U.S. CALLING FOR INVESTIGATION INTO REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL SOLDIERS ABUSING CHILDREN IN CAR

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
June 5, 2015

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Since horrific allegations came to light that international soldiers may have abused children in the Central African Republic, the United States has been calling for a full and impartial investigation into these disturbing reports as well as into the manner in which they were handled. We thus welcome the Secretary General’s recent announcement of the establishment of an External Independent Review to examine the UN system’s response to the allegations.

The Secretary General’s establishment of this review is an opportunity for the UN to learn how it and member states can best safeguard the dignity and welfare of vulnerable people; ensure swift action to make certain potential abuses are investigated and halted; protect those who expose abuses; and provide appropriate privacy and other protection for witnesses who come forward with allegations of abuse. There are many questions that need to be answered, and we view this as an important opportunity for member states – and the people of the Central African Republic – to learn what went wrong at every point in this process.

Alongside this independent review, it is essential that all countries whose soldiers are alleged to have been involved in such abuses fully, urgently, and transparently investigate all claims to ensure that justice is served. Any individual found to have committed such heinous abuses must be held accountable.

The United States looks forward to reviewing the outcome of the Panel’s findings in a timely manner and working with all parties to prevent sexual exploitation and abuse.

PRESIDENT OBAMA ON CONTINUATION OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE
May 08, 2015
Letter -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Central African Republic

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13667 of May 12, 2014, with respect to the Central African Republic is to continue in effect beyond May 12, 2015.

The situation in and in relation to the Central African Republic, which has been marked by a breakdown of law and order, intersectarian tension, widespread violence and atrocities, and the pervasive, often forced recruitment and use of child soldiers, threatens the peace, security, or stability of the Central African Republic and neighboring states, and continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13667 with respect to the Central African Republic.

Sincerely,

BARACK OBAMA

REP. POWER'S REMARKS ON DOMINIC ONGWEN'S ARRIVAL AT INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations 
New York, NY
January 20, 2015 UN 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Dominic Ongwen’s arrival at the International Criminal Court in the Hague is a welcome development in the international community’s campaign to counter the LRA’s dehumanizing violence, and to bring perpetrators to justice after more than two decades of the LRA’s brutal campaign of torture, rape and murder.

I commend the governments of the Central African Republic and Uganda, as well as the leadership of the African Union, for their close coordination on this effort and for their commitment to ensuring that perpetrators of human rights violations face justice.

The fact that Ongwen will finally face trial is the latest sign of tangible progress in the African Union-led effort to end the threat posed by the LRA and its leader, Joseph Kony, to which the United States has dedicated considerable resources, including more than 100 U.S. military advisors. Today’s outcome is a great example of what can result from regional coordination in combating the LRA, and it is imperative that the African Union Regional Task Force (AU-RTF) continue to coordinate with regional governments, the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA), and the United Nations Regional Office for Central Africa (UNOCA) in its fight against the LRA, which still remains a serious threat to regional peace and security.

Those remaining LRA members should follow the lead of Dominic Ongwen and the more than 250 other individuals who have left the LRA since 2012. They should end their lives on the run and turn themselves in.

The United States continues to look forward to the end of the LRA and the day when its victims will finally be free from LRA terror, seeing justice that is long overdue.

AMBASSADOR PRESSMAN'S REMARKS ON PEACE-BUILDING AT UN SECURITY COUNCIL BRIEFING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at a Security Council Briefing on Post-Conflict Peace-building
01/14/2015 01:30 PM EST
Ambassador David Pressman
Alternate Representative to the UN for Special Political Affairs 
New York, NY
January 14, 2015
AS DELIVERED

Thank you, Mr. President. And let me begin by thanking the Deputy Secretary General and Ambassador Patriota for your leadership on this issue and for your briefings this morning, and to you, Foreign Minister Muñoz, for your presence here today, and to Chile for convening this important discussion.

Mr. President, preventing relapse into conflict was the primary objective for the creation of the Peacebuilding Architecture in 2005. And a decade later, it remains an urgent undertaking.

It has been said by others and we know that war is not like the weather – it doesn’t just happen; it is not inevitable. And it can be stopped. But we also know that countries that have experienced conflict once have heightened risk for relapsing into conflict again, and again. And we have seen the devastating consequences of that deadly cycle of conflict, from South Sudan to the Central African Republic.

But while war or conflict should never be deemed inevitable, too often, too many adopt a cynical passivity to emerging signs of tension or indicators of potential conflict – a passivity that assumes the futility of efforts to prevent potential conflict from metastasizing into actual conflict; and a cynicism that assumes, essentially, that certain places are just destined to fight it out.

The Peacebuilding Architecture is a living challenge to that dangerous cynicism and deadly passivity. It is a challenge for us to turn expressions of concern into coordinated actions -- actions to ensure that societies recovering from conflict do not relapse back into it. And it is a commitment to the idea that our past can indeed be put behind us and that our shared future can be built, together and in peace.

We know that when the international community mobilizes in concert with national authorities, together we can change behavior and assumptions and we can stop that which may have been written off by some as “inevitable.” Peace is built through hard work and, as the Secretary-General notes in his report, we have made “significant gains” in places and countries as diverse as Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Tunisia in efforts to consolidate peace.

In Sierra Leone, the integrated work of successive UN missions and the country team, as well as the engagement of the Peacebuilding Commission, has been critical to breaking the cycle of violence – providing space for a country and a people hungry for peace to turn their focus from war to prosperity; from conflict to electoral contests; from isolation to sustainable development. Sierra Leone has held three peaceful, credible elections since the end of the civil war in 2002, and new institutions, supported by the international community, are finding their place in society and contributing to the important work of building a government that is responsive to its citizens. Support from the United Nations has been critical to this transition.

For instance, United Nations support for institutions such as the All Political Parties Women’s Association, with a target of 30% female participation in all political parties, has increased women’s participation in Sierra Leone’s elections, building public trust in the elections process. And we know that the full and equal participation of women – whether in forging peace agreements, electing leaders, or leading post-conflict reconstruction – is absolutely critical to sustainable peace and stability. We cannot build peace for half of a society and expect it to be meaningful or lasting.

That is why the work of entities like the United Nations Peace Fund for Nepal, which has designated 30% of their funding for projects addressing the needs of women and girls -- including projects in the domain of land reform, conflict prevention, the rule of law, and the reintegration of child soldiers -- is so important. A project on land issues ensured extensive women’s participation in consultations on land use planning, a domain from which women had traditionally been excluded. Developments in Nepal demonstrate that appreciable progress can be made with targeted funding, leadership, and capacities for gender-responsive programming.

As the Deputy Secretary General noted, in Guinea, the creation of a “Women’s Situation Room” to support a network of local women’s organizations during the 2013 parliamentary elections not only increased women’s participation in the elections, it enabled them to actively participate as elections monitors and helped build confidence in the entire electoral system. The creation of community-led, early childhood development centers in Cote d’Ivoire enhanced social cohesion by bringing together women of diverse backgrounds focused on the well-being of children.

Kyrgyz women, with training from UN Women and United Nations Development Program, have formed women’s peace committees and have become important actors in monitoring tensions and government response within their community -- again, building social cohesion as well as trust between local populations and authorities in regions affected by conflict.

Full and equal inclusion of women and girls is not something that is just “just”; it is essential to build the peace of which we speak. Yet still, the participation of women in peacebuilding receives too little attention, is too often underfunded, and is too often thought of as an “effort to be inclusive” rather than a recognition that the full participation of women is a precondition of lasting peace. We must change this mindset and, in the process, change minds. And we must build our peacebuilding efforts to ensure they are inclusive, and in doing so we will make them more effective.

The recent outbreak of Ebola presented a new kind of threat to international peace and security that has indeed demanded an unprecedented response. We commend the United Nations’ critical efforts to mobilize human, financial, and technical resources to deliver an integrated response in the post-conflict countries of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. The Peacebuilding Commission can play an important role in bringing together key partners to coordinate assistance efforts and maximize the impact of the international community on the ground.

Unfortunately, international efforts have been less successful in producing results towards ending the enduring and daily threat to international peace and security presented in places like South Sudan. Despite a hard-won independence, South Sudan has erupted into deadly and devastating conflict, exacerbating ethnic tensions, eroding hope, and provoking a dire and man-made humanitarian crisis. Despite one of the most comprehensive UN peacekeeping mandates ever adopted by the Council and despite historic levels of international support, and despite almost infinite goodwill from international partners, political leaders in South Sudan have prioritized political power and conflict over peace and stability. Their actions have exacerbated tensions, have brought about tens of thousands of deaths, have displaced nearly 2 million innocent people, and are bringing this young nation – the United Nations’ newest member state – to the threshold of state failure. We cannot give up and we cannot allow the parties in South Sudan to abandon their people’s aspirations and right to live in peace and prosperity. And in standing with the people of South Sudan, we must be unified in our demand for the violence to end and that those responsible for this carnage be held to account.

