DEFENSE SECRETARY CARTER MAKES REMARKS TO TROOPS AT CAMP ARIFJAN, KUWAIT

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

Right:  U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter holds a press conference after meeting with senior commanders attending a regional security conference on Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, Feb. 23, 2015. During the meeting, Carter and other defense leaders discussed strategies for dealing with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL, and other regional threats to partner and ally nations. DoD photo by Glenn Fawcett.  

Defeating ISIL Takes Diplomatic, Military Effort, Carter Says
DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, Feb. 23, 2015 – Dealing a lasting defeat to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant will require “a combined diplomatic and military effort,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter told reporters today at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, after he concluded a conference there with ambassadors and senior U.S. and regional military leaders.

Earlier in the day during a troop talk at Camp Arifjan, Carter said he convened the conference to “begin to make my own assessment of the campaign to counter ISIL.”

Carter thanked the conference participants, noting that “many traveled a significant distance on short notice to be here, and I sincerely appreciate it.”
Wide-ranging Discussion

He added, “We had an incisive, candid, wide-ranging discussion.”

There were no briefings during the conference, said Carter, noting it featured participants’ sharing “of experience and ideas and expertise, and it made me very proud of the American team here in this region working on this problem of ISIL.”

Conference participants reflected on the “seriousness and the complexity of the threat posed by ISIL, especially in an interconnected and networked world,” the secretary said.

“Lasting defeat of this brutal group can and will be accomplished,” he said. “But I learned some things that we'll need to guide our effort to do so.
“First, doing so, that is achieving the lasting defeat of ISIL, will require a combined diplomatic and military effort,” Carter continued. “That was abundantly confirmed by our discussion, and was affirmed or rather affirms the bringing together of this unique grouping of political and military leaders.”

Second, although he’s cognizant “of the great strength of the coalition the United States has assembled and leads in this struggle,” Carter said there’s a need “to leverage further the individual contributions of each.”

Third, he added, while the center of gravity of the anti-ISIL campaign is in Iraq and Syria, “it has ramifications in other regions of the world that need to be taken into account also in our approach.”

Fourth, ISIL's “use of social media will be pressing us to be more creative in combating it in the information dimension as well as the physical dimension,” Carter said.

The secretary also said that discussion among conference participants indicated to him that ISIL “is hardly invincible.”

Anti-ISIL Efforts ‘Having Some Important Impacts’

Coalition anti-ISIL efforts to date “have already been having some important impacts,” Carter said.

He added, “Our global coalition is up to the task, and so is American leadership, which has shone through -- throughout the course of this campaign.”

Carter described today’s conference as “very productive and very valuable, and you should expect to see more consultations like this by me in the future, convening senior leaders from across our government and sometimes experts from outside of it to ensure that our nation's defense is as dynamic as the challenges before it.”

At the conclusion of his remarks, Carter took questions from the press. One reporter asked him about the importance of a political-military balance in the fight against ISIL.

Political-Military Dimensions ‘Closely Interconnected’

Carter acknowledged that the anti-ISIL campaign in Syria does have both political and military dimensions.

“They're closely interconnected,” the secretary said. “We had an opportunity to review today the train and equip effort that is beginning in Syria, but I need to remind you and very much in the spirit of your question that -- and as the discussion certainly indicated there, our campaign in Syria, like our campaign in Iraq, has an important political dimension to it. And we discussed that also: they're both important, they're both essential, both the political and the military dimension.”

Another reporter asked Carter if there would be any fundamental changes to the anti-ISIL strategy.

The secretary replied that the coalition recognizes the need to employ a combined political and military effort against ISIL.

“I think that's crucial, and I think that's understood by all, and it's reflected in what we're trying to do,” Carter explained. “I think that we have clearly in focus the idea that this can't be a purely American thing, that it truly is a coalition effort and needs to be a coalition effort to succeed. I think it was clear to us that we can't neatly partition it geographically, that it has global evocations.”

Conference participants’ discussions “reinforced the idea of the need to stitch all of the different aspects of this together, and that the leaders that I met with today are to a remarkable degree doing that,” Carter said.

‘Working Closely Together’

He added, “And this bringing them together was a further effort to work across geographies and work across functions to make sure that we are in fact all working closely together. And to a large extent, these folks have been doing that already. But I think today's meeting reinforced that and gave them yet [another] opportunity to do that, and me to do that with them.”

Carter was also asked about his confidence level of building an anti-ISIL force. The secretary responded that providing good military training to people from other lands is a core skill of the U.S. military.

“It's become a skill of many of our coalition partners, knowing how to train others, how to work with and through others, how to enable and use U.S. capabilities to enable the capabilities of others and to make sure that –… we conduct all these activities in a way that's consistent with American values,” the secretary said. “We're good at all that. We've been doing that in many contexts for quite awhile.”

Providing training is “one of the key lessons that we learned in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Carter said. “It's one of the key skills we honed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I don't think there's any military that does it better.”

SECRETARY KERRY ANNOUNCES THAT SENATOR GARY HART TO PLAY ROLE AT STATE DEPARTMENT

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Senator Gary Hart To Play Diplomatic Role for State Department

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

October 21, 2014

I have asked Senator Gary Hart, one of our country's most respected and accomplished senior statesmen, creative and strategic thinkers, and my longtime friend who has been working with the State Department for close to two years, to also play a direct, on-the-ground diplomatic role.

