GENERAL HAM SPEAKS ABOUT U.S. AFRICA COMMAND'S WORK

Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command, addresses students and faculty at the Ralph J. Bunche International Affairs Center at Howard University in Washington, D.C., Jan. 24. Howard University is home to the nation's oldest Africa Studies program. DOD photo by Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Africom Works to 'Go Far' With Partners, General Says
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 24, 2013 - There are many challenges across the African continent, but there are also seldom-talked-about opportunities and successes, U.S. Africa Command's leader said here today

Army Gen. Carter F. Ham addressed students, faculty and reporters about what he's seen during his command in Africa. The general spoke at the Ralph J. Bunche International Affairs Center at Howard University here, home to the nation's oldest Africa studies program.

"It's really easy in Africa to get focused on all of the negative things," he said. "There [are] challenges in Mali, to be sure; Libya has challenges. The Great Lakes region is certainly in turmoil right now; Guinea-Bissau and many other places."

"There are lots of problems," Ham said. "I think it's worthwhile, every now and then, to take a step back, and in addition to looking at the problem sets – which is important to do – to look at the good things, and look at the opportunities that present themselves."

Ham provided examples of successes throughout the continent that are not generally the focus of attention.

"Africa is home to, depending on which survey you look at, six or seven of the fastest growing economies in the world," he said. "[This is] pretty extraordinary. But it gets lost in the noise sometimes."

"There are lots of countries that [have] had successful elections," he noted. "We focus on those where there's a coup or other unsettling events, and we tend to not think about the places where there have been very successful elections and good progress made."

The general said this tells him while Africa is "certainly home to lots of challenges," it is also the "home of great opportunity and progress and hope."

"I think we should never forget about that as well," Ham added.

The general noted he has now been to 42 of the countries on the continent, and "it's been exciting and exhilarating, and tiring at times, to be sure. It's a big place to move about."

Ham said a member of his staff, who is in the U.S. foreign service, gave him a list of African proverbs to think about.

"I found one that, to me, ideally captures what we, at U.S. Africom, are trying to do," he said. "It says, simply, 'if you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.'"

"And we, at U.S. Africa Command, choose to go far, and we choose to go together with our African partners," Ham said.

AFRICOM AND STATE PARTNERSHIPS

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Army Sgt. 1st Class Paul Deegan, right, leads Warrant Officer Class 1 Benjamin Afful and Sgt. Maj. Richard Kyere-Yeboah of Ghana's army off of the pop-up target M-16 marksmanship range at Camp Grafton Training Center in Devils Lake, N.D., Sept. 18, 2011. Afful and Kyere-Yeboah visited North Dakota as part of an engineer instructor exchange under the Defense Department-sponsored State Partnership Program. North Dakota and Ghana have been partners under the program since 2004. U.S. Army photo by Sgt. 1st Class David Dodds  

State Partnership Program Supports Africom's Theater Engagement
By Donna Miles
STUTTGART, Germany, July 6, 2012 - When a pro-democracy revolution swept Tunisia, launching what became known as the Arab Spring, the Tunisian military looked to its U.S. partner, the Wyoming National Guard, for help in teaching democratic values to the country's youth.

The Wyoming Guard had the perfect tool at its disposal: the National Guard's Youth Challenge program, which has been instilling values, skills, education and discipline in at-risk youth since 1993 with a goal of helping them lead successful, productive lives.

The Wyoming Guard "was immediately able to offer this program of instruction and this experience to assist the Tunisians in establishing a similar program," Army Maj. Gen. Charles Hooper, U.S. Africa Command's director of strategy, plans and programs, told American Forces Press Service at the command headquarters here. "So that is the kind of experiences, relationships, skills and capabilities that our state partners bring to our African partners."

With no permanently assigned forces and increasing budgetary constraints, Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, the Africom commander, is hoping to expand the popular State Partnership Program to increase the command's engagement across the African continent.
Ham called himself "a big fan" of the program during recent congressional testimony and said he hopes to expand the number of partnerships in Africa from the current eight to 10.
"In our efforts to strengthen defense capabilities of African partners, the National Guard State Partnership Program is an incredibly important component," he said. "We have very strong state partnership programs that contribute very significantly to our training and exercise programs."

Ham reported that he has asked the National Guard Bureau chief, Air Force Gen. Craig R. McKinley, to add two additional partners this year, including possibly one for Libya.
"That might be a place where we could apply a State Partnership Program to great effect," he told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March. "So we will continue to look for opportunities such as that."

McKinley has called the State Partnership Program, initially formed in 1993 to support former Soviet bloc countries after the Soviet Union collapsed, the crown jewel of the Guard's international engagement. Citing the program's high impact at a relatively low cost -- the exact type of engagement the Defense Department's new strategic guidance promotes -- McKinley said he, too, would like to expand it to promote mutual security cooperation with partners and allies around the world.

Navy Adm. James A. Winnefeld Jr., vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shares Ham's and McKinley's enthusiasm about the program. "It's proven to be a very, very valuable high-leverage tool for us," he said earlier this year, after the release of the new strategy. "So we plan to build on things like that to help us on these innovative approaches to other parts of the world."

The State Partnership Program includes partnerships with 63 countries within Africom, U.S. European Command, U.S. Southern Command, U.S. Central Command, U.S. Pacific Command and U.S. Northern Command areas of responsibility.

Africom currently has eight partnerships. The California National Guard is partnered with Nigeria; the New York National Guard with South Africa; the North Carolina Guard with Botswana; the North Dakota National Guard with Ghana; the Michigan National Guard with Liberia; the Vermont National Guard with Senegal; the Utah National Guard with Morocco; and the Wyoming National Guard with Tunisia.

Since Africom's inception in 2008, the State Partnership Program has been vital to its theater engagement strategy.

"What it brings to our toolbox is continuity," Hooper said. "It creates long-term relationships between the state partners and their African partners."
Hooper has seen firsthand the close bonds that form between National Guard participants, who don't typically rotate between assignments as frequently as their active-duty counterparts, and the African militaries they work with.