Until recently, successive conflicts in the Central African Republic, received too little attention from the international community. A lack of vision for national reform, limited political will from the international community, and successive weak UN presences with little capacity to help develop state institutions further destabilized the country’s weak governance structure and undermined social cohesion. Our action last year in authorizing an integrated peacekeeping mission to protect civilians, facilitate humanitarian access, and support the state as it seeks to re-establish governance was a necessary action to stop the ensuing bloodshed. Bolstered by the contribution of troops from member-states from several regional organizations and humanitarian donations from around the globe, these collective actions represent the most comprehensive level of international engagement in the Central African Republic to date.

Mr. President, we must reflect on these lessons as we undertake the five-year review of the UN Peacebuilding Architecture. We have learned that peacebuilding requires the sustained, not sporadic, and coordinated commitment of national, regional, and international actors. It requires inclusivity – meaning women and girls are at the forefront and at the table, not an afterthought or excluded. It means the international community holds political actors accountable to the agreements they undertake and agreed frameworks to which they subscribe. And it means that addressing human rights abusers, hate, and discrimination head-on is the path to sustainable peace, not a diversion from it or an obstacle to it.

We hope that the Peacebuilding Architecture Review’s Advisory Group of Experts will heed these lessons and develop concrete recommendations to enhance the Peacebuilding Commission’s relevance and real-world impact by focusing on achieving results through its core competencies of coordination, resource mobilization, and advocacy.

2015, as others have noted, will also see the Secretary-General’s High Level Review of UN Peace Operations, as well as the Global Study of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security. We must challenge ourselves not to think about these issues only in silos. Peacekeepers are essential in setting the stable foundation for peace and development and peacekeepers are increasingly and appropriately being called upon to protect civilians in dire need of protection. Protecting civilians is not only an essential element of creating space for peace, it is vital for the credibility of the United Nations in the eyes of local populations and around the world. As such, it is essential for UN peacekeepers to carry out their protection of civilian mandates robustly and in a way that gives people confidence that we mean what we say.

And in this vein, let’s mean what we say when we sit at this table and recommit ourselves to the work of the Peacebuilding Architecture. Let’s translate our commitment to the inclusion of women into the actual inclusion of women. And let’s translate our hope for peace into the hard work required of building it.

Thank you, Mr. President.

U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT LOOKS BACK AT 2014

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
A Look Back at 2014
Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
December 31, 2014

Dear Colleagues and Friends,

The holiday season and the end of the year is a chance to reflect on the past and look ahead to the New Year. The year 2014 opened with a set of terrible conflicts raging – including wars in Syria, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic. These civil wars are characterized by indiscriminate violence and attacks on innocent civilians, as combatants flout widely accepted norms and principles. In June, UNHCR announced that more people were forcibly displaced by the end of 2013 – as refugees, asylum-seekers, and internally displaced people – than at any time since World War II.

And then summer brought more bad news and a longer list of tragedies. ISIL’s attacks spread terror across Iraq. Bloody conflict in areas of southeastern Ukraine bordering Russia displaced hundreds of thousands of lives and left thousands dead. Fighting broke out between Hamas and Israel, unaccompanied Central American children arrived in record numbers at the United States’ southern border, and Africa faced the worst Ebola epidemic in history.

Despite this daunting list, humanitarians and supporters of humanitarian causes can take pride in what we have achieved. Aid groups that faced every conceivable obstacle – donor fatigue, staffing shortages, impassable roads, blockades and attacks –still found ways to keep millions of people alive. Humanitarians managed to stave off a man-made famine in South Sudan and to bring aid to besieged cities in Syria. Throughout the Middle East, a vaccination campaign that has reached 25 million children has helped contain the spread of polio.

The United States led the world’s humanitarian efforts by again serving as top donor. With the support of lawmakers from both parties, the State Department and USAID together provided more than $6 billion in humanitarian assistance this year. U.S. contributions powered the work of the UN refugee agency (UNHCR), the World Food Program, UNICEF, and other leading aid agencies. We also played a role in encouraging other nations to give, some made large donations to UN agencies for the first time. Kuwait organized a second international pledging conference for the Syria crisis that Secretary Kerry attended and gave generously itself. And Saudi Arabia stepped in at a critical moment with significant support for Iraq.

The leaders of UN and other humanitarian organizations called attention to the world’s crises and worked assiduously to mount and mobilize effective responses. Aid workers on the front lines showed professionalism and valor, even as they saw colleagues murdered by terrorists and felled by Ebola.

Countries that took in refugees deserve credit for keeping their borders open as the numbers of refugees climbed. Their hospitality saved countless lives and involved true acts of generosity. The massive influx of Syrian refugees in the Middle East is weighing heavily on communities where people are poor and housing and jobs scarce; there is widespread agreement that development dollars should be directed to helping societies that are coping with the arrivals of large numbers of refugees.

Even during challenging times, humanitarians must persevere. We must defend and rally support for humanitarian principles. We must attract new donors from across the globe, collaborate more, and seek new ways to respond nimbly and effectively. Our priorities and programs must evolve, along with refugees’ needs. Millions now crowd into cities, stay for years, and need ways to support themselves, so innovations such as electronic cash cards and mobile health clinics are essential. Because victims of conflict should thrive and not just survive, we must coordinate relief and development assistance. And we should also capitalize on the growing international momentum behind stopping all forms of violence against women or “gender based” violence. We know that women, girls, and children are particularly vulnerable during crisis, but abuses can be prevented and perpetrators held accountable.

This year we commemorated the 20th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development – called the “Cairo Conference.” We noted the tremendous progress that has been made around the world to reduce poverty and maternal and child mortality and send girls and boys to school. However, global progress has been unequal, often hampered by discrimination and inequality. John Kerry attended the Cairo Conference as a U.S. Senator, and now, as Secretary of State, he points to the clear evidence that human and reproductive rights, women’s empowerment, and economic development are closely intertwined. At a 20th anniversary celebration in September, the Secretary said:

“We all know that investing in women and youth isn’t just the right thing to do; it’s a strategic necessity. It’s how you create stability, foster sustainable societies, and promote shared prosperity, because societies where women and girls are safe, where women are empowered to exercise their rights and move their communities forward, these societies are more prosperous and more stable – not occasionally but always.”

I’ve also welcomed the growing interest in helping migrants. This year nearly five thousand migrants died in transit, more than double last year’s death toll. The majority perished at sea -- more than three thousand drowned in the Mediterranean. I recently attended a dialogue in Geneva on Protecting Migrants at Sea organized by UNHCR where experts from around the world agreed: whatever the political and logistical hurdles, our first priority must be saving lives. We also recognized that migrants need to be screened for particular vulnerabilities, e.g. in the case of unaccompanied kids, trafficking victims, or because they are fleeing violence or persecution.

In the United States, we can take pride in our program that helps refugees restart their lives here. In 2014, for the second year in a row, we resettled nearly 70,000 refugees of more than 65 nationalities who are now making their homes in cities and towns across our country. Once again, we ensured that they arrived at an even pace throughout the year to give them and their new communities the best possible chance at success. While we continued to admit large numbers of Iraqis, Burmese, Somalis, and Bhutanese, we also are starting to see growing numbers of Congolese and Syrians – two populations that will make up an increasing share of our resettled refugee population in coming years.

Fortunately, our bureau works with organizations that not only share our concerns, but also share our determination to find solutions to seemingly intractable problems. It is a privilege to engage on these issues alongside a host of the world’s best aid organizations. I realize that this letter serves as a reminder of a series of tragic events around the world, but I also write to remind you, our colleagues and friends, that much is being done every day to save lives, alleviate pain and suffering, and help some of the world’s most vulnerable to find safety. Thank you for your interest in and support for our work.

Best regards,


Anne C. Richard
Assistant Secretary
For Population, Refugees, & Migration

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS WITH FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Quai d'Orsay
Paris, France
November 5, 2014

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (In French.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Merci. Thank you, Laurent. As Foreign Minister Fabius has just said to you, we had a broad discussion on all of the topics that he mentioned to you. We agree that we are living in very, very complicated times with enormous challenges, but we also believe that we are up to those challenges. And whether it is Ebola or ISIL, Syria, Iraq, the challenge of the nuclear program in Iran, Afghanistan, France and the United States are cooperating more than ever before, hand in hand closely, driven by our values, as Laurent said, and mindful of the fact that the world is looking for leadership on these issues.

