesian people to choose their own leaders. The United States will not get involved. We will not, quietly or otherwise, be picking candidates. That would be entirely inappropriate. It’s up to the people of Indonesia to make their choices. And we’re not going to be hypocritical and say we value democracy and people’s independence and respect their sovereignty and then turn around and become involved.
We are confident that whatever outcome comes out of this election we will maintain a very strong relationship with Indonesia and it will reflect our shared goals: our commitment to democracy, our respect for human rights, our respect for pluralism, for tolerance with respect to religious practice and individual practice. And we are confident that Indonesia will continue to make progress, the way it has over the course of the last 10 years.

On the subject of climate change and the international conventions, actually the United States of America is taking a lead today. President Obama has decided that he will do, by executive order, what Congress has been unwilling to do. So we have passed new standards for our automobiles, higher standards for reducing emissions. We have passed new standards requiring lower emissions for all of our trucks. We have lowered emissions in the United States significantly. We have put out, by executive order, requirements for buildings and government buildings and government purchase of fleets of automobiles.

We have engaged, through – our Environmental Protection Agency has put on some of the toughest standards ever in our history with respect to any new coal-fired power plant. So it is very difficult now in America to build a coal-fire power plant without meeting very, very rigorous standards. We have much tougher standards than other countries in the rest of the world with respect to that, except perhaps for Europe, where they have very strong standards also.
We are increasingly moving on a climate action agenda, which President Obama has put into place and ordered. We meet regularly with the cabinet now in order to designate where each cabinet secretary – where each area could provide greater contribution to emissions reductions. That includes, for instance, agriculture and our agriculture practices.
And I just came from China, where we agreed to work with the Chinese. And they are beginning to take enormous steps, because they’re concerned about air quality, air pollution, as well as what’s happening to the globe in terms of climate change. And we have agreed to work together to set very strong standards as we go into 2015 and to try to work to compare how we can do this in a way that is least impactful on our economies and most beneficial to the environment.

So I’m proud of what the United States is doing today, and I believe we will help to move the process towards a successful 2015 negotiation in Paris.

FOREIGN MINISTER NATALEGAWA: Let me just say a little bit on the climate change.
Secretary Kerry just now had inform us about the national-level efforts the United States has been taking to address the challenge of climate change. Of course, likewise, at the national level in Indonesia, we have, as you are I’m sure very much well informed, have also been taking a number of concrete, important national-level steps to address the threat of climate change, whether to achieve our target of 26 percent or 41 percent emission cut by 2020, our efforts through the national action plan on the efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emission through dealing with the issue of forest degradation, the issue of energy mix and transportation and industry, and so on and so forth.

So both of us, I’m sure has a narrative to share in terms of our national-level efforts. What is important in this forum is to synergize those efforts so the national becomes, at the same time, bilateral. We can showcase some bilateral U.S.-Indonesia cooperation on climate change to the rest of the world, that this is – it is actually possible to synergize national and bilateral and to become drivers in global discussions on climate change.

So what we are dong very much is part of creating that synergy between national-level efforts, bilateral, regional, and global, because we have really – if there is one issue that requires cooperative outlook, this would be it.

And I was struck by the points made by Secretary Kerry yesterday in his remarks at the public forum, reminding all of us in the sense of how extensive and how expansive is the impact of climate change. And you can count on Indonesia as being a continued strong partner in this very worthwhile endeavor.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: The next question comes from (inaudible).

QUESTION: First question for Secretary Kerry. The Geneva II talks have yielded no progress and they’re stalling. And in your statement yesterday, you said the U.S. remains committed to a political solution. So what leverage can you bring to stop the Assad regime from obstructing the talks and that there is a political solution when there is no progress?

Also your statement, you said that regime supporters aren’t doing enough to pressure the regime. Are you talking specifically about Russia, and what are they not doing enough of?
And for Minister Natalegawa, are Indonesians traveling to Syria to join foreign fighters and help the extremist groups there establish their goal of establishing an Islamic state there? And if so, how many have done so? Where are they being recruited? And what is your government doing about this?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you very much. Syria is a tragedy to the world, and all of us have a stake in trying to change the equation on the ground with respect to the people of Syria.
The talks themselves are taking a recess for a moment, but all of us need to remember that there is no recess for the people of Syria, who are suffering. And the international community needs to use this recess in the Geneva talks to determine how to use this time most effectively in order to bring about a political solution. We still believe there is no military solution with respect to Syria; there has to be a political resolution.

But right now, Bashar al-Assad has not engaged in the discussions along the promised and required standard that both Russia spoke up for and the regime spoke up for, that they would come to Geneva and accept the Geneva I communique as the basis of negotiations. They have refused to open up one moment of discussion legitimately about a transition government, and it is very clear that Bashar al-Assad is continuing to try to win this in the battlefield rather than to come to the negotiating table in good faith.

None of us are surprised that the talks are hard. We always knew these talks would be very, very difficult, and we’re still at a difficult moment. But everybody should agree that the Assad regime’s attitude is what has made these talks tougher. The opposition, whom they dismissed completely, has come to these talks with a greater preparation, with a greater preparedness, to be able to talk seriously, and they have presented themselves – I think Marty would agree – far more effectively and with greater sense of purpose than the Assad regime.

I think it was an example to the whole world that, while the Assad regime has obstructed and filibustered, the opposition demonstrated a courageous and mature seriousness of purpose and a willingness to try to discuss all the aspects of the conflict. They put forward a well-thought-out, well-reasoned, viable roadmap for the creation of a transitional governing body and a viable path by which to move the negotiations forward. They did that. The opposition did that. The regime stonewalled. They did nothing, except continue to drop barrel bombs on their own people and continue to destroy their own country.

And I regret to say they are dong so with increased support from Iran, from Hezbollah, and from Russia. Russia needs to be a part of the solution and not be contributing so many more weapons and so much more aid that they’re, in fact, enabling Assad to double down, which is creating an enormous problem.

And as for Assad, who says he wants to talk about terrorism, Assad himself is a magnet for terrorists. He’s the principal magnet of the region for attracting foreign fighters to Syria. Moreover, Assad himself is engaging in state-sanctioned terror against his own people. When you indiscriminately drop bombs on women and children, when you starve people and torture people by the thousands, those are acts of terror.

And so it is important for the world to consider in these next days exactly what steps can now be taken in the face of this intransigence that is creating an even greater human catastrophe by the moment. The numbers of refugees within Syria has gone up about 50 percent, and the numbers of refugees who’ve gone out of Syria has gone up about 33 percent since October, when this process began.

So we are deeply committed and deeply concerned about it. The international community understands that the primary purpose of our diplomacy is to discuss the full implementation of the Geneva communique. The full implementation is what 40 countries came and supported in Montreux, and that calls for a transition government with full executive authority arrived at by mutual consent.

Russia, on several occasions, has stood up publicly with me, or in other places, and said they are committed to that transition government to the Geneva communique and Geneva I. And yet, we have not seen the kind of effort to create the dynamic by which that can be achieved.
So we will continue to look at options. We will continue to stay focused. And we will continue to debate among ourselves what steps are appropriate at this point in time.

FOREIGN MINISTER NATALEGAWA: On Syria, the specific question you had asked about the possibility of Indonesian nationals being somehow engaged or involved on the ground – actually, there’s no way of verifying the data. Our current efforts have been actually in repatriating our nationals out of Syria, because we’ve had – prior to the conflict – quite a sizeable number of our nationals in Syria, so we have been working very hard to have them repatriated, return back to Indonesia.

I have been hearing – we have been hearing information or suggestion that there are some who have gone to Syria to be involved in the conflict. Obviously, it’s not something that we condone. Our message to them is not to involve themselves in such activities and that they must return back.

But beyond that specific question, I mean, all of us, when we were in Geneva – I mean, in Montreux for the meeting, all of us are in recognition that more of the same is not acceptable. More of the same means more civilian causalities, more lives lost, and more humanitarian sufferings. I fear that we may become a little bit numb to all this – of all this humanitarian catastrophe. We must not allow that to happen. We must constantly ensure that the interest of the innocent Syrians are at the forefront and change the dynamics.

I have spoken on many occasions of Indonesia’s strong belief in the power of diplomacy, in the power of peaceful settlement of disputes, even in the face of obviously very difficult situation, as we are facing just now in Syria.

