FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Hagel Discusses Security With Egypt's Defense Minister
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 6, 2013 - Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called Egyptian Defense Minister Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi yesterday to discuss the U.S.-Egyptian security relationship, the current security situation in Egypt and progress on the political roadmap, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said.
In a statement summarizing the call, Little said the Egyptian defense leader updated Hagel on security developments, including the Sinai Peninsula, and stressed the importance of the U.S.-Egyptian partnership against violent extremists.
Hagel acknowledged Egyptian accomplishments in providing security in the Sinai and declared that the United States stands with Egypt and all nations against terrorism worldwide, the press secretary said.
The two defense leaders also discussed the situation in Syria and its implications for security and stability in the region, Little said, and Hagel expressed appreciation for the defense minister's insights.
Showing posts with label EGYPT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EGYPT. Show all posts
Friday, September 6, 2013
Thursday, August 22, 2013
4 HIZBALLAH LEADERS DESIGNATED BY U.S. TREASURY FOR TERRORISTS ROLES
FROM: U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT
Action Targets Hizballah’s Leadership Responsible for Operations Outside of Lebanon
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of the Treasury today designated four members of Hizballah’s leadership responsible for operations throughout the Middle East, further exposing Hizballah’s pernicious activities that reach beyond the borders of Lebanon. These designations include senior members of Hizballah responsible for activities ranging from assisting fighters from Iraq to support the Assad regime in Syria, to making payments to various factions within Yemen, and to military leaders responsible for terrorist operations in Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Cyprus, Israel, the Palestinian territories, and Iraq.
Belying Hizballah’s claim to be a domestic Lebanese “resistance” organization, its expansive global network seeks to extend its malign influence, and the influence of Hizballah’s patron Iran, throughout the Middle East and beyond. The Treasury Department will continue to combat Hizballah’s terrorist activity inside and outside Lebanon with all available tools and will continue to work with partners around the world to make it clear that Hizballah’s militant and extremist activities should not be tolerated by any nation.
“Whether ferrying foreign fighters to the front lines of the Syrian civil war or inserting clandestine operatives in Europe, the Middle East, and elsewhere, Hizballah remains a significant global terrorist threat,” said Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David S. Cohen. “So long as Hizballah spreads instability, conducts terrorist attacks and engages in criminal and illicit activities around the world, we will continue to sanction Hizballah’s operatives, leaders and businesses, wherever they may be found.”
The individuals sanctioned today were designated pursuant to Executive Order 13224, which targets terrorists and their supporters for acting for, or on behalf of Hizballah. U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any transactions with the individuals designated today, and any assets of those designees subject to U.S. jurisdiction are frozen.
Khalil Harb
In the years prior to Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, Khalil Harb served as the deputy commander for Hizballah’s central military unit’s southern Lebanon region from 1988 to 1992, and as the commander for this region from 1992 to 1994. From 1994 to 1997, Harb served as the commander of Hizballah’s central military operations. By 2000, Harb supervised Hizballah military operations inside Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Turkey.
In late November 2000, Harb was given responsibility for overseeing work of the Islamic Resistance, including assisting with the smuggling of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives from Syria into the West Bank via Jordan. By late 2003, Harb was head of the Syrian/Jordan/Israel/Egypt operations unit, which was subordinate to Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad council.
In March 2006, Harb served as Hizballah’s chief of military liaison with the Palestinian factions and Iran, dealing almost exclusively with Palestinians and Iranians inside and outside the territories. Prior to this posting, Harb had served as Hizballah’s chief of military special operations. During the summer of 2006, Harb was given command of a Hizballah special operations unit in southern Lebanon, which engaged the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in July 2006, at the Lebanese-Israeli border where IDF Special Forces entered Lebanon. In early 2007, Khalil Harb was chief of Hizballah’s Unit 1800, also known as Hizballah’s Nun Unit, the Hizballah entity responsible for supporting Palestinian militants and conducting Hizballah operations in the countries surrounding Israel, and he travelled to Iran for meetings regarding coordination between Hizballah, Iran, and the Palestinians.
In February 2010, Harb, serving as the leader of the Palestinian activities for Hizballah, planned unspecified attacks against Israeli officials in Israel, in retaliation for the assassination of former Hizballah External Security Organization (ESO) chief Imad Mughniyah. By mid-May 2010, Hizballah created a new position for Harb as “advisor to the Secretary General,” which provided Harb oversight of Hizballah Unit 1800, which he previously commanded.
As of 2012, Harb was responsible for Hizballah’s Yemen activities and was involved in the political side of Hizballah’s Yemen portfolio. Harb also served as commander of a Lebanon-based Hizballah special unit that focused on Israel. Since the summer of 2012, Harb has been involved in the movement of large amounts of currency to Yemen, through Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., and in late 2012, Harb advised the leader of a Yemeni political party that the party’s monthly Hizballah funding of $50,000 was ready for pick up.
Muhammad Kawtharani
As the individual in charge of Hizballah's Iraq activities, Kawtharani has worked on behalf of Hizballah's leadership to promote the group's interests in Iraq, including Hizballah efforts to provide training, funding, political, and logistical support to Iraqi Shi'a insurgent groups. A member of Hizballah's Political Council, Kawtharani also helped secure the release from Iraqi custody of Hizballah operative Ali Musa Daqduq, a senior Hizballah commander designated by the Treasury Department in November 2012 who was responsible for numerous attacks against Coalition Force in Iraq, including planning a January 20, 2007 attack on the Karbala Joint Provincial Coordination Center that resulted in the deaths of five U.S. soldiers.
Over the last year, Kawtharani has assisted in getting fighters to Syria to support the Assad regime.
Muhammad Yusuf Ahmad Mansur
Muhammad Yusuf Ahmad Mansur (Mansur), a member of Hizballah since at least 1986, once served in a Hizballah military unit operating in south Lebanon. Around 2004, Mansur was transferred to Hizballah’s Unit 1800. Mansur was subsequently dispatched to Egypt to work with Unit 1800 under Muhammad Qabalan, and in 2008, the cell escalated its operations to target tourist destinations in Egypt. Mansur served as the Egypt-based cell leader. By early 2009, Egyptian authorities had disrupted the Hizballah cell and arrested and detained Mansur and dozens of other individuals for planning to carry out terrorist operations against Israeli and other tourists in Egypt. Hizballah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah in November 2009 publicly acknowledged that Mansur was a Hizballah member involved in transporting arms and equipment to Palestinian militants. In April 2010, an Egyptian court sentenced Mansur to 15 years for his involvement in the cell, which was subordinate to Hizballah’s Unit 1800. However, in late January 2011, the imprisoned members of the Hizballah cell escaped and Mansur returned to Lebanon. In February 2011, Mansur appeared on Lebanese television with Hizballah officials at a Hizballah rally in Beirut.
Muhammad Qabalan
Hizballah terrorist cell leader Muhammad Qabalan (Qabalan) once served as the head of a Hizballah infantry platoon. In 2008, Qabalan, as a leader in Hizballah’s Unit 1800, was serving as the Lebanon-based head of the Hizballah Egypt-based terrorist cell targeting tourist destinations in Egypt and was coordinating the cell’s activities from Lebanon. In April 2010, an Egyptian court sentenced Qabalan in absentia to life imprisonment for his involvement in the cell, which was subordinate to Hizballah’s Unit 1800. As of late 2011, Qabalan worked in a separate Hizballah covert unit operating in the Middle East.
Action Targets Hizballah’s Leadership Responsible for Operations Outside of Lebanon
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of the Treasury today designated four members of Hizballah’s leadership responsible for operations throughout the Middle East, further exposing Hizballah’s pernicious activities that reach beyond the borders of Lebanon. These designations include senior members of Hizballah responsible for activities ranging from assisting fighters from Iraq to support the Assad regime in Syria, to making payments to various factions within Yemen, and to military leaders responsible for terrorist operations in Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Cyprus, Israel, the Palestinian territories, and Iraq.
Belying Hizballah’s claim to be a domestic Lebanese “resistance” organization, its expansive global network seeks to extend its malign influence, and the influence of Hizballah’s patron Iran, throughout the Middle East and beyond. The Treasury Department will continue to combat Hizballah’s terrorist activity inside and outside Lebanon with all available tools and will continue to work with partners around the world to make it clear that Hizballah’s militant and extremist activities should not be tolerated by any nation.
“Whether ferrying foreign fighters to the front lines of the Syrian civil war or inserting clandestine operatives in Europe, the Middle East, and elsewhere, Hizballah remains a significant global terrorist threat,” said Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David S. Cohen. “So long as Hizballah spreads instability, conducts terrorist attacks and engages in criminal and illicit activities around the world, we will continue to sanction Hizballah’s operatives, leaders and businesses, wherever they may be found.”
The individuals sanctioned today were designated pursuant to Executive Order 13224, which targets terrorists and their supporters for acting for, or on behalf of Hizballah. U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any transactions with the individuals designated today, and any assets of those designees subject to U.S. jurisdiction are frozen.
Khalil Harb
In the years prior to Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, Khalil Harb served as the deputy commander for Hizballah’s central military unit’s southern Lebanon region from 1988 to 1992, and as the commander for this region from 1992 to 1994. From 1994 to 1997, Harb served as the commander of Hizballah’s central military operations. By 2000, Harb supervised Hizballah military operations inside Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Turkey.
In late November 2000, Harb was given responsibility for overseeing work of the Islamic Resistance, including assisting with the smuggling of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives from Syria into the West Bank via Jordan. By late 2003, Harb was head of the Syrian/Jordan/Israel/Egypt operations unit, which was subordinate to Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad council.
In March 2006, Harb served as Hizballah’s chief of military liaison with the Palestinian factions and Iran, dealing almost exclusively with Palestinians and Iranians inside and outside the territories. Prior to this posting, Harb had served as Hizballah’s chief of military special operations. During the summer of 2006, Harb was given command of a Hizballah special operations unit in southern Lebanon, which engaged the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in July 2006, at the Lebanese-Israeli border where IDF Special Forces entered Lebanon. In early 2007, Khalil Harb was chief of Hizballah’s Unit 1800, also known as Hizballah’s Nun Unit, the Hizballah entity responsible for supporting Palestinian militants and conducting Hizballah operations in the countries surrounding Israel, and he travelled to Iran for meetings regarding coordination between Hizballah, Iran, and the Palestinians.
In February 2010, Harb, serving as the leader of the Palestinian activities for Hizballah, planned unspecified attacks against Israeli officials in Israel, in retaliation for the assassination of former Hizballah External Security Organization (ESO) chief Imad Mughniyah. By mid-May 2010, Hizballah created a new position for Harb as “advisor to the Secretary General,” which provided Harb oversight of Hizballah Unit 1800, which he previously commanded.
As of 2012, Harb was responsible for Hizballah’s Yemen activities and was involved in the political side of Hizballah’s Yemen portfolio. Harb also served as commander of a Lebanon-based Hizballah special unit that focused on Israel. Since the summer of 2012, Harb has been involved in the movement of large amounts of currency to Yemen, through Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., and in late 2012, Harb advised the leader of a Yemeni political party that the party’s monthly Hizballah funding of $50,000 was ready for pick up.
Muhammad Kawtharani
As the individual in charge of Hizballah's Iraq activities, Kawtharani has worked on behalf of Hizballah's leadership to promote the group's interests in Iraq, including Hizballah efforts to provide training, funding, political, and logistical support to Iraqi Shi'a insurgent groups. A member of Hizballah's Political Council, Kawtharani also helped secure the release from Iraqi custody of Hizballah operative Ali Musa Daqduq, a senior Hizballah commander designated by the Treasury Department in November 2012 who was responsible for numerous attacks against Coalition Force in Iraq, including planning a January 20, 2007 attack on the Karbala Joint Provincial Coordination Center that resulted in the deaths of five U.S. soldiers.
Over the last year, Kawtharani has assisted in getting fighters to Syria to support the Assad regime.
Muhammad Yusuf Ahmad Mansur
Muhammad Yusuf Ahmad Mansur (Mansur), a member of Hizballah since at least 1986, once served in a Hizballah military unit operating in south Lebanon. Around 2004, Mansur was transferred to Hizballah’s Unit 1800. Mansur was subsequently dispatched to Egypt to work with Unit 1800 under Muhammad Qabalan, and in 2008, the cell escalated its operations to target tourist destinations in Egypt. Mansur served as the Egypt-based cell leader. By early 2009, Egyptian authorities had disrupted the Hizballah cell and arrested and detained Mansur and dozens of other individuals for planning to carry out terrorist operations against Israeli and other tourists in Egypt. Hizballah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah in November 2009 publicly acknowledged that Mansur was a Hizballah member involved in transporting arms and equipment to Palestinian militants. In April 2010, an Egyptian court sentenced Mansur to 15 years for his involvement in the cell, which was subordinate to Hizballah’s Unit 1800. However, in late January 2011, the imprisoned members of the Hizballah cell escaped and Mansur returned to Lebanon. In February 2011, Mansur appeared on Lebanese television with Hizballah officials at a Hizballah rally in Beirut.
Muhammad Qabalan
Hizballah terrorist cell leader Muhammad Qabalan (Qabalan) once served as the head of a Hizballah infantry platoon. In 2008, Qabalan, as a leader in Hizballah’s Unit 1800, was serving as the Lebanon-based head of the Hizballah Egypt-based terrorist cell targeting tourist destinations in Egypt and was coordinating the cell’s activities from Lebanon. In April 2010, an Egyptian court sentenced Qabalan in absentia to life imprisonment for his involvement in the cell, which was subordinate to Hizballah’s Unit 1800. As of late 2011, Qabalan worked in a separate Hizballah covert unit operating in the Middle East.
DEFENSE SECRETARY HAGEL AND DANISH DEFENSE MINISTER WAMMEN MEET AT PENTAGON
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Hagel, Danish Defense Minister Discuss Continued Cooperation
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 21, 2013 - Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Danish Defense Minister Nicolai Wammen met today at the Pentagon, reaffirming the two countries' strong defense relationship based upon shared approaches to defense and security issues, and pledging to continue to deepen military cooperation, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said.
"The two leaders highlighted the long friendship between the two nations' armed forces, as well as present-day cooperation in North Atlantic Treaty Organization-led operations in Afghanistan, off the Horn of Africa, and cyber defense," Little said in a statement summarizing the meeting.
"Secretary Hagel and Minister Wammen also discussed the ongoing violence in Syria and the situation in Egypt," Little added.
The two defense leaders also discussed the developments in the capability of Afghanistan's national security forces to address the country's own security challenges and the role of NATO in Afghanistan after the alliance's current mission ends there at the end of 2014, Little said.
Hagel and Wammen underscored their belief that the United States and Denmark should work to maintain and increase interoperability and implement lessons learned from operations in Afghanistan, the press secretary said.