We did talk, as he said, about our approaches to and our concerns about the negotiations with respect to Iran’s program, and I agree with Laurent. They have a right to a peaceful program but not a track to a bomb. We believe it is pretty easy to prove to the world that a plan is peaceful. And so we talked today about our common positions, about our common interests. We are hand in hand, linked in this effort, and we will work extremely closely together in the next weeks to try to find a successful path.

In addition, we are very committed to continuing to press for the stability and ability to find peace in the Middle East. We talked about that today. We both have deep concerns about the continued settlements that are taking place and the need for all parties involved to avoid confrontation and try to find a way back to the negotiations, which are critical and the only way, in the end, to be able to bring about the stability and peace that people want.

So there are many challenges beyond even the ones we talked today – Libya, North Africa, counterterrorism – but I’m very grateful to Laurent Fabius for the leadership of France, for their engagement, for their initiative individually in certain countries – Mali, elsewhere, Central African Republic, where France has been willing to take the lead and help to make a difference. And we remain committed, particularly in these next weeks when so much is at stake, to continuing to work together extremely closely.

So I’m grateful for the opportunity to be here today and I thank Laurent for his good counsel and for his good food. (Laughter.) Thank you, sir.

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: Thank you, sir. Merci.

U.S. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS ON MASS ATROCITIES

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

You are subscribed to U.S. Mission to the UN for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available.

U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at a High Level Meeting on Mass Atrocities

09/26/2014 04:27 PM EDT

Samantha Power

U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations 

New York, NY

September 25, 2014

AS PREPARED

Thank you, Minister Fabius and Minister Meade, for your leadership in convening this meeting.

It is difficult to imagine a more important objective than preventing mass atrocities and genocide. The horrific atrocities of the Second World War galvanized the international community to create the United Nations.

If we are to prevent these atrocities, we must respond earlier, we must respond systematically, and we must respond together. States must do more than endorse statements about the responsibility to protect. States must take real action to prevent mass atrocities.

President Obama has declared that the prevention of mass atrocities and genocide is a “core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States.”

To translate those words into deeds, President Obama has taken unprecedented steps to ensure that our government can anticipate mass atrocities – because we know that the sooner we act, the more options we have.

He has established a standing body - the Atrocities Prevention Board - to focus our government on the risk of mass atrocities, and develop options for responding to potential mass atrocities before they metastasize and slaughter begins.

We are constantly considering what tools can best be deployed to prevent them, or to stop them from occurring. Our diplomats have exerted pressure on capitals, regional bodies, and here at the UN. Our Treasury Department has applied targeted sanctions on perpetrators, and blocked the flow of money to abusive regimes. And in certain circumstances, our military has intervened to stop atrocities from occurring, as it recently did to halt the mass killing of those trapped on Mt. Sinjar.

At the international level, the Security Council has a special responsibility for the preservation of international peace and security, and none of us should take this responsibility lightly.

In recent months, the Council has shown that it can act responsibly, mobilizing attention, resources, and support to end horrific cycles of violence. In South Sudan, we have surged forces to enable UNMISS to respond to a deadly civil war that has already claimed over 10,000 lives. And in the Central African Republic, we have authorized a new peacekeeping mission to support French forces in curbing a wave of sectarian violence that has caused thousands of deaths and displaced hundreds of thousands of people.

I would single out France for its leadership in helping prevent mass atrocities in Libya and helping halt them in Cote d’Ivoire, Mali, and the Central African Republic. And I would applaud Mexico for its announcement this week that it will deploy military personnel to UN peacekeeping operations for the first time in 60 years. Over time, this will prove a decision that helps prevent atrocities.

We have all seen how the irresponsible use of the veto by Security Council members can deprive this body, and the international community, of some of its most effective tools for preventing and responding to atrocities. In Syria, the Assad regime has committed widespread and systematic violations against its own people. Yet – in the face of some of the worst horrors in modern history – four vetoes by members of this Council stood in the way of holding its leaders accountable.

We can ask ourselves whether some 200,000 lives would have been lost in Syria if the Security Council had been able to come together. We can even ask whether ISIL – the monstrous terrorist movement the international community is uniting against – would have gained the foothold it has if we had been united.

The Security Council has the power to play a critical role in stopping atrocities. That power carries with it great responsibility. All five permanent members have a responsibility to respond with acute urgency in the face of mass atrocities that take the lives of innocents and that threaten international peace and security.

REMARKS AT UNICEF EXECUTIVE BOARD SECOND REGULAR SESSION

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at the UNICEF Executive Board Second Regular Session

09/09/2014 05:54 PM EDT

AS DELIVERED 

Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you Executive Director Lake for your remarks. Your statements always allow us to reflect on the impressive range of UNICEF’s truly essential work on behalf of the world’s children every day, often in the most arduous environments. We thank you and UNICEF staff worldwide for your dedication.

Over the last year, we have all seen the devastating impact of a rising scale of mounting and overarching crises – natural disasters, conflicts, and health emergencies, which take a particularly cruel toll on children. As many of these crises have become chronic, children in West Africa, the Central African Republic, the Philippines, Syria, South Sudan, Ukraine, the Middle East, Iraq and elsewhere have suffered unacceptable levels of violence, disruption, and vulnerability to which no child should be subject. UNICEF is vital for children in these kinds of conditions, providing water, medicines, nutrition, education, protection, and critical health services.

Let me particularly highlight the role UNICEF is playing in responding to the recent outbreak of Ebola in West Africa, which could affect almost 20,000 individuals and cause devastating secondary damage to public health infrastructure and economic development in the affected countries for years to come. UNICEF has the trust of local officials and communities and is in a rare position to make a significant difference in reducing suffering, as well as supporting efforts to mitigate secondary effects, and we believe it is critical for UNICEF to have continued flexibility to respond to such complex and evolving emergencies.

We are therefore grateful for UNICEF’s efforts to strengthen capacity for rapid and scaled humanitarian response, such:

Your nominating high caliber and an increasing number of candidates for the Humanitarian Coordinator Pool with tangible incentives for staff to pursue these positions;

Your taking on board the recommendations of evaluations to address gaps and ensure that actions taken are widely understood throughout the organisation;

And your taking the initiative to increase country office preparedness for cluster leadership in high-risk-contexts and improving capacity for cluster leadership.

We welcome any further moves that will ensure more consistent recruitment and training of right-skilled staff for large-scale emergencies, sufficient regular budget allocation to support changing scales of emergency response, better clarity on cluster roles and responsibilities, and increased reliance on joint work with other agencies.

Protection is obviously fundamental, and we welcome UNICEF’s embrace of the Rights Up Front agenda to improve protection of children in emergencies; your work to develop data-driven advocacy around protection; and your actions to improve prevention and response to sexual and gender-based violence.

We also look forward to even stronger emphasis on disabilities in all UNICEF activities,with disaggegated assessments to help ensure that children with disabilities have equal access to humanitarian and other forms of assistance.

We also appreciate Director Lake’s candor about the strain on the organization from multiple emergencies, and his call not to lose focus in the face of calamity on the long-term investments we need to make in children’s health and well-being and the developmental work for which UNICEF has long been known.

You also rightly insist that we look with clear eyes at the underlying drivers of risk, that we redouble every effort to remedy them, with a determination not to fail. You have also outlined a compelling path that would help integrate UNICEF’s emergency and development work in a way that builds the resilience of families and communities at all levels. We agree that the divide between humanitarian and development work is artificial, and we should seek every opportunity to bridge it.

UNICEF’s developmental work is widely and deservedly praised: getting children the nutrients they need to survive and thrive; getting the most vulnerable children to school and ready to learn; promoting adequate water and sanitation, food, and health services; working with other agencies to help prevent teenage pregnancy and help young women get access to trained birth attendants; and partnering with countries to advance the Millennium Development goals.

We need you to continue this work and we appreciate UNICEF’s leadership as a strong advocate for children’s priorities in our continuing deliberations over the post-2015 development agenda.

Turning to management issues, we appreciate UNICEF’s continuing dedication to transparency and accountability, including your pioneering tools like the Monitoring Results for Equity System. You have been a leader in the UN system in this regard.

It’s worthy of note that MoRES has now been expanded from 30 countries in 2012 to 80 countries in 2013, enabling more strategic analysis of data and improved results, including through integration of MoRES into countries’ own planning and monitoring systems, which builds capacity, builds comparability, and improves data collection that can improve results.

With regard to resources, we are glad to note UNICEF’s strong financial situation, with total revenue reaching an all-time high of $4.9 billion, nearly $1 billion more than 2012. These figures are a testament to your hard work on partnerships but mainly to the integrity, enduring value, and urgent need for UNICEF’s work. We also note with appreciation that you have dedicated resources where they are needed, including the 27% of revenue this year devoted to children in emergencies.

