REMARKS BY SECRETARY KERRY, GERMAN FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER

 FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Berlin Tegel Airport
Berlin, Germany
January 31, 2014

FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER: (Via interpreter) Well, ladies and gentlemen, allow me to bid you a very warm welcome. And let me say that I’m delighted to have my American colleague here today, that I am able to welcome him here to Berlin. It’s more than a stopover on the road towards Munich. We’ll see each other again on the margins of the security conference there.

Dear John, I’m very pleased to have you, delighted to be able to welcome you. The favorable winds across the Atlantic brought you here a little bit earlier than could be expected yesterday night, so this is why our talk here today was a little bit more extensive than we could have hoped for, which is a very good thing. And it’s very important, because as long as politics are made by people, and hopefully this is going to be the case for a very long time, personal contacts among those who are in political responsibility is of the utmost importance. And I think that this was a very good beginning.

We meet at an airport in Berlin. It’s not Tempelhof. Had we met in Tempelhof, we would be able to see the monument that was erected in memory of the airlift, and it would remind of those times. It would remind us of the very close links and bonds that have existed between Germany and the United States of America. We are very much aware here in Germany that a development towards a stable democracy in Germany would not have been possible without the assistance of Americans as well.

And we know that the suffering of the German people, particularly here in Berlin, would have been immeasurable had not America stepped in at the time, recognized clearly, seen its responsibility, and alleviate the suffering of the people who were enclosed.

And well, in a nutshell, ladies and gentlemen, German-American friendship is a reality. That doesn’t exclude that, from time to time, we may see things differently. That became very clear over the last few weeks and months when we were debating the surveillance activities of the NSA. But let me also state quite clearly such a debate, differences of opinion, if they are there and when they are there, must not be allowed to destroy a friendship that has grown over so many decades. And I am sure it won’t destroy this friendship.

It is true we all have to face challenges, but I am absolutely confident that we will be able to weather those challenges, because the debates that we have to make with each other we are able to have on a very firm foundation, on a very firm base as well.

Trust has been lost. I’m confident we will be able to rebuild it, to restore it. We talked about this today in our meeting, how we can actually get again into a bilateral dialogue where we look at those different assessments where we are trying to discuss about how we strike an equitable balance between freedom and security, which is sometimes difficult. We also addressed a number of bilateral issues, as I said. But we also looked a little bit beyond our two nations. The international agenda that will keep us busy also over this weekend in Munich was at the very top of our agenda.

We have just now come back from the Syrian conference. A small step was made in order to prepare to pave the way for an end to the civil strife in Syria and the civil war. Obviously, we are not completely satisfied, cannot be completely satisfied with the state of the negotiations. The only thing that we can safely say and that is positive is that those parties that for three years have been waging war against each other at least agreed at last to be at one at the same negotiating table and one in the same room. Sitting there together today, the first stage of negotiations at working level will end, and I think both of us hope that the delegations from Syria, after an appropriate time, will meet again in order to continue those negotiations.

The incredible suffering in Syria on the ground – death, expulsion, flight – all of that requires a solution where local cessation of hostilities, humanitarian corridors can be established at least as a next step. The crisis in Syria is one where my American colleague is very much engaged on, and I would like to issue a word of respect. It is a very strong attempt of the American Government to bring about also in the vicinity a solution to the Middle East peace – to the Middle East conflict, to find and establish a two-state solution, find a breakthrough there in the negotiations.

We talked about that as well just now, about the ongoing negotiations with the Israelis and the Palestinians. And dear John, I hope that your very good efforts will, in the end, be crowned by success. Wherever we see these attempts, these efforts to finally come to a peaceful solution to the Middle East conflict, wherever we can support that, we will gladly do so. And the same goes for those talks that we’ve had for quite some time already with Iran. It shows how long it may well take until conflicts that have – that are protracted, that have lasted for decades can again be calmed down. More than 30 years of conflict, more than 10 years of negotiations with Iran. Now a first step has been made that seems to be a fairly encouraging one, at least one that encourages us to test whether the Iranians, in that first step of negotiations, have been serious – whether that will be followed up in the next few weeks and months to come so that the long, ongoing dispute over the nuclear ambitions of Iran can be brought to a successful and peaceful settlement.

Tonight and tomorrow, over the weekend, we shall have an opportunity to address the situation in Ukraine repeatedly. The good news is that the last nights were more calm than the previous ones. We did not receive any news of casualties, but we’re far away from a political solution. That is true, too, there have been offers also from Yanukovych. Until this moment, we don’t know whether these offers are actually ones that one can build on that are reliable. In Munich, representatives of the opposition and of the government will be there on the ground. We shall have an opportunity to talk to the representatives of Ukraine, but we will also have an opportunity to talk to other foreign ministers present and try to explore, try to sound out what one can do not only to calm down the situation in Ukraine, but to also lend a helping hand towards enabling this country, Ukraine, to have a free and democratic future.

Thank you very much. Dear John, you have the floor.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you. You guys alright? (Laughter.)

Thank you, Frank-Walter. (Via interpreter) I am delighted to be back in Germany.

(In English) I’m really happy to be back here in Berlin, where I spent some formative years as a child. I remember Tempelhof. Obviously, we all remember the history of those events. But usually, when I came into Berlin back then, I came on a special military train from Frankfurt, which was an all-night trip. And for a young kid of 11, 12 years-old, it was a great adventure, I can assure you.