"In all of these relationships, the states bring the very best of their practices," he said. Along with military skills training that helps build capacity on the continent, he said the Guard also provides role models for African militaries.

In Liberia, for example, the Michigan National Guard is providing 24 members in support of Operation Onward Liberty, a joint venture between the U.S. Marine Corps, Air Force and Army to help Liberia's armed forces build capacity to defend their borders and their neighbors.

Last spring, North Dakota National Guard members demonstrated to the forces and civilian disaster-management experts in Ghana how the Guard supports civilian-led disaster response efforts -- in this case, during an actual snowstorm and major flooding in Fargo, N.D.

Although their climates are worlds apart, North Dakota and Ghana deal with similar disasters, including floods, drought and windstorms, a participating Guardsman noted.
In December, a team of North Carolina National Guardsmen traveled to Gaborone, Botswana, to share the U.S. experience in integrating military intelligence into operations with Botswana.

"Relationships count, and that's what makes the State Partnership Program so valuable," Hooper said. "It's the long-term relationships between the state partners and their African partners."

LIBYA BECOMES MILITARY PARTNER WITH AFRICOM

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCE PRESS SERVICE
Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command, left, looks on as U.S. Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta lays a wreath on the graves of U.S. sailors at a cemetery in Tripoli, Libya, Dec. 17, 2011. The sailors were lost aboard the USS Intrepid more than 200 years ago. DOD photo by Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo  

Africom Forms Military Relationship With Libya
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
STUTTGART, Germany, June 15, 2012 - Operation Odyssey Dawn, the U.S. Africa Command-led U.S. mission in Libya last year, imparted important lessons the Defense Department's newest combatant command is applying as it welcomes a new African partner to the fold while still dealing with some of the residual challenges left by the former regime, the Africom commander said.

Army Gen. Carter F. Ham conceded during recent congressional testimony that the challenges in Libya didn't end with the fall of Moammar Gadhafi and his dictatorship.

"There are some small pockets remaining in Libya and in other places in North Africa that were centers of foreign fighters who left North Africa, transited along various routes and ended up fighting against us and other coalition forces inside Iraq," he told the House Armed Services Committee in February.

"There are remnants of that, and there are indications that al-Qaida senior leadership is seeking ways to reestablish those networks," he said. "And that's one of the challenges that lie ahead for us."

Ham said he's concerned about their influence on Tunisia as well as Libya as both countries attempt to establish representative governments.
"It's very clear that extremist organizations -- notably al-Qaida, with some direction from al-Qaida's senior leaders -- would seek to undermine that good governance that the Tunisians and the Libyans seek," he told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March. "And so I think that's the real threat that is posed."

"So I think we need to partner very closely with the security forces [and] armed forces of Tunisia and Libya to prevent the reestablishment of those networks [and] to prevent those violent extremist organizations from undermining the progress that both countries are seeking."

Africom is forming a new military-to-military relationship with the Libyans and is working to strengthen its long-term military-to-military relationship with the Tunisians, Ham said, emphasizing the importance of close partnerships with both nations.
"I am very satisfied with the progress of the military-to-military relationship that is developing" with the new Tunisian government, he reported. "We need to sustain that."
"And similarly, with the Libyans, we are forming a good relationship," he continued, noting the standup of an Office of Security Cooperation at the embassy there that can help coordinate security assistance, international military education and training and other security cooperation. "So we're moving in the right direction, but we need to sustain that effort," he said.

Speaking with American Forces Press Service at his headquarters here, Ham said military operations in Libya drove home the point that all U.S. combatant commands including Africom must be capable of operating across the full spectrum of conflict.

"It is probably not going to be very often where Africa Command goes to the more kinetic, the more offensive operations in Africa," he said. "But nonetheless, we have to be ready to do that if the president requires that of us."

Africom typically conducts relatively small-scale, non-offensive missions focused on strengthening the defense capabilities of African militaries, he noted. "But there is an expectation that we must be able to do the full range of military activities."
Operation Odyssey Dawn also reinforced that the United States won't conduct military operations alone, Ham said. "We are always going to do them as part of some type of coalition," he continued. "So building the processes, the mechanisms that allow us to readily incorporate the capabilities of other nations is an important aspect for us as well."
Ham noted the United States' long history of operating with NATO, but said it wasn't as prepared to work side-by-side with non-NATO partners, particularly Arab countries, that joined the coalition. "We had to make sure we were postured to incorporate them very quickly," he said. "I think that is a good lesson for us as we think about operations across Africa in the future."

Africom's close association with U.S. European Command, with both command headquarters here in Stuttgart, proved particularly valuable during the Libya campaign, he said.

Ham called European-based forces absolutely critical to Operation Odyssey Dawn. "Simply stated, we could not have responded on the timelines required for operations in Libya had air and maritime forces not been forward-stationed in Europe," he said.
"Operations in Libya have truly brought U.S. European Command and U.S. Africa Command to a higher level of collaboration," Ham told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "And this year, we'll continue to work closely together to seek to more effectively address security challenges in our respective areas of responsibilities."
The Europeans, both through NATO and through the European Union, are heavily invested in security matters in Africa, Ham told the House Armed Services Committee. "And it is our strong relationship and partnership with U.S. European Command that allows us to have access and meaningful dialogue in the planning and coordination of those activities."

Navy Adm. James G. Stavridis, the Eucom commander who testified alongside Ham, noted that the two commands have shared nautical component commanders and regularly partner in counter-piracy operations.

"We are also exploring ways that we can create efficiencies in intelligence and information sharing," Stavridis said. "And I believe we essentially share intelligence facilities now, and there may be some ways to do even more of that."

MALARIA: FOCUSING ON THE TOP KILLER IN AFRICA

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Melissa McGaughey delivers mosquito bed nets to residents of Debaka Debobesa, Ethiopia, March 15, 2012. U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. James Brock  

New Malaria Task Forces Will Address Top Africa Killer
By Donna Miles
STUTTGART, Germany, June 13, 2012 - Two new task forces being stood up by U.S. Africa Command have set their sights on one of the biggest killers on the continent: the mosquito.