Turning briefly to the issue of critical mass: in our view, critical mass should simply reflect all the resources necessary for agencies to deliver the results we have agreed in Strategic Plans and integrated budgets. Every dollar is critical for UNICEF’s life-saving work. In the Board’s deliberations, we think the recently agreed decision on critical mass at the UNDP/UNFPA/UNOPS Board will provide a useful basis for moving forward.

Let me then just close in thanking you and all UNICEF staff once again for your leadership, dedication, and determination to champion the world’s most vulnerable children. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY'S PRESS STATEMENT ON WORLD REFUGEE DAY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Commemorating World Refugee Day

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

June 20, 2014

---

World Refugee Day is more than a moment marked on a calendar. It is a time to honor the strength and resilience of refugees around the world and renew our determination to support them as they rebuild their lives and communities. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees now counts the number of refugees, asylum-seekers, and internally displaced persons at 51 million. That number is staggering by any measure. It represents children, women, and men from Syria, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and now Iraq, who face death, destruction, and dislocation. For them, daily survival is a gamble.

The dreams refugees harbor have special meaning for Americans. Even before our land was a nation, America was a haven for those seeking freedom from persecution, hunger, oppression and war. Today, refugees continue to look to America for relief and opportunity. These refugees, many of whom arrive having lost everything, become some of the most resilient, entrepreneurial, and devoted citizens we have.

When I visited the UN’s Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan last year, I saw firsthand the value and importance of our work. Hundreds of thousands of Syrians – many women and children – live there in suspended animation, waiting for the opportunity to rebuild their lives. I met with some of the camp’s many residents. Their needs were simple: food, shelter, stability. But most of all, they want to live their lives with the dignity and respect that all people deserve.

That’s why I’m proud that the United States is the largest donor to humanitarian relief worldwide. Our humanitarian assistance has saved lives and eased suffering for 4.7 million people inside Syria and more than 2.8 million refugees in neighboring countries. We have also recently announced nearly $300 million in additional humanitarian assistance to help the people affected by the conflict in South Sudan. Beyond just dollars and programs, our efforts are assisting millions who have fled conflict and persecution in the Central African Republic, Burma, Afghanistan, and many other places around the world.

World Refugee Day is more than a moment marked on a calendar. It is a time to honor the strength and resilience of refugees around the world and renew our determination to support them as they rebuild their lives and communities. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees now counts the number of refugees, asylum-seekers, and internally displaced persons at 51 million. That number is staggering by any measure. It represents children, women, and men from Syria, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and now Iraq, who face death, destruction, and dislocation. For them, daily survival is a gamble.

The dreams refugees harbor have special meaning for Americans. Even before our land was a nation, America was a haven for those seeking freedom from persecution, hunger, oppression and war. Today, refugees continue to look to America for relief and opportunity. These refugees, many of whom arrive having lost everything, become some of the most resilient, entrepreneurial, and devoted citizens we have.

When I visited the UN’s Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan last year, I saw firsthand the value and importance of our work. Hundreds of thousands of Syrians – many women and children – live there in suspended animation, waiting for the opportunity to rebuild their lives. I met with some of the camp’s many residents. Their needs were simple: food, shelter, stability. But most of all, they want to live their lives with the dignity and respect that all people deserve.

That’s why I’m proud that the United States is the largest donor to humanitarian relief worldwide. Our humanitarian assistance has saved lives and eased suffering for 4.7 million people inside Syria and more than 2.8 million refugees in neighboring countries. We have also recently announced nearly $300 million in additional humanitarian assistance to help the people affected by the conflict in South Sudan. Beyond just dollars and programs, our efforts are assisting millions who have fled conflict and persecution in the Central African Republic, Burma, Afghanistan, and many other places around the world.

I’m especially proud that the United States welcomes the most refugees to our shores every year. Nearly 70,000 refugees from 65 nations found a new home in in the United States last year. We expect to admit just as many in 2014.

The losses refugees suffer, the journeys they make, and the commitment they put into rebuilding their lives are remarkable. Today of all days, we salute their courage and resilience. We pay tribute to the generosity of countries that give them refuge. And we applaud the compassion of communities and organizations the world over that lend a helping hand.

I’m especially proud that the United States welcomes the most refugees to our shores every year. Nearly 70,000 refugees from 65 nations found a new home in in the United States last year. We expect to admit just as many in 2014.

The losses refugees suffer, the journeys they make, and the commitment they put into rebuilding their lives are remarkable. Today of all days, we salute their courage and resilience. We pay tribute to the generosity of countries that give them refuge. And we applaud the compassion of communities and organizations the world over that lend a helping hand.

WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT REGARDING ATROCITIES IN CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

May 13, 2014

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Central African Republic

In late 2012, armed groups began a rebellion that sparked a period of devastating instability, lawlessness, and anarchy in the Central African Republic (CAR) that led to the overthrow of its government in early 2013.  Escalating violence and human rights abuses set the stage for the eruption of sectarian conflict by December 2013.  Communities that have lived together peacefully for generations are being torn apart along sectarian lines.  More than 2.5 million of the country’s 4.6 million people need humanitarian assistance.  Approximately one million people have been displaced.  Growing attacks perpetrated by both Muslim and Christian militias have brought CAR to a crisis of disastrous proportions.   

That is why today President Obama issued a new Executive Order declaring a national emergency and authorizing the imposition of sanctions to deal with the threat posed by the situation in the CAR.  The Executive Order also imposes sanctions on five individuals – sending a powerful message that impunity will not be tolerated and that those who threaten the stability of the CAR will face consequences.  Today's actions follows the UN Security Council's unanimous vote in January to establish a sanctions regime against those responsible for instability and atrocities in the CAR, and the listing of three individuals by the UN Security Council CAR Sanctions Committee on May 9.

The United States continues to work with the international community, regional partners, and CAR’s transitional authorities to help set the country on a path toward recovery.  We strongly support the African Union, French, and European Union forces who have been working to reestablish security for the people of the CAR, and the UN peacekeepers who will continue their heroic work.  We stand with the courageous individuals who continue to call for peace and reconciliation.  We will continue to provide support to the Transitional Government as it works to restore governance and pave the way for a return to an elected government, and to deliver humanitarian assistance to those affected by the conflict.  We urge all parties to end the violence, to ensure justice and accountability for perpetrators of human rights abuses, and to work together to forge a brighter and more prosperous future for all Central Africans.

KERRY, HAGEL MAKE REMARKS IN MUNICH, GERMANY

FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at Munich Security Conference
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel
Bayerischer Hof Hotel
Munich, Germany
February 1, 2014

MBASSADOR ISCHINGER: Thanks very much. I think now we can continue. It’s my great pleasure now to open our second panel this morning. We have two longtime friends of the Munich Security Conference. Both of our panelists have been with the Munich Security Conference when they served in the U.S. Senate for many years. So let me welcome both Secretary John Kerry and Secretary Chuck Hagel, both now no longer in the Senate but both now for a year, for practically a year, Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense. Welcome, Mr. Secretaries. (Applause.)

I think the way we want to use these 45 minutes or so is that both Secretaries will offer introductory comments; and if you have a question to ask, please put it on one of the slips of paper and hand it to the staff, and then we’ll use whatever time we have to have a discussion, a Q&A session, in just a few minutes.

John, would you like to start? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you very much, Ambassador Ischinger. I’m very grateful for the opportunity to be here. (In German.) Nice to be with everybody. And I am – I want to remark that Ambassador Ischinger had the pleasure of going to the renowned Fletcher School at Tufts University, but it sounds to me like he lost his Boston accent. I don’t know what happened to him along the way. (Laughter.)

This is a very real and special pleasure for Chuck and me to be here at this conference. We do know this conference well. And as Walter said, we are not just friends from the Senate but we’re friends from a common experience of a long period of time. So it’s a pleasure for us now to be working together as partners with respect to the national security issues that challenge all of us.

So the fact is also that both Chuck and I feel this Atlantic relationship very much in our bones. Both of our families emigrated to the United States from Europe, and both of our fathers signed up to fight tyranny and totalitarianism in World War II. And we both watched the Berlin Wall go up as we grew up, and we grew up as Cold War kids.

So we come to these discussions – both of us – with part of our formative years planted in the post-Cold War/post-World War period, and certainly deeply in the Cold War period. As a kid who grew up in school doing drills to get under my desk in the event of nuclear war, this is something that still conditions my thinking.

It was during that period of time that I first encountered what I came to understand as one of the unmistakable symbols of the enduring American-European partnership. I was a young kid who served – who was with my father in Berlin when he served as the legal advisor to the then High Commissioner to Germany, James Conant. And I spent a piece of my childhood getting on trains in Frankfurt and going through the dead of night to arrive in Berlin and be greeted by the American military man, and move between a British sector, a French sector, an American sector, and a Russian sector. So I can remember cold signs warning you about where you were leaving, and I can remember guns rapping on the windows of my train when I dared to lift the blinds and try to look out and see what was on the other side.

