U.S. OFFICIAL'S TESTIMONY BEFORE CONGRESS ON RWANDA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Rwandan Human Rights and U.S. Relations With Rwanda
Testimony
Steven Feldstein
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations
Washington, DC
May 20, 2015
As Prepared

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass and Members of the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations. Thank you for holding this important hearing on Rwanda and for the opportunity to speak today.

Rwanda holds a very personal connection for me. Fifteen years ago I first went to Rwanda as a fellow with the International Rescue Committee. I spent a year in the country supporting its efforts to recover from war and genocide – helping unaccompanied children and youth reintegrate back into their communities, working with villages to provide access to clean water, and traveling throughout the country to try to better understand what gives people the capacity to pick up their feet and move forward after such a shattering experience. Living in Rwanda had a profound impact on me and has been a key inspiration for my decision to pursue a career in foreign policy and human rights.

Indeed, Rwanda’s progress since the 1994 genocide has been remarkable. Rwanda’s GDP has grown at an estimated annual rate of 7 percent, youth literacy rates have improved from 65 percent in 2000 to 77 percent in 2010, and child and infant death rates have plummeted, going from an under-5 mortality rate of 152 children out of every 1,000 in 1990 to just 52 out of 1,000 in 2013. Rwanda also plays a crucial role in international peacekeeping operations, and has made great strides in its inclusion of women at all levels of government. Several years ago I paid a return visit to Kigali, and I found a city profoundly changed. Modern office towers have replaced dilapidated buildings. The streets were spotless – thanks in part to a widely acclaimed ban on plastic bags. New businesses seemed to be springing up daily, such as coffee ventures supplying top quality beans to U.S. brands like Starbucks and Peet’s.

But this is only part of the story. Alongside Rwanda’s remarkable development progress, there have been equally consistent efforts to reduce space for independent voices and to diminish the ability of the media, opposition groups, and civil society to operate. This space matters. It is essential not only for democratic progress, but for cementing Rwanda’s impressive economic and development gains.

When it comes to the human rights situation in Rwanda, we see three trends of note. First, political space in Rwanda and the overall human rights environment continues to shrink. There are reports of targeted killings, and an increasing number of reports of disappearances and harassment of civil society groups and opposition parties. Second, this trend is reinforcing the wrong lessons for Rwanda– particularly that a country can continue to experience robust economic growth and foreign investment even while repressing its citizens further and reducing democratic space. This is not a sustainable path. At some point – if unchecked - human rights violations will begin to affect Rwanda’s economic performance, stability and the willingness of foreign investors to pump in outside capital and do business. Third, Rwanda’s human rights records is setting a disturbing precedent for the region and continent. Other countries are carefully watching Rwanda’s model of economic liberalization and political repression. In my discussions, counterparts frequently point to Rwanda and question whether protecting the rights of their citizens matters if they can achieve substantial economic development.

The answer, of course, is that protecting the rights of all of Rwanda’s citizens and residents matters immensely to Rwanda’s long term stability and prosperity, to its continued positive economic trajectory, and to whether other countries recognize they can follow a similar path to greater prosperity. When governments repress fundamental freedoms and universal human rights, international investment can falter because this repression is a sign of societal fissures that can lead to instability and violence. This is also true when governments stifle civil society organizations that provide checks and balances on corruption and increase government accountability. Rwanda can be a model for the region, or it can slip backwards over time, never truly fulfilling its potential.

We have articulated our concerns about Rwanda’s human rights record for years directly to Rwanda’s senior leaders, including President Kagame, and we have highlighted the deteriorating situation in Rwanda, through the State Department’s annual human rights report. The Department’s 2013 human rights report for Rwanda noted that the government targeted political opponents and human rights advocates for harassment, arrest, and abuse. It reported that the government disregarded the rule of law and placed significant restrictions on the enjoyment of freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association, as well as restrictions on press freedoms. It observed that the government harassed and placed substantial limitations on local and international NGOs, particularly organizations that monitored and reported on human rights. And it highlighted reports that arbitrary or unlawful killings took place both inside and outside Rwanda.