It’s special for me to be back here, and I thank my friend, Frank-Walter, for his hospitality and for being willing to meet us here at the airport like this because he has to rush off to open the Munich conference. I get to spend a little more time, and then I will join him in Munich this afternoon for the rest of that conference over the next several days. And we are grateful to Germany for its longtime hosting of this important security gathering.

Almost a year ago, I came here on my first trip as Secretary of State. And I came here – I think this was one of my first stops – because of the value, of the longstanding relationship between the United States and Germany, and particularly, I want to say, with the German people. It’s no secret, and my friend Frank-Walter referred to it, that we’ve been through a rough period in the last months. But I’m pleased to be here to help direct our focus – my focus, that of the United States and of Germany – to the future and to strengthen the trust and the confidence that has always characterized this relationship. A strong U.S.-German partnership is crucial to the long list of global issues that we face. The United States, I want you to know, welcomes Germany’s growing and important role on the world stage.

I was grateful to see Foreign Minister Steinmeier at the Geneva II conference where we had a chance to talk just a couple of weeks ago. And there we reiterated the need for a Syrian-led political solution on the brutal civil war. We’re also working very closely – again, as he discussed – on the P5+1 negotiations with respect to Iran. The international community has expressed its concerns over Iran’s nuclear program through several United Nations resolutions, and obviously, they have been – those concerns have been reinforced through the sanctions regime that has been put in place by the global community – not by one country, but with the support and ratification and affirmation of the United Nations Security Council.

So we are working together, Germany and the United States, on this critical security challenge. We are also working hand-in-hand with respect to Afghanistan, and we are very mindful of the challenges that lie ahead, but also of the deep commitment that exists between us and our important leadership with respect to the other countries involved, so that we can have a successful conclusion to this significant effort and hopefully build a prosperous future for the Afghan people.

We also discussed briefly our ongoing economic relationship. Germany and the United States – Germany is the United States’ largest single European trading partner. And this is a relationship that has meant more jobs, investment, and growth in both of our countries. We believe that much more exciting opportunities lie ahead, and this must be one of the primary areas of focus for both of us.

We are working on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – the TTIP, as it is called. And this is a trade arrangement that could result in one of the world’s largest markets being created – the combined market of Europe and the United States – Europe the largest market in the world, the United States the largest single economy in the world. And if we can raise the standards, what we do is help the citizens of both of our countries, and indeed, of the rest of the world to see that the global community is responding in a way that provides opportunity for everybody and helps to raise the standards – the living standards, the labor standards, the trade standards, the product standards – all of the things that benefit our people. So that’s what we’re working for.

When I was here in Berlin last year – and I look forward to coming back here and being able to do this again – I had a really enjoyable, fun session with a group of young people. And we met in a cafe in the city and had a question-and-answer session, an opportunity for me to listen to them, them to listen to me, and just talk. And it was a great opportunity for me to understand better the hopes and aspirations of the next generation, and also to reconnect on a people-to-people level. It really was clear to me that young Germans and young Americans of any persuasion, walk of life, religion, belief all share the same goals, the same aspirations, and the same concerns. They share the same dreams and they share most of the same values.

So it’s our hope that those aspirations for opportunity, for democracy, for liberty, freedom, which have been at the heart of our bilateral relationship, will continue to be the centerpiece of what defines German-American relations. Those values are why both Germany and the United States find the recent events in Ukraine so concerning. We have worked shoulder-to-shoulder. Foreign Minister Steinmeier has talked to the opposition. I have talked to the opposition. We will meet with the opposition and with other leaders in Munich, and we will have an opportunity to be able to press forward in the months ahead to support democracy, freedom, freedom of association, and to support the European aspirations of the Ukrainian people. And together, we join firmly to reject violence. We are encouraging and supporting political dialogue. We hope that together, we can remain committed to helping the Ukrainians end the human rights abuses, get political prisoners released, and see their dignity restored.

So we look forward to continuing to work with Germany very, very closely to make progress on all of these issues, and frankly, just to build on the strength of the relationship that has defined United States-German relations for many decades now. And I look forward to my further meetings on that subject, but most importantly, I look forward to turning a page and getting us focused on the larger, most critical issues that we face together. Thank you.

MODERATOR: (Via interpreter) Questions from the American side, please.

QUESTION: A question for both ministers, please: What can you do to force Syria to meet its chemical weapons obligations on the deadlines that have been laid out? And on Ukraine, President Yanukovych says his government has met its obligations to resolve the crisis. Do you believe that’s true? And what is your message for the Ukrainian opposition leaders that you’ll be meeting in Munich? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well – go ahead.

FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER: No.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, with respect to Ukraine, no. The offers of President Yanukovych have not yet reached an adequate level of reform and an adequate level of sharing of the future so that the opposition can, in fact, feel that it could legitimately come to the table and form some kind of a unity government.

Now, we believe unity is important. And we believe that moving towards that is critical. So our message to the Ukraine opposition – that is certainly my message to them that we meet with today – will be the full support of President Obama and the American people for their efforts. We will reinforce their courage and their need to continue to be unified as they press for an adequate level of a reform agenda. But we will also say to them: If you get that reform agenda, if you are able to secure genuine participation and a genuine ability to bring the country together, then we would urge them to engage in that, because further standoff and further violence – or violence that becomes uncontrollable – is not in anybody’s interest.