Whether it's through his 12 years in the Senate, or his work on the U.S. Commission on National Security in the 21st Century, Gary is known as a problem-solver, a brilliant analyst, and someone capable of thinking at once tactically, strategically, and practically. He's been engaged already in the intellectual side of our government's foreign policy during this Administration, whether as chairman of the State Department's International Security Advisory Board, or as chairman of the Threat Reduction Advisory Council at the Department of Defense. Now we're fortunate that he's agreed to devote some additional time to engage in the tough and patient work of diplomacy as my Personal Representative, including on issues related to Northern Ireland. He does so with my confidence and trust.

Senator Hart has spent many weeks in Ireland and Northern Ireland over the past 30 years. He has listened and spoken to the people of Northern Ireland, and he knows many of the leaders. I’ve asked Senator Hart to support the parties in Northern Ireland as they enter a new round of talks to achieve a lasting peace. We welcome these new talks, supported by the United Kingdom and Ireland. I am confident Senator Hart will help the parties strengthen the institutions and economy of Northern Ireland, as well as reinvigorate efforts to promote a shared society. Our Consul General in Belfast Greg Burton will serve as Senator Hart’s deputy for his Northern Ireland work. Senator Hart expects to visit Belfast before the end of the month.

SECRETARY KERRY STATEMENT ON EXTENSION OF IRAN NUCLEAR TALKS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Extension of Iran Nuclear Talks

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

July 18, 2014

---

As President Obama and our entire administration has made clear, we are committed to testing whether we can address one of the world’s most pressing priorities – ensuring that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon – through the diplomatic negotiations in which we and our international partners are currently engaged.

This effort remains as intense as it is important, and we have come a long way in a short period of time. Less than a year ago, President Obama and Iranian President Rouhani spoke for the first time to try to usher in a new diplomatic moment, and I held the first bilateral meeting between a Secretary of State and an Iranian Foreign Minister in more than three decades.
Since that time, we’ve been intensely engaged in a constant and comprehensive effort – the best chance we’ve ever had to resolve this issue peacefully. This effort has been made possible by the Joint Plan of Action, which stopped the progress of Iran’s nuclear program – and rolled parts of it back – for the first time in a decade.

The JPOA was a six-month understanding that went into effect on January 20, and it has been a clear success. Since its implementation, Iran has complied with its obligations to neutralize its stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium; cap its stockpile of 5 percent enriched uranium; not install advanced centrifuges; not install or test new components at its Arak reactor; and submit to far more frequent inspections of its facilities. The International Atomic Energy Agency has regularly verified that Iran has lived up to these commitments. Meanwhile, we and our P5+1 and EU partners have provided limited sanctions relief, as agreed to in the Joint Plan of Action, while vigorously enforcing the broader sanctions regime that remains in place.

As I said on Monday in Vienna, it is clear to me that we have made tangible progress in our comprehensive negotiations, but there are very real gaps in some areas. Today, we have a draft text that covers the main issues, but there are still a number of brackets and blank spaces in that text.

In terms of progress, we have been working together to find a long-term solution that would effectively close off the plutonium path to a bomb through the reactor at Arak. We have been working on a different purpose for Fordow that would ensure it cannot be used to build a nuclear weapon. We have been working to guarantee Iran’s stockpile of low enriched uranium can’t be turned into higher enriched uranium suitable for a bomb. And we have agreed that any long-term, comprehensive solution will involve enhanced monitoring and verification measures that go well beyond the status quo – measures that are absolutely critical in creating the confidence we need that Iran will not be able to build a weapon in secret. There are other areas where we’ve made progress; these are just some of the most important. Of course, on all these issues there is still work to do and differences to resolve, but we have made real progress.
Still, there are very real gaps on issues such as enrichment capacity at the Natanz enrichment facility. This issue is an absolutely critical component of any potential comprehensive agreement. We have much more work to do in this area, and in others as well.
Diplomacy takes time, and persistence is needed to determine whether we can achieve our objectives peacefully. To turn our back prematurely on diplomatic efforts when significant progress has been made would deny ourselves the ability to achieve our objectives peacefully, and to maintain the international unity that we have built. While we’ve made clear that no deal is better than a bad deal, the very real prospect of reaching a good agreement that achieves our objectives necessitates that we seek more time.

As a result, we have decided – along with the EU, our P5+1 partners, and Iran – to extend the Joint Plan of Action until November 24, exactly one year since we finalized the first step agreement in Geneva. This will give us a short amount of additional time to continue working to conclude a comprehensive agreement, which we believe is warranted by the progress we’ve made and the path forward we can envision.

Under this short extension, all parties have committed to upholding their obligations in the Joint Plan of Action. For the next four months, we will continue to halt the progress of Iran’s nuclear program in key areas. In addition, Iran has committed to take further nuclear-related steps in the next four months that are consistent with the types of steps that they committed to in the JPOA. These include a continued cap on the amount of 5 percent enriched uranium hexafluoride and a commitment to convert any material over that amount into oxide.

In the JPOA, Iran diluted half of its 20 percent enriched uranium hexafluoride and converted the rest to oxide. In this extension, Iran has committed to go one step further and make all of this 20 percent into fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor. Twenty-five kilograms of this material will be converted into fuel by the end of the extension. Once the 20 percent material is in fuel form, it will be very difficult for Iran to use this material for a weapon in a breakout scenario. Attempting to do so would be readily detected by the IAEA and would be an unambiguous sign of an intent to produce a weapon.