Malaria -- that same affliction that decimated Roman legions,
Revolutionary War and Civil War soldiers and a scourge in the South Pacific during World War II -- continues to plague Africa, particularly the sub-Saharan region. Ninety percent of the world's malaria-related deaths are reported in Africa, and the disease kills some 600,000 African children each year.

The toll is so devastating that it overshadows Africa's other medical challenges, including HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, Army Col. (Dr.) John Andrus, Africom's deputy surgeon and medical logistics division chief, told American Forces Press Service.

And beyond the pure humanitarian toll, there's an operational one, too. Last year, during Africom's World Malaria Day observance, a soldier from an African partner nation told Andrus malaria is one of the biggest concerns among his troops deploying for peacekeeping operations across the continent. "This was a real eye opener to us," he said.
Africom incorporates malaria prevention into much of its theater engagement, distributing mosquito nets and teaching new diagnostic techniques during training events throughout Africa.

But at the African soldier's suggestion, Africom went to work to establish regional task forces to help partner nations create a unified front against the problem. The command stood up the East African Malaria Task Force in December with plans to form a similar task force in West Africa by the year's end, Andrus reported.

The East African task force includes Burundi, Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Rwanda and Tanzania. The United States is a member, but has no leadership role, Andrus said. "The task force is led by the African partners who are members," he said.

The task force plans to meet in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in late July to discuss their battle plan for combating the disease, Andrus said. They're expected to identify ways to encourage self-protection while promoting improved surveillance, diagnosis and treatment.

"This will give them an opportunity to move forward against a very challenging disease in a very positive way," he said.

Meanwhile, the first meeting of the new West Africa Malaria Task Force is scheduled for November.

Andrus called the task forces an example of the command's goal of helping African nations confront African problems.

"This is a wonderful example of what it means to work with our partners, assist them in coming up with solutions to their own challenges, and then to be a partner with them as we move toward addressing those challenges," he said.

Ultimately, this supports the concept of "stability through health," Andrus said. Helping partner nations protect their military forces against disease supports the bigger goal of establishing professional militaries that are trusted by their populations and able to respond to crises, he explained.
It also builds confidence within partner-nation militaries that they will be taken care of when they are called on to carry out their missions, he said. "If they can deploy forward, knowing that they are able to receive the health care they need, it gives them confidence they need to be able to perform in a way that promotes stability on the continent," he said.
While helping partner nations confront malaria, Africom also ensures U.S. service members who deploy to Africa are protected, Andrus said.

The Kelley Health Clinic here recently celebrated its one-year anniversary as a one-stop shop for Africom members traveling to the continent. It provides health screenings, immunizations, malaria prophylaxis and mosquito repellents.

"The first step is to get to know who you're fighting," said Lt. Col. (Dr.) Steven Baty, a veterinary epidemiologist for Public Health Command Region -- Europe. "If we can identify the mosquitoes in the area that are going to carry malaria, then we can look at prevention programs."

Because Africom personnel often travel in small groups to the continent, officials recognize the importance of keeping them healthy.

"Each person is critical," said Army Lt. Col Jose Nunez, chief of the command's health protection branch. "If you have one person go down, that person can't do his or her job."

AFRICOM TO LEAVE LIGHT FOOTPRINT

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Army Pfc. Daniel Baetson, deployed to Camp Lemonnier, Djibouti, serves as a mentor with Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa to help African partners build niche capabilities such as logistics, legal affairs and medicine, Aug. 6, 2009. U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Kelly Ontiveros  

Africom Will Maintain 'Light Footprint' in Africa
By Donna Miles
STUTTGART, Germany, June 12, 2012 - The United States has no plans to seek permanent bases in Africa, and, in the spirit of the new defense strategic guidance, will continue to maintain a "light footprint" on the continent, the top U.S. Africa Command officer said.

"In Africa, I would say a light footprint is consistent with what we need and consistent with the defense guidance," Army Gen. Carter F. Ham told the House Armed Services Committee in February.

With no troops directly assigned to it, Africom relies heavily on its service components: U.S. Army Africa based in Vicenza, Italy; U.S. Air Forces Africa, at Ramstein Air Base, Germany; U.S. Marine Forces Africa and Special Operations Command Africa, both based here.

"It is that proximity to the theater that enables the agility we require," Ham told Congress.
Africom has had its headquarters here since it initially stood up in 2007 as a subcommand of U.S. European Command before reaching full operational capability in 2008. Then-Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and the first Africom commander, Army Gen. William E. "Kip" Ward, agreed to defer any decision on its permanent location until 2012.
A congressionally directed review of alternate basing plans is under way, and is expected to be delivered sometime this year. None of the plans being developed involves relocating the headquarters to the African continent, Ham said.

While not expressing his own preferences, Ham said he believes Africom has "been very well served" by its Stuttgart headquarters. In addition to good facilities and proximity to an international airport with direct links to Africa, he noted, Stuttgart offers the operational advantage of being in the same time zone as many of Africom's African partners. "We are on the same daily rhythm," the general said.

In addition, he said, collocating Africom with U.S. European Command makes sense, promoting their tradition of working together as they share forces, resources and capabilities.

Ham also underscored the importance of Camp Lemonnier, Djibouti, the only permanent U.S. base in Africa. With about 2,000 U.S. personnel deployed there as part of Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa, many from the Army National Guard, it provides a stable platform for U.S. military operations in a critical part of the world, he said.

"It's a great strategic location," he told American Forces Press Service. "It facilitates not only our operations for U.S. Africa Command, but also U.S. Central Command and U.S. Transportation Command. It is a very key hub and important node for us, a good location that allows us to extend our reach in East Africa and partner with the countries of East Africa."

Ham said he recognizes concerns among some African countries about an increased U.S. presence on the continent, but emphasized that cost alone would preclude the United States from establishing more permanent bases there.