We also would say to our friends in Russia: This does not have to be a zero-sum game. This is not something where Ukraine should become a proxy and trapped in some kind of larger ambition for Russia or the United States. That’s not what this is about. This is about the freedom of choice for the people of Ukraine, and their ability to be able to define their future without coercion from outside forces. And that’s what we hope to achieve.

With respect to Syria, let me make it clear that Bashar al-Assad needs to understand that he agreed to an international United Nations Security Council Resolution which has reinforced a requirement that he remove all of those weapons and that he do so in a specific period of time. That was passed by unanimity within the United Nations Security Council. Russia is a partner in this effort. And Russia obviously plays a critical role in helping the Syrians to understand their obligation of compliance.

Now, Bashar al-Assad is not, in our judgment, fully in compliance because of the timing and the delays that have taken place contrary to the OPCW’s judgment that this could move faster. So the options are all the options that originally existed. No option has been taken off the table. We made that clear at the time of the passage of the UN resolution, and I restate that now today. We want the Syrian regime to live up to its obligations. And it is critical that very rapidly all of those chemical weapons be moved from once – from their 12 or so sites to the one site in the port and be prepared for shipment out of Syria all together.

Every indication we have is there is no legitimate reason that that is not happening now. And therefore we call on Bashar al-Assad to live up to his obligations or we will join together with our friends and talk about which, if any, of the options we deem necessary at this point to proceed forward.

FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER: (Via interpreter) Allow me to complement that briefly. I think the importance of this agreement on the destruction of chemical weapons cannot be overestimated. After three years of civil war in Syria, this was the first agreement that allowed at least to prevent a further escalation of the violence. So it is so important therefore that these agreements are abided by. And to complement what Secretary Kerry just said, I think the Syrians and Assad need to be well aware of the fact that they’re not only toying with their own credibility but after the first talks with the Americans, the Russian side was also in on this, so they’re also toying with the credibility of the Russian side. So I very much hope that this is not the end of the debate, but that there will be pressure and adequate pressure on the Syrian side to stand by their commitments. And this is an element also that is part and parcel of how we got to Geneva II in the first place. So the agreement on the destruction of chemical weapons is very important, and if it is not kept, that would have a negative impact on Geneva II.

To complement this even further, we – and I’m saying this for the German side, as the German journalists know – only a few days ago we adopted a decision about correct – the position that we have taken up until now. We have said if the negotiations towards a political solution in Syria are to be injected with at least a glimmer of hope, then we too need to step in and give our contribution to making this possible. And this is why we have decided to be part of the destruction of chemical weapons, and those chemical weapons that are transported out of Syria. And together with American assistance, they are diluted on the Mediterranean and the residual components will then have to be removed. We have the technical possibilities to help with this process in Germany, and we are glad to be of help. So should those chemical weapons be transported from Syria, out of Syria, then about two-thirds of those weapons will be destroyed in Northern Germany.

As to Ukraine, I don’t need to add to what the Secretary has said. My impression is that Yanukovych, up until now, still has not fully understood how serious the situation is, as can clearly be seen by the nature of the offers that have been made. They have been made contingent on a number of conditions. So up until now, we have not – we do not see yet that those offers that have been made to the opposition in the end will really make a crucial difference, politically speaking, on the ground in Ukraine. And we still are not able actually to say to what extent the president is willing and ready to accept a change of his – remit of his competences according to the constitution. And that’s going to be crucial in order to come to an agreement with the opposition.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) (Inaudible) from the German Press Agency. I have two questions directed to Secretary Kerry. You will soon – you will now also meet Chancellor Merkel, who has apparently been surveyed – eavesdropped on by the secret intelligence service of your country. I would like to know whether you are ready – whether the American side is ready to come to a contractual basis that, in the future, bans such spying – we call it, which is a bit curious, a no-spy agreement? And there are quite a number of people here in Germany who think that actually the United States ought to issue an apology. Would you be ready to do that?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, look, the United States and Germany enjoy a really long friendship, as we have described here today, and a long history, a long history of great cooperation, and particularly on complicated issues like counterterrorism and national security and defense. As part of our deep relationship, we cooperate very, very significantly on all of the collective security issues of our countries and our citizens. As the foreign minister knows, because he’s been here before, and he’s also been involved in security issues for a long time, none of this is simple. None of this is easy.

And since 9/11, when we were attacked out of nowhere and more lives were lost than at any time since Pearl Harbor, we responded, we think carefully, but in ways that tried to deal with the protection of not just the American people, but of everybody against acts of terrorism. Madrid saw a terrible act of terrorism, London has seen acts of terrorism – Athens, various other places. And we are living in a world where unfortunately some people are willing to strap a pack on their back and walk into a crowded theater or a sports event and just blow people up. So we are trying to respond as intelligently and responsibly of all that.

Now, Chancellor Merkel and President Obama, at their mutual direction – and they’ve had several conversations – we have undertaken a extensive, close consultation with Germany, which we are engaged in on the subject of cooperation and how we move beyond this particular challenge. We now have a better understanding, I think, of the requirements and the concerns of both sides.