In return, we will continue to suspend the sanctions we agreed to under the JPOA and will allow Iran access to $2.8 billion dollars of its restricted assets, the four-month prorated amount of the original JPOA commitment. Let me be clear: Iran will not get any more money during these four months than it did during the last six months, and the vast majority of its frozen oil revenues will remain inaccessible. And, just as we have over the last six months, we will continue to vigorously enforce the sanctions that remain in place.

Ultimately, our goal in pursuing this brief extension is to capitalize on the progress we’ve already made, while giving us the best chance of success at the end of this process. Critically, Iran’s nuclear program will remain halted during the next four months. This is in our interest, and in the interest of our allies. And as we pursue this path, we will continue to consult with those allies and with the Congress about this critical issue.

We do so mindful not just of where we hope to arrive, but of how far we have come. One year ago, few would have predicted that Iran would have kept all its commitments under a first step nuclear agreement, and that we would be actively negotiating a long-term comprehensive agreement. Now we have four additional months to determine the next miles of this difficult diplomatic journey. Let’s all commit to seize this moment, and to use the additional time to make the fundamental choices necessary to conclude a comprehensive agreement that makes the entire world a safer place.

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS FOR USA SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING FESTIVAL

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Remarks for USA Science and Engineering Festival

Remarks

John Kerry
Secretary of State

Washington, DC

April 25, 2014

---

SECRETARY KERRY: Hi, everybody. I wish I could be there with you for the USA Science and Engineering Festival. This is the first year that the State Department is participating, and let me tell you from our point of view: We’re just getting started. 

Science and technology are obviously central to America’s diplomacy. And our diplomacy is central to advancing American science and technology. That’s why President Obama and I are absolutely committed to making sure that our risk-takers and innovators can dream big and reach higher than ever before. 

This cause is actually deeply personal for me. I’ll never forget in the summer of 2006, speaking on the Senate floor with an intern from my office. She was a college student from Massachusetts named Beth Kolbe. bad car accident had left Beth paralyzed from the chest down when she was just 14 years old. Beth came to Washington in order to fight for the scientific research that held untold promise for her, and for tens of millions of Americans. And you know what she told me? She said that wanted to be "a face that Senators can see so that they can see what they’re voting for."　 

I really think of Beth every time I think about how we advance science and innovation. Because more and more, the most important progress in our world is driven by all of you: young people with the courage to think big and change things for the better; the willingness to actually go out and try something new even if it meant failure along the way. 

Each and every day, I see how we use science and technology to advance our diplomacy. I see it on the environment, where we use ocean mapping technology to chart our extended continental shelf. And I see it on international security, where we use the latest advances in nuclear physics, chemistry, biology, and emerging technologies to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction. And I see it on diplomatic security, where we use cutting-edge explosive detectors and armored vehicles to protect our facilities overseas. 

In fact, the way I’m even talking to you today wouldn’t be possible without our scientists, engineers, and technicians pushing the boundaries of what is possible. 

More than ever, we need to use our diplomacy to unleash innovation and ingenuity. And we’re doing exactly that. Just last month, we hosted a "CoderDojo at State" event to teach 21st century coding skills to kids, and we’ve helped to bring this volunteer-led movement to kids in Africa. We’re empowering women and girls to become scientists and engineers through "TechGirls," which prepares 15 to 17 year olds from the Middle East and North Africa for careers in STEM. And we’ve launched the State Department’s first "STEM at State" web page to showcase how science, technology, and innovation are central to our global mission. 

President Obama and I are committed to empowering the next generation of risk-takers and innovators in our diplomacy. By using your imagination in the classroom, all of you are making a difference in boardrooms and treaty rooms across the nation and around the world. That is our goal, and that’s what diplomacy is all about. 

So I tell you, I’ll never forget standing next to Beth that day on the Senate floor, fighting for greater investments in science and technology. Everywhere there is an opportunity to make a difference, there are students like you ready to be the Beth Kolbes of your moment – not by having to endure a terrible accident, but simply because you are able to inspire and able to push the limits. This is your moment. So let’s get to work and make these great things happen.

Thank you.

U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL'S REMARKS ON POLICY AND DIPLOMACY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

U.S. Foreign Policy and Diplomacy

Remarks

Tom Kelly

Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies

Fort DeRussy, Waikiki

April 17, 2014

---

Aloha! I work in the Foreign Ministry of the United States, the U.S. State Department. I’ve been a diplomat my entire life, and so I’m usually dressed a lot more formally than I am today. If it were up to me, I’d always dress like this. For the past few years, I’ve overseen the State Department’s Bureau of Political Military Affairs. This bureau is the connective tissue between the Department of State and the Department of Defense. We work closely with the Department of Defense to make sure that the work that we do is complimentary and consistent with U.S. foreign policy goals.

I know that many of you are leaders in your own nations on issues affecting defense, security, and foreign policy. So I thought that I would spend some time this morning giving you an overview of how, in our own government, we have tried to bring two distinct parts of our government – diplomats and soldiers – together so that we better serve the foreign policy and security interests of the United States. As someone who grew up on the shores of the Pacific Ocean, I’d also like to put the recent U.S. “rebalance to Asia” in proper context, and discuss with you our current security priorities in the Asia-Pacific region.