"They both agreed on the importance of exploring new approaches to bilateral and multinational cooperation for the benefit of both nations and of NATO as a whole," he added.
In addition, they discussed exchanging lessons learned in defense materiel and logistics and opportunities to cooperate on veterans' initiatives, Little said. They also agreed on the inauguration of annual policy-level staff discussions that would develop plans for cooperation in more detail.
"Secretary Hagel expressed appreciation for Denmark's close partnership, and Minister Wammen invited Secretary Hagel to visit Denmark at his earliest convenience," Little said.
Hagel, Danish Defense Minister Discuss Continued Cooperation
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 21, 2013 - Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Danish Defense Minister Nicolai Wammen met today at the Pentagon, reaffirming the two countries' strong defense relationship based upon shared approaches to defense and security issues, and pledging to continue to deepen military cooperation, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said.
"The two leaders highlighted the long friendship between the two nations' armed forces, as well as present-day cooperation in North Atlantic Treaty Organization-led operations in Afghanistan, off the Horn of Africa, and cyber defense," Little said in a statement summarizing the meeting.
"Secretary Hagel and Minister Wammen also discussed the ongoing violence in Syria and the situation in Egypt," Little added.
The two defense leaders also discussed the developments in the capability of Afghanistan's national security forces to address the country's own security challenges and the role of NATO in Afghanistan after the alliance's current mission ends there at the end of 2014, Little said.
Hagel and Wammen underscored their belief that the United States and Denmark should work to maintain and increase interoperability and implement lessons learned from operations in Afghanistan, the press secretary said.
"They both agreed on the importance of exploring new approaches to bilateral and multinational cooperation for the benefit of both nations and of NATO as a whole," he added.
In addition, they discussed exchanging lessons learned in defense materiel and logistics and opportunities to cooperate on veterans' initiatives, Little said. They also agreed on the inauguration of annual policy-level staff discussions that would develop plans for cooperation in more detail.
"Secretary Hagel expressed appreciation for Denmark's close partnership, and Minister Wammen invited Secretary Hagel to visit Denmark at his earliest convenience," Little said.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
READOUT OF SECRETARY HAGEL'S CALL TO ISRAELI DEFENSE MINISTER YA'ALON
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ISRAELI DEFENSE
Readout of Secretary Hagel's Call with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon
Pentagon Press Secretary George Little provided the following readout:
This morning Secretary Hagel spoke with Israeli Minister of Defense Moshe Ya'alon to discuss a number of regional security issues. The call touched upon the ongoing violence in Syria -- including the recent claims of use of chemical weapons -- the situation in Egypt, and Iran. Secretary Hagel and Minister Ya'alon agreed to continue to maintain intensive dialogue on the multitude of challenges facing the United States and Israel.
Readout of Secretary Hagel's Call with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon
Pentagon Press Secretary George Little provided the following readout:
This morning Secretary Hagel spoke with Israeli Minister of Defense Moshe Ya'alon to discuss a number of regional security issues. The call touched upon the ongoing violence in Syria -- including the recent claims of use of chemical weapons -- the situation in Egypt, and Iran. Secretary Hagel and Minister Ya'alon agreed to continue to maintain intensive dialogue on the multitude of challenges facing the United States and Israel.
Saturday, August 17, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS ON VIOLENCE AND BLOODSHED IN EGYPT
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Remarks by Secretary of State John Kerry on Egypt
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Press Briefing Room
Washington, DC
August 14, 2013
Sorry to keep you waiting, folks. I’ll make a statement and then Jen Psaki will stay and take questions and brief everybody.
The United States strongly condemns today’s violence and bloodshed across Egypt. It’s a serious blow to reconciliation and the Egyptian’s people’s hopes for a transition towards democracy and inclusion. In the past week, at every occasion, perhaps even more than the past week, we and others have urged the government to respect the rights of free assembly and of free expression, and we have also urged all parties to resolve this impasse peacefully and underscored that demonstrators should avoid violence and incitement.
Today’s events are deplorable and they run counter to Egyptian aspirations for peace, inclusion, and genuine democracy. Egyptians inside and outside of the government need to take a step back. They need to calm the situation and avoid further loss of life. We also strongly oppose a return to a state of emergency law and we call on the government to respect basic human rights including freedom of peaceful assembly and due process under the law. And we believe that the state of emergency should end as soon as possible.
Violence is simply not a solution in Egypt or anywhere else. Violence will not create a roadmap for Egypt’s future. Violence only impedes the transition to an inclusive civilian government, a government chosen in free and fair elections that governs democratically, consistent with the goals of the Egyptian revolution. And violence and continued political polarization will only further tear the Egyptian economy apart and prevent it from growing and providing the jobs and the future that the people of Egypt want so badly.
The United States strongly supports the Egyptian people’s hope for a prompt and sustainable transition to an inclusive, tolerant, civilian-led democracy. Deputy Secretary of State Burns, together with our EU colleagues, provided constructive ideas and left them on the table during our talks in Cairo last week. From my many phone calls with many Egyptians, I believe they know full well what a constructive process would look like. The interim government and the military, which together possess the preponderance of power in this confrontation, have a unique responsibility to prevent further violence and to offer constructive options for an inclusive, peaceful process across the entire political spectrum. This includes amending the constitution, holding parliamentary and presidential elections, which the interim government itself has called for.
All of the other parties – all of the opposition, all of civil society, all parties – also share a responsibility to avoid violence and to participate in a productive path towards a political solution. There will not be a solution through further polarization. There can only be a political solution by bringing people together with a political solution.
So this is a pivotal moment for all Egyptians. The path towards violence leads only to greater instability, economic disaster, and suffering. The only sustainable path for either side is one towards a political solution. I am convinced from my conversations today with a number of foreign ministers, including the Foreign Minister of Egypt, I am convinced that that path is, in fact, still open and it is possible, though it has been made much, much harder, much more complicated, by the events of today.
The promise of the 2011 revolution has simply never been fully realized, and the final outcome of that revolution is not yet decided. It will be shaped in the hours ahead, in the days ahead. It will be shaped by the decisions which all of Egypt’s political leaders make now and in these days ahead. The world is closely watching Egypt and is deeply concerned about the events that we have witnessed today. The United States remains at the ready to work with all of the parties and with our partners and with others around the world in order to help achieve a peaceful, democratic way forward.
Now Jen will be happy to answer any questions. Thanks.
Remarks by Secretary of State John Kerry on Egypt
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Press Briefing Room
Washington, DC
August 14, 2013
Sorry to keep you waiting, folks. I’ll make a statement and then Jen Psaki will stay and take questions and brief everybody.
The United States strongly condemns today’s violence and bloodshed across Egypt. It’s a serious blow to reconciliation and the Egyptian’s people’s hopes for a transition towards democracy and inclusion. In the past week, at every occasion, perhaps even more than the past week, we and others have urged the government to respect the rights of free assembly and of free expression, and we have also urged all parties to resolve this impasse peacefully and underscored that demonstrators should avoid violence and incitement.
Today’s events are deplorable and they run counter to Egyptian aspirations for peace, inclusion, and genuine democracy. Egyptians inside and outside of the government need to take a step back. They need to calm the situation and avoid further loss of life. We also strongly oppose a return to a state of emergency law and we call on the government to respect basic human rights including freedom of peaceful assembly and due process under the law. And we believe that the state of emergency should end as soon as possible.
Violence is simply not a solution in Egypt or anywhere else. Violence will not create a roadmap for Egypt’s future. Violence only impedes the transition to an inclusive civilian government, a government chosen in free and fair elections that governs democratically, consistent with the goals of the Egyptian revolution. And violence and continued political polarization will only further tear the Egyptian economy apart and prevent it from growing and providing the jobs and the future that the people of Egypt want so badly.
The United States strongly supports the Egyptian people’s hope for a prompt and sustainable transition to an inclusive, tolerant, civilian-led democracy. Deputy Secretary of State Burns, together with our EU colleagues, provided constructive ideas and left them on the table during our talks in Cairo last week. From my many phone calls with many Egyptians, I believe they know full well what a constructive process would look like. The interim government and the military, which together possess the preponderance of power in this confrontation, have a unique responsibility to prevent further violence and to offer constructive options for an inclusive, peaceful process across the entire political spectrum. This includes amending the constitution, holding parliamentary and presidential elections, which the interim government itself has called for.
All of the other parties – all of the opposition, all of civil society, all parties – also share a responsibility to avoid violence and to participate in a productive path towards a political solution. There will not be a solution through further polarization. There can only be a political solution by bringing people together with a political solution.
So this is a pivotal moment for all Egyptians. The path towards violence leads only to greater instability, economic disaster, and suffering. The only sustainable path for either side is one towards a political solution. I am convinced from my conversations today with a number of foreign ministers, including the Foreign Minister of Egypt, I am convinced that that path is, in fact, still open and it is possible, though it has been made much, much harder, much more complicated, by the events of today.
The promise of the 2011 revolution has simply never been fully realized, and the final outcome of that revolution is not yet decided. It will be shaped in the hours ahead, in the days ahead. It will be shaped by the decisions which all of Egypt’s political leaders make now and in these days ahead. The world is closely watching Egypt and is deeply concerned about the events that we have witnessed today. The United States remains at the ready to work with all of the parties and with our partners and with others around the world in order to help achieve a peaceful, democratic way forward.
Now Jen will be happy to answer any questions. Thanks.
Saturday, July 27, 2013
READOUT: SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL'S CALL WITH EGYPTIAN DEFENSE MINISTER AL-SISI
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Readout of Secretary Hagel's Call with Egyptian Defense Minister al-Sisi
Pentagon Press Secretary George Little issued the following readout:
"This afternoon Secretary Hagel spoke by phone with Egyptian Defense Minister al-Sisi to express deep concern about the security situation and recent violence in Egypt, and to encourage that restraint be exercised during this difficult period. The United States believes that the current transition needs to be marked by inclusivity, that Egyptian authorities should avoid politicized arrests and detentions, and take steps to prevent further bloodshed and loss of life. It is in the short and long term interests of the Egyptian people to renew their path toward democratic transition, and to emphasize tolerance across the political spectrum."
Readout of Secretary Hagel's Call with Egyptian Defense Minister al-Sisi
Pentagon Press Secretary George Little issued the following readout:
"This afternoon Secretary Hagel spoke by phone with Egyptian Defense Minister al-Sisi to express deep concern about the security situation and recent violence in Egypt, and to encourage that restraint be exercised during this difficult period. The United States believes that the current transition needs to be marked by inclusivity, that Egyptian authorities should avoid politicized arrests and detentions, and take steps to prevent further bloodshed and loss of life. It is in the short and long term interests of the Egyptian people to renew their path toward democratic transition, and to emphasize tolerance across the political spectrum."
Saturday, June 15, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY MAKES REMARKS WITH BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Remarks With British Foreign Secretary William Hague After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
June 12, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you very much. It’s a huge pleasure for me to welcome my friend and partner in so many efforts, the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, William Hague.
The United States and the United Kingdom obviously share a now time-honored and time-defined relationship, and it’s grounded in so much – our history, our values, our traditions. It is, without question, an essential, if not the essential relationship, and based on a common agenda that we share, our mutual cooperation on so many global issues, from peace and stability in the Middle East, Afghanistan, proliferation, Libya, Egypt, you run the gamut; we have been able to work together in effective ways. We’re the closest of military allies, having served alongside each other in major campaigns over the last 20 years, six major campaigns in total, including right now in Afghanistan, where our troops are serving side-by-side. And we promote together a very vigorous and a capable NATO.
But it’s fair to say that this special relationship really touches many different issues. Let me just say that two days ago, our governments signed a memorandum of understanding for the Global Innovation Initiative. And this important initiative is going to support multilateral research emphasizing science, technology, engineering, and it will focus on issues such as climate change, which we have just discussed at length, and sustainable development. And this initiative will also further our higher education cooperation, which is a priority of both President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron. It will bolster collaborations between universities in the United States and the United Kingdom.
I also want to applaud Prime Minister Cameron and Foreign Secretary Hague for their important leadership in the lead-up to the G-8. The UK is helping to take a lead on an important initiative to prevent sexual violence in conflict areas around the world. We met in London on that as a prep leading up to the G-8, and the Foreign Secretary convened a very important gathering and I think there was some important progress made in our discussions there. And we stood together in April, the G-8 foreign ministers, to affirm what will lead into the meetings in Ireland, Northern Ireland.
Our relationship is also rooted in our very, very close economic cooperation. We are each each other’s largest investors. Almost one million people in the United States work for British companies, and almost one million people work for American companies in the UK. We are also both committed to making this economic relationship stronger. President Obama’s commitment to launch the negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union is a significant way to make it stronger. And we look forward to the deliberations that will take place in a few days in the EU with respect to the mandate for those negotiations. We are convinced, both of us, that a successful conclusion to this agreement would have a profound, important impact boosting both of our economies and, in fact, the economies of Europe as a whole.
Together, our two countries also remain committed to a Syrian-led political solution to the crisis there. We are deeply concerned about the dire situation in Syria, including the involvement of Hezbollah, as well as Iran, across state lines in another country. So we are focusing our efforts now on doing all that we can to support the opposition as they work to change the balance on the ground. And together, we have provided tremendous humanitarian assistance in an effort to mitigate the human suffering that is taking place in Syria. We remain committed to the Geneva 2 conference. We both understand the complications with the situation on the ground and moving forward rapidly. But there will have to be a political solution, ultimately, to the situation on the ground, and that is the framework that will continue to be the outline, and we remain committed to it.
Throughout each of our careers, I think it’s fair to say that Foreign Secretary Hague and I have spoken candidly about the urgent need for a two-state solution in the Middle East. This is a top priority for President Obama, a top priority for Prime Minister Cameron, and we will continue to work towards it together.
With respect to Iran’s nuclear program, as President Obama said in Israel in March, Iran must not get a nuclear weapon. We appreciate the United Kingdom’s leadership in continuing to push for the EU efforts to adopt and implement strict EU sanctions on Iran. They are making a difference, and they are – the UK has also been critical in its leadership of the P-5+1 in those efforts.
So I am delighted to welcome, as you can see in all that I have just described, a vital partner, and in our case, I’m happy to say, a close friend. We’ve gotten to know each other better and better in this process, and I think we enjoy working together enormously. And I’m happy to welcome you here, William. Thank you.
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Thank you very much, John. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It is a great pleasure to be back here in Washington, D.C and with my great friend and colleague, who I’ve hugely enjoyed – come to enjoy working with already over the last four months, Secretary Kerry. The United States is the United Kingdom’s greatest ally in world affairs, and the range of issues that we have discussed today reflects that.