So what I can tell you is the consultations will continue between our intelligence services. And we absolutely share a commitment to trying to put this behind us in the appropriate way and to strengthen our practical cooperation going forward. Our consultations right now reflect our close relationship, they reflect the shared threats that we face, and the technical – very complicated technical environment in which we live where the threats to us have changed and become, in many ways, more lethal and harder to discover.

So we will continue to work to protect the privacy interests of all of our citizens. When I was in the United States Senate, John McCain and I are the original authors of the privacy laws and rules for the internet. So we are committed to privacy, and I assure our friends in Germany this will get worked through in the proper channels in the proper way, but most importantly Germany and the United States have very significant issues to continue to work on together and none of us want to let this get in the way of our ability to be able to continue to build our friendship and our cooperation.

Thank you all.

FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER: Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY TAKES QUESTIONS AT GENEVA II

FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT 
Solo Press Availability at the Geneva II International Conference on Syria
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Montreux, Switzerland
January 22, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, good evening, everybody, and thank you for your patience. We appreciate the opportunity to be able to share a few thoughts with you after the events of the day.

Obviously, for three years now the world has been witnessing civilians and refugees by increasing numbers who are enduring unspeakable suffering and continued violence. Today, both sides sat in the same room for the first time since the war began. And as all of you know, this has not been an easy road to bring people together; the hurdles have been enormous; government resistance, opposition resistance, different factions, different groups; a real tug-of-war, so to speak, within the war. But finally, the global community, through the force of the Geneva I communique, and through the force of the diplomacy and insistence on the political solution being the only viable long term solution, finally people came together.

No one should doubt, no one’s trying to gloss this over, that this is the beginning of a tough and complicated process. But the truth is that today, I think what leapt out from more than 40 countries and organizations in articulate, well- thought-out presentations, from more ministers than I have seen assembled in one room at any time other than at the United Nations itself, a very significant gathering of ministers who took the time to come – and all suggest together how this must end: that it has to have an inclusive Syria where every citizen can live in dignity, led by a government that the people of Syria empower with their consent.

So the fact that 40 countries and organizations came here from near and far – from Asia, from South Central Asia, from Europe, from America, from the North American continent, from Latin America, from Africa, north and south – all came united in support of the Syrian people, in support of their hopes for the future of Syria, and in support of the Geneva communique which does one thing that is of great significance: It recognizes that a political transition is the only way to go and that the political transition required under Geneva I is a transition government with full executive authority by mutual consent. Every entity here today with one exception talked about that and embraced the Geneva I communique.

It is significant that all of the other countries but that one came here to endorse the Geneva I communique understanding from the outset that the invitation sent by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon made it clear that was the purpose of gathering here today, and that is the purpose of the negotiations that will begin day after tomorrow in Geneva.

Now, I believe that this gathering today, which we all know is only a beginning and we have said so from the start, actually created a moment of special focus on the nature of this tragic conflict. Today, people can more clearly understand how alone Assad is in standing up for himself, not for Syria. And the resolution to this crisis cannot be about one man’s insistence or one family’s insistence about clinging to power. This needs to be about empowering all of the Syrian people.

The international community expressed a united vision for Syria that respects its citizens and that protects the rights of every group, every sect, every faith – pluralism: where all people are represented without discrimination; a nation in which all Syrians can peacefully confront their government without fear of retribution, without fear of imprisonment, without fear of death; a Syria that works closely with its neighbors, but also can exist peacefully as a sovereign, independent, and democratic state. These are the Syrian people’s hopes for the future of their country, and we support them.

Now let me emphasize, as I said earlier in my comments today, what happened in Syria began in the wake of a transformation that began to break out throughout the Middle East, throughout the Maghreb and the Middle East. And everybody knows the events that began in Libya and in Tunisia and Egypt. Eventually, young people in Syria stood up for change and some young kids with graffiti cans were arrested. When their parents came out to protest the arrest of their young children, 120 of them were killed.

That’s the beginning of this. Not a religious revolution, not terrorists. No terrorists were there then. This was people looking for change peacefully in their country, and they were met by bullets and violence and death.

It’s no secret that getting to where we are now has, as I said, been difficult, and peace and stability will not arrive overnight. But it’s important that this process is now in place. It is important that the government and the opposition will sit down over these next days. And we don’t expect a sudden breakthrough. What we do expect is a crystalizing of the difference: who stands for what, who’s really fighting for what, whose arguments are based on truth, whose arguments are based on facts. And this is what all of you will have an opportunity to be able to measure and to judge in the days to come.

Let me reiterate what the United States, the Syrian opposition, and many others said this morning: No one should think for a moment that in the future of Syria there can be a place for a man who has turned on his own people, permitted the death of 130,000 through many of them by his choice of weapons and others by his choice of their mission, because some of those deaths are obviously soldiers.

But the fact is that innocent students and doctors have been killed by Scud missiles. Those aren’t terrorists. Those are the people of Syria trying to serve the people of Syria, or trying to have a future by going to school in Syria. And they’ve been killed by those Scud missiles, children in a schoolyard, death by napalm. You’ve all reported on it. You’ve seen it. Gassed not once but many times, but once so egregious and so provable that it was sufficient to bring to the international community and to actually get a regime that one day earlier denied they even had the weapons, the next day they were ready to move the weapons out of Syria. What kind of credibility is there left in that?