Now I realize that it may strike some of you as odd that you have a diplomat rather than a soldier standing before you today to talk about U.S. security policy. But from the way we handle national security policy in the United States, it actually makes sense. For us, defense and foreign policy are two sides of the same coin. When the United States enters a military partnership with a foreign country, our bilateral relationship becomes more intimate and enduring. And we diplomats can help our military colleagues to handle the many challenges that confront them in foreign theaters of operation. As all of you know, it’s a complicated world out there.

At the forefront of the United States’ foreign policy is the notion that America helps itself by helping others. At his confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State John Kerry said that, “Global leadership is a strategic imperative for America, not a favor we do for other countries. It amplifies our voice and extends our reach….and it really matters to the daily lives of Americans.”

And in a world dominated by sovereign nation states, the United States can’t lead without looking at the question of security, which is the fundamental preoccupation of any nation. Security cooperation plays a central role in American foreign policy. As we in the US Government take on the challenges that this world presents, we look first and foremost to building the right kind of security partnerships to meet them.

The challenges we face today typically can’t be solved by just our military, or our economic engagement, and – while it pains me to say this as a State Department official – we can’t resolve everything just with our diplomatic efforts, either. No, addressing today’s challenges demands we utilize all of these elements of national power. Addressing the world’s toughest problems really does take a whole-of-government effort. So at our President’s behest, the Secretaries of State and Defense are working harder than ever before to improve our cooperation and coordination with the Defense Department and other agencies.
Building security partnerships starts at home. It requires our diplomacy and defense to be on the same page and it requires the Departments of State and Defense to coordinate and work more closely than ever before. And today I can tell you that the current level of cooperation between State and Defense is truly unprecedented. We are seeing more interaction, more coordinated engagements, more personnel exchanges than ever before.

One way we work with the Department of Defense is through personnel exchanges. We have more than 100 Foreign Service Officers working as Political Advisors, or Polads, in various areas within the Department of Defense. They work at, among other places, the Pentagon, Europe and, of course, in PACOM, the Pacific Command. In return, the Department of Defense has a large number of military personnel serving in various capacities at the Department of State. The guy who sits next to me at the State Department is a two-star Navy Admiral. The reason we trade personnel like this is that we understand the need to better understand each other so that we can work together more effectively, now and in the future. To achieve our objectives in today’s globalized world, we want diplomats to be able to think like soldiers, and soldiers to be able to think like diplomats.

When the United States – through our security cooperation efforts – enhances the military capabilities of our allies and partners, we inherently strengthen their ability to handle their own security. All countries benefit from a global environment that is stable and prosperous, and many could do more to take an active role in supporting it.

Building the capacity of our partners and allies reflects more than strategic reality, though. We are also acutely aware that because of the budgetary pressures that our government faces, the U.S. Government is looking for cost-effective ways to achieve its strategic objectives at home and abroad. In short, building partner capacity is a prudent investment which deepens our strategic ties and helps defend our interests in an era of diminishing resources.

One vital tool that I would like to talk a bit more about is our ability to deliver security assistance to allies and partners. These programs can be a critical tool to support states trying to build their security capacity. Security is often the foundation for economic growth, democratic governance, and the preservation of human rights. Therefore, by helping our partners to take on greater security responsibilities, our assistance helps empowers others to advance peace and stability, while at the same time reducing the likelihood of putting our military forces in harm’s way.

To our great fortune and benefit, countries want to partner with the United States. One indication of that is the tremendous growth of U.S. defense trade in recent years. In 2013, we saw $27.80 billion in for foreign military sales by American defense companies. A significant number of these potential sales in the region were with allies such as South Korea, Australia and Japan, but a large proportion was also with partners such as India. These sales strengthen our alliances and partnerships in the region—a top goal of the “rebalance” to the Asia-Pacific as well as the Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review and our Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs’ Joint Regional Strategy—but also bolster the U.S. economy.
To put that into perspective, 2012 was our largest year in history of foreign military sales to date by American defense companies, amounting to nearly $70 billion in calendar year 2012. The year before that, in 2011 we saw $32.1 billion in Foreign Military Sales, which broke previous record the year before, at $31.6 billion. We also completed the UK and Australia defense trade treaties, which will help our defense industry and make our partnerships with these two nations even closer. In 2013, we also processed more than 78,000 licenses for direct commercial sales with an average processing time of 21 days.

Washington Priorities

Building partnerships in the Asia-Pacific region takes up a lot of time and attention at the top of our government in Washington. For many of us, thinking about Asia and the Pacific is nothing new. The Pacific Ocean has always been a part of my life. For those of you who know the United States, I grew up in Manhattan Beach, a beach town in Southern California that is right next to Los Angeles. And our President was born right here on this island. He still comes back to Hawaii with his family every year. For people like us, and many millions of other Americans, the Pacific isn’t just a strategically important location or a good place to make money. It’s our home.

So it’s no surprise that the Asia-Pacific has been a priority for President Obama since he took office in 2009. The administration based this vision on America's stake in a prosperous and stable region. In this, President Obama’s second term, we continue to build on those commitments to modernize our alliances, strengthen regional institutions and respect for rule of law, and engage more effectively with emerging powers such as China. Our policy is not merely words: we are dedicating more diplomatic, public diplomacy and assistance resources to the region. And we are diversifying to put more of a focus on economic development, on energy, people-to-people exchanges, and education.