And I want to pay tribute to the energy and the resolve and the commitment that Secretary Kerry has brought to this role as Secretary of State. I’ve particularly welcomed his personal leadership on the Middle East peace process. He’s put an enormous amount of his time and energy into creating the foundations for a return to negotiations. And no single act would do more to unlock a more peaceful and stable Middle East than a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
A two-state solution is the only way to end this conflict and achieve peace and security for both sides, but the window for a viable settlement is closing fast, and the regional environment is growing more difficult and more dangerous, as you know, all the time. The United States can count on the full and active support of the United Kingdom in getting both sides to the negotiating table bilaterally, through our relationships with Israelis and Palestinians, and using our role in the European Union as well.
We also discussed the meeting of the G-8 in Northern Ireland, as you’ve heard, where we hoped to make progress on the priorities of trade and tax and transparency set out by Prime Minister David Cameron. I also reiterated our commitment to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the United States and the EU. This is the biggest opportunity in a generation to power new jobs and growth in Europe and America and to provide an immense boost to the world economy. The United Kingdom is fully behind it.
We’ve also discussed our work together to bring peace and stability to Afghanistan. We’ve identified new areas in which the State Department and the Foreign Office can work together on climate change issues. And the British Government greatly looks forward to welcoming President Obama to the G-8. We see this as an important opportunity to discuss many matters in world affairs, but it’s also an important opportunity to discuss with world leaders, including President Putin, the most urgent crisis anywhere in the world today, the terrible and deepening conflict in Syria.
Syria has been a focus, of course, of our talks today. We’re both deeply concerned by what is happening to innocent people there. The regime appears to be preparing new assaults, endangering the lives and safety of hundreds of thousands of Syrians who are already in desperate need. And the scale of the regime’s repression and the human suffering that it has caused beggars belief. A campaign of murder and tyranny that they have waged for more than 800 days now is not only a moral outrage, it’s a grave threat to the wider region, it’s a danger to our own national security, and this includes the risks of growing radicalization, the involvement of Hezbollah and Iranian proxies, and credible reports of the use of chemical weapons.
So we agreed today that we cannot turn away from Syria and its people. The United Kingdom believes the situation demands a strong, coordinated, and determined approach by the UK, the U.S., and our allies in Europe and in the region.
I want to pay tribute to the governments and people of Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon for their extraordinary generosity in hosting the vast refugee population and the burden that they’re shouldering for the whole world because of their proximity to this appalling conflict. And we will all have to do more in the coming weeks to assist with the immense humanitarian effort that is necessary.
We agreed today, of course, that our priority remains to see a diplomatic process in Geneva that succeeds in reaching a negotiated end to the conflict. But we will have to be prepared to do more to save lives, to pressure the Assad regime to negotiate seriously, and to prevent the growth of extremism and terrorism if diplomatic efforts are going to succeed. So we have discussed that thoroughly, how to help the regime and opposition come to the negotiating table, as well as to protect civilian life.
And we should never forget that this conflict began when the Assad regime turned its tanks, helicopter gunships, and heavy weapons against peaceful protesters. We shouldn’t forget that 1.6 million people have become refugees and more than 4 million are internally displaced. These are innocent victims of war and repression, and they’ve been at the forefront of our minds in our discussions here in Washington today.
Thank you very much.
MS. PSAKI: The first question will be from Jill Dougherty of CNN.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. Secretary Kerry – I have a question, actually, for both Secretary Kerry and Secretary Hague. After this catastrophic defeat for the opposition in Qusayr, do you still believe that they can win and do it without the weapons that they are asking for? That’s to both of you.
And then Secretary Kerry, these reports of NSA surveillance – are you hearing from allies concerned? Did you hear it from Secretary Hague today concerned about this? We’re hearing the Germans are disturbed. They’ll be talking with President Obama about it.
And then finally just a very quick one on the OIG. Are you concerned that these – that allegations of serious, perhaps even illegal behavior or conduct, are not being investigated because of any alleged undue influence by senior State Department officials?
Thank you very much.
SECRETARY KERRY: Okay. Let me take your three questions in order, beginning with the NSA leaks.
The answer is no, I think the Secretary and I both understand the very delicate but vital balance between privacy and the protection of people in our country. And the Secretary made a very fine statement on the floor of the parliament in which, at the beginning of the week, he made clear the British Government’s position with respect to this. And I’ll just say for us, as you’re hearing now more and more, the members of Congress understand that Congress passed on this, voted for it several times, and the judiciary branch of our country has reviewed this and been engaged in this. This is a three-branch of government effort to keep America safe, and in fact, it has not read emails or looked at or listened to conversations, the exception of where a court may have made some decision which was predicated on appropriate evidence.
The United States of America has been hugely protected over the course of these last years by the valiant efforts of our law enforcement community, our international law enforcement efforts, the FBI, our agencies, the Homeland Security, all of whom have coordinated in remarkable ways to prevent some very terrible events from taking place. And I think they have done so in a remarkable balance of the values of our nation with respect to privacy, freedom, and the Constitution. And I think over time, this will withstand scrutiny and people will understand that.
That said, on the OIG I’ll just say very quickly all employees of this Department are held to the highest standards of behavior, and now and always. And I welcome the OIG who was asked – I’m a former prosecutor. I can tell you as a former prosecutor I take very seriously a investigative process, and I am confident that the OIG’s process where he has invited outsiders to come and review whatever took place a year ago will be reviewed. And I welcome that, I think the Department welcomes that, because we do want the highest standards applied.
And finally with respect to Syria, your question on Syria is specifically about whether or not --
QUESTION: About specifically with, after Qusayr --
SECRETARY KERRY: Yeah, I got it, whether or not they’re going to be able to win and so forth. Yeah.
QUESTION: Whether you have confidence.
SECRETARY KERRY: Look, I think that nobody wins in Syria the way things are going; the people lose, and Syria as a country loses. And what we have been pushing for, all of us involved in this effort, is a political solution that ends the violence, saves Syria, stops the killing and destruction of an entire nation. And that’s what we’re pushing for. So it’s not a question to me whether or not the opposition can, quote, "win." It’s a question of whether or not we can get to this political solution.
And the political solution that the Russians have agreed to contemplates a transition government. The implementation of Geneva 1 is the goal of Geneva 2, and that is a transition government with full executive authority which gives the Syrian people as a whole, everybody in Syria, the chance to have a new beginning where they choose their future leadership. Now, that’s the goal. And we have said that we will do everything we can and we’re able to do to help the opposition be able to achieve that goal and to reach a point where that can be implemented. And that’s what we’re trying to do. And I think that there’s a unanimity about the importance of trying to find a way to peace, not a way to war. Now, the Assad regime is making that very difficult.
We will be – as everybody knows and has written about, we’re meeting to talk about the various balances in this issue right now. And I have nothing to announce about that at this point, but clearly, the choice of weapons that he has engaged in across the board challenge anybody’s values and standards of human behavior. And we’re going to have to make judgments for ourselves about how we can help the opposition to be able to deal with that.
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: On that, I want to support what Secretary Kerry has said. He’s spoken quite rightly, as I often have, of there only being a political solution in the end in Syria. Whatever happens, however long it goes on for, in the end there has to be a political solution. There isn’t a solution for either side of only military conquest. The Syria that would be left at the end of that is not a Syria that would be able to function at all. And so there has to be a political solution. That is why I particularly pay tribute to Secretary Kerry’s efforts to create a new process in Geneva, building on what we agreed last year at Geneva, a transitional government with full executive powers, formed by mutual consent.
But what the regime is doing at the moment, and what you’ve seen over the last couple of weeks in the military action, supported in this case by Hezbollah, is making a political solution more difficult. It may be designed to make a political solution more difficult. And so our efforts in Syria have been to try to save lives, to prevent radicalization, to send a message to the regime that in the end there does have to be a political solution. That’s why the United Kingdom has sent practical support to the opposition, to the national coalition, why we send so much humanitarian support. This is what our diplomatic effort is working towards. And so I think Secretary Kerry are in complete agreement about this. I also don’t have any new announcement that we’re making today about this. But we are determined that we will address this issue together and do our utmost to create the conditions for a political solution in Syria.
On the NSA and intelligence matters, that’s not been the focus of our discussions today. We’ve noted recent controversies, and the Secretary was very kind about my speech in the House of Commons on Monday. The intelligence sharing relationship between the UK and the U.S. is unique in the world. It is the strongest in the world. And it contributes massively to the national security of both countries. I think that’s something that the citizens of our countries should have confidence in, and in particular have confidence in that that relationship is based on a framework of law in both countries, law that is vigorously upheld. And so I repeat what I said in the House of Commons on Monday about the importance of that. And it’s a relationship we must never endanger, because it has saved many lives over recent decades in countering terrorism and in contributing to the security of all our citizens.
MODERATOR: The second question is Tom Whipple, The Times.
QUESTION: Thank you. I’ve got one question for both of you on Syria, if you don’t mind. But first of all, Foreign Secretary, to pick you up on the NSA story, I mean, you have made it clear in Parliament you don’t think British intelligence is breaking the law using information gathered by whatever means by U.S. intelligence. I’m not sure you that you’ve addressed what safeguards there are protecting British people from U.S. intelligence using these kinds of wholesale trawling of phone records and online activity we’ve been hearing about directly on innocent people in the UK.
And on Syria, we have heard what you’ve been saying about Syria for 800 days now. Have you discussed what military help you can give Syria’s rebels? And have you agreed on anything?
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Well, on the first point, the UK and the U.S. are very close partners on cyber security, on intelligence sharing. There couldn’t be two more trusted partners in the world than the United Kingdom and the United States. And I think that should give some level of assurance to the citizens of our countries. I pointed out in the House of Commons on Monday the legal protections that are there. And of course, I’ve made very clear that any information received by the United Kingdom is subject to all the laws of the United Kingdom. And so that remains the answer. That is the situation.
But no two countries in the world work more closely to protect the privacy of their citizens than the United Kingdom and the United States. There may be threats from elsewhere, of course, and there are, from criminal networks, sometimes from other states. It’s the UK and the U.S. that work together in trying to deal with that. So it’s not the United States we should be looking at when we’re worried about those things.
On the question about Syria, we’ve discussed many things about Syria, but I think we’ve dealt with this point earlier where we are restating today our determination that the UK, the U.S., our other allies in Europe and across the region, will work closely on this. Secretary Kerry has done a great deal in recent weeks to pull together a group of foreign ministers. We’ve met several times, including in Istanbul and in Amman recently, to coordinate our actions and our diplomacy and our support for the national coalition. We will continue to do that, and we may well have to intensify that in various ways over the coming weeks and months in order to make it more likely that we can achieve a political solution in Syria. So we’ve discussed all the ramifications of that today, but I can’t go into any more detail than that at the moment.
SECRETARY KERRY: Which part of it do you want me to answer?
QUESTION: Sorry. About Syria. We’ve heard you say similar things for 800 days about Syria.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, not me. I haven’t been in office for 800 days.
QUESTION: Officials like yourself, sir. Can you say – can you give us a sense, any sense at all, what you’ve been talking about in terms of the kind of help you may be offering the Syrian rebels, and why you aren’t able to say anything more than you’re saying at the moment, which you’re staying pretty tight-lipped about what you’ve been discussing in terms of this help you can give the rebels? At some point, it’s going to be too late for that, isn’t it? Do you think we’ve reached that point?
SECRETARY KERRY: I’m not going to make judgments about the points, where we are or aren’t. I’ll just say to you that as I said to you, we are determined to do everything that we can in order to help the opposition to be able to reach – to save Syria. And that stands. That’s exactly what we’re going to do. I have nothing new to announce today. When and if I do, you’ll hear about it. But at this moment, we are in consideration, as everybody knows – it’s been written about this week. People are talking about what further options might be exercised here. And we certainly had some discussion about that, obviously. But we don’t have anything to announce at this moment.
Thank you, all. Appreciate it.
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Thank you very much.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks very much.
Remarks With British Foreign Secretary William Hague After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
June 12, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you very much. It’s a huge pleasure for me to welcome my friend and partner in so many efforts, the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, William Hague.
The United States and the United Kingdom obviously share a now time-honored and time-defined relationship, and it’s grounded in so much – our history, our values, our traditions. It is, without question, an essential, if not the essential relationship, and based on a common agenda that we share, our mutual cooperation on so many global issues, from peace and stability in the Middle East, Afghanistan, proliferation, Libya, Egypt, you run the gamut; we have been able to work together in effective ways. We’re the closest of military allies, having served alongside each other in major campaigns over the last 20 years, six major campaigns in total, including right now in Afghanistan, where our troops are serving side-by-side. And we promote together a very vigorous and a capable NATO.
But it’s fair to say that this special relationship really touches many different issues. Let me just say that two days ago, our governments signed a memorandum of understanding for the Global Innovation Initiative. And this important initiative is going to support multilateral research emphasizing science, technology, engineering, and it will focus on issues such as climate change, which we have just discussed at length, and sustainable development. And this initiative will also further our higher education cooperation, which is a priority of both President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron. It will bolster collaborations between universities in the United States and the United Kingdom.
I also want to applaud Prime Minister Cameron and Foreign Secretary Hague for their important leadership in the lead-up to the G-8. The UK is helping to take a lead on an important initiative to prevent sexual violence in conflict areas around the world. We met in London on that as a prep leading up to the G-8, and the Foreign Secretary convened a very important gathering and I think there was some important progress made in our discussions there. And we stood together in April, the G-8 foreign ministers, to affirm what will lead into the meetings in Ireland, Northern Ireland.
Our relationship is also rooted in our very, very close economic cooperation. We are each each other’s largest investors. Almost one million people in the United States work for British companies, and almost one million people work for American companies in the UK. We are also both committed to making this economic relationship stronger. President Obama’s commitment to launch the negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union is a significant way to make it stronger. And we look forward to the deliberations that will take place in a few days in the EU with respect to the mandate for those negotiations. We are convinced, both of us, that a successful conclusion to this agreement would have a profound, important impact boosting both of our economies and, in fact, the economies of Europe as a whole.
Together, our two countries also remain committed to a Syrian-led political solution to the crisis there. We are deeply concerned about the dire situation in Syria, including the involvement of Hezbollah, as well as Iran, across state lines in another country. So we are focusing our efforts now on doing all that we can to support the opposition as they work to change the balance on the ground. And together, we have provided tremendous humanitarian assistance in an effort to mitigate the human suffering that is taking place in Syria. We remain committed to the Geneva 2 conference. We both understand the complications with the situation on the ground and moving forward rapidly. But there will have to be a political solution, ultimately, to the situation on the ground, and that is the framework that will continue to be the outline, and we remain committed to it.
Throughout each of our careers, I think it’s fair to say that Foreign Secretary Hague and I have spoken candidly about the urgent need for a two-state solution in the Middle East. This is a top priority for President Obama, a top priority for Prime Minister Cameron, and we will continue to work towards it together.