This is a regime backed by Iran and by a terrorist organization that has crossed over from Lebanon into Syria into order to fight. There is no one who has done more to make Syria a magnet for terrorists than Bashar al-Assad. He is the single greatest magnet for terrorism that there is in the region. And he has long since, because of his choice of weapons, because of what he has done, lost any legitimacy. Who can imagine that tomorrow or in a week or in a month you could suddenly say oh okay, it’s all right, you can lead Syria? I think everybody here understands, as we have come to understand, that people in the region who support the opposition will never stop because of what he has done and how he has done it. You cannot have peace, you cannot have stability, you cannot restore Syria, you cannot save Syria from disintegration as long as Bashar al-Assad remains in power.

So this is what is at stake here. And as we continue to pursue, we know that the latest charges are charges with photographs and documentation of mass torture with bodies with numbers on them and designations written on them. And the questions raised by this require an answer. I can’t tell you exactly what all of it is except that I know that they are people who have suffered egregious torture and death. The opposition today called for the United Nations to investigate these allegations, and we join with them in demanding that there be a thorough investigation of these charges.

Now, as we continue to pursue a political solution that will enable the Syrian people to realize the better future that they seek, we cannot over these next days turn a blind eye to the crisis that Syrians live with every single day. And that’s why the United States is proud to have contributed more than any other country to support refugees within Syria and the housing and shelter and education and safety of refugees in Lebanon, in Jordan, and elsewhere. The United States will continue to press for local ceasefires and we will work with the international community to press for increased humanitarian access to the hardest-hit areas. This is what human dignity at its most basic demands, and it is what security in the region and the fight against extremism requires.

We will keep pushing for improved humanitarian access and for the return of journalists and aid workers who are held hostage. And as we proceed toward a political transition, we will continue to demand an end to the regime’s Scud missiles, barrel bombs, and horrific weapons that have been used against civilians, including the weapon of starvation.

We are joined by the international community in calling for Assad to stop using these tactics, and today you heard a universal condemnation of Assad’s violent assaults and his use of starvation as a weapon of war, which is, by the way, a war crime. In the coming days, our team, including Ambassador Ford and his team, will travel to Geneva to support the more intensive discussions that will follow. And led by the UN, these talks will continue between the regime and the opposition. We all know the process ahead will be difficult, but what I would like on behalf of President Obama and the American people for the Syrian people to know is that we will continue to support the people of Syria, broadly spoken, every step of the way as they fight for freedom and for the dignity and stability and security and the future that they deserve.

I’d be happy to take a few questions. I think Jen will call on the questions.

MS. PSAKI: One at a time, please. The first question will be from Margaret Brennan of CBS News.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. Diplomacy typically works when there’s a parallel pressure track. Should increased support to the armed opposition be a consequence if this round of diplomacy fails? And what assurances do you have that the Syrian opposition will still participate in this diplomacy given that today, the Syrian foreign minister blasted them and questioned the very premise of this conference and explicitly said that Assad’s exit is not an option? Does that surprise you?

SECRETARY KERRY: No. That was fully what we, frankly, expected. And opening positions are opening positions. Who knows where they decide to go as this goes on? But the bottom line is that the support for the opposition is already augmenting, it is growing, it is continuing from many different sources of support that exist for it, and I am confident that that will continue in the days ahead.

Now, there are still other possibilities of ways to be able to bring pressure and to try to work a solution to this. Foreign Minister Lavrov and I have talked. Our presidents talked yesterday. President Obama and President Putin talked, and they talked at some length about this. And they both instructed Foreign Minister Lavrov and me to continue our efforts, which we will do. We will continue to talk, and there are a number of things that we believe we can engage in that may or may not be able to have an impact; I can’t predict with certainty.

But I can tell you this: What you see in the direct talks between the opposition and the Assad regime will not be the full measure of effort being expended in order to try to find a solution here. And so without going into any further detail, I will just say to you that lots of different avenues will be pursued, including continued support to the opposition and augmented support to the opposition.

MS. PSAKI: The next question will be from Hayvi Bouzo of Orient TV.

QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary Kerry. My question is: There’s some fears that – from Secretary Lavrov, today’s speech, and the Assad regime in general – that they’re going to try to use the Geneva talks to use more time and to spend more time. Is there going to be any timeframe or time table that’s going to be set for the Geneva talks to deliver results? And what is after Geneva? What is the alternative solution if the Geneva talks don’t work? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, we’re not going to talk about after Geneva on the first day that Geneva starts. Geneva, today, is the opening statements and the beginning of the negotiation is on Friday. I expect that there’ll be a first round, maybe second round.

Look, negotiations to end wars, particularly complicated, difficult confrontations and conflicts like this, sometimes take a long time. You can go back and look at Bosnia, Kosovo, you can look at other open conflicts, you can look at the – go back as far as Vietnam and think of all the hours spent just deciding the shape of the table – I think a whole year before they even began to talk.

So talk takes a while. None of us are satisfied with leaving Syria to the kind of horrendous acts that have been engaged in, which is why I said there will be parallel efforts being made, even while the talks are going on in order to try to find different pressure points and different ways of finding a solution. But my sense is that – I mean, this is already one of the worst catastrophes of humanitarian crises in the world today. You have upwards of 9 million people displaced and in refugee status. The burden on Jordan is growing and significant. The burden on Lebanon is growing and significant. The increase of the number of terrorists and terrorist groups is unacceptable to any nation that cares about stability and the long-term safety and security of our people.