The Rebalance Towards Asia: Cooperative Opportunities

The Asia-Pacific is home to many of the world’s most heavily traveled trade and energy routes. $555 billion in U.S. exports to the region last year supported 2.8 million jobs in America. The security and prosperity of the United States are inextricably linked to the peaceful development of the Asia-Pacific. Peaceful development means economic partnership opportunities that can tie our societies closer together.

When I look at the history of the Asia-Pacific over the past sixty years, I see a period of extraordinary prosperity. Hundreds of millions of people have lifted themselves out of poverty, providing an example to the rest of the world. In just a few generations, the Asia-Pacific has fostered innovative economies that today are fueling global growth.

At the Asia Pacific Economic Conference in October, Secretary Kerry described how U.S. economic engagement is good for both the region and good for the United States. Within APEC and as part of our ongoing rebalance toward Asia, we worked to strengthen regional economic integration; promote energy cooperation, private sector investments, and education exchange; reduce barriers to trade and investment; improve connectivity; and support sustainable growth.

On the margins of APEC, Secretary Kerry joined Trans Pacific Partnership Leaders in announcing that the negotiations are on track to complete the historic agreement this year. With its high ambition and pioneering standards for new trade disciplines, the TPP will be a model for future trade agreements and a promising pathway to our APEC goal of building a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific.

The Secretary also spoke at the Global Entrepreneurship Summit in Kuala Lumpur, also in October, to more than 3,000 entrepreneurs, investors, academics, startup organizers, business people, and government officials from over 100 countries.

In short, the Asia-Pacific is a by-word for opportunity for investment and win-win partnerships.
But reaching the goal of universal prosperity also depends on security – in this case, maritime security. We know that you don’t get trade within Asia, and with Asia and the Americas, without open sea lanes. The way we see it, twenty-first century capitalism cannot function unless the sea lanes throughout Asia-Pacific remain secure. A Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific includes freedom of navigation.

In Asia as in the rest of the world, the key to effective security is effective security partnerships. We’re working to modernize our alliances and ensure that we can cooperate seamlessly with partners to respond to crises and contingencies. The potential problems are not limited to those caused by people. Mother Nature sometimes reminds us that she is in charge. Super Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines is a case in point. The U.S. played an important role in supporting the recovery. That crisis demonstrated that a credible U.S. security presence is very important. And that security presence in itself is essential for economic progress to occur.
The most recent example, I think, of our interest in the security of Asia is our joining the Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia. This is better known as ReCAAP. We recently signed the accession agreement. I understand that the United States received a warm welcome at the meeting of the ReCAAP Information Sharing Center at the beginning of March. We look forward to a long and close relationship. ReCAAP, of course, is not the only multilateral program in which we participate. We also take part in the ASEAN Regional Forum or the East Asia Summit, Pacific Islands Forum, and APEC, as well as in the bilateral engagements on the margins of those multilateral meetings. When you look at U.S. participation in those meetings, you will see again and again evidence of how much the Obama Administration is committed to the Asia-Pacific as a strategic component of our foreign policy and economic agenda.

This island is also the home port of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The United States Navy obviously has a huge role to play in the safety of the Asia-Pacific’s sea lanes. As the U.S. rebalances toward Asia, we will increase the percentage of our surface ships in the Pacific theater from about 50 to over 60. But it’s not just a quantitative shift; it’s also a qualitative one. The United States is moving its most technologically advanced platforms to the Pacific. For example, all the ships of the Zumwalt Guided Missile Destroyer Class will come to the Pacific. The first P-8s—an incredible improvement in Maritime Patrol Aircraft capabilities—will come to the Pacific first. Our Navy’s newest surface combatant, the Littoral Combat Ship, has already completed one deployment to the South China Sea. We’ll see another rotational deployment this summer. When we do field the Joint Strike Fighter, it will go first to the Pacific theater.

The challenges in the maritime domain remain complex and complicated. Our Chief of Naval Operations has spoken at length about partnerships and our Navy’s ability to contribute to the global challenge of maintaining freedom of navigation and overflight. These partnerships will enable all navies to take advantage of each other’s strengths and build a maritime community that enables all of us to sail the seas without intimidation or interference. Working together in partnerships, whether bilaterally or multilaterally, allows us to also respond more quickly to humanitarian and disaster assistance when needed.

The Rebalance as Continuity of U.S. Policy

The story of the rebalance is a story of continuity. The United States has been and will continue to be a Pacific Power. Our strategic rebalance to the Asia-Pacific recognizes the important role the region will play in the 21^st century and the fact that the region is critically important to U.S. security and economics. As a marker of how important we see continuing our support of Asia-Pacific, the Obama administration has begun a process which will increase foreign assistance to the Asia-Pacific region by seven percent.

You may have noticed that in the rebalance much of our effort seems to be aimed at South and Southeast Asia. One of the reasons for that is that we have always had a very strong presence, including the stationing of several thousand American soldiers and sailors, in Northeast Asian countries like the Republic of Korea and Japan. We seek to deepen our engagement with new partners and multilateral institutions in Southeast Asia, to find opportunities to work together to advance our shared interests.