With respect to Iran’s nuclear program, as President Obama said in Israel in March, Iran must not get a nuclear weapon. We appreciate the United Kingdom’s leadership in continuing to push for the EU efforts to adopt and implement strict EU sanctions on Iran. They are making a difference, and they are – the UK has also been critical in its leadership of the P-5+1 in those efforts.
So I am delighted to welcome, as you can see in all that I have just described, a vital partner, and in our case, I’m happy to say, a close friend. We’ve gotten to know each other better and better in this process, and I think we enjoy working together enormously. And I’m happy to welcome you here, William. Thank you.
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Thank you very much, John. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It is a great pleasure to be back here in Washington, D.C and with my great friend and colleague, who I’ve hugely enjoyed – come to enjoy working with already over the last four months, Secretary Kerry. The United States is the United Kingdom’s greatest ally in world affairs, and the range of issues that we have discussed today reflects that.
And I want to pay tribute to the energy and the resolve and the commitment that Secretary Kerry has brought to this role as Secretary of State. I’ve particularly welcomed his personal leadership on the Middle East peace process. He’s put an enormous amount of his time and energy into creating the foundations for a return to negotiations. And no single act would do more to unlock a more peaceful and stable Middle East than a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
A two-state solution is the only way to end this conflict and achieve peace and security for both sides, but the window for a viable settlement is closing fast, and the regional environment is growing more difficult and more dangerous, as you know, all the time. The United States can count on the full and active support of the United Kingdom in getting both sides to the negotiating table bilaterally, through our relationships with Israelis and Palestinians, and using our role in the European Union as well.
We also discussed the meeting of the G-8 in Northern Ireland, as you’ve heard, where we hoped to make progress on the priorities of trade and tax and transparency set out by Prime Minister David Cameron. I also reiterated our commitment to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the United States and the EU. This is the biggest opportunity in a generation to power new jobs and growth in Europe and America and to provide an immense boost to the world economy. The United Kingdom is fully behind it.
We’ve also discussed our work together to bring peace and stability to Afghanistan. We’ve identified new areas in which the State Department and the Foreign Office can work together on climate change issues. And the British Government greatly looks forward to welcoming President Obama to the G-8. We see this as an important opportunity to discuss many matters in world affairs, but it’s also an important opportunity to discuss with world leaders, including President Putin, the most urgent crisis anywhere in the world today, the terrible and deepening conflict in Syria.
Syria has been a focus, of course, of our talks today. We’re both deeply concerned by what is happening to innocent people there. The regime appears to be preparing new assaults, endangering the lives and safety of hundreds of thousands of Syrians who are already in desperate need. And the scale of the regime’s repression and the human suffering that it has caused beggars belief. A campaign of murder and tyranny that they have waged for more than 800 days now is not only a moral outrage, it’s a grave threat to the wider region, it’s a danger to our own national security, and this includes the risks of growing radicalization, the involvement of Hezbollah and Iranian proxies, and credible reports of the use of chemical weapons.
So we agreed today that we cannot turn away from Syria and its people. The United Kingdom believes the situation demands a strong, coordinated, and determined approach by the UK, the U.S., and our allies in Europe and in the region.
I want to pay tribute to the governments and people of Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon for their extraordinary generosity in hosting the vast refugee population and the burden that they’re shouldering for the whole world because of their proximity to this appalling conflict. And we will all have to do more in the coming weeks to assist with the immense humanitarian effort that is necessary.
We agreed today, of course, that our priority remains to see a diplomatic process in Geneva that succeeds in reaching a negotiated end to the conflict. But we will have to be prepared to do more to save lives, to pressure the Assad regime to negotiate seriously, and to prevent the growth of extremism and terrorism if diplomatic efforts are going to succeed. So we have discussed that thoroughly, how to help the regime and opposition come to the negotiating table, as well as to protect civilian life.
And we should never forget that this conflict began when the Assad regime turned its tanks, helicopter gunships, and heavy weapons against peaceful protesters. We shouldn’t forget that 1.6 million people have become refugees and more than 4 million are internally displaced. These are innocent victims of war and repression, and they’ve been at the forefront of our minds in our discussions here in Washington today.
Thank you very much.
MS. PSAKI: The first question will be from Jill Dougherty of CNN.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. Secretary Kerry – I have a question, actually, for both Secretary Kerry and Secretary Hague. After this catastrophic defeat for the opposition in Qusayr, do you still believe that they can win and do it without the weapons that they are asking for? That’s to both of you.
And then Secretary Kerry, these reports of NSA surveillance – are you hearing from allies concerned? Did you hear it from Secretary Hague today concerned about this? We’re hearing the Germans are disturbed. They’ll be talking with President Obama about it.
And then finally just a very quick one on the OIG. Are you concerned that these – that allegations of serious, perhaps even illegal behavior or conduct, are not being investigated because of any alleged undue influence by senior State Department officials?
Thank you very much.
SECRETARY KERRY: Okay. Let me take your three questions in order, beginning with the NSA leaks.
The answer is no, I think the Secretary and I both understand the very delicate but vital balance between privacy and the protection of people in our country. And the Secretary made a very fine statement on the floor of the parliament in which, at the beginning of the week, he made clear the British Government’s position with respect to this. And I’ll just say for us, as you’re hearing now more and more, the members of Congress understand that Congress passed on this, voted for it several times, and the judiciary branch of our country has reviewed this and been engaged in this. This is a three-branch of government effort to keep America safe, and in fact, it has not read emails or looked at or listened to conversations, the exception of where a court may have made some decision which was predicated on appropriate evidence.
The United States of America has been hugely protected over the course of these last years by the valiant efforts of our law enforcement community, our international law enforcement efforts, the FBI, our agencies, the Homeland Security, all of whom have coordinated in remarkable ways to prevent some very terrible events from taking place. And I think they have done so in a remarkable balance of the values of our nation with respect to privacy, freedom, and the Constitution. And I think over time, this will withstand scrutiny and people will understand that.
That said, on the OIG I’ll just say very quickly all employees of this Department are held to the highest standards of behavior, and now and always. And I welcome the OIG who was asked – I’m a former prosecutor. I can tell you as a former prosecutor I take very seriously a investigative process, and I am confident that the OIG’s process where he has invited outsiders to come and review whatever took place a year ago will be reviewed. And I welcome that, I think the Department welcomes that, because we do want the highest standards applied.
And finally with respect to Syria, your question on Syria is specifically about whether or not --
QUESTION: About specifically with, after Qusayr --
SECRETARY KERRY: Yeah, I got it, whether or not they’re going to be able to win and so forth. Yeah.
QUESTION: Whether you have confidence.
SECRETARY KERRY: Look, I think that nobody wins in Syria the way things are going; the people lose, and Syria as a country loses. And what we have been pushing for, all of us involved in this effort, is a political solution that ends the violence, saves Syria, stops the killing and destruction of an entire nation. And that’s what we’re pushing for. So it’s not a question to me whether or not the opposition can, quote, "win." It’s a question of whether or not we can get to this political solution.
And the political solution that the Russians have agreed to contemplates a transition government. The implementation of Geneva 1 is the goal of Geneva 2, and that is a transition government with full executive authority which gives the Syrian people as a whole, everybody in Syria, the chance to have a new beginning where they choose their future leadership. Now, that’s the goal. And we have said that we will do everything we can and we’re able to do to help the opposition be able to achieve that goal and to reach a point where that can be implemented. And that’s what we’re trying to do. And I think that there’s a unanimity about the importance of trying to find a way to peace, not a way to war. Now, the Assad regime is making that very difficult.
We will be – as everybody knows and has written about, we’re meeting to talk about the various balances in this issue right now. And I have nothing to announce about that at this point, but clearly, the choice of weapons that he has engaged in across the board challenge anybody’s values and standards of human behavior. And we’re going to have to make judgments for ourselves about how we can help the opposition to be able to deal with that.
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: On that, I want to support what Secretary Kerry has said. He’s spoken quite rightly, as I often have, of there only being a political solution in the end in Syria. Whatever happens, however long it goes on for, in the end there has to be a political solution. There isn’t a solution for either side of only military conquest. The Syria that would be left at the end of that is not a Syria that would be able to function at all. And so there has to be a political solution. That is why I particularly pay tribute to Secretary Kerry’s efforts to create a new process in Geneva, building on what we agreed last year at Geneva, a transitional government with full executive powers, formed by mutual consent.
But what the regime is doing at the moment, and what you’ve seen over the last couple of weeks in the military action, supported in this case by Hezbollah, is making a political solution more difficult. It may be designed to make a political solution more difficult. And so our efforts in Syria have been to try to save lives, to prevent radicalization, to send a message to the regime that in the end there does have to be a political solution. That’s why the United Kingdom has sent practical support to the opposition, to the national coalition, why we send so much humanitarian support. This is what our diplomatic effort is working towards. And so I think Secretary Kerry are in complete agreement about this. I also don’t have any new announcement that we’re making today about this. But we are determined that we will address this issue together and do our utmost to create the conditions for a political solution in Syria.
On the NSA and intelligence matters, that’s not been the focus of our discussions today. We’ve noted recent controversies, and the Secretary was very kind about my speech in the House of Commons on Monday. The intelligence sharing relationship between the UK and the U.S. is unique in the world. It is the strongest in the world. And it contributes massively to the national security of both countries. I think that’s something that the citizens of our countries should have confidence in, and in particular have confidence in that that relationship is based on a framework of law in both countries, law that is vigorously upheld. And so I repeat what I said in the House of Commons on Monday about the importance of that. And it’s a relationship we must never endanger, because it has saved many lives over recent decades in countering terrorism and in contributing to the security of all our citizens.
MODERATOR: The second question is Tom Whipple, The Times.
QUESTION: Thank you. I’ve got one question for both of you on Syria, if you don’t mind. But first of all, Foreign Secretary, to pick you up on the NSA story, I mean, you have made it clear in Parliament you don’t think British intelligence is breaking the law using information gathered by whatever means by U.S. intelligence. I’m not sure you that you’ve addressed what safeguards there are protecting British people from U.S. intelligence using these kinds of wholesale trawling of phone records and online activity we’ve been hearing about directly on innocent people in the UK.
And on Syria, we have heard what you’ve been saying about Syria for 800 days now. Have you discussed what military help you can give Syria’s rebels? And have you agreed on anything?
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Well, on the first point, the UK and the U.S. are very close partners on cyber security, on intelligence sharing. There couldn’t be two more trusted partners in the world than the United Kingdom and the United States. And I think that should give some level of assurance to the citizens of our countries. I pointed out in the House of Commons on Monday the legal protections that are there. And of course, I’ve made very clear that any information received by the United Kingdom is subject to all the laws of the United Kingdom. And so that remains the answer. That is the situation.
But no two countries in the world work more closely to protect the privacy of their citizens than the United Kingdom and the United States. There may be threats from elsewhere, of course, and there are, from criminal networks, sometimes from other states. It’s the UK and the U.S. that work together in trying to deal with that. So it’s not the United States we should be looking at when we’re worried about those things.
On the question about Syria, we’ve discussed many things about Syria, but I think we’ve dealt with this point earlier where we are restating today our determination that the UK, the U.S., our other allies in Europe and across the region, will work closely on this. Secretary Kerry has done a great deal in recent weeks to pull together a group of foreign ministers. We’ve met several times, including in Istanbul and in Amman recently, to coordinate our actions and our diplomacy and our support for the national coalition. We will continue to do that, and we may well have to intensify that in various ways over the coming weeks and months in order to make it more likely that we can achieve a political solution in Syria. So we’ve discussed all the ramifications of that today, but I can’t go into any more detail than that at the moment.
SECRETARY KERRY: Which part of it do you want me to answer?
QUESTION: Sorry. About Syria. We’ve heard you say similar things for 800 days about Syria.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, not me. I haven’t been in office for 800 days.
QUESTION: Officials like yourself, sir. Can you say – can you give us a sense, any sense at all, what you’ve been talking about in terms of the kind of help you may be offering the Syrian rebels, and why you aren’t able to say anything more than you’re saying at the moment, which you’re staying pretty tight-lipped about what you’ve been discussing in terms of this help you can give the rebels? At some point, it’s going to be too late for that, isn’t it? Do you think we’ve reached that point?
SECRETARY KERRY: I’m not going to make judgments about the points, where we are or aren’t. I’ll just say to you that as I said to you, we are determined to do everything that we can in order to help the opposition to be able to reach – to save Syria. And that stands. That’s exactly what we’re going to do. I have nothing new to announce today. When and if I do, you’ll hear about it. But at this moment, we are in consideration, as everybody knows – it’s been written about this week. People are talking about what further options might be exercised here. And we certainly had some discussion about that, obviously. But we don’t have anything to announce at this moment.
Thank you, all. Appreciate it.
FOREIGN SECRETARY HAGUE: Thank you very much.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks very much.
Sunday, June 2, 2013
U.S. CONCERNED OVER EGYPTIAN CIVIL SOCIETY LAW
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Concerns with Proposed Egyptian Civil Society Law
Press Statement
Jen Psaki
Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
May 31, 2013
The United States is concerned by the civil society draft law submitted by the Egyptian Presidency to the Shura Council. After holding consultations with local stakeholders and international experts, the government requested and received constructive recommendations for revisions to the bill, and we note that some improvements were made from earlier drafts. However, the draft law still imposes significant government controls and restrictions on the activities and funding of civic groups, which appear contrary to the right of freedom of association enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Egypt is a party. The United States believes the proposed law is likely to impede Egyptians’ ability to form civic groups that are critical to advancing freedoms, supporting democracy, and acting as appropriate checks on the government. As the Shura Council reviews the draft legislation, we urge further consultations with civil society and revisions to ensure the law respects universal human rights, empowers civil society to play its legitimate role, and responds to the Egyptian people’s aspirations for democracy as guaranteed specifically in Egypt’s new constitution.
U.S. Concerns with Proposed Egyptian Civil Society Law
Press Statement
Jen Psaki
Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
May 31, 2013
The United States is concerned by the civil society draft law submitted by the Egyptian Presidency to the Shura Council. After holding consultations with local stakeholders and international experts, the government requested and received constructive recommendations for revisions to the bill, and we note that some improvements were made from earlier drafts. However, the draft law still imposes significant government controls and restrictions on the activities and funding of civic groups, which appear contrary to the right of freedom of association enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Egypt is a party. The United States believes the proposed law is likely to impede Egyptians’ ability to form civic groups that are critical to advancing freedoms, supporting democracy, and acting as appropriate checks on the government. As the Shura Council reviews the draft legislation, we urge further consultations with civil society and revisions to ensure the law respects universal human rights, empowers civil society to play its legitimate role, and responds to the Egyptian people’s aspirations for democracy as guaranteed specifically in Egypt’s new constitution.