So based on Geneva I, we must redouble our efforts in order to ensure that the diplomatic option, the diplomatic solution, becomes at the forefront. We owe the people of Syria that at least, that we apply ourselves seriously and that we don’t have – no longer have the luxury of allowing things to be prolonged. Because every day that passes means more lives lost and more sufferings for the ordinary people of Syria.

Indonesia’s view is very clear. We have always felt, first and foremost, we must engineer, we must enforce even, some kind of a cease-fire or pause in the conflict to allow for precisely the kind of transitional process, political process to get underway, as well as humanitarian assistance to be extended. Indonesia and United States are strong partners, I am sure, in speaking on behalf of such important principles as ensuring that the choices and the wishes of the Syrian people are actually respected. Thank you very much.

SECRETARY KERRY: Can I just add one other thing, quickly, if I may? On the humanitarian situation, we are trying very hard at the United Nations, through the United Nations Security Council, to achieve a meaningful resolution that might be able to have some impact on this humanitarian crisis. In Homs, people were allowed finally, after a long negotiation – we don’t have time for negotiations for every single place where you’re trying to save lives. So there has to be a broad rule of access for humanitarian assistance.

More than 250,000 people are currently under siege and being starved, some of them for as long as a year or two. They haven’t received humanitarian assistance. The Assad regime blocks it or requires it to come through to Damascus, where it gets separated and never gets to some of the people it’s supposed to get to. Now sometimes, the opposition has gotten in the way, certain opposition, the really bad opposition, and they’ve stood in the way of delivery. So both have to happen, and we’re trying to include both. We’re not trying to point a finger at one party alone.

But the fact is that you can’t allow people to be taken out as a matter of humanitarian effort – and then they’re separated. The young men are separated and the government takes them, and some of them have disappeared, some have been tortured. That’s not humanitarian. That is not part of providing humanitarian assistance to people. But that’s the way the Assad regime has treated it.

So this is an urgent matter for the international community. And President Obama and I call on all members of the United Nations Security Council to join together and pass a meaningful, impactful resolution with respect to this humanitarian crisis.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

FORMER EXEC. CHARGED WITH FRAUD AND MONEY LAUNDERING IN FOREIGN KICKBACK SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Monday, February 10, 2014
Former Executive of Power Generation Company Charged with Fraud and Money Laundering
Indictment Alleges an Eight-Year Scheme to Obtain More Than $5 Million in Kickbacks from Three Foreign Power Companies to Secure More Than $2 Billion in Lucrative Contracts

Asem Elgawhary, the former principal vice president of Bechtel Corporation and general manager of the Power Generation Engineering and Services Company (PGESCo), was indicted by a grand jury in Maryland today on charges that he defrauded his former employers, laundered the proceeds of the fraudulent scheme and violated federal tax laws.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein of the District of Maryland, Special Agent in Charge Stephen E. Vogt of the FBI’s Baltimore Division and Chief Richard Weber of the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) made the announcement after the indictment was returned earlier today.

“As today’s indictment alleges, this high-ranking executive took millions of dollars in kickbacks from power companies in exchange for preferential treatment and, in doing so, defrauded his former employer, other companies who were playing by the rules and U.S. tax authorities,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Raman.  “He then allegedly concealed his kickback scheme by hiding the payments in off-shore bank accounts, giving false information to his former employer and destroying evidence.  The Justice Department is committed to prosecuting not just the companies and individuals who pay bribes and kickbacks, but also those who solicit and accept them.”

“Mr. Elgawhary has been charged with using his corporate position for his own personal gain,” stated IRS-CI Chief Weber.   “No matter what your career or position is in a corporation, all U.S. citizens are obligated to comply with the tax laws.  When individuals and corporations deliberately fail to comply, IRS Criminal Investigation agents conduct investigations and recommend prosecution to the Department of Justice.”

The eight-count indictment alleges that from 1996 to 2011, Elgawhary, 72, of Maryland, was assigned by Bechtel – a U.S. corporation engaged in engineering, construction and project management – to be the general manager at PGESCo, a joint venture between Bechtel and a state-owned and state-controlled electricity company (EEHC).   PGESCo assisted EEHC in identifying possible subcontractors, soliciting bids and awarding contracts to perform power projects for EEHC.   The charges allege that Elgawhary used his position at PGESCo to provide preferential treatment to three power companies attempting to secure projects with EEHC in exchange for kickbacks from those power companies and their third-party consultants.   The court documents allege that the power companies and their consultants paid more than $5 million in kickbacks into various off-shore bank accounts under the control of Elgawhary, including various Swiss bank accounts.   In return, the power companies secured more than $2 billion in lucrative contracts.

The indictment alleges that Elgawhary then also attempted to conceal the kickback scheme and the proceeds he obtained from it.   Elgawhary allegedly sent to Bechtel executives and members of the PGESCo board of directors in Maryland various documents and “Representation Letters” that falsely represented that he had no knowledge of any fraud or suspected fraud at PGESCo and that there were no violations or possible violations of law or regulations whose effects were material and should have been considered for disclosure in PGESCo’s financial statements.   In addition, when Elgawhary was interviewed by counsel for Bechtel in April 2011, he claimed that he never received money from power companies or their consultants and that he did not maintain control over any foreign bank accounts.   With the help of other employees at PGESCo, Elgawhary also allegedly caused evidence about the kickback scheme to be deleted and destroyed, according to the charges.

The court documents also allege that Elgawhary used money from one of his Swiss bank accounts to purchase a $1.78 million home in Maryland for two close family members.   In order to conceal the origin of the money, however, Elgawhary and others made it appear that the money was from an unsecured loan from a marketing company owned and operated by another relative.

Elgawhary also allegedly obstructed and impeded the administration of U.S. tax laws by falsely claiming that he maintained only one foreign bank account and denying that he received any income from any foreign bank account.   Elgawhary also allegedly failed to report any of the kickbacks as income for the tax years 2008 through 2011.

The mail and wire fraud counts each carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine of the greater of $250,000 or twice the value gained or lost.   The conspiracy to commit money laundering count carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine of the greater of $500,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the transaction.   The tax count carries a maximum penalty of three years in prison and a fine of $5,000.

The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

The department has received significant assistance in this matter from its law enforcement counterparts in Switzerland, Germany, Italy and Cyprus.   Significant assistance was also provided by the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs.

The case is being investigated by the FBI’s and IRS-CI’s Baltimore Divisions.   The case is being prosecuted by Assistant Chief Daniel S. Kahn of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney David Salem of the District of Maryland.

U.S. CONGRATULATES PEOPLE OF KOSOVO ON THEIR NATIONAL DAY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Kosovo's National Day
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 14, 2014

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of the Republic of Kosovo as you commemorate the sixth anniversary of your independence on February 17.

The United States remains firmly committed to an independent, sovereign, and multiethnic Kosovo.

On this occasion, we reflect on the historic achievements of the past year, including the April 2013 agreement on normalization of relations with Serbia and the progress of the EU-facilitated Dialogue.

We also look forward to the important work of building a prosperous and inclusive Kosovo integrated in European and Euro-Atlantic institutions. We are confident that with continued courage, persistence, and patience, Kosovo will realize its aspirations in a Europe whole, free, and at peace.

As you celebrate the accomplishments of the people of Kosovo, the United States stands with you as a steadfast partner and friend.

I offer best wishes for a peaceful and prosperous future.

NSF ON BIOLOGY AND NEW MATERIALS RESEARCH

FROM:   NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION BIOLOGY
Learning from biology to create new materials
Researcher studies crystal growth that may lead to biomaterials for both and tooth repair

In nature, some organisms create their own mineralized body parts--such as bone, teeth and shells--from sources they find readily available in their environment. Certain sea creatures, for example, construct their shells from calcium carbonate crystals they build from ions found in the ocean.

"The organism takes brittle carbonate and turns it into a structural shape that protects it from predators, and from being bashed against the rocks," says Lara Estroff, an associate professor of materials science and engineering at Cornell University. "There is much scientific interest in how the organism controls the crystal growth, and what mechanisms are involved in strengthening and toughening the shells, especially in comparison to their components, which are brittle."

Researchers such as Estroff are very interested in synthesizing this kind of biology in the lab, and creating new organic and inorganic materials that mimic the "biomineralization" that occurs in nature, so they can gain a better understanding of how these natural processes work.

"We are trying to learn the techniques from the organisms, and apply them in the laboratory," says the National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded scientist, a synthetic chemist by training. "Part of it is creating simplified systems so that we can tease apart the more complicated mechanisms that are going on in biology. I am not recreating biology in the lab. I am learning from biology to create new materials."