And quickly, I want to address the issue of China. I know that there are some in Beijing who think our rebalance to the Asia-Pacific is part of a broader American effort to contain China. Let me be clear: that is not the case. On the contrary, the United States seeks to continue building a cooperative partnership with China. A positive and cooperative relationship with China is a key element of our rebalance strategy. We understand that China will play an important role in critical global challenges like fighting climate change, wildlife trafficking, and countering proliferation. We welcome that role: those problems won’t get fixed without China’s help. And we recognize that our two economies are deeply intertwined. We consistently seek to engage with China on all levels on a wide range of issues. We want to do more with China in many areas, including economic relations. National Security Advisor Susan Rice recently said that the United States welcomes China and any other nation interested in joining and sharing the benefits of the Trans-Pacific Partnership so long as they can commit to the high standards of the agreement.

The United States is committed to building healthy, stable, reliable, and continuous military-to-military relations with China. We maintain a robust schedule of military-to-military exchanges and dialogues in pursuit of that goal and to encourage China to exhibit greater transparency with respect to its military capabilities and intentions. In addition, U.S. military, diplomatic, and defense officials participate in a range of combined civilian-military dialogues with the Chinese in which we work to build mutual trust and understanding. I’ve participated personally in some of them, both in Washington and Beijing.

Farther Into Asia

South Asia, where I’ll travel in a few days, also merits some comment. I’ve travelled several times over the past few years to India. I think it’s fair to say that there is growing interest in both Washington and New Delhi in greater security cooperation. There is a significant degree of coincidence of strategic interests. During the Obama Administration, the United States carried out our first political-military dialogue with India in six years. And it was significant because we were able to help our Indian counterparts work through the challenges of our interagency process on national security issues. Indian officials told us that the dialogue is especially helpful in helping them to coordinate the same issues within their own government, as well as giving them a better idea of how to deal with our own large and admittedly complicated bureaucracy. The Indian military is also increasingly interested in buying equipment from the United States. Our foreign military sales to India have grown from virtually zero in 2008 to more than $9 billion. In comparison, we had only $363 million in military sales with India from 2002-2006.
I’m not going to India on this trip, but I will travel to Bangladesh, another important South Asian partner. I’ll visit the port city of Chittagong, where the Bangladeshi Navy will show me the Somudra Joy, formerly the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Jarvis, which enables the Bangladeshi Navy to promote maritime security. This transfer has achieved real results by contributing to a seventy percent reduction in piracy in the Bay of Bengal.

My conviction and my experience is that our ongoing rebalance strategy that dates back to 2009 is broad, is deep, and encompasses not just regional security, but also economic prosperity, and people-to-people ties. This is the subject of a very intense ongoing interagency collaboration within the U.S. Government, precisely because it is a strategic priority of the President, of the Administration, and of the nation.

This brings me back to the beginning of my speech, and what motivates U.S. leaders to invest significant resources to support U.S. leadership in the Asia-Pacific and around the globe. Citizens of this country are learning what you already know – that world events are closer to home than we may think, and can change rapidly. That means we need to be on our toes, adapting and evolving to enhance and sustain U.S. global leadership. This can be challenging, but we really need to remember that in this changing world it has been international partnerships that have brought about stability and prosperity, not only to the United States, but across the world.

By tackling the world’s toughest problems together, we can bring new perspectives and expanded capabilities to bear. And we can build partnerships to be proud of – within government, with civil society, and with nations around the world.

Thank you again for your personal contributions to that effort. And with that, I will be happy to take your questions.

U.S. MILITARY SAYS IT IS READY TO BACK UP DIPLOMACY WITH SYRIA

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Military Assets Ready to Back Up Diplomatic Push With Syria
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2013 - U.S. military assets remain ready to launch attacks if the diplomatic efforts to secure and dismantle the Syrian regime's chemical arms should fail, senior defense officials said here today.

In a Pentagon news conference, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the military role today is limited.

"The current role of the military is to provide some planning assistance to the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons ... who has the lead, and as well as to maintain the credible threat of force, should the diplomatic track fail," Dempsey said.

The chairman said he believes forces loyal to Syrian president Bashar Assad have maintained control of the regime's chemical weapons. The environment inside Syria is "very challenging," he added.

Still, Dempsey said, he believes it is possible for the international community to work in the country.

"So long as [Syrian leaders] agree to the framework, which causes them to be responsible for the security, the movement, the protection of the investigators or the inspectors, then I think that ... it is feasible," Dempsey said. "But we've got to make sure we keep our eye on all of those things."

The chairman acknowledged that disposing of chemical weapons is a complicated task.

"The framework calls for it to be controlled, destroyed or moved," he said. "In some combination, it is feasible, but those details will have to be worked by the OPCW."

Overall, the conflict in Syria ebbs and flows, the chairman said, and rebel groups in the country are concerned that the focus on chemical weapons will detract from the willingness of partners to support them.

"But ... in terms of direct threats to U.S. interests, I think ... that the elimination of the Assad regime's chemical capability is right at the top of our national interests," Dempsey added. "If this process bears fruit and achieves its stated purpose, we will be in a better position."