Friday, April 26, 2013
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL MEETS WITH MEDIA IN CAIRO, EGYPT
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Presenter: Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel
April 24, 2013 Media Availability with Secretary Hagel in Cairo, Egypt
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE CHUCK HAGEL: Okay, good, good. Good afternoon. How were the pyramids?
Q: Still there, huh.
Q: We wouldn't know.
SEC. HAGEL: You worked, that's right. Yeah, well, let me open up with a couple of comments, and then we'll go to whatever you want to talk about.
I wanted to stop in Egypt to, first, reaffirm American commitment to Egypt's emerging democracy, encourage the democratic and economic reforms that are underway here. Egypt's been an important partner of the U.S. over many years, and I wanted to get acquainted with the new president. I did not know him. I knew many of the military leaders.
So today was -- was a day to get acquainted, get reacquainted, and also reaffirm America's commitment to this emerging democracy. It is not easy. This is a difficult part of the world. This is a large country, an important country. They are undertaking the right course of action, human dignity and freedom and democratic norms and governance. We are committed to helping any nation that does that.
So we discussed, the president and I, many issues this afternoon, had a good meeting. I spent a lot of time with the defense minister and a number of his representatives. Some I've known over the years. So I was -- I was very, very happy that I stopped here and pleased that I spent the day to really take my own assessment of the situation here.
So that's what I was doing here. I'd be glad to respond to your questions.
Q: Question for you about Syria and chemical weapons. We haven't had a chance to ask you that since before the news of the Israeli assessment. What do you make of this new Israeli assessment, that they have used chemical weapons?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, when I was in Israel, they did not give me that assessment. I guess it wasn't complete. So I haven't seen the specifics, haven't talked to any Israeli officials, nor have I talked to any of our intelligence officials specifically about it. As I said, our intelligence agency, our agencies are assessing the information. So I really don't have anything to say beyond that.
Q: Is there -- sorry to follow up -- I'll try -- is there a danger here, a risk that U.S. credibility comes into question? Because there's been this red line declared. And yet you now have the British and the French also very strong suspicions, and now you have this very explicit confirmation from Israeli military intelligence.
SEC. HAGEL: Well, I don't think there's any danger. Suspicions are one thing. Evidence is another. I think we have to be very careful here before we make any conclusions -- draw any conclusions based on -- on real intelligence. And that's not at all questioning other nations' intelligence, but the United States relies on its own intelligence and must. So until I can see that intelligence, I really don't have anything else to say.
Q: Mr. Secretary, you said that they did not give you that assessment, but you spent a lot of time with Defense Minister Ya'alon. Did -- what did he discuss with you about Syrian chemical weapons? I mean, did he give you other assessments? Did he say they were still pending? Did he give you a different story? Or did he not talk to you about it?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, you know I don't discuss my conversations with any senior officials, nor -- nor do I get into any specifics -- any of our allies' specific conversations I had. We talked about everything. We talked about Syria. We talked about chemical weapons. We talked about the region. We talked about many issues. And we did talk about this issue.
Q: Well, with all due respect, you do talk about what you discuss with senior officials all the time. I mean, did -- it's an important question.
SEC. HAGEL: I don't discuss with you what I discuss with senior officials.
Q: Well, I understand, but I still think it's a fair question. Did the minister bring this up with you or not?
SEC. HAGEL: I said he did. We talked about it. I said we talked about it.
Q: But not that assessment particularly --
SEC. HAGEL: Well --
Q: -- that the IDF came out with
SEC. HAGEL: No, because I -- I think, as I just said earlier, I don't know if that assessment had been completed when I was there. So -- go ahead.
Q: I was going to ask you, do you think that assessment reflects the Israeli government's position at this point? Do you think it was just the IDF wanting to put that out there? And when we talk about a red line, you know, looking down the road, let's say we do find that this was true, that there was chemical weapons used. How do you decide -- does it -- does setting the red line -- does it mean it has to be used to a certain degree, so many people have to be affected in order to cross that red -- how -- how do we define a red line?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, first, I can't address whose assessment you're referring to was specifically in Israel. I assume it was an Israeli assessment, but I haven't seen it. That's my point. And I can't respond to something I don't know about, nor have I seen.
I'm not sure I understand your question about assessing red lines.
Q: (off mic) what would be a trigger, you know -- I mean, if a small amount is used, that's not the same as a large amount being used --
SEC. HAGEL: No.
Q: -- and, therefore, our response would -- would depend on those kinds of factors. Is that the kind of thing that you guys are talking about, in terms of how you would respond, if you were to determine that the line was crossed?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, we're looking at all possibilities, assessing all situations, and until we have intelligence, until we have facts, until we have confidence in those facts, then I have nothing else to say about it.
Q: Has -- has the Defense Department -- has the U.S. government sought clarification on what the military intelligence officer reported in his speech? And do you know, is that -- again, is that the official Israeli assessment on what happened there at Aleppo in Damascus? Do you know that?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, first -- first, you all know more about it than I do on official assessments. I have not talked to anybody about the Israeli assessment or report. That's first. And what I rely on is specific U.S. intelligence agency assessments. And any recommendations I would make to the president would have to come from those assessments, from our intelligence agencies.
Q: Do you think there's a risk, sir, that -- do you think that we need to make -- the U.S. needs to make the determination relatively quickly, now that you have three close allies having put out these assessments? Does the U.S. need to make a determination in the next week or few weeks or months? I mean, what are we looking at in terms of a timeline here?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, I don't think -- I don't think you judge these kinds of serious matters based on you have a timeline. It's based on the facts. It's based on intelligence. It's -- it's based on what you know, what you don't know, and what you think you know.
But this is serious business. And you want to be as sure as you can be on these kind of things. And until I see our intelligence assessments and the results of those, I can't respond any further.
Q: Sir, you have an intelligence background. How long do these things take? What's the --
SEC. HAGEL: I'm not in the intelligence business. I was on the Intelligence Committee in the Congress, co-chaired the president's Intelligence Advisory Board, but to say I have an intelligence background, I think, is a stretch.
But you don't take intelligence and say, okay, here's the timeframe. We're going to have it done in 24 hours. Intelligence is a matter of many pieces coming together. You look at all those pieces and facts. Sometimes it's easy. Most times it's not easy.
So you take the facts as they are. You get those facts. You do all the things you've got to do to make an assessment based on what you know and the facts, and then you come to some conclusion and some judgment based on that -- it's like a big mosaic. And I just don't have anything more to say until I see what our intelligence agencies have.
Q: How about a different topic?
GEORGE LITTLE: Thanks. That's all right. We've got to run now.
Q: (off mic)
SEC. HAGEL: All right. We'll take one more (off mic)
Q: (off mic)
Q: I have an Egypt question for you.
SEC. HAGEL: Go ahead, Bob, and then -- okay, all right.
Q: (off mic)
Q: So, I mean, the U.S. provides $1.7 billion to Egypt by way of military assistance each year. And most of that goes towards upgrading fighter jets and military tanks. But the problem that Egypt seems to face right now is counterterrorism. Is there any thought being given to taking or diverting some of that money towards counterterrorism efforts that Egypt needs right now than upgrading fighter planes and tanks?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, as you know, that's a program that goes through the FMF program, Foreign Military Financing, and Egypt makes assessments on where they think their security needs are.
Q: One more on Egypt, if I could. The Sinai is of interest to Israel, your first stop. I'm curious whether the rise of militancy in Sinai came up today, whether the Egyptians pledged anything to sort of tamp that down, which could be a big problem with the Israelis.
SEC. HAGEL: We did talk about the Sinai. We talked about many issues today and all the big issues that affect Israel's and Egypt's security, affects the Middle East security, stability, regional stability, America's security. Yes, we talked about it all.
Q: Thanks.
MR. LITTLE: Got to wrap up (off mic)
SEC. HAGEL: Thank you.
Q: Thank you very much.
Q: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Sunday, March 3, 2013
SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS AT ROUNDTABLE WITH BUSINESS LEADERS IN CAIRO
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at Top of Roundtable Discussion With Business Leaders
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Marriott Zamalek Hotel
Cairo, Egypt
March 2, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: I apologize to everybody for being detained, but I had a very, very spirited, as you can imagine, conversation with members of the opposition, and it was really valuable – very, very valuable. And I’m very grateful to them for taking the time to come and share thoughts. It was really a conversation – we could have gone on for a couple of more hours, and I wish I’d had the time actually to do that because I thought it was very productive.
But I particularly am glad to be back here in Cairo and back here with some of you I met previously and others for the first time. But this is my first trip to Cairo as Secretary of State, obviously, and a lot of things have been happening in the course of the last year, so I wanted to have a chance to be able to talk with you a little bit about the economic challenge that Egypt is facing.
We’ve been a longtime friend and partner, and the American people support Egypt and want its political and economic success. And we really look forward to being able to work with Egypt as it continues to play a very critical role in the region’s economy and in its security issues. We come here – I come here – on behalf of President Obama, committed not to any party, not to any one person, not to any specific political point of view, but filled with the commitment that Americans have to democracy, to a robust commitment to our values – to human rights, to freedom of expression, to tolerance.
And these are things that, historically, the strong civil society of Egypt has cared about. We believe it’s very important for the Egyptian people to come together around those values, but also to come together to meet the economic challenge at this particular moment. It is paramount, essential, urgent that the Egyptian economy get stronger, that it get back on its feet. And it’s very clear that there’s a circle of connections in how that can happen. To attract capital, to bring money back here that will invest, to give business the confidence to be able to move forward, there has to be a sense of security and there has to be a sense of economic and political viability.
And so we understand that. You have to get people back to work, and the energy of this country needs to hopefully be able to move from the streets to enterprise and to work and to daily life and to building the strength of that civil society. And so I’m here primarily to listen to you and you tell me what you think you need to do that. But it’s clear to us that the IMF arrangement needs to be reached, that we need to give the marketplace the confidence. And that very capable and entrepreneurial Egyptian Diaspora that is currently in many parts of the world with its capital, needs to feel comfortable that it could come back here and that there’s a viability in going forward.
So when I speak with President Morsy tomorrow, I will be speaking with him about the very specific ways that we, the United States, that President Obama, would like to see us engage, including economic assistance, support for private businesses, growing Egypt’s exports to the United States, investing in Egypt’s people through education. There are some very specific things that we need to do, and all of them we would only do in consultation with the government of this country. These are not things that we would do on our own without a government desiring it or wanting it or being part of it, obviously. But they are only things that we can do with the same confidence that you make your choices, knowing that Egypt is going to make the right fundamental economic decisions with respect to the IMF and that it stands ready to provide the foundation for sustainable and inclusive growth.
So we’re working on a number of initiatives towards supporting greater trade and business development. Last September, we brought more than 100 representatives from American businesses to Cairo in order to explore these very opportunities. We’re certainly ready to try to do that and try to do more. And I spoke in the last days with Prime Minister Qandil, with President Hollande of France, with Chancellor Angela Merkel, yesterday with Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey – all of them are prepared to be helpful, but all of them believe that Egypt needs to make some fundamental economic choices.
The sad thing is that shortly after the visit of those 100 businesses last year, there was a problem in terms of the violence with respect to the Embassy and the community and it deterred people from following up on that. So a clear message: The United States is committed to helping Egypt become an economically successful, democratic nation. And I know that most of you here are – or all of you here are too. And I look forward for hearing from you your thoughts about the ways in which that can happen rapidly and what we can do most effectively to try to help make it happen. And I thank for listening to those opening comments.
On that note, I invite any members of the chamber or any of the businesses here to speak up. We’re going to – sorry – wait for the press. Apologize. Thank you all very much. Appreciate your being here.
Remarks at Top of Roundtable Discussion With Business Leaders
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Marriott Zamalek Hotel
Cairo, Egypt
March 2, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: I apologize to everybody for being detained, but I had a very, very spirited, as you can imagine, conversation with members of the opposition, and it was really valuable – very, very valuable. And I’m very grateful to them for taking the time to come and share thoughts. It was really a conversation – we could have gone on for a couple of more hours, and I wish I’d had the time actually to do that because I thought it was very productive.
But I particularly am glad to be back here in Cairo and back here with some of you I met previously and others for the first time. But this is my first trip to Cairo as Secretary of State, obviously, and a lot of things have been happening in the course of the last year, so I wanted to have a chance to be able to talk with you a little bit about the economic challenge that Egypt is facing.
We’ve been a longtime friend and partner, and the American people support Egypt and want its political and economic success. And we really look forward to being able to work with Egypt as it continues to play a very critical role in the region’s economy and in its security issues. We come here – I come here – on behalf of President Obama, committed not to any party, not to any one person, not to any specific political point of view, but filled with the commitment that Americans have to democracy, to a robust commitment to our values – to human rights, to freedom of expression, to tolerance.
And these are things that, historically, the strong civil society of Egypt has cared about. We believe it’s very important for the Egyptian people to come together around those values, but also to come together to meet the economic challenge at this particular moment. It is paramount, essential, urgent that the Egyptian economy get stronger, that it get back on its feet. And it’s very clear that there’s a circle of connections in how that can happen. To attract capital, to bring money back here that will invest, to give business the confidence to be able to move forward, there has to be a sense of security and there has to be a sense of economic and political viability.
And so we understand that. You have to get people back to work, and the energy of this country needs to hopefully be able to move from the streets to enterprise and to work and to daily life and to building the strength of that civil society. And so I’m here primarily to listen to you and you tell me what you think you need to do that. But it’s clear to us that the IMF arrangement needs to be reached, that we need to give the marketplace the confidence. And that very capable and entrepreneurial Egyptian Diaspora that is currently in many parts of the world with its capital, needs to feel comfortable that it could come back here and that there’s a viability in going forward.
So when I speak with President Morsy tomorrow, I will be speaking with him about the very specific ways that we, the United States, that President Obama, would like to see us engage, including economic assistance, support for private businesses, growing Egypt’s exports to the United States, investing in Egypt’s people through education. There are some very specific things that we need to do, and all of them we would only do in consultation with the government of this country. These are not things that we would do on our own without a government desiring it or wanting it or being part of it, obviously. But they are only things that we can do with the same confidence that you make your choices, knowing that Egypt is going to make the right fundamental economic decisions with respect to the IMF and that it stands ready to provide the foundation for sustainable and inclusive growth.
So we’re working on a number of initiatives towards supporting greater trade and business development. Last September, we brought more than 100 representatives from American businesses to Cairo in order to explore these very opportunities. We’re certainly ready to try to do that and try to do more. And I spoke in the last days with Prime Minister Qandil, with President Hollande of France, with Chancellor Angela Merkel, yesterday with Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey – all of them are prepared to be helpful, but all of them believe that Egypt needs to make some fundamental economic choices.