Estroff's primary research focus is to discover the role of gels in crystal formation. Hydrogels, which are gels made in water, similar to Jell-O®, are involved in a number of natural biological systems, including the mother-of-pearl in mollusk shells, tooth enamel in mammals, even otoconia, which are tiny particles found in human ears. These substances are composed of both organic and inorganic materials; often the organic components form a gel. Estroff wants to know their purpose.

"Is there something special about a hydrogel in directing crystal growth?" she asks. "Does it change properties? Is it somehow responsible for giving rise to organic-inorganic composites?"

Understanding and controlling crystal growth is very important in many industrial fields, chief among them the manufacture of pharmaceuticals, since many drugs are in crystalline form, and "it's of vast importance to know how to modulate the solubility of crystals and how they pack into tablets," she says.

There also may be potential applications in producing biomaterials for bone and tooth repair, and in creating more functional inorganic materials, such as substances structured at the nanoscale that could enhance energy storage, for example in batteries. "Being able to manipulate these crystal structures down to the nanoscale opens up a lot of opportunities," she says.

Estroff is conducting her research under an NSF Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) award, which she received in 2009. The award supports junior faculty who exemplify the role of teacher-scholars through outstanding research, excellent education and the integration of education and research within the context of the mission of their organization. NSF is funding her work with $472,773 over five years.

The project focuses on observations, both in nature and in the laboratory, of macroscopic, single crystals with incorporated polymer fibers and other macromolecules. The project aims to understand the mechanisms by which these polymer networks become incorporated into macroscopic, single crystals.

Her lab, in studying crystal growth mechanisms in gels and their relationship to biomineralization, is trying to answer at least three questions. "First, what is the internal structure of these crystals, and where does the gel material become trapped?" she asks. "Second, can we understand the mechanism of how it is trapped to control how much is trapped? And, third, what effect does this material have on the mechanical properties of the crystals?"

To find the answers, her team developed a synthetic analog to the biological system. Using agarose, a more purified form of the gel agar-agar, they grew their own crystals in the lab, then compared them to crystals grown without gel in an ordinary water-based solution, and later to natural biological crystals.

During the process, they ran a high resolution electron tomography scan of their samples, creating a three-dimensional image of the gel-grown crystal, which "was the first time that people had actually seen how the organic phase can be incorporated in the crystal," she says. "A crystal is an order array of ions, and a polymer is a floppy, poorly-defined blob. How do you accommodate this floppy blob into this ordered array?"

In comparing their synthetic crystals to natural ones, "there were similarities and differences," she says. "We now have the best image of how these objects are incorporated and now can start asking questions about the structure-property relationships, including how this internal structure translates into changes in the mechanical properties. We've been poking at the crystals and looking at the response."

As it turns out, "these organic inclusions mechanically strengthen and toughen the material in both biological crystals and synthetic crystals," she says. "The organic material that is trapped within the crystals makes them stronger and harder--more resistant to fracture--than their geologic counterparts with no organic material."

The researchers' next step is to synthesize other materials. "We'd like to find out if we can grow different types of crystals in different types of gels," she says. "We're now pursuing that route."

As part of the grant's educational component, Estroff teaches a course on biomineralization for both graduate students and undergraduates. "One of my goals is to get them reading primary literature and analyzing it," she says. "They also go out and look for biomineralizing organisms on campus. They go to local streams and bring them back to the lab."

She also is trying to recruit more female students to her department. She is the faculty advisor to a group known as WIMSE, which stands for Women in Materials Science and Engineering, and has organized a mentoring program where freshmen and sophomores are paired with juniors and seniors who, in turn, are paired with graduate students. The enrollment of women in the materials science and engineering major has grown from 10 percent to 30 percent during the last five years.

"Having a group creates a critical mass," she says. "It's really had a positive impact."

-- Marlene Cimons, National Science Foundation
Investigators
Lara Estroff
Related Institutions/Organizations
Cornell University

Sunday, February 16, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS ON CLIMATE CHANGE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Jakarta, Indonesia
February 16, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, Robert. Thank you very, very much. I don’t know. I think some of you were cheering twice for the same university. I don’t know. (Laughter.) It seemed to come from the same place anyway.

What a pleasure to be here at America, where we are looking at all of the air conditioning pipes running right through here. I love it. The spirit and feel of this place is very special and it’s wonderful to see our friends up here from Kalimantan and also everybody from Sumatra. Thank you very much for being with us. Can you hear me? Yeah! Wave! (Laughter.) Do a few selfies, everybody will – (laughter.) Anyway, it’s really a pleasure to be here. I see a lot of iPads up in the air sort of flashing away.

This is special. Ambassador Blake, thank you for doing this. Thank you all for coming here today. I want to welcome all of those of you who are tuning in elsewhere, some of you who are watching on a home webcast, and we’re delighted to have you here. It’s really a pleasure for me to be able to be back in Jakarta, back in Indonesia, where you have one of the richest ecosystems on Earth. And you live in a country that is at the top of the global rankings for both marine and terrestrial biodiversity, and you have a human ecosystem that includes some 300 ethnic groups, speaking at least 700 languages – extraordinary place.

But because of climate change, it is no secret that today, Indonesia is also one of the most vulnerable countries on Earth.

This year, as Secretary of State, I will engage in a series of discussions on the urgency of addressing climate change – particularly on the national security implications and the economic opportunities. And I want you to think about those. But I wanted to start right here, in Jakarta, because this city – this country – this region – is really on the front lines of climate change. It’s not an exaggeration to say to you that the entire way of life that you live and love is at risk. So let’s have a frank conversation about this threat and about what we, as citizens of the world, need to be able to do to address it.

Some time ago I travelled to another vibrant city – a city also rich with its own rich history – Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. And I was there, sitting in a big room, surrounded by representatives from about 170 countries. We listened as expert after expert after expert described the growing threat of climate change and what it would mean for the world if we failed to act. The Secretary General of the conference was – he was an early leader on climate change, a man by the name of Maurice Strong, and he told us – I quote him: “Every bit of evidence I’ve seen persuades me that we are on a course leading to tragedy.”

Well, my friends, that conference was in 1992. And it is stunning how little the conversation has really changed since then.

When I think about the array of global climate – of global threats – think about this: terrorism, epidemics, poverty, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction – all challenges that know no borders – the reality is that climate change ranks right up there with every single one of them. And it is a challenge that I address in nearly every single country that I visit as Secretary of State, because President Obama and I believe it is urgent that we do so.

And the reason is simple: The science of climate change is leaping out at us like a scene from a 3D movie. It’s warning us; it’s compelling us to act. And let there be no doubt in anybody’s mind that the science is absolutely certain. It’s something that we understand with absolute assurance of the veracity of that science. No one disputes some of the facts about it. Let me give you an example. When an apple separates from a tree, it falls to the ground. We know that because of the basic laws of physics. No one disputes that today. It’s a fact. It’s a scientific fact. Science also tells us that when water hits a low enough temperature, it’s going to turn into ice; when it reaches a high enough temperature, it’s going to boil. No one disputes that. Science and common sense tell us if you reach out and put your hand on a hot cook stove, you’re going to get burned. I can’t imagine anybody who would dispute that either.

So when thousands of the world’s leading scientists and five reports over a long period of time with thousands of scientists contributing to those reports – when they tell us over and over again that our climate is changing, that it is happening faster than they ever predicted, ever in recorded history, and when they tell us that we humans are the significant cause, let me tell you something: We need to listen.

When 97 percent of scientists agree on anything, we need to listen, and we need to respond.

Well, 97 percent of climate scientists have confirmed that climate change is happening and that human activity is responsible. These scientists agree on the causes of these changes and they agree on the potential effects. They agree that the emission of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide contributes heavily to climate change. They agree that the energy sources that we’ve relied on for decades to fuel our cars and to heat our homes or to air condition our homes, to – all the things that provide us electricity like oil and coal – that these are largely responsible for sending those greenhouse gases up into the atmosphere. And the scientists agree that emissions coming from deforestation and from agriculture can also send enormous quantities of carbon pollution into our atmosphere.

And they agree that, if we continue to go down the same path that we are going down today, the world as we know it will change – and it will change dramatically for the worse.