REMARKS BEFORE THE RUSSIA 2+2 MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks Before the Russia 2+2 Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu
Benjamin Franklin Room
Washington, DC
August 9, 2013

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, good morning, everybody, and welcome. We are delighted to welcome Ministers Lavrov and Shoygu, two Sergeys. We’re happy to have them here today, and I particularly want to welcome my old friend Chuck Hagel from the Defense Department.

The relationship between the United States and Russia is, needless to say, a very important relationship, and it is marked by both shared interests and at times colliding and conflicting interests. Now, I think we’re all very clear-eyed about that. Sergey Lavrov and I are old hockey players and we both know that diplomacy, like hockey, can sometimes result in the occasional collision. So we’re candid, very candid, about the areas in which we agree, but also the areas in which we disagree.

It’s no secret that we have experienced some challenging moments, and obviously not just over the Snowden case. We will discuss these differences today for certain. But this meeting remains important above and beyond the collisions and the moments of disagreement. It is important for us to find ways to make progress on missile defense, on other strategic issues, including Afghanistan, Iran, on North Korea, and Syria. And one thing I would emphasize is that on Syria, while Sergey and I do not always agree completely on responsibility for the bloodshed or on some of the ways forward, both of us and our countries agree that to avoid institutional collapse and descent into chaos, the ultimate answer is a negotiated political solution. And Geneva 2 conference is a step toward that solution. And I look forward to a very honest and robust discussion on all of these issues.

So we welcome the delegation from Russia here today, and we look forward to a very productive, hopefully, and full conversation.

Sergey.

FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: (Via interpreter) Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, thank you for the warm hospitality extended to myself and Sergey Shoygu, Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation. We attach great importance to cooperation in this format, +2. We haven’t met in a while and it was the right idea of the two presidents, Obama and Putin, when they met June 17th on the sidelines of the G-8 summit in Lough Erne when they decided to resume the format. And thus we meet here today in Washington.

We were preparing a number of documents, a package of documents for approval at the meeting between the two presidents. I am referring to the statement on the comprehensive development of our cooperation in the context of the 80th anniversary of resumption of diplomatic relationship between our two countries we are celebrating this year. I’m also referring to the statement aimed at giving momentum to the development of trade and economic cooperation between our two countries. By design, presidents were supposed to adopt the statement in the presence of captains of business of the two countries, because we want economy to be way more dominant in our relations.

We also prepared number of statements on enhancing cooperation in combating drug threat, cooperation on – further cooperation – agreement on further cooperation of nuclear threat reduction centers, cooperation agreement on research and nuclear sector. So I want to highlight that we have laid very solid foundation for our future work, and once we start building on the foundation, once these – the instruments are approved, we will be able to enhance cooperation in different sectors, and significantly.

Today, naturally, we will discuss international issues, global security. In particular, John mentioned missile defense. We have been discussing this issue for a long time. First, we start – since we started discussions of the New START Treaty, we always spoke about missile defense, and we note with satisfaction that in his April letter to President Putin, President Obama recognized the need to take into account all factors that impact strategic stability when talking about reductions. In Lough Erne, our two presidents discussed steps that were proposed by our U.S. partners to increase transparency in the sector. Ministers of Defense of the two countries were given instructions in that respect, and at least we in Russia were prepared to table our proposals to the two presidents, and we will do so once their summit meeting takes place.

As regards crisis settlement, Syria indeed is on top of our agenda. Our goal is the same. We need to start political process. We need to stage Geneva 2 conference. And in my view, the most important task for the Geneva 2 would be honor the commitment of all G-8 leaders made in Lough Erne when they called upon both government and opposition to join efforts to fight terrorists and force them away from Syria. And I’m convinced that in the current day reality, especially in light of the fact and assessments we’ve been hearing lately, this is indeed our top priority.

Of course, Afghanistan is also important, Iranian nuclear program is, Korean peninsula nuclear issue, and many other topics will be discussed today. We are united by shared responsibility. We must prevent destabilization of the global situation. We must prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. We need to ensure peaceful settlements of all crises by global community and avoid attempts to impose forced solutions irrespective of the situation. We’ve seen examples in the past, and we’ve seen that they are not working. Just like U.S., we want to see the situation get back to normal.

In Egypt, we want to see the national reconciliation process begin. We appreciate greatly efforts made by our U.S. colleagues and John Kerry personally. Especially, I’m referring to his efforts aimed at resumption of Israeli-Palestinian dialogue.

So the agenda is very intense. Of course, we have disagreements. We’ll continue discussing matters on which we disagree calmly and candidly. I recall when I first met John in his capacity, his present-day capacity, and we were having this initial conversation, if I may put it that way, he told me that our countries have special responsibility, so we need to work as grown-ups. And this is what we do. And we hope that this will be reciprocal. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Sergey, thank you very much. Appreciate that. And Secretary Hagel.

SECRETARY HAGEL: Secretary Kerry, thank you. And you and your colleagues here at the State Department, thank you for hosting today’s meeting. To our guests from the Russian Federation, welcome. We are very grateful for this opportunity to spend some time with Minister Lavrov and Minister Shoygu and your colleagues who have accompanied you to address some of the most pressing and important issues facing our countries, facing the world. Our interests, almost in every case noted, and more, are mutual interests. The world is complicated; it is combustible. To find solutions at a critical time in the world are not easy. But just as Minister Lavrov and Secretary Kerry have noted, to address these clearly, directly with each other, honestly, and to find the common denominators where we can build high ground to move forward to help resolve these great issues of our time.