I’ll also never forget walking into a building – I used to ride my bicycle down to Kurfurstendamm when it was still rubble. We’re talking about the early 1950s, just to date myself. And you could see a plaque on a building that said: “This was rebuilt with help from the Marshall Plan.” But the truth is today, as we gather in Munich in 2014, George Marshall’s courageous vision – resisting the calls of isolationism and investing in this partnership – requires all of us to think about more than just buildings. That period of time saw the Marshall Plan lead America’s support for the rebuilding of a continent. But it was more than just the rebuilding of a continent; it was the rebuilding of an idea, it was the rebuilding of a vision that was built on a set of principles, and it built alliances that were just unthinkable only a few years before that.

And I say all of this to try to put this meeting and the challenges that we face in a context. So long as I can remember, I have understood that the United States and Europe are strongest when we stand united together for peace and prosperity, when we stand in strong defense of our common security, and when we stand up for freedom and for common values. And everything I see in the world today tells me that this is a moment where it’s going to take more than words to fulfill this commitment. All of us need to think harder and act more in order to meet this challenge.


With no disrespect whatsoever – in fact, only with the purest of admiration to the strategic and extraordinary vision of Brent Scowcroft sitting over here, Henry Kissinger, Zbig Brzezinski, who I don’t see but I know is here somewhere. There he is. These are men who helped to shape and guide us through the Cold War and the tense moments and the real dangers that it presented. But the fact is that this generation of confluence of challenges that we’re confronting together are in many ways more complex and more vexing than those of the last century. The largely bipolar world of the Cold War, East-West, was relatively straightforward compared to the forces that have been released with the fall of the Berlin Wall, the rise of sectarianism, the rise of religious extremism, and the failure of governance in many places. In fact, we should none of us be surprised that it is the wisdom and vision of Henry Kissinger in his brilliant book Diplomacy – which, if you’ve read it, reread it; if you haven’t, read it for the first time – lays all of this out in his first chapter as he talks about the balance – the old game of balance of power and interests. And as he predicts that this is more convoluted because of the absence of a structure to really manage and cope with this new order that we face. Those were his words.

So today we are witnessing youth populations, huge youth populations: 65 percent of a country under the age of 30, under the age of 25 in some places; 50 percent under the age of 21; 40 percent under the age of 18 – unemployed, disenfranchised, except for what globalization has brought them in their capacity to be able to reach out and see what the rest of the world is doing even as they are denied the opportunity to do it too – an enormous, desperate yearning for education, for jobs, for opportunity. That’s what drove Tahrir Square, not the Muslim Brotherhood, not any religious extremism, but young kids with dreams. That’s what led that fruit vendor in Tunisia to self-immolate after he grew too tired of being slapped around by a police officer, denied his opportunity just to sell his fruit wares where he wanted to.

We are facing threats of terrorism and untamed growth in radical sectarianism and religious extremism, which increases the challenge of failed and failing governments and the vacuums that they leave behind. And all of this is agitated by a voracious globalized appetite and competition for resources and markets that do not always sufficiently share the benefits of wealth and improved quality of life with all citizens.

And this is all before you get to the challenge of global food security, water availability, and global climate change. These are the great tests of our time. Now, even as our economies in the United States and Europe begin to emerge from the economic trials of the last years, we are not immune to extremism or to the natural difficulties of nurturing democracy, and particularly as we measure what is happening with the number of jihadists who are attracted by the magnet of the Assad regime to Syria, where from Europe and from America and from Australia and from Great Britain and from many other places they now flock to learn the trade of terror, and then perhaps to return to their home shores.

The task of building a Europe that is whole and free and at peace is not complete. And in order to meet today’s challenges both near and far, America needs a strong Europe, and Europe needs a committed and engaged America. And that means turning inward is not an option for any of us. When we lead together, others will join us. But when we don’t, the simple fact is that few are prepared or willing to step up. That’s just a fact. And leading, I say respectfully, does not mean meeting in Munich for good discussions. It means committing resources even in a difficult time to make certain that we are helping countries to fight back against the complex, vexing challenges of our day.

I’ll tell you, I was recently in Korea and reminded that 10 of the 15 countries that used to receive aid from the United States of America as recently as in the last 10 years are today donor countries. Think about that: 10 of the 15 and the others are on their way to being donor countries. Now let me be fair. We need to have this debate in America too right now. The small fraction of our budget that we invest in our diplomacy and in foreign assistance is a miniscule investment compared to the cost of the crises that we fail to avoid.

So as a transatlantic community, we cannot retreat and we must do more than just recover – all of us. What we need in 2014 is a transatlantic renaissance, a new burst of energy and commitment and investment in the three roots of our strength: our economic prosperity, our shared security, and the common values that sustain us.

Now first, our shared prosperity: Who would have imagined at the first Munich conference in 1963 that $2.6 billion in goods and services would flow between us every day? That didn’t happen by accident, nor did the 4 trillion that we invest in each other’s economies every single year, or the more than 13 million jobs that we support mutually because of it. The depth and breadth of our economic position and partnership was a conscious choice of the men I described and other men and women during that period of time who had a vision, and they need to be a conscious reflection of our vision today.

Today, as our economies recover, we also have to do more to put this indispensable partnership to work, a shared prosperity that benefits us all. And we can start, frankly, by harnessing the energy and the talents of our people, which is what the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is all about. T-TIP is about more than growing our economies. It will promote trade, investment, innovation. It will bring our economies closer together while maintaining high standards in order to ensure that we create good jobs for these young people who are screaming about the future. And it will cement our way of doing business as the world’s gold standard. Imagine what happens when you take the world’s largest market and the world’s largest single economy and you marry them together with the principles and the values that come with it. It will – if we’re ambitious enough, T-TIP will do for our shared prosperity what NATO has done for our shared security, recognizing that our security has always been built on the notion of our shared prosperity.

We are the most innovative economies in the world, the United States and Europe, and as such we have a major responsibility to deal with this growing potential catastrophe of climate change. I urge you, read the latest IPCC report. It’s really chilling. And what’s chilling is not rhetoric; it’s the scientific facts, scientific facts. And our history is filled with struggles through the Age of Reason and the Renaissance and the Enlightenment for all of us to earn some respect for science. The fact is that there is no doubt about the real day-to-day impact of the human contribution to the change in climate.

Next year, the United States will assume responsibility for the Arctic Council, and I can tell you just looking at what’s happening in the Arctic – and there are others here who are deeply invested in that – we have enormous challenges. None of them are unsolvable. That’s the agony of this moment for all of us. There are answers to all of these things, but there seems to be an absence of will, an absence of collective leadership that’s ready to come together and tell our people not what they’re necessarily telling us through this crazy social media, incredible confluence of information that they’re sort of told they’re interested in, but for us as leaders to suggest to them this is what you ought to be interested in because it actually affects your life and your livelihood and your future.

President Obama is implementing an ambitious plan that sees climate change not only as a challenge, but as an incredible set of opportunities for all of us, and I believe that. The marketplace that created the great wealth in our country in the 1990s which saw every single quintile of our income earners see their income go up, every quintile saw their income go up, and we created the greatest wealth the world has seen during the 1990s, greater even in America than the period of the Pierponts and the Morgans and the Rockefellers, Carnegies, Mellons, much greater. You know what it was? It was a $1 trillion market with 1 billion users. It was the high-tech market, the personal computer mostly, communications.

The energy market that we are staring at – that is the solution to the climate change. Energy policy is the solution to climate change. That market, my friends, is a $6 trillion market today with 4 to 5 billion users today, and it will grow to some 9 billion users over the course of the next 20 to 30 years. It is the mother of all markets, and only a few visionaries are doing what is necessary to reach out and touch it and grab it and command its future.


I spoke last week at Davos about the diplomatic work that the United States is engaged in, that I am engaged in, at the direction of President Obama, who believes in this vision and in all of these issues, and our European partners are jointly with us undertaking on three of the most important initiatives right now to make the Middle East and the world more secure.

With the help of countries like Germany, the U.K., Italy, Denmark, Norway, Russia, we reached an agreement, ratified by the United Nations, to remove chemical weapons from Syria. Obviously, I’m sure there’ll be some questions about that, and there ought to be, but together, we need to all keep the pressure on the Assad regime to stop making excuses and fulfill Syria’s promises and obligations and meet the UN deadlines.