Meanwhile, a new initiative that Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno announced last month could increase Africom's engagement opportunities with no uptick in permanent staffing.

The Army plans to implement a regionally aligned force concept next year to better support combatant commanders, Odierno said. Africom is expected to be the first to receive these rotational forces as part of the pilot program to begin next year, followed by U.S. Southern Command, U.S. Central Command and U.S. Pacific Command.

U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT DAILY BRIEFING

FROM U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Mark C. Toner
Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
April 5, 2012
TRANSCRIPT:

1:04 p.m. EDT
MR. TONER: Hey, everybody. Welcome to the State Department. You guys are the only thing between me and a long weekend. No, I’m just kidding. (Laughter.) I love being here. I look forward to these constructive exchanges with the members of the press corps.
Matt.
QUESTION: You have nothing to start with?
MR. TONER: I have nothing to start with.
QUESTION: How goes your search for a venue to meet the Iranians?
MR. TONER: Well, again, I think we talked about this a little bit – well, actually, not a little bit – at length yesterday. And that’s a question best directed to High Representative Ashton’s office. They are our point of contact on these discussions, and, as I at least attempted to make the case yesterday, it’s very important, we feel, when we’ve got four other members of the – or five other members of the P-5+1 as well as Iran, as we’ve noted yesterday, speaking with many voices on this issue, that there just be two points of contact on it.
QUESTION: Yeah, but it’s – now it’s eight days away.
MR. TONER: We are --
QUESTION: If this – is the date in question now because the venue hasn’t been decided, or is it still your --
MR. TONER: I would say that we are still expecting this to take place next week, but there’s certainly some degree of urgency.
QUESTION: Okay. Well, I mean, is it the U.S. position – does – is the U.S. position still what the Secretary said it was over the weekend, that this meeting will be on the 13th in Istanbul?
MR. TONER: That’s what I said. It’s still our expectation, but I agree we need to nail down the venue.
QUESTION: So – but it is still the U.S. position that the meeting will be in Istanbul on the 13th?
MR. TONER: It is – that was our expectation when the Secretary spoke those words. It was our expectation up until we heard some other venues tossed about by the Iranians.
QUESTION: But it does not remain --
MR. TONER: High Representative Ashton’s office is trying to clarify and nail down the venue, but the dates – we’re still expecting to meet the Iranians on the 13th and 14th.
QUESTION: In?
MR. TONER: Again --
QUESTION: So in other words, it’s --
MR. TONER: -- we were ready to meet in Istanbul. We’re trying to clarify that right now.
QUESTION: So it’s no longer your expectation that it will be – that it will necessarily be in Istanbul on the 13th?
MR. TONER: Again, let’s let High Representative Ashton deal with the Iranians and nail that down.
QUESTION: Are you happy? I mean, does it – it doesn’t have to be in Istanbul as far as you’re concerned? I mean, it does – some of these proposals for wherever, Baghdad or Beijing, I mean, if the point of these is to sit down and talk with them, why not sit down and talk with them wherever they want to do it?
MR. TONER: Agree. Again, we talked about this at length yesterday. We’re just one part of this group, the P-5+1, so there’s logistical aspects to this that go without saying, really, on any one of these venues or locations. As we noted, it was our expectation that this was going to be in Istanbul. It’s not for us to say one place over another, but it’s important that we start to nail this down, working through Catherine Ashton, so that we do have a place to meet next week.
Yeah. Go ahead, Jill.
QUESTION: Another subject?
MR. TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: The $10 million man? (Laughter.) I just wanted to see. I know you went into it at great length yesterday, but --
MR. TONER: Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: -- has he actually been indicted?
MR. TONER: Has he been indicted in a U.S. court?
QUESTION: Mm-hmm.
MR. TONER: I’m not sure of that. I’ll take the question. I don’t believe he has, but we certainly want to see him brought to justice. I mean, as everyone and their mother know at this point, he’s hiding in plain sight in Pakistan, so what we’re – again, just to clarify what we talked about yesterday, which is that we’re not seeking his whereabouts. We certainly know that. But we’re seeking information that can be used to prosecute him.
QUESTION: But the Pakistanis would say there really is no evidence. Let’s say that he hasn’t been indicted. Then it’s really just an allegation, correct?
MR. TONER: An allegation based on our conviction that he is, in fact, guilty of these crimes, but again – we talked a little bit about this yesterday; obviously, can’t get into the detail – we’re – our belief is based on intelligence. But what we’re looking for is evidence that can be used to prosecute him in a court of law in Pakistan or elsewhere, and the $10 million is that sweetener, if you will, to encourage people to come forward.
QUESTION: But doesn’t this appear to have been backfired, really, when you look at it? Because here’s the United States putting a reward on a man’s head and he’s now a celebrity, he’s on talk shows, he’s having a news conference, and thumbing his nose at the United States.
MR. TONER: Well, Jill, I think he can do what he wants to, certainly, and he’s clearly trying to bask in the media attention. We just hope that and reiterate that our offer is very real, that if anybody knows or can produce evidence that ties him to the Mumbai bombings and other terrorist attacks that they step forward.
Go ahead in the back.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR. TONER: In the back and then over to you.
QUESTION: First question, President Zardari is due to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh next week in India, and there are now conservative groups in Pakistan, like the Defy Pakistan Council, that have asked him not to visit India at all. Do you feel that by issuing this notice at this time, it may have had an adverse effect on India-Pakistan relations?
MR. TONER: Well, look, we’ve talked about this upcoming visit. We’ve talked about the fact that we’ve had some high-level U.S. officials in Pakistan, Deputy Secretary Nides, for example. And I was very clear that none of this is related to any of those visits, any of those interactions. As I tried to clarify yesterday, our Rewards for Justice program is a separate process, if you will, and takes place in our Diplomatic Security channels and that it is indeed a long process to evaluate these individuals and indeed designate them. So there’s no relation here. We certainly don’t want it to impact on his visit to India. We think his visit to India actually is very constructive, and we’re all for it.