We live in a very defining time in the world, and just as Minister Lavrov noted in his first conversation with Secretary Kerry, our countries have some responsibility to each other, obviously, but to the world in many respects. We are leading nations, and we must work with alliances and others as to how we find these solutions to these great challenges.

Some of the issues that we will deal with today have been noted; there are others. I particularly appreciated the opportunity to spend an hour with Minister Shoygu this morning and his colleagues as we addressed some of the more specific issues related to our defense ministries and our military-to-military cooperation. That meeting was a very positive meeting, which set the standard, I hope, for our meeting today.

I very much look forward to this meeting, and again thank Ministers Lavrov and Shoygu and their delegation for being here, and to you, Secretary Kerry, for hosting us.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much, Secretary Hagel.

Mr. Minister Shoygu.

DEFENSE MINISTER SHOYGU: (Via interpreter) Thank you, Your Excellency. Secretaries, indeed, today I had an hour-long meeting with my colleague, Secretary Hagel. We spoke about military-to-military cooperation. We spoke about military-political and military-technical cooperation as well.

I would like to thank colleagues for the wonderful arrangement of the meeting here in Washington and once again highlight that the 2+2 format is, in our view, very efficient and important.

Naturally, we couldn’t but discuss issues that are of concern to our Washington colleagues today and to us – Afghanistan, in the first place, and the forthcoming 2014 events. Of course, we spoke about Syria. We also discussed bilateral cooperation, ways to intensify our contacts. We agreed to step up cooperation between deputy ministers of the two countries. And what is no less important, we spoke about how we could give incentive to practical cooperation, such as exercise, military exercise, both naval or special forces exercise.

We also spoke about the need for more transparency. I would like to make sure that major events, such as exercise and others hosted by the Ministry of Defense in the Russian Federation, would like to invite U.S. colleagues and will do that timely. And of course we would like to invite not just military attaches, but also delegations from the U.S. capital, from Washington, to attend major events.

We started talking about missile defense, but missile defense should probably be discussed in this expanded format, the way we have gathered today. And I would like to again thank U.S. colleagues for organizing the meeting, and I hope it’s going to be as constructive as my meeting with Secretary Hagel was. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. Again, we emphasize the importance of this conversation and in order to do it properly, we regrettably need to ask our friends in the press if they would now leave us so that we can have an opportunity to talk. Thank you very, very much. Appreciate it.

U.S. ADM. LOCKLEAR III WANTS "COLLABORATION, NOT CONFRONTATION"

Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, briefs the media on Asia security issues at the Pentagon, Dec. 6, 2012. DOD photo by Glenn Fawcett

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Pacific Command Seeks Collaboration, not Confrontation
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Dec. 6, 2012 - The United States would like China to be a constructive influence on the world stage, and the U.S. Pacific Command is stressing cooperation and collaboration, not confrontation, in the region, Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III said here today.

The admiral, the commander of U.S. Pacific Command, said the command is moving forward on the U.S. move to rebalance forces to the Pacific.

"The rebalance draws on the strengths of the entire U.S. government, including policy, diplomacy, trade and, of course, security," Locklear said during a Pentagon news conference.

The rebalance is not aimed at any one nation or region, the admiral said. The strategy underscores that the United States is and will remain a Pacific power.

Locklear stressed that rebalancing is not so much about equipment or troops -- although they play a part -- but about relationships. Rebalancing to the Pacific came from the defense strategic guidance released in January. Pacom's mission is to strengthen relationships in the region, adjust U.S. military posture and presence, and employ new concepts, capabilities and capacities.

This will "ensure that we continue to effectively and efficiently contribute to the stability and security of the Asia-Pacific as we protect U.S. national interest," the admiral said. "The keys to success will be innovative access agreements, greatly increased exercises, rotational presence increases and efficient force posture initiatives that will maximize the dollars that we are given to spend."

China is increasingly asserting itself in the region, but the admiral said he has good relations with Chinese leaders. China has undergone a power transfer and the Peoples' Liberation Army has new commanders.

There are territorial disputes between China and other nations in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Locklear reiterated the U.S. position on these disputes. He said America does not take sides but does want to see issues resolved peacefully.

"We call on all the parties there, including the Chinese, to ensure that, as they approach these problems, that they do so in a way that avoids conflict, that avoids miscalculation, that uses the vehicles available today through diplomacy and through those legal forums that allow them to get to reasonable solutions on these without resorting to coercion or conflict," the admiral said.

In addition to asserting what it believes is its role in the region, China has also embarked on an effort to modernize its military. The latest indicator was the landing of a naval variant of the J-15 jet on Beijing's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning.

"If I were China and I was in the economic position that China is in and I was in a position of where I have to look after my global security interests, I would consider building an aircraft carrier, and I might consider building several aircraft carriers," Locklear said.

It's not so much having such a military capability, but what China does with it that concerns the admiral.

Aircraft carriers have a role in maintaining the peace. "If the issue is that [the Chinese] are not part of that global security environment, then I think we have to be concerned about [Chinese aircraft carriers]," Locklear said.

India is another rising world power and Pacom is working closely with the government there to cement the military relationship between the world's two largest democracies.

"We very much support India taking a leadership in the security issues in and around the Indian Ocean," the admiral said. "We are looking for opportunities to participate and interoperate with them where we can."