With the help of the EU, Germany, U.K., France, and Russia – as well as China – Iran agreed to freeze and roll back its nuclear weapons program for the first time in a decade. And in the coming months, we will remain unified – or I hope we will – to guarantee Iran’s willingness to reach a comprehensive agreement that resolves the world’s concerns about its nuclear program, hopefully through diplomacy backed up by the potential of force.

With the help of the EU and the Quartet, we are pursuing a long-sought and much-needed peace between Israelis and Palestinians. I have to tell you, the alternatives to successfully concluding the conflict, when you stop and list them, are or ought to be unacceptable to anybody. If you look at it hard, you ought to come out and say failure is not an option, though regrettably the dynamics always present the possibility.

And so together we need to help the parties break through the skepticism, which is half the challenge, and begin to believe in the possibilities that are within their grasp. As President Obama said on Tuesday, “In a world of complex threats, our security and leadership depend on all the elements of our power – including strong and principled diplomacy.” And it depends on harnessing the power of our strongest alliances, too. No one country can possibly hope to solve any of the challenges that I have listed on its own.

That’s why this kind of meeting and the alliance that it represents, more importantly, and the work that we do out of here after these meetings – that’s why it’s so important that the United States and Europe stick together, that we continue to understand the importance of the strength of our unity and unity in action, whether we’re working on Afghanistan, the Central African Republic, the challenge of the Maghreb, the Levant, the DPRK, global challenges like cyber security, infectious disease, or the pursuit of a world without nuclear weapons. Plain and simply, our shared prosperity and security are absolutely indivisible. And in a shrinking world where our fundamental interests are inseparable, a transatlantic renaissance requires that we defend our democratic values and freedoms. Don’t for an instant underestimate how important that it is or that the difference that it makes to courageous people like those in the Ukraine, in Ukraine who are standing up today for their ability to have a choice about their future.

As I say all of this, the United States is the first to admit that our democracy too has always been a work in progress. We know that. We’re proud that we work at it openly, transparently, accountably to reform it, to fix it, and to strengthen it when needed. President Obama’s review and revision of our signals intelligence practices is a case in point. So I assure you we come to this conversation with humility. But humility is not a reason to avoid calling it the way you see it. And the fact is that we see a disturbing trend in too many parts of Central and Eastern Europe and the Balkans. The aspirations of citizens are once again being trampled beneath corrupt, oligarchic interests, interests that use money to stifle political opposition and dissent, to buy politicians and media outlets, and to weaken judicial independence and the rights of nongovernmental organizations.

Nowhere is the fight for a democratic European future more important today than in Ukraine. While there are unsavory elements in the streets in any chaotic situation, the vast majority of Ukrainians want to live freely in a safe and a prosperous country, and they are fighting for the right to associate with partners who will help them realize their aspirations. And they have decided that that means their futures do not have to lie with one country alone, and certainly not coerced. The United States and EU stand with the people of Ukraine in that fight. Russia and other countries should not view the European integration of their neighbors as a zero-sum game. In fact, the lessons of the last half century are that we can accomplish much more when the United States, Russia, and Europe work together. But make no mistake, we will continue to speak out when our values and our interests are undercut by any country in the region. President Obama leaves no doubt about America’s commitment to this relationship, and he will come to Europe three times already scheduled this year to reinforce the investment in our shared future.

For more than 70 years – this year we will celebrate the 70th anniversary of D-Day – the United States and Europe have fought side by side for freedom, and that is what binds us. Those ties have grown stronger in the 25 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the 15 years since our post-Cold War NATO enlargements began, in the 10 years since the EU began expanding again. It is important to understand this is more than just a measure of years; it is a measure of the most productive partnership in the history of international affairs, nothing less.

Our challenge today is to ensure opportunity, security, and liberty for Americans and Europeans, but also for people all over the world who look to us for that possibility. Our challenge is to renew this partnership and to live up to the legacy of the world’s strongest alliance. The 21st century will demand these commitments from all of us, and I believe we have to rise to this occasion as Americans and Europeans always have, and that’s the only thing that will give meaning to this kind of a meeting and meaning to the legacy that we need to honor in our generation. Thank you. (Applause.)

My pleasure to introduce to you my friend from the Senate. We are both in different parties, but believe me, we share a vision and we are really enjoying working together these days. Chuck Hagel, the Secretary of Defense. (Applause.)

SECRETARY HAGEL: John, thank you. Thank you very much, and to Ambassador Ischinger, thank you for once again hosting this conference, an important conference. It’s good to be back in Munich. As you noted, I have been here many times, and I especially appreciate being here with my friend and former colleague and now cabinet partner John Kerry.

I want to also recognize our United States congressional delegation, which I have been part of a number of times, led by an unfamiliar face here, John McCain. John, I see you. Thank you. Sheldon Whitehouse, Senator, thank you for your leadership. And many of the delegation are individuals who have led on this issue for many years, and you are all quite familiar with most of the U.S. congressional delegation. So thank you for your continued leadership and involvement.

I also want to recognize our American Ambassador to Germany John Emerson, who is here somewhere, for his work and his efforts. And it is not easy, as we all know, for an ambassador in any country at any time, but Ambassador Emerson has done a tremendous job and we very much appreciate his good work and his leadership as well. (Applause.)

In preparing for these remarks, I was looking through the memoirs of Henry Stimson, who over a long and distinguished career held both my job – actually, he held my job when it was Secretary of War, and he held it twice. He also held John Kerry’s job, Secretary of State. The book I thumbed through contained a handwritten letter from McGeorge Bundy. Many of you know – knew McGeorge Bundy, worked with McGeorge Bundy, and certainly, everyone knows who he was. He helped in this particular case Henry Stimson write his memoirs, and that book was published in 1952.

In Bundy’s letter to an admirer, Bundy described Stimson’s recollections of life as a picture of history worth going on with, whatever the ups and downs. I recall these words here in Munich this morning because this conference is itself a picture of history, the history of the transatlantic partnership. And that history is very much worth going on with. That’s why we’re celebrating this gathering’s 50th anniversary.

The transatlantic partnership has been successful because of the judicious use of diplomacy and defense. Over the last year, John and I have both worked to restore balance, balance to the relationship between American defense and diplomacy. With the United States moving off a 13-year war footing, it’s clear to us, it’s very clear to President Obama that our future requires a renewed and enhanced era of partnership with our friends and allies, especially here in Europe.

As this panel acknowledges, we need what John just described and as Ambassador Ischinger has noted, a transatlantic renaissance. The foundation of our collective security relationship with Europe has always been cooperation against common threats. Throughout most of the 20th century, these common threats were concentrated in and around Europe, but today the most persistent and pressing security challenges to Europe and the United States are global. They emanate from political instability and violent extremism in the Middle East and North Africa, dangerous non-state actors, rogue nations such as North Korea, cyber warfare, demographic changes, economic disparity, poverty, and hunger.

And as we confront these threats, nations such as China and Russia are rapidly modernizing their militaries and global defense industries, challenging our technological edge in defense partnerships around the world. The world will continue to grow more complicated, interconnected, and in many cases more combustible. The challenges and choices before us will demand leadership that reaches into the future without stumbling over the present. Meeting this challenge of change will not be easy, but we must do so and we must do so together. As our strategy in defense investments will make clear, the U.S. sees Europe as its indispensable partner in addressing these threats and challenges, as well as addressing new opportunities.

The centerpiece of our transatlantic defense partnership will continue to be NATO, the military alliance that has been called the greatest peace movement in history. In Afghanistan, NATO-led forces are doing extraordinary work to help the Afghan people by strengthening the Afghan army and police so that they can assume responsibility for their nation’s security. European nations have maintained remarkable cohesion and commitment in the face of sacrifice, uncertainty, and challenges in Afghanistan.

As we bring our combat mission to a conclusion after 13 years, we should all be very proud of what our alliance has accomplished. Members of the International Security Assistance Force, especially smaller nations, have greatly benefited from the experience of training and working alongside other partners in Afghanistan. We must continue to hone the capabilities we’ve fielded and sustain these deep and effective defense relationships. And NATO must continue to develop innovative ways to maintain alliance readiness as we apply our hard-earned skills to new security challenges.

In reviewing U.S. defense priorities tempered by our fiscal realities, it’s clear that our military must place an even greater strategic emphasis on working with our allies and partners around the world. That will be a key theme of the Department of Defense’s upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review which will articulate our defense strategy in a changing security and fiscal environment.

The United States will engage European allies to collaborate more closely, especially in helping build the capabilities of other global partners. We’re developing strategies to address global threats as we build more joint capacity – joint capacity with European militaries. In the face of budget constraints here on this continent as well as in the United States, we must all invest more strategically to protect military capability and readiness.