So this crisis is growing, not diminishing. And I believe the impact is going to be continued to be felt in ways that’s going to compel others to think in many different ways about what the options may be as we go down the road. I’m not going to go into those now, but clearly the importance of today cannot be underestimated in terms of focusing people’s attention on the nature of the crisis and the ways in which it is actually getting worse, not better.

So it’s up to all of us to do our best to try to make sure that Geneva and/or one of the parallel tracks works, and I’m not going to talk about the possibilities of it not finding some road forward.

MS. PSAKI: The next question will be from Kim Ghattas of BBC News.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for taking our questions. Iran was disinvited from this conference because Tehran did not endorse the Geneva communique. But then clearly, as we saw today, neither does the Syrian Government. Iran is almost as much a party to the conflict as the Syrian Government. Can you really expect to make progress in the negotiations without finding a way to involve Iran in the conversation at some point?

And as a follow-up, I’ve just spent a month in the region, and everybody I spoke to said that there is simply no way that things will get better, whether in Syria or in the region, if you don’t get Iran and Saudi Arabia to talk to each other. How can you help facilitate that?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m not going to go into the details of it, but obviously, we’re very aware of the need for a number of specific countries to be able to contribute to a solution rather than to be part of the problem.

With respect to Iran’s participation formally in the conference, it was very clear what the standard was for participation. We never ever minced our words about that. We always said countries that want to support Geneva I, which since 2012 has been the framework – since June of 2012, that has been the framework for trying to resolve the problem of Syria. And country after country after country has signed up to Geneva I communique. So what you all need to do is ask yourselves why Iran won’t sign up to it, not why they’re not here. Why didn’t they sign up to it? Why won’t they agree as every other nation has that this is the method that even – I mean, the Russian Federation signed up to it and was here, and Russia has been a critical partner in helping to bring us this far.

So I believe that with Russia and other efforts – Saudi Arabia was here. Saudi Arabia wasn’t going to be here, but they decided that it was important and they came. So I think that we have a critical mass building, and yes, Iran certainly does have an ability to be able to help make a difference. We hope that they would decide to be constructive and to make a decision to operate in a way going forward that can allow them to do so. There are plenty of ways that that door can be opened in the next weeks and months, and my hope is that they will want to join in a constructive solution.

MS. PSAKI: We have time for one more question. Michel Ghandour from Al Hurra TV.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, is the military option still on the table in dealing with Syria?

SECRETARY KERRY: President Obama has never taken any option off the table in dealing with Syria. I think he made that very clear. When he made a decision to use military force, he used – he made the decision in the context of the chemical weapons. The chemical weapons problem got solved, but he left that issue on the table, as he did leave it on the table for the full compliance of Syria with that agreement. So the President has fully left that option on the table with respect to the compliance issue of the chemical weapons, and depending on what happens in the future, the President never takes any option off the table.

MS. PSAKI: Thank you, everyone.

QUESTION: Please stay.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you all.

QUESTION: I had a question (inaudible).

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you. I know, but everybody else does too. (Laughter.)

GENEVA II CONFERENCE ON SYRIA: SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS

FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT 
Intervention at the Geneva ll International Conference on Syria
Intervention
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Montreux, Switzerland
January 22, 2014

Thank you very much, Secretary Ban, and thank you, Ambassador Brahimi, for your commitment to helping the Syrian people find a new future. And I join with Foreign Minister Lavrov in thanking all of the countries around the table, all of the groups around the table. I thank President Burkhalter and the people of Switzerland for making this important meeting possible. And I thank the Russian Federation and Foreign Minister Lavrov for his cooperation and efforts together with us, working to try to initiate this process. I also want to welcome the leaders of the Syrian opposition, and I thank them for the courageous decision they’ve made. Everybody here knows the pressures that have existed.

Today is a beginning. It’s a beginning of what will obviously be a tough and complicated negotiation; peace talks to end a war and to end a struggle like this always are tough. Frankly, this is a test for all of us who support the Syrian people in their effort to end the extraordinary suffering that the world has witnessed, and which continues. And it is a test of the global community’s ability to come together and ultimately secure a Syria where people can live in dignity and not in fear.

I want to start by saying that I think it is impressive, I think it is significant in and of itself, that so many countries have come together, even though we know it’s for one day that all the countries will be here in this forum. But all of them have come together because everybody understands how critical it is for the world to prove that we have the ability to make a difference in this kind of a conflict.

Now, lost in the daily reports of violence is the fact that this revolution did not begin as an armed resistance. This started peacefully. It was started by schoolboys in Daraa who are armed only with graffiti cans, citizens who were peacefully and legitimately calling for change. And they were met almost immediately with violence. When their parents came out to protest the arrest of the children, 120 people died. That was the beginning.

And tragically, the Assad regime answered peaceful demonstration after peaceful demonstration with ever-increasing force. In the three years since then, this conflict has now left more than 130,000 dead, and it’s hard to count accurately. We all know that. The fact is that these people have been killed by guns, by tanks, by artillery, by gas, by barrel bombs, by Scud missiles. They’ve been killed by weapons almost exclusively of the magnitude not possessed by the opposition. Starvation has been used as a weapon of war. And most recently, we have seen horrific reports of systematic torture and execution of thousands of prisoners. This is an appalling assault, not only on human lives, but on human dignity and on every standard by which the international community tries to organize itself, recognizing the horrors of the humanitarian catastrophe that has unfolded, the destabilization of neighboring countries, and the endless exile of refugees.