QUESTION: I have a follow question. By issuing this notice, are you trying to create a split in the Lashkar-e Tayyiba again, as well, by asking someone to come forward? And you just mentioned – you said 26 – the Mumbai attacks and other terrorist attacks. Can you specify what other attacks that the U.S. believes Lashkar-e Tayyiba is responsible for in India or other parts of the world?
MR. TONER: Well, there’s numerous incidents in the region. They are, obviously, an active terrorist organization. In terms of your first question, it’s a – we’re not – we’re asking for an individual to step forward, who can have evidence – who can produce evidence that ties into these attacks. Whether that we’re trying – we’re not playing some sort of strategic game here. We’re just trying to prosecute this individual.
QUESTION: Follow up. As far as (inaudible) are concerned, India had charged him. Have you asked India for the evidence against him, since he had open press conferences and all that? Everybody knows where he is who he is, including the Pakistan Government. Is India with you on the evidence?
MR. TONER: You’re asking if – you’re asking me to – about the Indian evidence against him? Again, that’s a question for the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan to answer.
QUESTION: The kind of evidence you are seeking, are you in touch with the Indian Government?
MR. TONER: We’re in very close contact with the Indian Government on this, yes.
QUESTION: And second, as far as – what kind of message are you sending to Pakistan, one because of this – just to follow what Yuma said – is this some kind of message that you are sending to Pakistan as far as this $10 million bounty is concerned? And also at the same time, you’re asking Pakistan to open their doors of U.S.-Pakistan relations as far as supply route to Afghanistan is concerned.
MR. TONER: Goyal, I talked about this yesterday. There’s no connection here, whatsoever. In answer to your first question, we’re trying to give the Pakistani authorities the information, the evidence that they can use to prosecute this individual.
In terms of your second question, Deputy Secretary Nides is concluding a very productive visit to Pakistan. He’s had high-level contacts during his time there. It’s been very productive, very constructive. And we’re obviously waiting for the end of the parliamentary review process so that we can engage with Pakistan on our way forward.
QUESTION: And finally, Mr. Zardari’s – President Zardari’s visit to India. This is the first visit, I understand, official visit to India. What role do you think U.S. is playing as far as India-U.S. relations are concerned in connection with his visit?
MR. TONER: What role is --
QUESTION: U.S. playing. Any role U.S. playing?
MR. TONER: On whose visit?
QUESTION: About his visit to India. And U.S. – Pakistan --
MR. TONER: No role. I just said, in answer to a previous question, we’re certainly – we want to see – to us, it’s a win-win situation when Pakistan and India are engaging in dialogue, are talking to each other, and are building better cooperation.
I did want to – I’m sorry, I did want to get back to you on that. I know I had it somewhere, which is why I was leafing through my paper as I was answering Goyal. But there’s several attacks that Lashkar-e Tayyiba has claimed responsibility for, been implicated in. January 2010 attack on Srinagar airport that killed five Indians; December 2001 attack on the Indian parliament building; the July 2006 train attack in Mumbai; and a February 2010 attack against hotels in Kabul that we’re all aware of that killed nine Indians, four Afghans, and one French citizens.
QUESTION: And through all --
MR. TONER: Sorry.
QUESTION: And through all this, the Indian Government hasn’t seen fit to offer a reward for any information, so it’s up to the U.S. taxpayer to foot the bill, correct?
MR. TONER: Matt, I don’t know what they’ve offered.
QUESTION: All right.
MR. TONER: I’d refer you to the Indian Government.
QUESTION: Okay. Just a quick – just a couple --
MR. TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- things on this. I mean, you say, yes, this is a separate process, the Rewards for Justice, but it certainly doesn’t operate in a vacuum. And with all the things going on this week – Under Secretary Sherman’s visit to India, Deputy Secretary Nides’ visit to Pakistan, the Zardari visit to India – if you didn’t want to have an impact on any of these things, you sure really picked a bad time to do this. Because whether you want it to impact these things or not, it does, particularly in the Pakistani public’s view.
So can you take the question as to whether anyone at DS or who was involved in this actually paid attention to the schedules of things that were coming up diplomatically when they decided to put this out on late Monday night – apparently accidently put onto the website late Monday night before it was announced here formally the next day?
MR. TONER: Well, the process was completed. This was – look, these kind – this kind of counterterrorism cooperation --
QUESTION: If it took – it’s been more than three years. The thing took months to do. Why did you pick this week, when it had the best chance of screwing up diplomacy, to put it out?
MR. TONER: All right. I would argue against the fact that it screwed up any --
QUESTION: Well, can you take the question.
MR. TONER: -- diplomacy. In fact, Deputy Secretary Nides had very effective discussions --
QUESTION: Right. That was the second part of my question.
MR. TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Prove it. What was so productive --
MR. TONER: Prove it?
QUESTION: -- and what was so constructive about Deputy Secretary Nides’--
MR. TONER: Well, first of all they were --
QUESTION: -- visit to Pakistan?
MR. TONER: He engaged at a very senior level. He met with Prime Minister Gillani, President Zardari, Foreign Minister Carr, Finance Minister Shaikh, as well as Pakistani business leaders. And I would refer you to Foreign Minister Carr’s press release about his visit that’s very positive in tone. They had real substantive discussions, and overall the message was that – and of course, I can refer you to Deputy Secretary Nides’ public remarks – is that we value our relationship with Pakistan and we respect their parliamentary process and we’re looking, once that’s completed, to engage with them.
QUESTION: That’s it?
MR. TONER: But we believe the visit --
QUESTION: I mean, one could go and have a ton of meetings --
MR. TONER: Matt.
QUESTION: -- with a ton of people --
QUESTION: And that --
QUESTION: And they say no to everything you ask for.
MR. TONER: And I’m – I think I’m --
QUESTION: And I wouldn’t say that that’s very constructive or productive.
MR. TONER: -- implying without getting into the substance of our private diplomatic exchanges, that these were constructive in material.
QUESTION: Okay. Can you say what’s different now about the U.S.-Pakistan relationship than it was before Deputy Secretary Nides visited?