The question is not just how much we spend, but how we spend together. It’s not just burdens we share, but opportunities as well. The Department of Defense will work closely with our allies’ different and individual strengths and capabilities, from the training of indigenous forces to more advanced combat missions. We’re looking at promising new initiatives, including Germany’s framework nations concept, which could help NATO plan and invest more efficiently and more effectively.

In Africa, the U.S. military and our European allies are already partners in combating violent extremism and working alongside our diplomats to avert humanitarian catastrophes. In Mali, in the Central African Republic, the U.S. and European partners are providing specialized enablers such as air transport and refueling. We’re there to support a leading operational role for French forces. The U.S. has supported France’s leadership and efforts. And we also welcome the German Defense Minister von der Leyen’s recent proposal to increase German participation in both countries.

All of us must work closely together with African nations in helping them build their security forces and institutions. A more collaborative approach to global security challenges will require more defense establishments to cooperate not just on the operational level, but on the strategic level as well. We are working with two allies – the U.S., UK, and Australia, building the three of us closer collaboration between our militaries across a broad range of areas from force development to force posture.

For example, the United States is helping the UK regenerate its aircraft carrier capability, which will enable more integrated operation of our advanced F-35 fighters and more broadly enhance our shared ability to project power. And last year, an Australian army officer became the deputy commanding general of U.S. Army forces in the Pacific. This is helping connect our forces more strategically with our allies and partners in the regions.

We believe this collaboration offers a model – a model for closer integration with other allies and partners, including NATO as a whole, and it’ll influence U.S. strategic planning and future investments. Sustaining and enhancing these cooperative efforts will require shared commitment and shared investment on both sides of the Atlantic. That includes United States commitments to a strong military posture in Europe.

Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has continuously adjusted its defense posture to new strategic realities around the world. As our force structure draws down following the end of our longest war, there will be, there must be, adjustments in our posture to meet new challenges. For example, to respond to elevated threats to our diplomatic facilities in North Africa and the Middle East, we have partnered with Spain to position U.S. Marines in Moron, and we have put other forces throughout the region on heightened alert status. These forces not only enable us to respond to crises or support ongoing operations, but they also expand our diplomatic options amid the recent violence in South Sudan. The rapid availability of nearby forces allowed American diplomats to remain on the ground and help broker a ceasefire.

An important posture enhancement is European missile defense in response to ballistic missile threats from Iran. Over the last two days, I’ve been in Poland, where I reaffirmed the United States commitment to deploying missile defense architecture there. As you all know, that’s part of Phase 3 of our European Phased Adaptive Approach. Yesterday afternoon, the USS Donald Cook departed the United States for Rota, Spain, where over the next two years she will be joined by three additional missile defense-capable destroyers.

Despite fiscal constraints, the budget that we will release next month fully protects our investment in European missile defense. Our commitment to Europe is unwavering. Our values and our interests remain aligned. Both principle and pragmatism secure our transatlantic bonds.

In 1947, a time of widespread doubt about the continued value of the transatlantic partnership, Henry Stimson argued that America could, in his words, no sooner stand apart from Europe than desert every principle by which we claim to live. He helped persuade Americans that, in his words, our policy toward the world – in that policy, “There is no place for grudging or limited participation… Foreign affairs are now our most intimate domestic concern.” Americans know well the wisdom in Stimson’s warning. We also know well the responsibilities we shoulder in partnership with all of you.

As President Obama told the American people in his State of the Union Address this week, our alliance with Europe remains the strongest the world has ever known. I have every confidence that our successors will be there 50 years hence to again celebrate the most successful and effective collective security alliance in history. But as we all know, it will require continued strong and visionary leadership, attention, resources, and strong commitment.

In 2064, there will still be a Wehrkunde, and there will still be a strong and enduring transatlantic alliance. Thank you. (Applause.)

AMBASSADOR ISCHINGER: Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. We have not a lot of time, so we’ll call on a few questions. I have a huge number of cards, and I apologize – I have to apologize to most of those who have written down their questions. We can literally take two or three or maximum of four depending on the length of the answers.

Let me start with a question of my own, which I’d like to address – (laughter) – to Secretary Kerry. We had the very interesting panel discussion yesterday between Tzipi Livni and Saeb Erekat, who were both sitting right here in the first row with Martin Indyk, on the situation as where we are right now. How optimistic are you that you can actually nail this down? Question one.

And if I may add one to you, Mr. Secretary of Defense, a couple years ago, one of your predecessors, Bob Gates, gave a pretty strong valedictorian speech admonishing us, European allies, to do more, because if we didn’t do more, we would be not as useful as your allies as we should be. Now, are you today as unhappy as Bob Gates was with us?

Maybe we start with the Secretary of State.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Mr. Ambassador, I am willing to take risks, but I’m not willing to hang myself here. (Laughter.) So I’m not going to tell you how optimistic I am. I’m going to tell you that I’m hopeful. I believe in the possibility or I wouldn’t pursue this. President Obama believes in the possibility. I don’t think we’re being quixotic and un – I’m a little surprised by some of the articles that tend to write about an obsession or a fanatical effort to try to achieve this, et cetera. We’re just working hard. We’re working hard because the consequences of failure are unacceptable.

I mean, I want you all to think about it. Ask yourselves a simple question: What happens if we can’t find a way forward? Is Fatah going to be stronger? Will Abu Mazen be strengthened? Will this man who has been committed to a peaceful process for these last years be able to hold on if it fails? What is the argument for holding on? Are we going to then see militancy? Will we then see violence? Will we then see transformation? What comes afterwards? Nobody can answer that question with any kind of comfort.

By the same token, for our friends, I see good Minister Tzipi Livni here, who has been absolutely spectacular in this process, committed to it. Prime Minister Netanyahu has taken very tough decisions to move this down the road, very tough decisions, as has President Abbas, who had the right to go to the United Nations and has foresworn it in an effort to try to keep at the table and keep the process moving.

For Israel, the stakes are also enormously high. Do they want a failure that then begs whatever may come in the form of a response from disappointed Palestinians and the Arab community? What happens to the Arab Peace Initiative if this fails? Does it disappear? What happens for Israel’s capacity to be the Israel it is today – a democratic state with the particular special Jewish character that is a central part of the narrative and of the future? What happens to that when you have a bi-national structure and people demanding rights on different terms?

So I think if you – and I’m only just scratching the surface in talking about the possibilities, and I’ve learned not to go too deep in them because it gets misinterpreted that I’m somehow suggesting, “Do this or else,” or something. I’m not. We all have a powerful, powerful interest in resolving this conflict. Everywhere I go in the world, wherever I go – I promise you, no exaggeration, the Far East, Africa, Latin America – one of the first questions out of the mouths of a foreign minister or a prime minister or a president is, “Can’t you guys do something to help bring an end to this conflict between Palestinians and Israelis?” Indonesia – people care about it because it’s become either in some places an excuse or in other places an organizing principle for efforts that can be very troubling in certain places. I believe that – and you see for Israel there’s an increasing de-legitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it. There are talk of boycotts and other kinds of things. Are we all going to be better with all of that?

So I am not going to sit here and give you a measure of optimism, but I will give you a full measure of commitment. President Obama and I and our Administration are as committed to this as anything we’re engaged in because we think it can be a game-changer for the region. And as Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed said – he’s here somewhere – to a Paris meeting of the Arab League the other day, spontaneously he said, “You know, if peace is made, Israel will do more business with the Gulf states and the Middle East than it does with Europe today.”

This is the difference of 6 percent GDP per year to Israel, not to mention that today’s status quo absolutely, to a certainty, I promise you 100 percent, cannot be maintained. It’s not sustainable. It’s illusionary. There’s a momentary prosperity, there’s a momentary peace. Last year, not one Israeli was killed by a Palestinian from the West Bank. This year, unfortunately, there’s been an uptick in some violence. But the fact is the status quo will change if there is failure. So everybody has a stake in trying to find the pathway to success.

The final comment I would say, Mr. Ambassador, is after all of these years, after Wye, after Madrid, after Oslo, after Taba, after Camp David, after everything that has gone on, I doubt there’s anyone sitting here who doesn’t actually know pretty much what a final status agreement actually looks like. The question is: How do you get there? That’s political courage, political strength, and that’s what we have to try to summon in the next days. And I’ll just tell you I am hopeful and we will keep working at it. And we have great partners of good faith to work with, and I’m appreciative for that.

AMBASSADOR ISCHINGER: Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause.)

SECRETARY HAGEL: Ambassador, thank you. Let me just add a couple of sentences to what Secretary Kerry said. First, I enthusiastically support what Secretary Kerry is doing. We all know there is risk in everything. There is risk in status quo. The risk is always there in anything in complicated areas of the world. But I believe there is far more risk in letting this slide.