So we know this is happening, and we know it with virtually the same certainty that we understand that if we reach out and touch that hot stove, we’re going to get burned. In fact, this is not really a complicated equation. I know sometimes I can remember from when I was in high school and college, some aspects of science or physics can be tough – chemistry. But this is not tough. This is simple. Kids at the earliest age can understand this.

Try and picture a very thin layer of gases – a quarter-inch, half an inch, somewhere in that vicinity – that’s how thick it is. It’s in our atmosphere. It’s way up there at the edge of the atmosphere. And for millions of years – literally millions of years – we know that layer has acted like a thermal blanket for the planet – trapping the sun’s heat and warming the surface of the Earth to the ideal, life-sustaining temperature. Average temperature of the Earth has been about 57 degrees Fahrenheit, which keeps life going. Life itself on Earth exists because of the so-called greenhouse effect. But in modern times, as human beings have emitted gases into the air that come from all the things we do, that blanket has grown thicker and it traps more and more heat beneath it, raising the temperature of the planet. It’s called the greenhouse effect because it works exactly like a greenhouse in which you grow a lot of the fruit that you eat here.

This is what’s causing climate change. It’s a huge irony that the very same layer of gases that has made life possible on Earth from the beginning now makes possible the greatest threat that the planet has ever seen.

And the results of our human activity are clear. If you ranked all the years in recorded history by average temperature, you’d see that 8 of the 10 hottest years have all happened within the last 10 years. Think about it this way: all 10 of the hottest years on record have actually happened since Google went online in 1998.

Now, that’s how fast this change is happening. And because the earth is getting hotter at such an alarming speed, glaciers in places like the Arctic are melting into the sea faster than we expected. And the sea is rising – slowly, but rising – and will rise to dangerous levels. Scientists now predict that by the end of the century, the sea could rise by a full meter. Now, I know that to some people a meter may not sound like a lot, but I’ll tell you this: it’s enough to put half of Jakarta underwater. Just one meter would displace hundreds of millions of people worldwide and threaten billions of dollars in economic activity. It would put countries into jeopardy. It would put countless – I mean, come to the local level – it would put countless homes and schools and parks, entire cities at risk.

Now, climate change also tragically means the end of some species. The changing sea temperature and the increasing amount of acidity – the acidity comes from coal-fired power plants and from the pollution, and when the rain falls the rain spills the acidity into the ocean. And it means that certain species of fish like cod or sardines can no longer live where they once lived. This is devastating for the world’s fisheries. And scientists predict that fisheries will be among the hardest hit. Just think about the fishermen who sell their fish catches at Pasar Ikan. Think about it. There are some studies that say that Indonesia’s fisheries could actually lose up to 40 percent of what they currently bring in – so a fisherman who usually has about a hundred fish to sell one day would suddenly only have 60 or so for sale. The impact is obvious.

Climate change also means water shortages. And if you have these enormous water shortages, then you have a change in the weather – because of the weather patterns, you’re going to wind up with droughts, the lack of water. And the droughts can become longer and more intense. In fact, this isn’t something around the corner – this is happening now.

We are seeing record droughts right now, and they’re already putting a strain on water resources around the world. We’ve already seen in various parts of the world – in Africa, for instance – people fighting each other over water, and we’ve seen more conflicts shaping up now over the limits of water. Back in the United States, President Obama just the other day visited California, where millions of people are now experiencing the 13th month of the worst drought the state has seen in 500 years. And no relief is in sight. What used to be a 100-year or a 500-year event is now repeating itself within 10 years.

Furthermore, climate change means fundamental transformations in agriculture worldwide. Scientists predict that, in some places, heat waves and water shortages will make it much more difficult for farmers to be able to grow the regular things we grow, like wheat or corn or rice. And obviously, it’s not only farmers who will suffer here – it’s the millions of people who depend on those crops that the farmers grow. For example, the British government research showed that climate change may have contributed to the famine that killed as many as 100,000 people in Somalia just back in 2010 and 2011.

And scientists further predict that climate change also means longer, more unpredictable monsoon seasons and more extreme weather events. Now, I’ll tell you, I can’t tell you – no weatherman on TV or anybody is going to be able to look at you and tell you – that one particular storm was absolutely the result of climate change. But scientists do predict that many more of these disastrous storms will occur if we continue down the current path. Ladies and gentlemen, I saw with my own eyes what the Philippines experienced in the wake of Typhoon Haiyan and I will tell you it would be absolutely devastating if that kind of storm were to become the normal thing that happens every single year in many places.

On top of the unspeakable humanitarian toll, the economic cost that follows a storm like that is absolutely massive. I don’t mean just the billions that it costs to rebuild. We’ve seen here in Asia how extreme weather events can disrupt world trade. For example, after serious flooding in 2011, global prices for external computer hard drives rose by more than 10 percent. Why? Because electronic manufacturing zones around Bangkok were out of commission, wiped out by the weather. So it’s not just about agriculture – it’s also about technology. It’s about our global economy. It’s about potentially catastrophic effects on the global supply chain.

Now, despite all of these realities – despite these facts – much of the world still doesn’t see or want to see the need to pursue a significant response to this threat. As recently as 2011, a survey of city officials here in Asia found that more than 80 percent of the population said they did not anticipate climate change hurting their cities’ economies.

And despite more than 25 years of scientific warning after scientific warning after scientific warning – despite all that, the call to arms that we heard back in Rio back in 1992 – despite that, we still haven’t globally summoned the urgency necessary to get the job done. And as a result of this complacency, last year the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere reached the highest point in human history – despite all the warnings.

Now, I know that these are some dramatic scientific facts – statistics. But think of it this way: If the worst-case scenario about climate change, all the worst predictions, if they never materialize, what will be the harm that is done from having made the decision to respond to it? We would actually leave our air cleaner. We would leave our water cleaner. We would actually make our food supply more secure. Our populations would be healthier because of fewer particulates of pollution in the air – less cost to health care. Those are the things that would happen if we happen to be wrong and we responded. But imagine if the 97 percent of those scientists are correct and the people who say no are wrong. Then the people who say no will have presented us with one of the most catastrophic, grave threats in the history of human life. That’s the choice here.

Notwithstanding the stark choices that we face, here’s the good thing: there is still time. The window of time is still open for us to be able to manage this threat. But the window is closing. And so I wanted to come to Jakarta to talk to you because we need people all over the world to raise their voices and to be heard. There is still time for us to significantly cut greenhouse emissions and prevent the very worst consequences of climate change from ever happening at all. But we need to move on this, and we need to move together now. We just don’t have time to let a few loud interests groups hijack the climate conversation. And when I say that, you know what I’m talking about? I’m talking about big companies that like it the way it is that don’t want to change, and spend a lot of money to keep you and me and everybody from doing what we know we need to do.

First and foremost, we should not allow a tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme ideologues to compete with scientific fact. Nor should we allow any room for those who think that the costs associated with doing the right thing outweigh the benefits. There are people who say, “Oh, it’s too expensive, we can’t do this.” No. No, folks. We certainly should not allow more time to be wasted by those who want to sit around debating whose responsibility it is to deal with this threat, while we come closer and closer to the point of no return.

I have to tell you, this is really not a normal kind of difference of opinion between people. Sometimes you can have a reasonable argument and a reasonable disagreement over an opinion you may have. This is not opinion. This is about facts. This is about science. The science is unequivocal. And those who refuse to believe it are simply burying their heads in the sand.

Now, President and I – Obama and I believe very deeply that we do not have time for a meeting anywhere of the Flat Earth Society. One of the arguments that we do hear is that it’s going to be too expensive to be able to address climate change. I have to tell you, that assertion could not be less grounded in fact. In fact, it’s exactly the opposite. Serious analysts understand that the costs of doing nothing far outweigh the costs of investing in solutions now. You do not need a degree in economics or a graduate degree in business in order to understand that the cost of flooding, the cost of drought, the cost of famine, the cost of health care, the cost of addressing this challenge is simply far less – the costs of addressing this challenge are far less than the costs of doing nothing. Just look at the most recent analysis done by the World Bank, which estimates that by 2050, losses – excuse me one second – losses from flood damage in Asian ports – fishing ports, shipping ports – the losses in those ports alone could exceed $1 trillion annually unless we make big changes to the infrastructure of those ports.

Finally, if we truly want to prevent the worst consequences of climate change from happening, we do not have time to have a debate about whose responsibility this is. The answer is pretty simple: It’s everyone’s responsibility. Now certainly some countries – and I will say this very clearly, some countries, including the United States, contribute more to the problem and therefore we have an obligation to contribute more to the solution. I agree with that. But, ultimately, every nation on Earth has a responsibility to do its part if we have any hope of leaving our future generations the safe and healthy planet that they deserve.