MR. TONER: Well, I think we have seen a pivot in the last weeks that is tangible, that we are trying to move behind the very tragic events --
QUESTION: I thought everything was hold until – after the parliamentary review?
MR. TONER: Again, Matt, I’m talking about diplomatic engagement, and it’s not about making widgets necessarily and having a product to display at the end of the day. It’s about the hard spadework of engaging with a key ally in the region and rebuilding the relationship that was seriously damaged November 26th.
QUESTION: I’m – right. But didn’t the President meet with --
MR. TONER: He did.
QUESTION: -- the head – yeah. Well, wasn’t that, like, last week or 10 days ago?
MR. TONER: I’m not sure what you’re getting at. I think I’ve addressed your question. Any other questions?
QUESTION: I’d just like to know why you think that Deputy Secretary Nides’ trip was so productive and so constructive if you can’t point to anything that’s resulted from it. I mean, you could say he had a great trip because he had a nice meeting and enjoyed tea with whoever he met with and they were all cordial and shook hands and smiled at each other, but that doesn’t necessarily – that’s not necessarily productive and constructive. So I want to know why you’re using those two terms.
MR. TONER: Well, Matt, I think I answered your question in the sense that he had high-level meetings – senior Pakistani officials. He delivered our message that we value this relationship and that we want to see us move forward in the relationship. Again, I’d refer you to Foreign Minister Khar’s press release that she put out that also called these substantive and constructive discussions.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. TONER: And I can’t --
QUESTION: So your argument is the very fact that the meetings happened is what makes it --
MR. TONER: That’s not what I’m saying at all. Anyway, next question.
Yeah. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Syria?
MR. TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: I know there was a lot of activity at the UN today, but I mean, in listening to the speeches at the UN, it seems like everyone’s as pessimistic as ever. I mean, realistically, what hope does the U.S. have that Assad is going to abide by this deadline?
MR. TONER: Well, you’re right, Cami. The 10th is approaching and you saw, of course, the UN released its presidential statement today that once again called on the Syrian Government to adhere to the commitments it has agreed to. And you are also correct in that, thus far, we haven’t seen, either from press reports or activists on the ground, any suggestions that the regime is carrying out any withdrawal from these city centers and retreating to barracks as the Annan plan calls for them to do.
So it’s not surprising; certainly discouraging. It is clear that the Assad regime appears to be using this window to continue to carry out its horrible assault on the Syrian people. And in the event, as I think Ambassador Rice has said, that we don’t – that he does not comply by April 10th, then we’re going to be consulting with the Security Council on next steps.
QUESTION: Was the U.S. satisfied with the strength of the presidential statement coming out of the Security Council? I mean, it’s urging them; it’s not – it didn’t have any demands in it.
MR. TONER: Well, look, it’s very clear what Assad needs to do. So it was a strong message of unity on this issue. And I don’t think it’s a message that we can convey enough to Assad and his regime that time is running out. They need to comply with the April 10th deadline.
QUESTION: Are you guys confident that that unity will continue when and if it becomes a discussion of whether he’s – how much he’s complying with this? You have a non-spokesperson saying that the Syrian Government has told them that they’re withdrawing forces from several cities and saying that this is going to be verified but not saying how. Are you persuaded that the Security Council, as a body, will have the same information, will all agree that either it’s happening or it won’t – it isn’t happening?
MR. TONER: I mean, that’s really a question for Kofi Annan to answer, or his spokesperson, which is how we’re going to coordinate to verify any withdrawal. So far, we’re getting out ahead of ourselves. We haven’t seen any signs that that’s happening.
QUESTION: Can you say anything about the U.S. assistance, the non-lethal assistance?
MR. TONER: You’re talking about the --
QUESTION: The status of that. Right.
MR. TONER: – the humanitarian assistance or --
QUESTION: Is it being delivered? The assistance that you couldn’t say what it was?
MR. TONER: Oh. I don’t have any updates for you. I’ll try to get it. You’re talking about the – to the Syrian opposition.
QUESTION: Mm-hmm.
MR. TONER: Yeah. No, I don’t have any updates for you on that. I’ll take the question.
QUESTION: How about the Syrian Government’s reported agreement to allow the ICRC access? Is that an important step? Or do you think that’s a serious step?
MR. TONER: Well, it certainly is, and we saw press reports, and indeed the ICRC confirmed that one of the two main Syrian/Arab Red Crescents warehouse facilities containing stocked goods intended for distribution to people in need was destroyed on April 4th. And some distributions have been canceled as a result. So obviously, that underscores the urgent need for safe and secure access for these humanitarian organizations.
QUESTION: Mark, I just want to make sure I got this right. You said that if Assad doesn’t comply by the April 10thdeadline, the U.S. – you guys and your allies are going to consult –
MR. TONER: We’re going to consult on next steps, yeah.
QUESTION: I’m sure he’s shaking in his boots. That’s really what the “or else” is? You do this or else we’re going to consult?
MR. TONER: Matt, our approach to Syria is on several fronts. We have the Friends of Syria group that, as you saw over the weekend, took additional steps to provide support to the opposition, as well as increase humanitarian assistance to people in need in Syria. We’ve got this sanctions group that’s look at how to more effectively implement sanctions against Assad. We’re – this is something we’re working on multiple fronts. We’re going to continue to use the UN where we believe it’s going to be effective. We’re going to go back and consult on next steps.
QUESTION: So does that mean that if he does comply with – by April 10th – if he does comply with this, that those sanctions will be lifted? You won’t be going for any more sanctions?
MR. TONER: It does not mean that.
QUESTION: So – I’m sorry. What does he get out of this deal?
MR. TONER: Again, it’s not so much what he gets out of this deal except that what there needs to be, first and foremost in Syria, is an end to the violence. This is a country that, as we said, is going down a very dangerous path.
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR. TONER: We have the opposition, or members of the opposition, now defending themselves, as we’ve talked about. The violence is expanding, and we need to stop that.