The sad thing is that shortly after the visit of those 100 businesses last year, there was a problem in terms of the violence with respect to the Embassy and the community and it deterred people from following up on that. So a clear message: The United States is committed to helping Egypt become an economically successful, democratic nation. And I know that most of you here are – or all of you here are too. And I look forward for hearing from you your thoughts about the ways in which that can happen rapidly and what we can do most effectively to try to help make it happen. And I thank for listening to those opening comments.
On that note, I invite any members of the chamber or any of the businesses here to speak up. We’re going to – sorry – wait for the press. Apologize. Thank you all very much. Appreciate your being here.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
MORE U.S. AID TO PEOPLE AFFECTED BY SYRIAN CONFLICT
 |
| Map: Syria. Credit: CIA World Factbook. |
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
The U.S. Announces Additional Humanitarian Assistance in Response to the Syrian Crisis
Fact Sheet
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
January 29, 2013
Today, President Obama reaffirmed the United States’ continued commitment and support for the Syrian people by announcing an additional $155 million in humanitarian aid to help meet the acute needs of people inside Syria and refugees across the region who are affected by the violence in Syria. This new funding includes the $10 million announced last week in Turkey by the visiting U.S. delegation. This new assistance brings the United States’ total humanitarian response to the crisis in Syria to approximately $365 million to date.
In December 2012, the United Nations issued revised humanitarian appeals to help meet the growing needs of those affected by the conflict in Syria. The United States strongly supports these appeals as the most effective way for donors to provide urgently needed humanitarian aid to the Syrian people. The United States is helping to meet urgent needs in all 14 governorates inside Syria through its support for the UN appeals and by partnering with non-governmental organizations.
INSIDE SYRIA:
U.S. assistance is:
· helping feed millions of Syrians throughout all 14 governorates;
· providing medicine and medical treatment in areas including Damascus, Dar’a and Homs;
· immunizing one million Syrian children against preventable diseases like the measles;
· providing winter supplies to Syrians in areas including Aleppo, Dayr az Zawr and Homs.
With this additional funding, the United States is providing nearly $202 million to address critical needs inside of Syria. U.S. assistance is tackling severe food shortages through robust funding of international and non-governmental organizations providing food packages to those in need and flour to restart bakeries. Funding for emergency health care and supplies will enable surgeons in field hospitals and mobile clinics to save more lives. For those taking refuge in damaged public buildings, we are providing winter supplies such as blankets, heating stoves, and heavy-duty plastic sheeting to cover windows and other damaged areas. We are supporting the provision of household items, shelter support, cash assistance, health care, and community protection services to displaced Syrians. U.S. funding enables direct food, cash, and winter assistance for more than 400,000 Palestinian refugees inside Syria who are affected by the violence.
REGIONAL:
The United States is providing $5 million in additional regional contributions to UN agencies as part of the refugee response, including in Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon and Iraq.
JORDAN:
The United States is providing over $52 million for Syrians in Jordan who have fled the violence in Syria.
U.S. assistance to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the World Food Program (WFP), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), and non-governmental organizations is helping Syrians living in local communities as well as in Za’atri camp. In addition to providing food, water, winter supplies and shelter, U.S. assistance is supporting medical assistance, efforts to address psychological trauma, and support measures to prevent and respond to gender-based violence. Community impact projects provide needed support to Syrians as well as to Jordanian host communities. U.S. assistance helps children through informal and remedial education programs, formal schooling, and programs that help them deal with trauma. Partners are also providing emergency transport and reception and health referrals.
LEBANON:
With this additional funding, the United States is providing nearly $51 million to help support displaced Syrians and Palestinians in Lebanon who have fled the violence in Syria.
Previous U.S. contributions in Lebanon are helping provide rent support, household items, and food vouchers. Additionally, U.S. assistance supports primary health care consultations, services, and emergency medical care.
As part of this new announcement, the United States is supporting UNHCR Lebanon’s critical work providing for the basic humanitarian needs of Syrians in Lebanon, including medical services and supplies, such as clean water, blankets, and shelter support. Additional support to WFP will continue to provide food vouchers and dry rations to refugees throughout Lebanon.
The United States is also supporting efforts to assist Palestinian refugees who have fled Syria by providing education, relief supplies, shelter, and medical care in Lebanon.
In addition, the United States is also providing contributions to other UN agencies as well as international NGOs providing much needed shelter and medical care to Syrian refugees in Lebanon.
TURKEY:
With this additional funding, the United States is providing more than $34 million to help those in Turkey who have fled the violence in Syria.
The Government of Turkey, through the Turkish Red Crescent, is leading the relief effort with strong support from the United States and international partners. U.S. support of UN agencies helps feed Syrians, provides safe, child-friendly learning environments, and resources like household items, winter tents and blankets. The United States is also funding measures to prevent and respond to gender-based violence.
As part of this new announcement, the United States is supporting the expansion of programs providing debit cards and cookware so Syrians can purchase and cook food for their families. This contribution includes funding to the Turkish Red Crescent for winterization support in the camps. U.S. funding also supports primary health care for urban refugees and Syrian children dealing with the trauma they have endured.
IRAQ:
With this assistance, the United States is providing nearly $19 million to help support Syrians who have fled to Iraq.
The United States is providing food aid, medical supplies, emergency and basic health care, shelter materials, clean water, hygiene education and supplies, and other relief supplies to refugees in host communities and camps. Separately, the United States continues its strong support for the thousands of Iraqi refugees who have returned to Iraq as a result of the violence in Syria.
As part of this new announcement, in addition to UNHCR, the United States is supporting IOM for the provision of basic domestic and hygiene items and other non-food items for Syrian refugee camps in Iraq. Additional funding through WFP ensures the continued provision of hot meals, bread, dry rations and food vouchers.
EGYPT:
The United States is providing more than $2 million in food assistance and to support UNHCR’s efforts for Syrian refugees in Egypt.
The United States recognizes and applauds the generosity of the governments and people of Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq, Egypt and other nations hosting all those who have fled the violence in Syria. These countries have taken on a significant burden. They are not alone.
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
U.S. AIR FORCE NATIONAL GUARD HISTORICAL PHOTO
FROM: U.S. AIR FROCE NATIONAL GUARD
A C-130 of the 130th Tactical Airlift Group, West Virginia Air National Guard, flies over the Pyramids of Giza, Egypt, 1981.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
PENTAGON OFFICIALS HOPE FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN MILITARY/ GOVERNMENT IN EGYPT
U.S. Hopes Egyptian Civilian, Military Leaders Work TogetherBy Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 13, 2012 - U.S. defense officials were expecting Egypt's new president to name his own defense team and hope civilian and military leaders can work together to address the country's problems, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said today.
Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi announced yesterday that the head of military intelligence, Gen. Abdul-Fattah el-Sisi, would replace Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi as defense minister and leader of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. The council effectively led Egypt after last year's fall of President Hosni Mubarak until Morsi took office in June.
Morsi is the first democratically elected leader in Egypt's history.
The president also replaced army chief of staff Gen. Sami Hafez Anan and the leaders of the navy, air force and air defense branch.
"It's important for both the military and civilians leaders in Egypt to work together to address the economic and security challenges facing that country," Little said. "We had expected President Morsi to coordinate changes in the military leadership. The United States and the Department of Defense, in particular, look forward to continuing a very close relationship with the [Supreme Council of the Armed Forces]."
U.S. officials know General Sisi, Little said. "He comes from within the ranks of the SCAF, and we believe we will be able to continue the strong partnership that we have with Egypt," he added.
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta has not spoken to the new defense minister, "but looks forward to doing so at the earliest possible moment," Little said.
Egyptian officials said the 76-year old Tantawi retired, but would continue to serve as a presidential advisor.
Monday, June 25, 2012
U.S. SEC. OF DEFENSE PANETTA COMMENDS EGYPTIAN MILITARY
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Panetta Commends Egyptian Military for Supporting Elections
By Cheryl Pellerin
WASHINGTON, June 25, 2012 - Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta commends Egyptian Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the country's top military officer, and his staff for supporting a secure, free and fair election in Egypt, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said today.
Egypt's election commission announced June 24 that Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Morsi won the presidential runoff over Ahmed Shafiq, the last prime minister under deposed leader Hosni Mubarak.
Little said the secretary placed two phone calls to Tantawi, head of Egypt's Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, late last week to express his desire for the Egyptian military to support a free and fair election, "and that's precisely what occurred."
Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke this morning with his Egyptian counterpart, Lt. Gen. Sami Hafez Enan, Little added.
"The tenor of all these discussions has been to express a desire to encourage the Egyptian military to support the democratic process," the press secretary said, "and we've seen what's occurred in Egypt."
Egypt has an enduring role as a security partner and leader in promoting regional stability, "and we look forward to working with the new government on a host of issues," Little told reporters last week.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
PENTAGON OFFICIAL EXPRESSES CONCERN OVER POWER TRANSITION IN EGYPT
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Officials Express Concern Over Egyptian Transition
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
WASHINGTON, June 18, 2012 - Millions of Egyptian people voted to elect a new president democratically, but the Egyptian military's last-minute amendments to the country's constitution concern the Defense Department, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said here today.
"We support the Egyptian people and their expectation that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces will transfer full power to a democratically elected civilian government, as the SCAF previously announced," Little said in a statement released to reporters."We have, and will continue, to urge the SCAF to relinquish power to civilian-elected authorities and to respect the universal rights of the Egyptian people and the rule of law," he added.
Little said the Defense Department is "deeply concerned" about the new amendments to Egypt's constitutional declaration and the timing of the announcement as polls closed for the presidential election.
"We believe Egypt's transition must continue and that Egypt is made stronger and more stable by a successful transition to democracy," he said. "Egypt has an enduring role as a security partner and leader in promoting regional stability, and we look forward to working with the new government on a host of issues."
Meeting today with reporters along with Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt. John Kirby, the press secretary said Defense Department officials remain in close contact with the Egyptian military on the matter, noting that Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta spoke June 15 with Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, leader of Egypt's ruling council. "We plan to continue to maintain those close contacts and cooperation with the SCAF," Little said. "That being said, we need to see where things go."
Little said the U.S. and Egypt have maintained a very strong military-to-military relationship for many years.
"We want that to continue, ... [and] we're going to monitor events closely," he said. "It's very important to the entire U.S. government, and the U.S. military, that the SCAF take steps to promote a peaceful transition to democracy and a government in Egypt that is responsive to the Egyptian people."
Little said the United States has been clear about its position on Egypt's transition to a democratically elected government and that he believes the SCAF is fully aware of these concerns.
"We believe they've taken those concerns onboard, and there's time for all of this to be sorted out ... in the right way," he said.
Kirby said the Defense Department has enjoyed a strong military-to-military relationship and cooperation with the Egyptian military for more than three decades and still believes in maintaining that connection.
"Speaking from a purely military perspective, that relationship continues," he said. "It's been important."
Kirby said that while Egypt has been going through "a year of momentous change" that has altered the two nations' exercise regimen, the core of the relationship still remains.
"We've expressed our concerns about some of these recent decisions," Kirby said. "Our hope, and our expectation, is that they will facilitate a smooth, democratic transition in accordance with the constitution of their country. It's now up to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to do the things that the Egyptian people expect it to do," he added.
Friday, May 25, 2012
SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON'S REMARKS ON THE 2011 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Release of the 2011 Human Rights Report
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Washington, DC
May 24, 2012
Good morning. Good morning, everyone. I’m very pleased to be joined here today by Assistant Secretary Posner to release our 2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. These reports, which the United States Government has published for nearly four decades, make clear to governments around the world: We are watching and we are holding you accountable. And they make clear to citizens and activists everywhere: You are not alone. We are standing with you.
Mike and his team and the staff at our embassies and consulates around the world have worked tirelessly to produce these reports. And I want to thank each and every person who has contributed to them.
Now, as you know, this has been an especially tumultuous and momentous year for everyone involved in the cause of human rights. Many of the events that have dominated recent headlines from the revolutions in the Middle East to reforms in Burma began with human rights, with the clear call of men and women demanding their universal rights.
Today in Egypt, we are seeing in real time that those demands are making a difference as Egyptians are going to the polls to determine for the first time in their history who their leaders will be. Whatever the outcome of the election, the Egyptian people will keep striving to achieve their aspirations. And as they do, we will continue to support them.
We will support people everywhere who seek the same. Men and women who want to speak, worship, associate, love the way they choose – we will defend their rights; not just on the day we issue these reports, but every day.
As Secretary, I have worked with my superb team on advancing human rights in a 21st century landscape, focusing on new frontiers even as we stand up against age-old abuses. Where women have been and continue to be marginalized, we’re helping them become full partners in their governments and economies. Where LGBT people are mistreated and discriminated against, we’re working to bring them into full participation in their societies. We’re expanding access to technology and defending internet freedom because people deserve the same rights online as off. And we know that in the 21st century human rights are not only a question of civil and political liberties, it’s about the fundamental question of whether people everywhere have the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.
So we are supporting efforts around the world to give people a voice in their societies, a stake in their economies, and to support them as they determine for themselves the future of their own lives and the contributions they can make to the future of their countries. We think this is the way, together, we can make human rights a human reality.
Now as these reports document, there is a lot of work that remains to be done. In too many places, governments continue to stifle their own people’s aspirations. And in some places like Syria, it is not just an assault on freedom of expression or freedom of association, but an assault on the very lives of citizens. The Assad regime’s brutality against its own people must and will end, because Syrians know they deserve a better future.
These reports are more than a report card; they are a tool for lawmakers and scholars, for civil society leaders and activists. We also think they are a tool for government leaders. It’s always been bewildering to me that so many government leaders don’t want to make the most of the human potential of their own people.
And so I don’t expect this to be reading material everywhere, but I do hope somewhere in the corner of my mind that maybe a leader will pick it up and say: How do we compare with others, and what can we do today, tomorrow, and next year that will maximize the potential of more of our citizens?
This year we’ve made the reports easier to read online, easier to track trends across a region, easier to follow the progress of a particular group, easier to find out which governments are or are not living up to their commitments.
Now, every year that we issue this, we take stock of ourselves. We say: What more can we do? Where have we succeeded or are succeeding? Where are we falling short? And we know we have to recommit to the work of advancing universal rights, building the partnerships that will move us forward, helping every man, woman, and child live up to their God-given potential. And we know we have to be able to speak out and speak up for those unable to use their own voices.
But this is at the core of who we are. This is central to what we believe. And this is the work that will continue administration after administration, secretary after secretary, because of its centrality to our foreign policy and national security.
Now I’d like to turn things over to Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Right, and Labor Mike Posner, who will speak further about some of the specific findings in this year’s reports. Thank you all very much. Thanks, Mike.
Monday, April 30, 2012
U.S. BELIEVES AL-QAIDA IS STILL MAJOR THREAT
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Al-Qaida Offshoots Are Biggest Terror Threat, Official Says
By Jim Garamone
WASHINGTON, April 29, 2012 - Core Al-Qaida – the group led by Osama bin Laden – has been surpassed by its affiliates as the biggest terrorist threat to the United States, a senior intelligence official said.