You have a saying, I think, here in Indonesia, “Luka di kaki, sakit seluruh badan”. (Laughter.) I – for those that don’t speak as well as I do – (laughter) – it means “when there’s a pain in the foot, the whole body feels it.” Well, today in this interconnected world that we all live in, the fact is that hardship anywhere is actually felt by people everywhere. We all see it; we share it. And when a massive storm destroys a village and yet another and then another in Southeast Asia; when crops that used to grow abundantly no longer turn a profit for farmers in South America; when entire communities are forced to relocate because of rising tides – that’s happening – it’s not just one country or even one region that feels the pain. In today’s globalized economy, everyone feels it.

And when you think about it, that connection to climate change is really no different than how we confront other global threats.

Think about terrorism. We don’t decide to have just one country beef up the airport security and the others relax their standards and let bags on board without inspection. No, that clearly wouldn’t make us any safer.

Or think about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It doesn’t keep us safe if the United States secures its nuclear arsenal, while other countries fail to prevent theirs from falling into the hands of terrorists. We all have to approach this challenge together, which is why all together we are focused on Iran and its nuclear program or focused on North Korea and its threat.

The bottom line is this: it is the same thing with climate change. And in a sense, climate change can now be considered another weapon of mass destruction, perhaps the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.

Now I mentioned earlier, a few minutes ago, that last December I went to Tacloban in the Philippines, not long after Typhoon Haiyan. I have to tell you: I’ve seen a lot of places in war and out of war and places that have been destroyed, but in all the time of my life, I don’t think I’ve ever seen devastation like. We saw cars and homes and lives turned upside-down, trees scattered like toothpicks all across a mountainside. And most devastating of all, so quickly, that storm stole the lives of more than 5,000 people – women, and children who never saw it coming.

The fact is that climate change, if left unchecked, will wipe out many more communities from the face of the earth. And that is unacceptable under any circumstances – but is even more unacceptable because we know what we can do and need to do in order to deal with this challenge.

It is time for the world to approach this problem with the cooperation, the urgency, and the commitment that a challenge of this scale warrants. It’s absolutely true that industrialized countries – yes, industrialized countries that produce most of the emissions – have a huge responsibility to be able to reduce emissions, but I’m telling you that doesn’t mean that other nations have a free pass. They don’t have a right to go out and repeat the mistakes of the past. It’s not enough for one country or even a few countries to reduce their emissions when other countries continue to fill the atmosphere with carbon pollution as they see fit. At the end of the day, emissions coming from anywhere in the world threaten the future for people everywhere in the world, because those emissions go up and then they move with the wind and they drop with the rain and the weather, and they keep going around and around and they threaten all of us.

Now, as I’ve already acknowledged, I am the first one to recognize the responsibility that the United States has, because we have contributed to this problem. We’re one of the number – we’re the number two emitter of greenhouse gas emissions. The number one is now China. The fact is that I recognize the responsibility that we have to erase the bad habits that we have, which we adopted, frankly, before we understood the consequences. Nobody set out to make this happen. This is the consequence of the industrial revolution and the transformation of the world, and many of the advances that we made that have changed the world for the better came from these steps. But now we do know the attendant consequences that are linked to these actions.

President Obama has taken the moral challenge head on. Over the past five years, the United States has done more to reduce the threat of climate change – domestically and with the help of our international partners – than in the 20 years before President Obama came to office.

Thanks to President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, the United States is well on our way to meeting the international commitments to seriously cut our greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, and that’s because we’re going straight to the largest sources of pollution. We’re targeting emissions from transportation – cars trucks, rail, et cetera – and from power sources, which account together for more than 60 percent of the dangerous greenhouse gases that we release.

The President has put in place standards to double the fuel-efficiency of cars on American roads. And we’ve also proposed curbing carbon pollution from new power plants, and similar regulations are in the works to limit the carbon pollution coming from power plants that are already up and already running.

At the same time, Americans have actually doubled the amount of energy we are creating from wind, solar, and geothermal sources, and we’ve become smarter about the way we use energy in our homes and in our businesses. A huge amount of carbon pollution comes out of buildings, and it’s important in terms of the lighting, in terms of the emissions from those buildings, the air conditioning – all these kinds of things thought through properly can contribute to the solution. As a result, today in the United States, we are emitting less than we have in two decades.

We’re also providing assistance to international partners, like Indonesia. This year the Millennium Challenge Corporation launched the $332 million Green Prosperity program to help address deforestation and support innovation and clean energy throughout the country. We also implemented what we called “debt for nature” swaps, where we forgive some of the debt – and we have forgiven some of Indonesia’s debt – in return for investments in the conservation of forests in Sumatra and Kalimantan.

But the United States – simple reality: just as I talked about the scientific facts in the beginning, this is a fact – the United States cannot solve this problem or foot the bill alone. Even if every single American got on a bicycle tomorrow and carpooled – instead of – or carpooled to school instead of buses or riding in individual cars or driving, or rode their bike to work, or used only solar powers – panels in order to power their homes; if we each, every American, planted a dozen trees; if we eliminated all of our domestic greenhouse gas emissions – guess what? That still wouldn’t be enough to counter the carbon pollution coming from the rest of the world. Because today, if even one or two economies neglects to respond to this threat, it can counter, erase all of the good work that the rest of the world has done. When I say we need a global solution, I mean we need a global solution.

That is why the United States is prepared to take the lead in bringing other nations to the table. And this is something that President Obama is deeply committed to. And as Secretary of State, I am personally committed to making sure that this work is front and center in all of our diplomatic efforts. This week I will be instructing all of the chiefs of our missions at American embassies all over the world to make climate change a top priority and to use all the tools of diplomacy that they have at their disposal in order to help address this threat.

Now I have just come here today, I arrived last night from China, where I met with government leaders and we discussed our cooperation, our collaboration on this climate change front at length. The Chinese see firsthand every single day how dangerous pollution can be. I recently read that an 8-year-old girl was diagnosed with lung cancer because of all the air pollution that she was inhaling. Eight years old. And the devastating human toll pollution, it takes comes with a very hefty price tag: Air pollution already costs China as much as 8 percent of its GDP because two things happen as a result of the pollution: healthcare spending goes up and agricultural output goes down.

Now I am pleased to tell you that the leaders of China agree that it is time to pursue a cleaner path forward. And China is taking steps, and we have already taken significant steps together through the U.S.-China Climate Change Working Group that we launched in Beijing last year.

Just yesterday, we announced a new agreement on an enhanced policy of dialogue that includes the sharing of information and policies so that we can help develop plans to deal with the UN climate change negotiation that takes place in Paris next year, in planning for the post-2020 limit to greenhouse gas emissions. These plans are a key input into UN negotiations to develop a new global climate agreement, and we have hopes that this unique partnership between China and the United States can help set an example for global leadership and global seriousness.

Now make no mistake: this is real progress. The U.S. and China are the world’s two largest economies. We are two of the largest consumers of energy, and we are two of the largest emitters of global greenhouse gases – together we account for roughly 40 percent of the world’s emissions.

But this is not just about china and the United States. It’s about every country on Earth doing whatever it can to pursue cleaner and healthier energy sources. And it’s about the all of us literally treating the pain in the foot, so the whole body hurts a little less.

Now this is going to require us to continue the UN negotiations and ultimately finalize an ambitious global agreement in Paris next year. And nations need to also be pursuing smaller bilateral agreements, public-private partnerships, independent domestic initiatives – you name it. There’s nothing to stop any of you from helping to push here, to pick things that you can do in Indonesia. It’s time for us to recognize that the choices the world makes in the coming months and years will directly and substantially affect our quality of life for generations to come.

Now I tell you, I’m looking out at a young audience here. All of you are the leaders of the future. And what we’re talking about is what kind of world are we going to leave you. I know that some of what I’m talking about here today, it seems awful big, and some of it may even like it’s out of reach to you. But I have to tell you it’s not. One person in one place can make a difference – by talking about how they manage a building, how they heat a school, what kind of things you do for recycling, transportation you use. What you don’t – I think what you don’t hear enough about today, unfortunately, and I’ve saved it for the end, because I want you to leave here feeling, wow, we can get something done. There’s a big set of opportunities in front of us. And that’s because the most important news of all: that climate change isn’t only a challenge. It’s not only a burden. It also presents one of the greatest economic opportunities of all time.