QUESTION: Why is not an accurate assessment – because I’m sure you’ll say it’s not an accurate assessment – that there is no reward for compliance and there’s no punishment for non-compliance? How does that work?
MR. TONER: Punishment for noncompliance – the punishment for non-compliance --
QUESTION: Yes. The punishment is that you’re going to consult.
MR. TONER: The punishment for noncompliance is going to be increased pressure on Assad, on his regime, and a clear message to those around him that they’re on the wrong side of history.
Yeah, Jill.
QUESTION: Egypt?
MR. TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: Let me – one more on Syria?
MR. TONER: Sure. Finish up Syria.
QUESTION: So what kind of strong consequences Secretary Clinton talk about if he doesn’t --
MR. TONER: I think I just talked about that. We’ve – this is not just about the Security Council, just about the UN. We’ve said before that we’re going to consult with the Security Council on next steps when appropriate. But we’re also applying pressure through sanctions, political pressure through the Friends of Syria group.
Yeah, go ahead, Jill.
QUESTION: In Egypt, there now are reports that the Obama Administration is asking Interpol to turn down, deny that request for the arrest of the American NGO people. Can you tell us – give us some more details about that?
MR. TONER: I can’t. I mean, first of all, it would be a Department of Justice issue. But secondly --
QUESTION: I think the State Department actually is involved.
MR. TONER: -- we don’t really talk about Interpol arrest warrants.
QUESTION: Right. But we do have State Department --
MR. TONER: I mean, what I can tell – what I can say to you, Jill, is what we’re – what we would convey both privately and publicly, which is that we’re making this message very clear in every available forum that we believe these charges against these individuals are politically motivated and therefore without any legal merit.
QUESTION: But tangential to that, there is apparently an Egyptian request for you to notify the people who have been charged that they – there is a court date coming up, and that they are expected to attend. Considering that you fronted the bail – or not fronted it, you actually paid it – are you going to comply with the Egyptians’ request, which I understand is your – is a treaty obligation for you to do so, and notify these people whether or not they go or not? Are you going to tell them that they are expected to pass on the – are you going to pass on the Egyptians’ notice to them that they are expected to appear in court, or are you really forfeiting the taxpayers’ $5 million in bail?
MR. TONER: You are correct that it’s these individuals’ own decision to make whether they’re going to return. I’ll – I mean, I – we’re in communication, obviously, with their lawyers. I don’t know if we’ve conveyed anything on the part of the Egyptian Government.
QUESTION: But will you pass on that, as you are obligated to do?
MR. TONER: I’ll take the question, but --
QUESTION: Similar to that, also on Egypt, just – I was wondering if there is a fuller readout of the meetings with the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, in particular about the substance of meetings, whether there’s any talk about democratic principles, types of things that might be raised as concerns, if there is a fuller readout of the meetings that you had.
MR. TONER: Well, I mean, I think – I’ll try to get one for you, but certainly, the deputy secretary met with members of this Carnegie Group that’s visiting that included a broad range of individuals from across the – not just Egypt, but obviously in other countries, Tunisia and elsewhere. I can’t get into the substance of his private discussions. I’m sure they talked about the transitions going on in all of their countries, and certainly the challenges in those democratic transitions.
QUESTION: I’m sorry. So who from the Muslim Brotherhood was in this delegation?
MR. TONER: I don’t know if we’ve got a – we don’t have a strict list of --
QUESTION: Are you sure that there was anyone from --
MR. TONER: Yeah. I’ll get you the information.
QUESTION: Well, can you – can I – and is it now – it’s now your stand, or it’s now your position that any conversation that a State Department official has, even if it’s in a private – even if it’s to a private citizen, i.e. not another government official, that that is – that’s somehow secret now?
MR. TONER: I didn’t say it was secret.
QUESTION: Well, you said we’re not going to get into the private discussion.
MR. TONER: Yeah, but I didn’t say it was secret.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Well --
MR. TONER: I mean, what do you – I mean, I just said we’re not going to --
QUESTION: Well, I’m just saying – so everything that is said --
MR. TONER: Yes, I’m not going to – I mean, I will give you an appropriate readout, but I’m not going to detail every x, y, and z of the conversation.
QUESTION: But you said you would look into this, but my suspicion is that you are going to come back to show the readout that you get is going to be that they talked about matters of mutual interest and regional concern. Would be that an appropriate readout for the most transparent administration since – in the history of the United States?
MR. TONER: Matt, don’t prejudge.
QUESTION: I’ll wait.
MR. TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: North Korea --
MR. TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: What’s your position --
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR. TONER: Oh. Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: So even if the Egyptians’ request to Interpol were to through, the U.S. would not be obligated to arrest anyone on U.S. soil if they were subjects of the Red Notice. We were just referring to what Jill was talking about, my report from --
MR. TONER: Right. I’m sorry. The first part of your question that --
QUESTION: The U.S. would not necessarily be obligated to – would not be obligated to arrest anyone who’s subject to a Red Notice under Interpol on their soil, but are you concerned that the Egyptians might follow up with extradition papers? And what’s the recourse for U.S. if that’s the case?
MR. TONER: You’re getting way out in front on this. I’m not going to talk about this legal process, what it may turn into two or three steps down the road. We’re very clear that we believe these are politically motivated charges.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. TONER: I’m sorry. You did actually ask first.
QUESTION: Yeah. What’s your position on the possible IAEA mission to Yongbyon? Do you think that IAEA should decline the invitation from North Koreans if they go ahead with missile launch? Have you discussed this matter with IAEA?
MR. TONER: Well, I’m sure we have discussed it with the IAEA. I can tell you on the part of the U.S. that we have no intention on observing the launch. But I’ll have to refer you to the --
QUESTION: No. Not talking about observing the launch, but did North Koreans send an invitation to IAEA about monitoring?
MR. TONER: Oh, I’m sorry. I thought you were talking about invitations. They have been sending out invitations to --