"With bin Laden's death, the global jihadist movement lost its most iconic, most effective and most inspirational leader," Robert T. Cardillo, deputy director for intelligence integration with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, told reporters in an April 27 conference call.
Bin Laden's death allowed al-Qaida second-in-command Ayman al Zawahiri to move up, but he has not changed the group's strategic direction and does not have the charisma to appeal to new recruits, Cardillo said.
Navy SEALs killed bin Laden in Pakistan during an intelligence-driven operation on May 2, 2011.
The al-Qaida offshoots – al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, al-Shabob in Somalia, al-Qaida in the Mahgreb – "will surpass the core al-Qaida remaining in Pakistan," Cardillo said. "Each group will seek opportunities to strike Western interests in its operating area, but each group will have different intent and opportunity to execute those plans."
The "Arab Spring" uprisings that began last year have influenced the jihadist movement, the deputy director said. "The unrest and reduced security provides terrorists inspired by that movement more operating space as security services focus more on internal security and regime stability," he said.
As new Middle East leaders address public demands for their participation in government, "we assess that core al-Qaida and the jihadist movement will suffer a strategic setback in that the Arab Spring strikes at the very core of their jihadist narrative," he said.
Al-Qaida believes in progress by violence, but the elections in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and the up-coming election in Libya rebuke that assertion, Cardillo said.
"However, prolonged instability or unmet promises by these new governments ... would give al-Qaida, its affiliates and its allies more time to establish networks, gain support and potentially engage in operations," he said.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
U.S. DAILY STATE DEPARTMENT MEETING
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
April 25, 2012
TRANSCRIPT:
1:06 p.m. EDT
MS. NULAND: Good afternoon, everybody. In keeping with our Free the Press campaign heading up to May 3rd, our journalist of the day is from Eritrea. And he is Dawit Isaak, who’s an independent Eritrean journalist. He co-owned the first Eritrean independent newspaper, which often reported on alleged abuses of regime power. He was arrested in 2001 without any formal charges or a trial, and he has since been held incommunicado by the Government of Eritrea. And we take this opportunity to call on the government to release him immediately. And you can learn more about him at our website humanrights.gov.
Let’s go to what’s on your minds.
QUESTION: I don’t have anything that’s significant enough to begin with, so --
MS. NULAND: Excellent.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) with the Free the Press campaign.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: Are you aware that the Palestinian Authority blocked something like eight websites that are critical of Mahmoud Abbas? And if you are, do you have a comment on that?
MS. NULAND: I do have something on this. We have seen these reports, and we are concerned about any uses of technology that would restrict access to information. We are raising these concerns with the Palestinian Authority. You know that we’ve had these concerns in other parts of the world, and we wouldn’t want to see the PA going in the direction that some of those regimes have gone in. You know how strongly we advocate freedom of expression, freedom of information. So we will raise these things and endeavor to figure out what’s going on.
QUESTION: Are any of these news agencies and websites U.S.-financed?
MS. NULAND: Said, we started to do a little investigation of that. None of them is funded by the State Department programs under MEPI. I don’t have a full picture of the USAID programs yet. As soon as we do, we’ll get something back to you.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
Please, Andy.
QUESTION: I have a related – slightly related question. In an interview with CNN yesterday, President – Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he supported the idea of a contiguous Palestinian state – which commentators said seemed to be a new line from him – that it wouldn’t look like Swiss cheese under any future arrangement. Is that – do you see that as progress? Is that something that is – marks a step forward?
MS. NULAND: Well, I think you know that our goal remains a comprehensive peace that creates and allows for a secure Israel and a prosperous and contiguous Palestinian state. But as we’ve always said, we can’t do this through press announcements. We can only do this when the parties sit down together and do the negotiating they have to do.
QUESTION: But I guess my question is: Is Netanyahu’s statement a – does this mark a new – an advance in Israel’s position toward this goal that you’re referring to, contiguous state being now --
MS. NULAND: Well, we ourselves have always called for a contiguous state, so that’s a good thing. But what’s most important is that these parties really roll up their sleeves and work together.
Shaun.
QUESTION: On a somewhat related note, the head of the Israeli military, Lieutenant General Gantz, made some remarks about Iran, saying that he considers the Iranians to be – the Iranian leadership to be rational, and hinting that pressure can work in terms of making them refrain from a bomb. What is your – do you have a reaction to his remarks, an assessment?
MS. NULAND: I don’t, Shaun. I really don’t. I mean, you know where we are. We are working on this approach of pressure and talks in the hope that we can make progress on this. But I think it’s really only Iranian behavior that’s going to tell the true story of what their intentions are.
QUESTION: Also on Iran? There’s the report that apparently, according to the Iranian ambassador to Russia, that the country is now thinking about giving up its nuclear program in order to avoid the looming EU sanctions. Does the U.S know about this? What can you say about it? If this is indeed true, is this a positive development?
MS. NULAND: Well, frankly, these issues have to be negotiated at the table that we have now created and restarted with the P-5+1 process. So the ambassador of Iran to Russia is not a central player in those, and frankly, what’s most important is what Iran says and does at the negotiating table.
QUESTION: But the fact that he is indicating that they are seriously looking at the long-term impact – we believe – ostensibly – on the Iranian economy, is that perhaps a leverage point for the P-5+1 process?
MS. NULAND: I don’t think that we consider it new that the sanctions are biting on the Iranian economy, and that it is a direct result of the international pressure that we’ve been able to bring to bear – more sanctions than we’ve ever been able to muster against Iran – that has brought them back to the negotiating table. But now, what’s most important is that they actually roll up their sleeves and work with us and come clean on their program.
QUESTION: Have there been any conversations with the Embassy in Moscow to see if indeed this was directly communicated, perhaps, to the Russian Government to actually see whether this is just speculation in the press or there might be some sort of signal coming out of this?
MS. NULAND: Again, I think you’re taking this far more seriously than we are. What matters to us is what happens in the room.
Please.
QUESTION: If I can go back to Andy’s question for a second?
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: Do you see – does the prime minister’s statement present you with an opportunity to drive the point home about settlement and outposts and so on, the fact that he acknowledged the need for a contiguous contiguity for a possible Palestinian state?
MS. NULAND: Well, I don’t think there’s any lack of emphasis on our part with regard to how we feel about settlements. I mentioned yesterday that we had been in to talk to the Israelis about this latest move, just to confirm that our Ambassador Shapiro did speak to Israeli negotiator Molho on this issue. So I don’t think there’s any lack of attention to that matter.
QUESTION: Yeah. But up to this point, there has been either a dismissal on the part of the Israelis or they just flat out snub your call to stop the settlements and so on. Now the prime minister himself has spoke of the need for contiguity. Don’t you think that this is a good opportunity to sort of emphatically make the point once more?
MS. NULAND: Well, we’ve been emphatically making the point all week long, but thanks, Said.
Please.
QUESTION: What was the Israeli response when Shapiro went in to --
MS. NULAND: The Israelis have made their views known on this publicly as well as privately. I don’t think that what they said to us privately differed all that much from what they’ve said privately[1]. But I’ll let them speak for themselves.
QUESTION: Which is that?
MS. NULAND: I’m going to let them speak for themselves.
QUESTION: Well, what’s your – I want to get – find out what your – is your understanding that they have legalized these outposts?
MS. NULAND: I am not going to get into what happened in the room with them. I’m going to let them characterize their own views. But they’ve been pretty clear publicly --
QUESTION: Well, forget about that. What’s your understanding? I don’t know what they’ve said. I’m asking you: What have they said? What is your understanding of what their position is?
MS. NULAND: I’m going to send you to them on their position.
QUESTION: No, no. (Laughter.)
MS. NULAND: Yeah, yeah. I am.
Go ahead. Please.North Korea?
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: No. I need to stay with the Palestinian for a second.
MS. NULAND: Yeah. Right. You can ask the Israelis about their own views
.
QUESTION: Yeah. This has to do with a determination that was in today’s Federal Register signed by Bill Burns, who I believe is a U.S. official, right?
It says – and I’m not going to read the whole thing, but it says: “I hereby determine and certify that the Palestinians have not, since the date of the enactment of that act -- ” which refers to the appropriations bill – “obtained in the UN or any specialized agency thereof the same standing as member-states or full membership as a state outside of an agreement negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians and waive the provisions of Section 1003 of the Anti-Terrorism Act,” et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Basically what this means is that the Palestinians can still have a waiver to have an office here. Now, I’ve got a couple of questions about this. One, I’m not aware – and maybe I’m wrong, but I am not aware that the Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2012 has actually been enacted yet.
So one, is that correct? And two, how is possible that you’re waiving this if they got membership in UNESCO in November?
MS. NULAND: Well, I haven’t seen this citation that you’re reading from, so why don’t I take it from you and why don’t we endeavor to come back to you with answers on both of those.
Okay.
QUESTION: A question on North Korea.
MS. NULAND: Please.
QUESTION: The Chinese vice foreign minister today appeared to make a veiled warning to North Korea not to carry out this supposed or possible nuclear test. I was curious if you had seen or had a reaction to those comments from the Chinese vice foreign minister, and if there’s – what the thinking is, if China is doing enough with their leverage with North Korea to put off a possible nuclear test.
MS. NULAND: Well, as we’ve said all through this period, we have been working closely with the Chinese, encouraging them to use all of the political and other kinds of leverage that they have with the DPRK to encourage it to change course. So obviously, public statements of this kind are most welcome. And we look forward to consulting with the Chinese on what more they think can and should be done when we go to – when the Secretary and Secretary Geithner are in Beijing for the Strategic and Economic Dialogue next week.
Please, in the back.
QUESTION: A question to Iran again. They – Iran reported that there was a cyber attack on its oil industry last week. The implications were that the West was behind it, although the United States weren’t named specifically. Have you any idea what might be behind those attacks, who might be, or can you even confirm that these attacks occurred?
MS. NULAND: I don’t have any information on that one way or the other. I refer you to the Iranians.
QUESTION: Former negotiator Larijani said today that this is a really good time for the negotiations to go on between Iran and the West. Do you feel that this is really a propitious time for Iran to go forward with --
MS. NULAND: Well, I think it’s going to be a matter of what these talks produce. So we are obviously committed to working hard. As we said at the time, we believe the first meeting in Istanbul was worth having. We’re going to have another meeting in Baghdad. But I think we’re now getting down to concrete proposals. If there are real steps, we’ll be prepared to respond, but we need to now see some real steps.
QUESTION: So your feeling is that the meeting on May 23rd in Baghdad will be far more substantive than the meeting in Istanbul, which basically set the date of the meeting?
MS. NULAND: I think we’ve sort of set the table at Istanbul. Now we need to start seeing what the meal’s going to look like.
QUESTION: And when you say concrete proposal, do you expect Iran to submit like a – to open up its facilities and to submit to whatever it needs from the West to aid it in a civilian program?
MS. NULAND: Well, I think you know all of the issues of concern to us with regard to Iran’s program. They’re clearly outlined in the repeated IAEA reports. So we had a chance to have that opening meeting of this round of talks and to talk about all the issues that we care about, and now we have to do some more technical exchanges between now and Baghdad, and then we have to see whether at the Baghdad round we can really get down to what the Iranians are prepared to do and what steps we might be willing to take to respond if the steps are real.
Okay.
QUESTION: And finally, is the feeling in this town that the sanctions are so biting that Iran is beginning to approach these talks seriously?
MS. NULAND: Well, again, we’ve said that we believe that the sanctions are biting, as I said at the top of the briefing. We think that that has led to their decision to come back to the table, and we hope that it’ll continue to contribute to working through this issue diplomatically, because that’s obviously the best way to get this done.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Did you have an update on David Hale?
MS. NULAND: I did, especially after I mangled it yesterday.
QUESTION: Oh. Was he not in Saudi?
MS. NULAND: Yeah. He actually went to Saudi last night. He had a meeting with Deputy Foreign Minister bin Abdullah today in Riyadh. He then went on to Cairo this evening. In Cairo, he’s going to meet with Egyptian officials. But he’s also going to meet with Qatari Prime Minister Al Thani, who is also going to be in Cairo at the same time.
QUESTION: So --
MS. NULAND: And then he is coming back to Washington on the weekend.
QUESTION: So he’s not going to Qatar, he’s --
MS. NULAND: Correct, correct.
QUESTION: And wasn’t there another one that he was going to – wasn’t he going to go to the UAE or something like that? Maybe --
MS. NULAND: Net on this trip: He will have been in Jerusalem, Jericho, Amman, Riyadh – I think he was in Kuwait at the front end, I can’t remember – Saudi, et cetera.
QUESTION: All right. And so he decided that it’s not worth his while, it’s not worth his time to go back to Israel and the PA after Cairo?
MS. NULAND: I think he – that he wants to come home and report and consult here before he makes another trip. That’s the current planning.
QUESTION: When he is in Cairo, isn’t he going to bring up the gas issue between Egypt and Israel?
MS. NULAND: The which issue?
QUESTION: The gas.
QUESTION: Gas.
QUESTION: Natural gas.
MS. NULAND: I’m sure that’ll be one of the subjects that he discusses, yes.
QUESTION: Any message he will bring to Cairo in this regard?
MS. NULAND: I think we’ll let him have his consultations in Cairo and we see what we want to read out on those.
Please.
QUESTION: Do you have a readout on Ambassador Grossman’s travel to Copenhagen, Ankara, and Abu Dhabi?
MS. NULAND: I do have some info on Ambassador Grossman’s travels.
First, on his European stops, as you know, he was primarily focused on support for the Afghan National Security Forces in line with the Chicago summit agenda that the Secretary laid out when she was in Brussels last week. He also was yesterday in Turkey for the same purposes, in Ankara. Today, he is in Abu Dhabi, and he – there was also a meeting of the International Contact Group on Afghanistan in the UAE.
And he is going on tonight to Islamabad, where he will be having bilateral conversations, and he will also be taking part in a core group meeting – this is Afghanistan, U.S., and Pakistan – that’ll be attended for the Pakistanis by Foreign Secretary Jilani, and by the Afghans by Deputy Foreign Minister Ludin.
QUESTION: So when he visits Islamabad and meets the foreign ministers, is he carrying any message from Secretary Clinton on --
MS. NULAND: When he goes to Pakistan?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MS. NULAND: Well, this is, as you know, in the context of the parliament concluding its review. We have begun our process of reengaging with the Pakistani Government to work through the issues that have come up during the review. So this will be an effort to really take up those issues one at a time and to see how we work through them.
QUESTION: So has Pakistan formally informed you about the parliamentary review or the conditions that they have announced publicly?