The global energy market is the future. The solution to climate change is energy policy. And this market is poised to be the largest market the world has ever known. Between now and 2035, investment in the energy sector is expected to reach nearly $17 trillion. That’s more than the entire GDP of China and India combined.

The great technology – many of you have your smart phones or your iPads, et cetera, here today – all of this technology that we use so much today was a $1 trillion market in the 1990s with 1 billion users. The energy market is a $6 trillion market with, today, 6 billion users, and it’s going to grow to maybe 9 billion users over the course of the next 20, 30, 40 years. The solution to climate change is as clear as the problem. The solution is making the right choices on energy policy. It’s as simple as that. And with a few smart choices, we can ensure that clean energy is the most attractive investment in the global energy sector.

To do this, governments and international financial institutions need to stop providing incentives for the use of energy sources like coal and oil. Instead, we have to make the most of the innovative energy technology that entrepreneurs are developing all over the world – including here in Indonesia, where innovative companies like Sky Energy are building solar and battery storage and projects that can help power entire villages.

And we have to invest in new technology that will help us bring renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and hydro power not only to the communities where those resources are abundant –but to every community and to every country on every continent.

I am very well aware that these are not easy choices for any country to make – I know that. I’ve been in politics for a while. I know the pull and different powerful political forces. Coal and oil are currently cheap ways to power a society, at least in the near term. But I urge governments to measure the full cost to that coal and that oil, measure the impacts of what will happen as we go down the road. You cannot simply factor in the immediate costs of energy needs. You have to factor in the long-term cost of carbon pollution. And they have to factor in the cost of survival. And if they do, then governments will find that the cost of pursuing clean energy now is far cheaper than paying for the consequences of climate change later.

Make no mistake: the technology is out there. None of this is beyond our capacity.

I am absolutely confident that if we choose to, we will meet this challenge. Remember: we’re the ones – we, all of us, the world – helped to discover things like penicillin and we eradicated smallpox. We found a way to light up the night all around the world with a flip of the switch and spread that technology to more than three quarters of the world’s population. We came up with a way for people to fly and move from one place to another in the air between cities and across oceans, and into outer space. And we put the full wealth of human knowledge into a device we can hold in our hand that does all of the thinking that used to take up a whole room almost this size.

Human ingenuity has long proven its ability to solve seemingly insurmountable challenges. It is not a lack of ability that is a problem. It is a lack of political resolve that is standing in our way. And I will tell you as somebody who ran for elected office, when you hear from the people, when the people make it clear what they want and what they think they need, then people in politics respond.

Today I call on all of you in Indonesia and concerned citizens around the world to demand the resolve that is necessary from your leaders. Speak out. Make climate change an issue that no public official can ignore for another day. Make a transition towards clean energy the only plan that you are willing to accept.

And if we come together now, we can not only meet the challenge, we can create jobs and economic growth in every corner of the globe. We can clean up the air, we can improve the health of people, we can have greater security; we can make our neighborhoods healthier places to live; we can help ensure that farmers and fishers can still make a sustainable living and feed our communities; and we can avoid disputes and even entire wars over oil, water, and other limited resources. We can make good on the moral responsibility we all have to leave future generations with a planet that is clean and healthy and sustainable for the future.

The United States is ready to work with you in this endeavor. With Indonesia and the rest of the world pulling in the same direction, we can meet this challenge, the greatest challenge of our generation, and we can create the future that everybody dreams of.

Thank you all very much for letting me be with you. Thank you. (Applause.)

DOJ FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST RHODE ISLAND, R.I. CORRECTIONS FOR RACE AND NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Monday, February 10, 2014

Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against the State of Rhode Island and the R.I. Department of Corrections Alleging Race and National Origin Discrimination
The Justice Department announced the filing of a lawsuit today against the State of Rhode Island and the Rhode Island Department of Corrections (RIDOC) alleging that the defendants are engaged in a pattern or practice of employment discrimination against African-Americans and Hispanics in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII).  Specifically, the lawsuit challenges the defendants’ use of a written examination and a video examination to screen and select applicants for entry-level correction officer (CO) positions at RIDOC as part of the department’s ongoing efforts to ensure that state and local government employers utilize non-discriminatory assessment tools in their hiring practices.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, alleges that the defendants require applicants for entry-level CO positions at RIDOC to undertake a multi-step selection process that includes, among other things, a written examination and a video examination taken on the same day.  The complaint further alleges that the manner in which the defendants use the written and video examinations as part of their multi-step selection process disproportionately screens out African-American and Hispanic applicants, resulting in an unjustified disparate impact against these applicants.

Title VII not only prohibits intentional discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin and religion, but also prohibits employment practices that result in a disparate impact upon a protected group, unless the employer can prove that such practices validly predict an applicant’s ability to perform a job or there is a less discriminatory alternative that the employer can use.  The department’s complaint states that the manner in which the defendants use the written and video examinations violates Title VII because such use is not “job related or consistent with business necessity,” as the law requires, and does not validly enable the employer to identify those applicants who are qualified for entry-level CO positions at RIDOC.

The department shares the goal of enabling public employers to hire qualified applicants to perform their critical public safety functions.  In light of its findings and this shared goal, the department is seeking a court order requiring the defendants to stop using the challenged written and video examinations, develop selection procedures for entry-level CO positions at RIDOC that comply with Title VII and provide make-whole relief including, where appropriate, offers of hire, back pay and retroactive seniority, to African-Americans and Hispanics who have been or will be harmed as a result of the defendants’ use of the challenged examinations.

“Bringing an end to practices that have an unjustified discriminatory impact on the basis of race or national origin is a major priority of the Department of Justice,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels for the Civil Rights Division.  “Employers must be able to show that examinations like those at issue here, that disproportionately screen out large numbers of African-American and Hispanic applicants, validly distinguish between qualified and unqualified applicants for the job.  Otherwise, the examinations will not serve the employer’s purposes and will violate the law.”

SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT ON GENEVA CONFERENCE AND SITUATION IN SYRIA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Geneva Conference and Situation in Syria


Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 16, 2014


There's no recess in the suffering of the Syrian people, and the parties and the international community must use the recess in the Geneva talks to determine how best to use this time and its resumption to find a political solution to this horrific civil war.

None of us are surprised that the talks have been hard, and that we are at a difficult moment, but we should all agree that the Assad regime’s obstruction has made progress even tougher. It was an example to all the world that while the regime obstructed and filibustered, the opposition demonstrated a courageous and mature seriousness of purpose and willingness to discuss all aspects of the conflict. They put forward a viable and well-reasoned roadmap for the creation of a transitional governing body and a viable path by which to move the negotiations forward. That's precisely the spirit of the Geneva I Communique, and we commend the opposition for responsibly meeting its spirit.

The opposition delegation has regularly demonstrated that they are willing to engage constructively in the interests of all the Syrian people. In sharp contrast, we have seen a refusal to engage on the part of the regime. While it stalled in Geneva, the regime intensified its barbaric assault on its civilian population with barrel bombs and starvation. It has even gone as far as to add some of the opposition delegates at Geneva to a terrorist list and seize their assets. This is reprehensible.

The international community understands that the primary purpose of our diplomacy is to discuss the full implementation of the Geneva communique, including the creation of a transitional governing body. The Syrian people deserve no less. We call on the regime's supporters to press the regime. In the end, they will bear responsibility if the regime continues with its intransigence in the talks and its brutal tactics on the ground.

The United States deeply appreciates the efforts of Joint Special Representative Brahimi to secure a negotiated political transition. We remain committed to the Geneva process and to all diplomatic efforts to find a political solution as the only way to a lasting and sustainable end to the conflict.


SEC CONCLUDES BRIBERY CASE AGAINST FORMER SIEMENS EXECUTIVES

FROM:  SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 
SEC Concludes Its Case Against Former Siemens Executives Charged with Bribery in Argentina, Obtaining Judgments over $1.8 Million

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that on February 3, 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a final judgment against Andres Truppel, a former CFO of Siemens Argentina. On February 4, 2014, the Court also entered

a final judgment against Ulrich Bock and Stephan Signer, both former Heads of Major Projects at Siemens Aktiengesellschaft (Siemens). The judgments resolve the Commission’s Civil Action against Truppel, Bock and Signer for their role in a decade long bribery scheme at Siemens and its regional company in Argentina.