I noted in my comments that – not in the context of this particular issue but overall on security issues, it’s going to continue to take – as the world is very instructive on this point and the history has been particularly instructive – committed leadership and vision to address any big challenge. And as much risk and uncertainty that is in this one, I do strongly applaud and support what John’s doing here. It’s clearly in everyone’s interest.

As to your question, Secretary Gates may have said it a little differently than I did, but essentially, I said the same thing as Secretary Gates did. This is a partnership. Partnerships mean partnership. Everybody has to participate. Everyone has to contribute. Everybody has a role to play. Because not only is something new today with restrained resources in everyone’s budgets. I get that, the realities of what we’re each dealing with in our own respective countries, own respective political dynamics and dimensions – but if your nation’s security is not worth an investment, is not worth leadership in fighting for that investment, then you’ve got the wrong leadership or – again, history’s been instructive on this point – then the future of that country is in some peril. It’s going to take some courage and vision and strong leadership to make this point clear to all of our constituents. And the Europeans must play their role as well. Thank you.

AMBASSADOR ISCHINGER: Thank you very much. Among the many questions that were handed to me, there are two that are almost identical, and I’m going to take these two together.

The first one is from Lord Powell from the UK, and they’re both on the T-TIP. Now, they’re both addressed to both of you as former senators, and I read the first question from Charles Powell: “T-TIP is indeed vital, as Secretary Kerry says. Is it achievable now that the Senate majority leader intends to deny the President fast-track trade promotion authority?”

And the other question is from an American, Charles Kupchan from Georgetown University. Professor Kupchan raises the following question: “T-TIP is ‘the next big thing’ for the Atlantic relationship. As former senators, please discuss the prospects for congressional support, especially in light of Senator Reid’s recent comments.”

This is exactly the same question. I don't know which one of you wants to take that one.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I don’t – look, I respect Harry Reid. I’ve worked with him for a long time, obviously. Our colleagues are here – Lindsey Graham and John McCain and former Senator Joe Lieberman. And I think all of us have learned to interpret a comment on one day in the United States Senate as not necessarily what might be the situation in a matter of months or in some period of time.

Let’s get T-TIP done, put it in its context, then we wage the fight. And I’m not at all convinced that what we’ve heard is going to – I just think that there’s a lot of room here still, so I wouldn’t let it deter us one iota, not one iota. I’ve heard plenty of statements in the Senate on one day that are categorical, and we’ve wound up finding accommodation and a way to find our way forward. So this should not be a deterrent, and I hope nobody will let it stand in the way.

On the merits, this is a major initiative for us, for Europe, for the relationship, for the world. And when you combine it with the TPP, it really has a capacity to achieve what the WTO has not been able to succeed in, and it could have a profound impact on jumpstarting the economies for all of us. It’s worth millions of jobs, and in the end, jobs are a very powerful political persuasion.

SECRETARY HAGEL: This TPP is clearly in the self-interest of both sides of the Atlantic, clearly. And I would suspect that our senators here this morning would have a better sense of this than two former senators, but this is a good example of what I was referring to in my remarks about let’s be smart and let’s be wise and let’s be collaborative and use all of the opportunities and mechanisms that we have to enhance each other – culturally, trade, commerce, exchanges.

We all know that a secure economic base – a dynamic, strong economy – is the anchor of any nation’s freedom. Without the money, without the resources, your options become very limited very quickly. So I would hope that this would get done by the United States Senate. It’s clearly in everyone’s interest. Thank you.

AMBASSADOR ISCHINGER: Thank you very much. I have one concluding question because we have already run out of time for a while. This is from Jo Joffe, whom both of you know. His question is the following, and I read it: “The U.S. keeps going through cycles of withdrawal. Is this another one? And if so, who is going to mind the store?”

A question addressed, again, to both of you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I think – look, I think everything I said in my comments make it clear – and I said it at Davos – we’re not withdrawing from anything, folks, except we’re drawing down our troops in Afghanistan because that’s an agreed-upon approach with ISAF, some 50 nations, and because it is time for the full transition to the Afghan Armed Forces and the Afghan people. So that’s a planned process, but it is also contemplating maintaining a presence for the purpose of continuing to train, equip, and advise the Afghan Armed Forces and to maintain a platform to do counterterrorism. So we’re hardly withdrawing; we’re transitioning.

Even as we do that, right now we have just finished helping to conclude a ceasefire in the Sudan. I spent most of the Christmas break on the phone with President Kiir, former Vice President Riek Machar, with the foreign minister and prime minister of Ethiopia, the president of Uganda. That’s not disengagement. In the Great Lakes, we have a special envoy who has just succeeded in working with Mary Robinson of the UN and with President Kabila and Paul Kagame. And we have succeeded in disarming the M23, creating a structure by which we will now be able to begin doing development and helping those nations to stabilize.

We’re working in the Central African Republic and we’re working to help the French in Mali. We are deeply engaged in Iran negotiations for some two years. We have been working – I began that work as a United States senator to begin to open up that opportunity of a dialogue. We have an interim first-step agreement – not an interim agreement – a first step to lead to final conclusion. We are working with Geneva II, with Russia. That came from diplomacy and cooperation. And we are trying to press for transition. I think we need to do more. John McCain, Senator Graham and I are talking. There are powerful feelings for why we believe Assad needs to feel even more sense of urgency to come to the table. We’re deeply involved there.

We’re deeply involved in the Middle East peace process. We’re involved with the Emirates, with the Saudi Arabians, and others working with respect to Egypt and Egypt’s transition. We’re rebalancing with Asia. We’re working on North Korea. I will be in China in two weeks working on the North Korean issue, working with Korea, Japan, reunification – you name the issue – South China Sea.

I can’t think of a place in the world that we are retreating, not one. And I believe we are engaged in a profoundly proactive and visionary way to try to give life to this partnership in ways that make a difference. We’re working in Libya. We’re working together with our friends from Italy, Great Britain, and France to stabilize and work with President – with Prime Minister Zaydan to build a legitimate security force. We’re deeply engaged in that training and otherwise.

So as I think – I mean, there isn’t a part of the world that I can think of. We’re working on Cyprus quietly. You’re not hearing about it. We’re working on Nagorno-Karabakh, the Caucasus. We have an extraordinary amount of diplomatic reach at this particular moment, including in Latin America. And most recently, I just concluded a summit with the foreign minister of Mexico and the foreign minister of Canada leading up to a summit between the president and the prime minister which will further cement the North American hemispheric interests and our work on the TPP and the T-TIP.

So I think this narrative, which has, frankly, been pushed by some people who have an interest in trying to suggest that the United States is somehow on a different track, I would tell you it is flat wrong and it is belied by every single fact of what we are doing everywhere in the world.

SECRETARY HAGEL: I would just add, Ambassador – (applause) – that we have just heard the Secretary of State of the United States inventory some of the things we’re doing, some of the places we’ve been. I have never seen a full inventory of exactly what we’re doing everywhere, but I would venture to say the United States is more present doing more things in more places today than maybe ever before. How we’re doing it is differently, and it’s what I talked about, what John talked about – capacity-building for our partners, working closer with our partners, being able to do more as we are more creative with these initiatives.

So we’re not going anywhere, and I would just add this as I end my comment. I’ve been Secretary of Defense almost a year. I have had three major trips to the Asia Pacific. I have had countless trips to Europe. I’ve had a number of trips to the Middle East, Afghanistan. He’s the traveler. I’m not. But when you have a Secretary of Defense dealing with the things that we’re dealing with in the Pentagon, with budget restraints and force posture reductions and so on, and still we in DOD are doing the kinds of things we’re doing with our combatant commanders to assist our diplomatic effort, which I talked about, we’re doing a lot of things all over the world. And if that narrative is not getting out there, then maybe that’s our fault, but I hope no one will leave here with any kind of misunderstanding that somehow we’re withdrawing from the world or we’re doing limited work. It’s just the opposite.

SECRETARY KERRY: Mr. Ambassador, can I just add to that important areas? We just concluded a security – a High-Level Strategic Dialogue with Pakistan. And I’ve just concluded, as you know, some two months ago a negotiation with President Karzai for a bilateral security agreement, which we are waiting for a signature for. But we continue our anti-terror initiatives not just there, but in Yemen, in many other parts of the world, and particularly now, we are focusing in on Syria where there are increasing numbers of extremists. And so I think you’ll be hearing and seeing more of this over the course of the next weeks and months. But I think Chuck may be right; I think we need to be more assertive about what we are doing.

AMBASSADOR ISCHINGER: Thank you very much. Thank you also, both of you, for deciding to show up here jointly together. I can’t think of a better demonstration of the commitment of the Obama Administration to keep the transatlantic link, keep the transatlantic relationship strong and alive. So thank you for that strong message here today. Let’s give these two gentlemen a hand. Thank you very much. (Applause.)