As a result, the international community came together 18 months ago to support the Syrian people as they sought to change course. Now, this has taken a lot longer than many of us wanted to bring everyone together. But we have come here determined as ever to implement the Geneva communique. Sergey Lavrov just mentioned the Geneva communique; I reiterate the Geneva communique. And the Geneva communique can only be implemented through the concerted efforts of everybody in this room. Millions of people are relying on the international community’s ability to help find a solution that can save their lives and their country. And we see only one option: a negotiated transition government formed by mutual consent.

Now, we need to deal with reality here. We really need to deal with reality. Mutual consent, which is what has brought us here, for a transition government means that that government cannot be formed with someone that is objected to by one side or the other. That means that Bashar Assad will not be part of that transition government. There is no way – no way possible in the imagination – that the man who has led the brutal response to his own people could regain the legitimacy to govern. One man and those who have supported him can no longer hold an entire nation and a region hostage. The right to lead a country does not come from torture, nor barrel bombs, nor Scud missiles. It comes from the consent of the people. And it’s hard to imagine how that consent could be forthcoming at this point in time.

So just as there could be no place for the perpetrator of this violence, there could also be no place for the thousands of violent extremists who spread their hateful ideology and worsen the suffering of the Syrian people. And as we hear talk about terrorism today, make no mistake: It is the presence of the current intransigence within the existing government that makes this problem worse. That is creating a magnet for terrorists. And until a transition takes place, there is no prayer of reducing the increase of terrorism.

There is another way forward. We all know it. It is what this conference is organized around. It is the Geneva communique, which has the support of the international community as a peaceful roadmap for transition. And the only thing standing in its way is the stubborn clinging to power of one man, one family. I believe the alternative vision of the Syrian people is one that can gather the respect and support of people all around the world. It is a place that doesn’t force people to flee or live in fear, a Syria that protects the rights of every group. We have not only an opportunity, but we have an obligation to find a way forward so that the people of Syria can choose their leadership, know peace, and for 9 million refugees, finally be able to return home in dignity.

My final comment is this: There are, in this room, all of the players who have the ability, with the exception of one or two, to have an impact on the choices that are made here. People who are supporting different groups are here. These people have the ability to affect the outcome. And if we put our common energies together, we can forge a resolution that can provide peace to the region and peace to the people of Syria. And I hope we will succeed.

GENEVA II PROGRESS REMARKS BY SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY

FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks to the Press
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Briefing Room
Washington, DC
January 16, 2014

Good morning, everybody. Good afternoon. And let me just say that I know you’d like to ask some questions, and unfortunately I have to go straight from here over to the White House for a meeting, but I will have an availability tomorrow in the morning when we have our friends from Mexico here, and I’ll take a couple of extra questions to make up for not being able to answer some here now.
I know that many of you have been asking about some of the recent revisionism as to why the international community will be gathering in Montreux next week, so let me make it clear here today.

From the very moment that we announced the goal of holding the Geneva conference on Syria, we all agreed that the purpose was specifically and solely to implement the 2012 Geneva I communique. That purpose, that sole purpose, could not have been more clear at the time this was announced and it could not be more clear today. It has been reiterated in international statement after international statement that the parties have signed up to, and venue after venue, in resolution after resolution, including most recently in Paris last weekend when both the London 11 and the Russian Federation reaffirmed their commitment to that objective, the implementation of Geneva I.

So for anyone seeking to rewrite this history or to muddy the waters, let me state one more time what Geneva II is about: It is about establishing a process essential to the formation of a transition government body – governing body with full executive powers established by mutual consent. That process – it is the only way to bring about an end to the civil war that has triggered one of the planet’s most severe humanitarian disasters and which has created the seeding grounds for extremism.

The Syrian people need to be able to determine the future of their country. Their voice must be heard. And any names put forward for leadership of Syria’s transition must, according to the terms of Geneva I and every one of the reiterations of that being the heart and soul of Geneva II, those names must be agreed to by both the opposition and the regime. That is the very definition of mutual consent.

This means that any figure that is deemed unacceptable by either side, whether President Assad or a member of the opposition, cannot be a part of the future. The United Nations, the United States, Russia, and all the countries attending know what this conference is about. After all, that was the basis of the UN invitation send individually to each country, a restatement of the purpose of implementing Geneva I. And attendance by both sides and the parties can come only with their acceptance of the goals of the conference.

We too are deeply concerned about the rise of extremism. The world needs no reminder that Syria has become the magnet for jihadists and extremists. It is the strongest magnet for terror of any place today. So it defies logic to imagine that those whose brutality created this magnet, how they could ever lead Syria away from extremism and towards a better future is beyond any kind of logic or common sense.

And so on the eve of the Syrian Opposition Coalition general assembly meeting tomorrow to decide whether to participate in Geneva in the peace conference, the United States, for these reasons, urges a positive vote. We do so knowing that the Geneva peace conference is not the end but rather the beginning, the launch of a process, a process that is the best opportunity for the opposition to achieve the goals of the Syrian people and the revolution, and a political solution to this terrible conflict that has taken many, many, many, too many lives.