MS. NULAND: Well, I think we mentioned a week ago that the Secretary had spoken to Foreign Minister Khar, so she gave some views on this, and it was agreed at that time that Ambassador Grossman would make a trip to Pakistan to deepen and broaden the conversation that we’ve been having. I think you know that we had also had Deputy Secretary Nides in Pakistan, I think it was two weeks ago. And we had
USAID Administrator Shah there, we had Generals Allen and Dempsey there. So you can see us working hard now with the Pakistanis to work through the issues.
QUESTION: And this is a day-long trip?
MS. NULAND: He will be there – he’s arriving this evening. I think he will be there through Friday is my understanding, because the core group meeting is on Friday.
QUESTION: And he’s also going to Afghanistan?
MS. NULAND: He’s not going to Afghanistan on this trip.
QUESTION: He’s going back to D.C.?
MS. NULAND: Correct, yeah.
QUESTION: As part of the deepening of the relationship, did Pakistan inform the U.S. that it was going to conduct this missile test in the last 24 hours?
MS. NULAND: I don’t know what kind of advanced information we have – we had. I assume we had some, because I do know that they did have contact with the Indian Government before they proceeded with this.
QUESTION: Any reaction to that, to the missile test, to this – obviously it comes after the Indian test.
MS. NULAND: Well, we – obviously, the same message that we gave at the time of the Indian test, that we urge all nuclear-capable states to exercise restraint regarding nuclear and missile capabilities. We understand that this was a planned launch. The Pakistanis have said it wasn’t a direct response to the Indian test. But what’s most important is that they do seem to have taken steps to inform the Indians, and we, as you know, are quite intent on those two countries continuing to work together and improve their dialogue.
QUESTION: Sorry, just on Grossman’s meetings with the Pakistanis, not the core group --
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: So Ambassador Grossman is prepared to discuss everything that’s on the list of Pakistani concerns?
MS. NULAND: I think he’s open to working through the results of the parliamentary review with the Pakistani Government. I don’t want to prejudge or preempt how those conversations will go or what agenda the Pakistani side will bring, but as we said, we had been waiting for that review to be concluded before we could fully reengage. So this is our opportunity to do that.
QUESTION: But do you see the results of that review as something that can be negotiated, or is it something that you’re just going to accept flat out or --
MS. NULAND: I think we want to hear the Pakistani Government’s presentation of where it thinks the bilateral relationship needs to go, and then we will present our views and work through the issues, as partners do. That’s the expectation, so --
QUESTION: So it is something that you see as a negotiation process?
MS. NULAND: This is a conversation. This is a bilateral consultation about how we can improve our relationship along all of the lines that have been difficult. So I don’t want to prejudge what he’s going to hear or where we’re going to go in response. But as you know, we had said that we really needed them to complete their internal work and then come back to us, give us a sense of what they think this ought to lead to, and then we can talk. So that’s – this is the talk.
QUESTION: Does he have the authority to – or the authorization to discuss things like drone strikes, which are very high on the Pakistanis’ list? Well, I mean, at the top of the Pakistanis’ list.
MS. NULAND: Well, I think you can imagine that (a) I’m not going to get into intelligence issues and how we talk about them or don’t talk about them; and I’m certainly not going to get into the precise instructions of our fully empowered special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
QUESTION: So he is? He can negotiate with the Pakistanis on this and any other issue?
MS. NULAND: I am not using the “n” word and I’m not going to get into his instructions.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Just briefly on that?
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: Do you when the last time he was in Pakistan, when his last visit was to Pakistan?
MS. NULAND: I do not have that. I will take it for you.
Yeah, please.
QUESTION: In the same region, Afghanistan. Congressman Rohrabacher has been giving interviews talking about his co-del he was on where he did not end up going to Afghanistan. He said he had a conversation with the Secretary, who, basically, what he is saying is told her it would be best if he did not go to Afghanistan. I was curious if you had any comment on that situation and whether the Secretary might have had any conversations with President Karzai about letting Congressman Rohrabacher come to Afghanistan as part of that co-del.
MS. NULAND: Well, I don’t think we can improve on what Congressman Rohrabacher himself has said, so why don’t we just leave it there.
QUESTION: Any reason why we would support President Karzai’s wishes over a U.S. congressman going on this trip?
MS. NULAND: I think you know whenever any American travels, including members of Congress, members of the Executive Branch, traditionally there’s a visa process engaged there. In this case, sometimes when they fly in, it’s sort of handled more administratively. We were advised, as Congressman Rohrabacher made clear, that the sovereign government didn’t think this visit was timely. So it was in that context that he made his decision after our advice.
Okay, please.
QUESTION: I have a question on South America --
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- for what Americans might consider the ongoing soap opera involving the Secret Service, except this doesn’t involve the Secret Service. We’re talking about three U.S. Marines who apparently have been punished as well as an employee of the U.S. Embassy in Brasilia who apparently were implicated in tossing a prostitute out of a moving car sometime last year. And I wanted to find out, since we know that the Marines have been punished, who was the employee of the Embassy? Was this person an American? Was this person a local hire? What can you say about a pending lawsuit now, apparently, against the Embassy?
MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, your report of the incident in question is not accurate in terms of what actually happened. Second, this is something that happened back in December. There was a State Department employee involved. The – we did cooperate fully with the appropriate Brazilian authorities, including with the civil police. None of the Americans involved in the incident are still in Brazil. The civil police, as I understand it, are still working on their case, and no charges have been brought by the Brazilian authorities.
QUESTION: When you say that none of the people involved are still in Brazil, does that imply that the Embassy employee is an American?
MS. NULAND: Correct.
QUESTION: And does that person still work for the U.S. Government?
MS. NULAND: I do not have the answer to that. I believe so. But as you know, we don’t talk about our personnel for privacy reasons.
QUESTION: What is the policy? Much has been made about the Secret Service reviewing its standards of behavior for its employees when they’re detailed overseas. What is the standard for the State Department and its employees and how they’re expected to behave, conform to local laws overseas?
MS. NULAND: We have a zero-tolerance policy for any kind of conduct of the kind that was of – that involves prostitution or anything of that nature. I can give you the Foreign Affairs Manual regulations, if that’s helpful to you.
QUESTION: Mm-hmm.
MS. NULAND: Not only for the reasons of morality and local law, but also because any kind of conduct of that kind exposes our employees to blackmail and other things.
QUESTION: Even though that a country like Colombia may have legalized activity in this (inaudible)?
MS. NULAND: Correct.
QUESTION: Just a couple things on that. What about the description that you were read of the incident isn’t correct?
MS. NULAND: Well, Ros talked about somebody being thrown out of a car and this kind of thing. That is not what happened in this case.
QUESTION: What did happen?
QUESTION: Because that’s the description that the Secretary of Defense offered to reporters who were traveling with him. So --
MS. NULAND: Our information is that after four Embassy personnel left the club, the – a woman involved in this incident attempted to open a car door and get into a closed and moving vehicle. She was not able to do so. She fell and she injured herself. All of the Embassy personnel involved in this incident were interviewed by the Brazilian civil police. We have also conducted our own investigation into the incident, and we’ve taken all the appropriate steps regarding the individuals involved consistent with our laws and our regulations.
QUESTION: Did these – did any of these – in particular, the Embassy employee, did they violate any rule?
MS. NULAND: Well, as I said, they haven’t been charged by Brazilian authorities.
QUESTION: Right. But I mean any of the FAM rules.
MS. NULAND: I’m not going to get into the precise adjudication of the case for reasons of privacy with regard to our employee.
QUESTION: Well, yeah, but you said that none of the people are still in the country.
MS. NULAND: Correct.
QUESTION: But someone can be moved without being punished. I mean, you could be transferred just simply because this person – for another reason. So do you know if there was any – was there any reprimand or punishment handed out, and was there any reason to? Did they – did these people do anything wrong?
MS. NULAND: Again, my information is that we conducted our own investigation of this issue, and we took the appropriate steps. What I’m not at liberty to get into is what steps those might have been, given the privacy issues involving the employee. And that’s our policy that we don’t talk about disciplinary steps taken with employees.
QUESTION: Well, the Secret Service didn’t either until just recently.
MS. NULAND: I understand that.
QUESTION: Well, that’s why it’s important to know whether they actually did something wrong or they were just transferred or moved to – or demoted or whatever. I mean, maybe – I mean, the description that you just read, it sounds like it could be perfectly plausible that these people didn’t do anything wrong at all. So that’s --
MS. NULAND: And it may well be. I just don’t have information with regard to the case beyond what I’ve just given you.
QUESTION: Well, I would suggest that the Department might want to come clean on this, considering the interest in the – in that. The other thing is that in the FAM, it talks about – it said “notorious behavior” or something like that. But it only talks about that being a problem if it were to become publicly known.
MS. NULAND: Well, I don’t have the FAM in front of me. I think I should get it for you.
QUESTION: So I’m not sure I – okay. But I’m not – I’m curious as to – you say it’s a zero-tolerance policy, but it’s not clear to me that it is, in fact, zero tolerance if the only way it gets you into trouble is if other people find out about it.
MS. NULAND: But the problem – but this is the problem. This is why you have to have a zero-tolerance policy, because at any given time, if you open yourself up to such behavior, it could become known. And you can’t, as somebody engaged in behavior of that kind, predict when that might happen. And so you’re immediately vulnerable, and so is the U.S. Government. So that’s why we have the regulations that we have.
QUESTION: Okay. Can we --
QUESTION: Is there a lawsuit pending against the U.S. Government?
MS. NULAND: As I said, we have – I have information to indicate that there have been no charges filed by the – in Brazil.
QUESTION: FAM stands for foreign manual?
QUESTION: Wait, wait. I just want to make sure that you understand that – what I’m trying to get. I want – basically, I want to know if the people involved in this violated that FAM regulation.
MS. NULAND: I understand that, and I – my expectation is that we are not going to talk about an individual personnel case from the podium.
QUESTION: I’m just curious as to what FAM stands for.
MS. NULAND: Sorry. Foreign Affairs Manual, which are our published rules and regulations for ourselves. But anybody who’s interested in those, we’ll get them for you. I did have them a couple of days ago. I don’t have them here.
Please.
QUESTION: On Japan?
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: There are reports that a U.S.-Japan joint announcement on the realignment of the U.S. forces in Japan scheduled on Wednesday, today, has been delayed because there are some senators have been criticizing it. I am curious if it’s really a reason – if you – do you think you can make an announcement before Japan’s prime minister visit to D.C. at this – at the end of this April?
MS. NULAND: Well, let me say that we have made progress in these negotiations. As you know, and as members of Congress have made clear, we have obligations to consult and to brief. And there are implications, including budgetary implications, that the Congress has to be happy with. So we are having those consultations. I’m not prepared to predict right now when we’ll go public with where we are, but everybody has their internal procedures, and we’re working through those now.
QUESTION: Toria?
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: I wonder if you’re aware, but the head of the Syrian National Council, Burhan Ghalioun, cancelled his trip to Washington. Are you aware of that, or do you have a comment on that?
MS. NULAND: I am. I frankly don’t have any back story. He’s a pretty busy guy, so maybe he had things to --
QUESTION: Okay. So it was not done at the suggestion, let’s say, of Washington?
MS. NULAND: No, not at all. Not at all. Not to my knowledge.
QUESTION: Okay. Do you find yourself in a position where the options towards Syria are actually – they range from bad to worse?
MS. NULAND: Well, the Secretary talked about this quite a bit yesterday. She made clear that we’re at a crossroads, and we’re at a very difficult crossroads as these monitors are starting to come in, are trying to do their job. In some cases, they are able to provide space and bear witness to what is going on, but in other cases, either they’ve had difficulty getting where they need to go, they’ve had difficulty in getting agreement with regard to the makeup of the personnel, and they have – as we talked about yesterday, we’ve had at least one incident where they went into a town, they were able to interview people, and then there were reprisals afterwards, which is just deplorable.
QUESTION: To follow up on my question that I raised a couple days ago on the number of monitors: Are you comfortable that 300 will be able to do their jobs, considering that there are so many flashpoints and there are so many places and villages and hamlets that they need to be at?
MS. NULAND: Well, frankly, we’re – right now we’re at 12, so let us get this scaled up and let us see what a mission of 300 that’s truly able to operate freely, truly able to do what it thinks is necessary in terms of interviewing people, in terms of gathering information, moving around, and then we’ll go from there. But at the moment, we’re at 12, and that’s not enough.
QUESTION: Okay. Going back to the Balkans experience, I mean, we – they had, like, thousands of monitors to be able to do the job. Do you see a point in time where this actually needs to be done?
MS. NULAND: Said, I think we have to take this one step at a time. We’ve seen what just a handful have been able to do in the towns where they’ve been – they’ve shown up. We’ve had outpourings of Syrian civilians thanking them, able to express themselves, so let’s see what we can do with 300. The most important thing now is to get them in and get them deployed and get them deployed freely.
Ros.
QUESTION: The French foreign minister, Mr. Juppe, suggested today that even if we let the full complement of monitors try to do its work in Syria, that it may well be time for the world to start looking at some sort of military intervention. Is he jumping the gun? Pardon the pun.
MS. NULAND: I think the Secretary made clear again yesterday, as she had in Paris, that even as we do our best to get these monitors in and doing their job, we also have to look at increased pressure in case this Annan plan doesn’t succeed. With regard to external military forces, our position on that has not changed, Ros.
Please.
QUESTION: Was the Secretary intending to meet with Burhan Ghalioun?
MS. NULAND: I don’t think we’d gotten that far in the planning of his schedule. She has met with him, I think, three times now. She – and most recently when we were in Istanbul some three weeks ago. So I think one of the issues was whether he was going to be here when she was here, but yeah.
QUESTION: A U.S. Congressman Joe Walsh from Illinois has written a letter to Secretary Clinton on reviewing a U.S. decision of 2005 not to issue a visa to the Gujarat chief minister in India, Narendra Modi. Is Secretary Clinton responding to the letter? And are you reviewing the U.S. position on that issue?
MS. NULAND: I haven’t seen the letter. I think you know that our position on the visa issue hasn’t changed at all, so I would guess that if we do respond, it’ll be along familiar lines.
I’m getting the high sign here because we have --
QUESTION: One more, on Burma.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: Nine NGOs have – in a statement, have expressed concern on Secretary’s decision to ease sanctions on Burma. They are saying this is not going to be fruitful as far as Burma is concerned. How do you address their concerns?
MS. NULAND: If you’re referring – you’re referring to the letter from the American NGOs, right?
QUESTION: Yes.
MS. NULAND: Yeah. Well, as you know, we are not at the step with Burma yet that the NGOs are concerned about. We do have a very strong, vibrant dialogue with our own NGOs, with Burmese NGOs, as we develop this action for action policy, and we’ll continue to do that.
Thanks, everybody.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)