On December 13, 2011, the Commission filed a Civil Action charging Bock, Signer, Truppel and four other senior executives of Siemens and its regional company in Argentina with violations of the anti-bribery, books and records, and internal controls provisions of the FCPA. The Commission alleged that between 2001 and 2007, the defendants paid bribes to senior government officials in Argentina to retain a $1 billion contract (“the DNI contract”) to produce national identity cards for Argentine citizens. The officials included two Argentine presidents and cabinet ministers in two presidential administrations.

The Commission’s complaint alleged that Bock and Signer, both senior Siemens managers based in Germany, took various actions to revive the DNI contract after it was cancelled by government officials in Argentina, and made sure that the bribery connected to the contract went undetected. Truppel, a former CFO of Siemens Argentina with close ties to government officials, assisted their efforts. The Commission’s complaint also alleged that Uriel Sharef, a member of Siemens Managing Board, or “Vorstand,” and the most senior officer charged in connection with the scheme, met with payment intermediaries in the U.S. and agreed to pay bribes to Argentine officials while enlisting subordinates to conceal payments and circumvent Siemens’ internal accounting controls.

The final judgment as to Bock and Signer enjoins them from violating Sections 30A and 13(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 13b2-1 thereunder, and from aiding and abetting Siemens’ violations of Exchange Act Sections 31(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(2)(B), and orders them to each pay a civil penalty of $524,000, the highest penalty assessed against individuals in an FCPA case. The judgment also orders Bock to pay disgorgement of $316,452, plus prejudgment interest thereon in the amount of $97,505. Bock and Signer failed to respond to the Commission’s complaint.

The final judgment as to Truppel enjoins him from violating Sections 30A and 13(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 13b2-1 thereunder, and from aiding and abetting Siemens’ violations of Exchange Act Sections 13(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(2)(B), and orders him to pay a civil penalty of $80,000. Truppel settled the Commission’s charges without admitting or denying the allegations in the complaint.

This concludes the SEC’s case. The Commission previously announced that on April 16, 2013, a final judgment was entered by the Court against Uriel Sharef, a former officer and board member of Siemens, for his role in the long standing bribery scheme. The final judgment, to which Sharef consented without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission’s complaint, enjoined him from violating the anti-bribery and related books and records and internal controls provisions of the FCPA, and ordered him to pay a $275,000 civil penalty. Bernd Regendantz settled with the Commission when the complaint was filed, and allegations against Herbert Steffen and Carlos Sergi were dismissed. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Department of Justice, Fraud Section, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Office of the Prosecutor General in Munich, Germany and authorities in Argentina.

NLRB PROPOSES RULE CHANGES TO BETTER ADMINISTER NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT

FROM:  NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 
The National Labor Relations Board Proposes Amendments to Improve Representation Case Procedures
February 4, 2014

The National Labor Relations Board announced today that it is issuing proposed amendments to its rules and regulations governing representation-case procedures. In substance, the proposed amendments are identical to the representation procedure changes first proposed in June of 2011. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) will appear in the Federal Register tomorrow. The proposals are intended to enable the Board to more effectively administer the National Labor Relations Act. Specifically, the NPRM presents a number of changes to the Board’s representation case procedures aimed at modernizing processes, enhancing transparency and eliminating unnecessary litigation and delay. Issuance of the proposed rule was approved by Board Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce and Members Kent Y. Hirozawa and Nancy Schiffer. Board Members Philip A. Miscimarra and Harry I. Johnson III dissented.

In announcing the proposals, Pearce said: “The Board is unanimous in its support for effective representation case procedures. I am pleased that all Members share a commitment to constructive dialogue, and we all agree that important issues are involved in this proposed rulemaking. With a Senate-confirmed five-member Board, I feel it is important for the Board to fully consider public comment on these proposed amendments, along with the comments we previously received in 2011. These amendments would modernize the representation case process and fulfill the promise of the National Labor Relations Act.”

“I believe that the NPRM first proposed in June of 2011 continues to best frame the issues and raises the appropriate concerns for public comment,” Pearce said. He stressed that the Board is reviewing the proposed changes with an open mind: “No final decisions have been made. We will review all of the comments filed in response to the original proposals, so the public will not have to duplicate its prior efforts in order to have those earlier comments considered. Re-issuing the 2011 proposals is the most efficient and effective rulemaking process at this time.”

“Unnecessary delay and inefficiencies hurt both employees and employers. These proposals are intended to improve the process for all parties, in all cases, whether non-union employees are seeking a union to represent them or unionized employees are seeking to decertify a union,” Pearce said. “We look forward to further exchanges of ideas to improve the processes in a way that will benefit workers, employers and all of the American people.”

The reforms the Board will propose would:

allow for electronic filing and transmission of election petitions and other documents;
ensure that employees, employers and unions receive and exchange timely information they need to understand and participate in the representation case process;

streamline pre- and post-election procedures to facilitate agreement and eliminate unnecessary litigation;

include telephone numbers and email addresses in voter lists to enable parties to the election to be able to communicate with voters using modern technology; and
consolidate all election-related appeals to the Board into a single post-election appeals process.

The previous NPRM was published on June 22, 2011. After considering the input provided in response, the Board had announced on December 22, 2011 that it was going to implement a final rule adopting some of those proposed amendments and defer the remainder for further consideration. That final rule was invalidated by a District Court ruling that it had been adopted without a validly constituted quorum. The Board’s appeal of that ruling was dismissed, pursuant to a joint stipulation, on December 9, 2013

FLORIDA RESIDENT CONVICTED IN "FEES TO COLLECT" LOTTERY WINNINGS FRAUD

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
South Florida Resident Convicted in Connection with International Fraudulent Lottery Scheme

A federal jury in Miami today convicted a South Florida resident for her role in an international fraudulent lottery scheme that targeted U.S. citizens, the Justice Department announced.  Charmaine Anne King, 51, of Lauderdale Lakes, Fla. was convicted of one count of conspiracy, three counts of mail fraud and two counts of wire fraud.  The case is part of the government’s crackdown on international fraudulent lottery schemes.

A federal grand jury returned an indictment against King and a co-conspirator on Oct. 31, 2013, charging that King’s co-conspirators contacted individuals in the U.S. and falsely informed them that they had won more than a million dollars in a lottery.  The evidence at trial showed that a co-conspirator sent letters to the victims from a purported sweepstakes company in the U.S. and included false and fraudulent cashier’s checks made out to the victims for thousands of dollars.  These letters instructed victims to call “claims agents” who were actually co-conspirators, and when the victims called the purported claims agents, the agents informed the victims that they had to pay several thousand dollars in fees in order to collect their purported lottery winnings.  The claims agents told the victims to deposit the cashier’s checks in the victims’ bank accounts in order to purportedly cover the money they had to pay.  The co-conspirators instructed the victims on how to send and wire this money to King and others.

Evidence presented at trial showed that King kept a percentage of the money she received from victims and sent the rest of the money to a co-conspirator.  King continued to participate in this scheme even after the U.S. Postal Inspection Service verbally informed her that she was participating in unlawful activity, and after she later signed a Cease and Desist Order requiring that she stop receiving money from victims of fraud.  The Cease and Desist Order that King signed referenced a complaint detailing the activity that the U.S. Postal Inspection Service explained was unlawful.

As the evidence presented at trial showed, the cashier’s checks victims received from the fraudulent lottery had no value.  The evidence demonstrated that after the victims sent money to King, the fraudulent cashier’s checks bounced.  Victims never received any lottery winnings.

King faces a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison on each count of conviction, a fine and mandatory restitution.  King’s sentencing has been scheduled for April 17, 2014.

Also, on Feb. 4, 2014, U.S. District Court Judge K. Michael Moore adopted a report and recommendation accepting the guilty plea of King’s co-defendant, Althea Peart.  Peart had entered a change of plea to guilty on Jan. 9, 2014, to one count of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud.  She is scheduled to be sentenced on March 20, 2014.

Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division, commended the investigative efforts of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, Homeland Security Investigations and the U.S. Marshals Service.  The case is being prosecuted by Assistant Director Jeffrey Steger and Trial Attorney Kathryn Drenning with the Department of Justice’s Civil Division, Consumer Protection Branch.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY AT ISTIQLAL MOSQUE IN JAKARTA, INDONESIA

Remarks At the Istiqlal Mosque


Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Istiqlal Mosque
Jakarta, Indonesia
February 16, 2014




SECRETARY KERRY: The Istiqlal mosque is a famous mosque – very, very beautiful. It’s an extraordinary place – the third-largest mosque in the world, the largest mosque in Asia, and a very remarkable place of worship, and I’m very privileged to be here. And I’m grateful to the Grand Imam for allowing me to come.
As-salam alaikum.