We will continue to push in the meantime for vital access for humanitarian assistance. I talked yesterday with Russian Federation Foreign Minister Lavrov in an effort to push still harder for access to some areas where the regime played games with the convoys, taking them around a circuitous route instead of directly in the way that the opposition had arranged for and was willing to protect them in. It is important that there be no games played with this process.

We will also continue to fight for ceasefires where we could achieve them, and we will continue to fight for the exchange or release of captive journalists and aid workers and others in order to try to improve the climate for negotiations.

Now, obviously, none of this will be easy. Ending a war and stopping a slaughter never is easy. We believe, though, this is the only road that can lead to the place where the civilized world has joined together in an effort to lead the parties to a better outcome. And to the Syrian people, let me reiterate: The United States and the international community will continue to provide help and support, as we did yesterday in Kuwait, where we pledged $380 million of additional assistance in order to try to relieve the pain and suffering of the refugees.

We will continue to stand with the people of Syria writ large, all the people, in an effort to provide them with the dignity and the new Syria which they are fighting for. Thank you. And as I said, I’d be happy to answer questions tomorrow. Thanks.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS AFTER MEETING WITH SECRETARY OF STATE OF HOLY SEE

FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks After Meeting With Secretary of State of the Holy See Pietro Parolin
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Villa Richardson
Rome, Italy
January 14, 2014

Well, let me just say that it was a privilege for me as the first Catholic Secretary of State in about 32 or 33 years to have the privilege of going to the Vatican today to talk with the new secretary of state there about the broad array of issues that we face together across the world. And on a personal level, it was a thrill for me to be able to do that, as an altar boy, as a young kid, I would never have imagined that I would have been crossing the threshold of the Vatican to meet, as Secretary of State, with the Secretary of State of the Holy See.

And it was a very comprehensive, very, very interesting conversation. We touched on just about every major issue that we are both working on, that are issues of concern to all of us. First of all, we talked at great length about Syria, and I was particularly appreciative for the Archbishop’s raising this issue, and equally grateful for the Holy Father’s comments – the Pope’s comments yesterday regarding his support for the Geneva II process. We welcome that support. It is very important to have broad support, and I know that the Pope is particularly concerned about the massive numbers of displaced human beings and the violence that has taken over 130,000 lives.

In addition, the Secretary – Archbishop Parolin asked me for a solid briefing with respect to the Middle East peace process. Pope Francis will be going to Israel and the Palestinian territories and to Jordan in May, and so we agreed, after I gave a briefing, that we would stay in touch in order to keep him abreast of what we’re doing and then what progress there may be in the peace process. But obviously, there are issues of enormous concern to the Holy See, not just about peace, but also about the freedom of access for religious worship in Jerusalem for all religions and appropriate resolution with respect to Jerusalem that respects that going forward.

We also talked about Africa, the challenge of Sudan, where there are particular interests. There is a large Catholic population in South Sudan. President Kiir, himself, is Catholic, and I think that our efforts over the last days could be augmented by the efforts of the Holy See with respect to trying to end the violence and bring about a peaceful resolution. I think the Secretary of State of the Holy See was very interested in what he and they could do in order to try to assist in that process.

We talked also about Cuba and the need for respect for freedom of religion and freedom of – and respect for human rights. I raised the issue of Alan Gross and his captivity, and we hope very much that there might be able to be assistance with respect to that issue. And similarly, the Holy Father yesterday in his speech raised the responsibility that we all have for the climate, for responsibility for planet Earth, which is our common home, as he said. And we share the responsibilities with respect to that.

We talked about the common interest of Pope Francis and President Obama in addressing poverty and extreme poverty on a global basis. The United States of America is deeply involved in efforts in Africa and in other parts of the world – in Asia, South Central Asia – to address this poverty, as is the Catholic Church. And so we have a huge common interest in dealing with this issue of poverty, which in many cases is the root cause of terrorism or even the root cause of the disenfranchisement of millions of people on this planet.

So this was as comprehensive a conversation as I’ve had with any secretary of state or foreign minister in the course of my tenure, and I think, happily, we agreed on an enormous amount of things that we can cooperate on. That’s what’s important. We need to find all of the voices that are prepared to fight for anti-poverty or peace or for reconciliation among peoples, to bring religions together, to bring people together, and to make peace. I am very mindful of the fact that in his first Urbi et Orbi speech or address, the Holy Father did speak about the importance of peace and the importance of all people on Earth being peacemakers.

So I’m grateful for the conversation we had today. I know that the Holy Father is anticipating the visit of President Obama here, and the President is looking forward to coming here to meet with him. So much was agreed on as a mutual agenda this morning, and I’m particularly pleased to know that the Holy Father and the Secretary of State in the Holy See will continue to speak out about peace in the Middle East, continue to try to bring the parties together, continue to help address some of the most pressing concerns that are challenging failed states and failing states in too many parts of the world.

It is good to know that we will have this common enterprise together, and I was very grateful to the archbishop who I had the pleasure of congratulating on his elevation to cardinal, which will take place in February. So it was an all-in-all very helpful meeting, and I’m confident that the groundwork and agreement that we reached with respect to the peace process, as well as a number of other urgent priorities, will help us as we go forward in the next days and months.

Thank you very much.