QUESTION: Yeah, but about monitoring facilities, nuclear facilities in Yongbyon, as after the --
MR. TONER: We are consulting with them on this. I’d refer you to them for what their position is.
QUESTION: So just to follow up on that, you said the U.S. has no intention of observing the launch, which doesn’t surprise me.
MR. TONER: Yes.
QUESTION: But has there been a formal communication or was there a formal invitation? Has there been a communication with Pyongyang?
MR. TONER: I was told shortly before coming down here that it would go to NASA apparently – that we have not received any invitation.
QUESTION: Have not?
MR. TONER: Have not.
QUESTION: Do you know if NASA has? Obviously, that’s --
MR. TONER: That’s what I meant. I said we’d check with NASA. I’m aware – so yeah, no.
QUESTION: That they have not sent anything to NASA?
QUESTION: Announcement in – North Korea has announced yesterday if the United States sanctions against North Korea, then North Korea would held to another nuclear test soon. How do you respond, sir?
MR. TONER: My response is: What we said very clearly is that we don’t want to see the satellite launch. I’m not going to speculate down the road. We believe that this satellite launch would be in violation of UN Security – existing UN Security Council resolutions, so let’s deal with the issue at hand here.
Yeah, in the back.
QUESTION: I don’t know if this subject came under discussion. Can you tell us something about Nides’ visit to Pakistan and what kind of economic cooperation -
MR. TONER: Did you just come here, or did you just arrive?
QUESTION: I’m – I had --
MR. TONER: I apologize. Let me give you a readout afterwards. I don’t want to rankle Matt again.
QUESTION: And –
QUESTION: On Ambassador David Hale’s visit to the Middle East, there’s a report the Jordanian hosted a meeting yesterday for the Palestinians and the Israeli negotiators?
MR. TONER: Yeah. He was obviously – it was in Ramallah yesterday. He met with Prime Minister Fayyad and President Abbas, and then he was meeting with his Israeli counterparts today. I don’t have a readout from those meetings. But obviously, all of this is done as – in preparation for leading up to next week’s Quartet meeting.
QUESTION: Tibet?
MR. TONER: Tibet?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR. TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: Are you concerned about ongoing violence in Tibet? And one after another, they are putting themselves on fire or (inaudible). What they are saying is that China is destroying their culture and history and their livelihoods, and now time has come for the international community to intervene.
MR. TONER: Well, certainly we’ve been very vocal. And I would refer you to the numerous public statements we’ve made about our concerns about increasing these self-immolations and China’s actions vis-a-vis Tibet.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Sure. On Mali?
MR. TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: There was a statement just a short while ago by the Foreign Minister Burkina Faso saying that Captain Sanogo, the coup leader, has a proper attitude, a right attitude, and as a result of that he thinks that the sanctions should be lifted, the sanctions that were just imposed. I mean, does the U.S. see any progress in Mali so far? Any progress that would warrant that type of thing?
MR. TONER: We know that the ECOWAS chiefs of defense are meeting in Abidjan today, and they’re in fact discussing next steps concerning the situation in Mali. And they have issued these sanctions. We do expect them to have a strong impact. But the choice is clear, that Sanogo and his compatriots need to reinstitute civilian rule with an eye towards near-term elections.
QUESTION: So, and then maybe --
MR. TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Maybe it’s just something that came out from Burkina Faso, but do you think it would be a premature step to ease the pressure?
MR. TONER: Not at all. I mean, we’ve seen very little in the way – on the part of the --
QUESTION: The question was --
QUESTION: To ease the pressure.
QUESTION: To ease the pressure, and you said not at all. You mean to --
MR. TONER: I mean --
QUESTION: Sorry I mumbled.
QUESTION: You shouldn’t ease the pressure.
MR. TONER: Right.
QUESTION: That’s what you --
MR. TONER: Clearly. We’re not easing sanctions on Mali, not at all. We’re not looking to ease sanctions in any way on Mali right now.
QUESTION: And just --
MR. TONER: We want to keep the pressure up.
QUESTION: Just briefly on that, just to follow up from the question yesterday – but the talks Assistant Secretary Carson had in Algeria, is there anything more on that, just particularly as it relates to Mali?
MR. TONER: Yes, I do. He was in, indeed, Algeria, so thanks for calling that to my attention. He was there, obviously, with General Ham of AFRICOM, and they did meet with President Bouteflika as well as Algeria’s African affairs minister yesterday and precisely there to discuss the situation in Mali, as well as our concerns about the Sahel and the activities of AQIM.
QUESTION: Is there anything specific you’d like to see from Algeria on Mali as a neighboring country?
MR. TONER: Well, I mean, obviously we’re looking to cooperate closely with them. This is an issue that touches their borders, and so it’s of great concern to them. So – and especially, as I said, the activities of AQIM in the region and the fact that they are, as al-Qaida often does, trying to exploit the current situation.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Do you have any updates on any potential ongoing communication or diplomacy with the Emirates about the NDI case? Have that – has that – I mean, I know the Secretary remarked on it over the weekend, but has there been anything more on that? And there’s also a report that a couple of NDI folks have been prevented from leaving, although one was later allowed to leave. Can you confirm that? Do you have any --
MR. TONER: Right. My understanding to your second question is that they were – there were two individuals briefly detained and then released. One was allowed to, in fact – or I think departed the country and the other remains. But I – and the Secretary obviously spoke to this over the weekend. And we continue to be in close contact with the Government of the UAE, trying to find a resolution to this.
QUESTION: Did the State Department – was the State Department involved at all in discussions with them while these two folks were being held, particularly the American citizen?
MR. TONER: You know what? I’m not – I don’t know, frankly. I don’t know how long the detention was, but --
QUESTION: Are you saying --
MR. TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- one of them was an American citizen?
MR. TONER: I believe so.
QUESTION: I didn’t hear that and --
MR. TONER: I’ll double check, Matt.
QUESTION: --what you said. That is your understanding, though, yeah?
MR. TONER: I believe so.
That it? Great. Thanks.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:37 p.m.)