PARARESCUE TRAINING AT STANFORD TRAINING AREA, ENGLAND



FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
U.S. Air Force pararescue specialists take medical equipment and mock victims to a location for pick up on Stanford Training Area, England, Feb. 6, 2014. U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Nigel Sandridge.




An HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopter drops a pararescue specialist during an exercise on Stanford Training Area, England, Feb. 6, 2014. U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Nigel Sandridge.

YOUNG STAR CLUSTER NGC 346

FROM:  NASA 

This Chandra X-Ray Observatory image of the young star cluster NGC 346 highlights a heart-shaped cloud of 8 million-degree Celsius gas in the central region. Evidence from radio, optical and ultraviolet telescopes suggests that the hot cloud, which is about 100 light years across, is the remnant of a supernova explosion that occurred thousands of years ago. The progenitor could have been a companion of the massive young star that is responsible for the bright X-ray source at the top center of the image. This young star, HD 5980, one of the most massive known, has been observed to undergo dramatic eruptions during the last decade. An alternative model for the origin of the hot cloud is that eruptions of HD 5980 long ago produced the cloud of hot gas, in a manner similar to the gas cloud observed around the massive star Eta Carinae. Future observations will be needed to decide between the alternatives. Until then, the nature of the heart in the darkness will remain mysterious. > View original image > More about Chandra Image Credit-NASA-CXC-U.Liege-Y.Nazé et al.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY EXPRESSES CONCERN OVER VIOLENCE IN VENEZUELA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Recent Violence in Venezuela
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 15, 2014

The United States is deeply concerned by rising tensions and violence surrounding this week's protests in Venezuela. Our condolences go to the families of those killed as a result of this tragic violence.

We are particularly alarmed by reports that the Venezuelan government has arrested or detained scores of anti-government protestors and issued an arrest warrant for opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez. These actions have a chilling effect on citizens' rights to express their grievances peacefully.

We join the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Secretary General of the Organization of American States, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, and others in condemning this senseless violence. We call on the Venezuelan government to provide the political space necessary for meaningful dialogue with the Venezuelan people and to release detained protestors. We urge all parties to work to restore calm and refrain from violence.

Freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly are universal human rights. They are essential to a functioning democracy, and the Venezuelan government has an obligation to protect these fundamental freedoms and the safety of its citizens.

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS ON POLLUTION IN BEIJING, CHINA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks at Cummins-Foton Joint Venture Plant
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Cummins-Foton Joint Venture Plant
Beijing, China
February 15, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY: Good morning, everybody. Thank you very much, Steve Chapman, Vice President of Cummins-Foton. And I’m very, very grateful to Foton and Cummins for inviting us here today, and thank you all for taking a few minutes to be with us.

I’m delighted to be joined up here by the American Ambassador to China, who is leaving in a few days, and we’re very grateful for his work – Gary Locke, thank you very much. (Applause.)

I’m also here with a very important individual who helps to make many of the decisions that help to advance the issue of climate change response, and he is the Vice Chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission. I’m delighted to see Vice Chairman Xie here. Thank you very much for being with us. (Applause.)

And I want you to know – excuse me – I want you to know that just now, as we were here, we’d been completing our meetings and Vice Chairman Xie made some very important phone calls and succeeded in completing our agreement with respect to some steps we are going to take to move the climate change process forward. And I’m very grateful to him and the leaders of China for their rapid and important response on this issue.

Jim, you may want to twist that up a little towards you. There you go.

And we’re also pleased be here and I thank him for his help in making this possible – the Foton Chairman Xiu. Thank you very much, sir. (Applause.) Thank you.

And finally, we have our special – the American special representative on climate change, who represents me in all of our – and the President in all of our negotiations, and that’s special representative Todd Stern, and I thank him for his important work here. (Applause.)

One of the most important challenges that we all face here in China, in America, in Europe and other countries, particularly where there’s a lot of industry and development, is how do we improve the quality of the air that we breathe and at the same time reduce the greenhouse gas emissions which contribute to climate change? To be successful, it is going to take the cooperation of China and the United States – not just our governments, but also our industries. I just toured this amazing facility, and let me tell you, what you have built here is really a blueprint for the businesses of the future. Not only is the facility modern and clean and state-of-the-art, but the workers are well paid and the benefits are good, and there is collaboration between what happens here and what happens in the United States.

I learned that this past year, the Foton-Cummins plant received a huge shipment of equipment from Michigan. And for that to happen, before any of that equipment gets here, there are people back in Indiana, in the United States, who are doing research and development. In fact, hundreds of people in the United States and right here in Beijing – all of you – have jobs because of what is going on here at this facility.

So we’re not just improving lives by building cleaner engines, which you see right here, and making it easier for people to breathe; we’re not just transforming the way we use and produce energy – we are also creating jobs and strengthening our economies by moving towards clean energy, clean technology, alternative and renewable fuels.

But here’s the truth that we all need to think about: In order to meet the global and the economic challenge of climate change, undeniably all of us are going to have to do more. China and the United States together are the world’s largest emitters of greenhouse gas. Together we account for almost 40 percent of all of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. President Xi and President Obama have joined in agreeing that we both have a special role to play in reducing those emissions. And we all know that air quality is really a fundamental part of a decent quality of life for people.

We know where the problem starts. Approximately 22 percent of the air pollution here in Beijing, and more than 25 percent of climate pollution in the United States, comes from cars, trucks and buses that are on the road. Now, a lot more comes from power plants and the fuel that’s used, depending on what the fuel is, for those power plants. But we have to come at this issue step by step. And one of the big steps that we can take is to build cleaner engines, like you are building here at Foton-Cummins.

So we have to build cleaner engines that run on cleaner fuels. And how does that happen? It happens through innovation – innovation that the Foton-Cummins plant makes happen every single day. Innovation like making a cleaner engine. Innovation like making a car or a truck that can go farther, a longer distance on fuel with fewer pollutants coming out of it. Innovation like finding ways to take an old truck or an old car and change the way that it provides its power and can run on clean fuels.

Above all, innovation depends on governments sending the right signals. China has already committed itself to ambitious fuel-quality standards so that the engines run on cleaner fuel. During Vice President Biden’s most recent visit, we agreed to move even more aggressively in reducing emissions and cleaning up air pollution that comes from heavy-duty vehicles. And when these cleaner fuel standards are fully implemented, everyone in China will benefit.

People everywhere, in every country, whether it’s in Beijing or in the streets of Washington, D.C., people want healthy air for themselves and for their children. Last year, when I was here, we joined together with our – with China’s leaders in what we call the Strategic & Economic Dialogue. Within this dialogue, we have launched five initiatives as part of our Climate Change Working Group. I’m very pleased to report today that we have completed implementation plans for those five initiatives on heavy-duty vehicles, on smart grid for the delivery of energy, on carbon capture, utilization and storage, on energy efficiency, and finally on collection and management of data.

I’m very pleased to also announce today that the leaders of China have agreed to join us in a mutual effort – China and the United States will put an extra effort into exchanging information and discussing policies that will help both of us to be able to develop and lead on the standards that need to be announced next year for the global climate change agreement. This is a unique cooperative effort between China and the United States, and we have hopes that it will help to set an example for global leadership and global seriousness on the issue of next year’s climate change negotiation.

And finally, I’ll end by saying this, and you’ve all been very patient. Thank you. There is a great Chinese proverb that speaks to the question of adapting to change. We would be wise to take it to heart today. The proverb says that, when the wind changes directions, there are those who build walls and there are those who build windmills. Today, not only are we on the side of building windmills, we’re actually building something better. We’re building cleaner engines and making cleaner fuels. We’re building wind turbines and solar panels. We’re building new technologies to help us respond to the challenge of climate change.

Two world powers, the two largest economies in the world – China and the United States – are joining together in order to help power the world in a new way and help to make better quality of life for all citizens.

So we want to thank you, all of you, for being part of this larger challenge, this larger mission. We’re grateful to you for the work you do here, and we thank you for building engines that are moving us forward in more ways than one. Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause.)

Search This Blog

Translate

White House.gov Press Office Feed