The credibility of elections provides an important indication of the level of space for independent voices and views. Unfortunately, Presidential elections in 2010 and parliamentary elections in 2013 were beset by irregularities both in the pre-electoral period and on Election Day. Part of this is due to the passing in 2008 of the “genocide ideology” law, which was intended to restrict any actions that could lead to genocide. In practice, the government has used this law to impede the activities of opposition parties, opposition candidates, and civil society organizations. In the 2010 elections, in which President Kagame was reelected with 93 percent of the vote, there was a lack of critical opposition voices in the pre-election period, opposition political parties were unable to register, and two opposition party leaders were arrested on what appear to be spurious charges. Two unregistered political parties were unable to field presidential candidates due to legal or administrative issues.

International observers reported that Rwanda’s 2013 parliamentary elections also failed to meet standards for free and fair elections. While the elections were calm and well organized, there were numerous irregularities, including the presence of security officials in polling rooms, multiple voting, and local election officials filling out ballots in the absence of voters. Rwandan electoral officials also denied U.S. Embassy observers access to polling stations and vote tabulation centers, thereby making it impossible to verify the accuracy of the final vote count and official participation rate. Rwanda’s next presidential election is in 2017, and we are cautiously hopeful that this election will mark an improvement upon previous contests.

Our concerns about restrictions on press freedom, freedom of assembly, expression, and association extend beyond electoral processes. Most Rwandan news outlets follow party lines. Rwandan journalists self-censor their work, and some have fled the country out of fear of government harassment. The Rwandan government has also stepped up its use of a law amended in 2012 that allows security officials to monitor online communications. During the period surrounding the 20-year genocide commemoration in spring 2014, the country’s few remaining independent journalists were increasingly targeted for harassment and arrest. This led the United States to issue a statement in June 2014 expressing deep concern about the arrest and disappearance of dozens of Rwandan citizens and credible reports that individual journalists were being threatened, and in some cases directly censored.

We are also deeply troubled by the succession of what appear to be politically motivated murders of prominent Rwandan exiles. This includes the December 2013 killing of former Rwandan government official Colonel Patrick Karegeya, who was found dead in a hotel room in South Africa. Months later, armed men raided the South African home of former Rwandan Army Chief of Staff Kayumba Nyamwasa, who had previously been targeted for assassination attempts. President Kagame’s 2014 statements about “consequences” for those who betray Rwanda has further heightened these concerns.

Also of deep concern are corpses that appeared in Lake Rweru, along the border between Rwanda and Burundi, between July and October in 2014. Fishermen reported seeing dozens of floating bodies, some bound and wrapped in sacks. Four bodies were recovered and buried near a village in Burundi’s Muyinga Province. Fishermen reported that on the nights of September 21 and 22, Rwandan marines attempted to exhume the bodies, allegedly to return them to Rwanda. Both Rwanda and Burundi called for a joint investigation into the identity and origin of the bodies. In December, Burundi’s minister of foreign affairs accepted an offer of forensic assistance funded by the United States and several other donor governments for an investigation led by the African Union. Rwandan officials stated that the government also supported a joint investigation, but no investigation has been conducted. The United States continues to press the African Union to move forward with an investigation into these killings and accountability for those responsible.

As a close partner with Rwanda on many global and regional issues, we have and will continue to maintain a close dialogue with the government on these concerns, while recognizing their strong policies and actions with respect to issues of concern, such as women’s rights, the rights of LGBTI persons, and access to health and education.

In closing, Rwanda is an important ally. It is a respected contributor to peacekeeping missions throughout the region, it has rebuilt itself from genocide, and it has achieved impressive development and economic gains. I have seen with my own eyes the remarkable progress that Rwanda has made. I believe there is a bright future ahead for its people, which is why Rwanda’s current human rights situation is so personally disappointing to me. Ensuring respect for freedoms of expression, association, and peaceful assembly, and respect for the rule of law is essential for cementing, and building from these gains. The United States will continue to urge Rwanda to respect the rights of all its citizens.

Thank you very much and I welcome your questions.

PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STATEMENT ON 21ST ANNIVERSARY OF RWANDA GENOCIDE

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE
April 07, 2015
Statement by the President on the 21st Anniversary of the Genocide in Rwanda

Twenty-one years ago today, a genocide began that would claim the lives of more than 800,000 Rwandan men, women, and children and mark the beginning of one hundred days of horror for Rwanda’s people.  Today is a day to commemorate those who lost their lives, to honor the courage of those who risked their lives to save others, and to grieve with the Rwandan people.  It is also a day to reaffirm what our common humanity demands—that we stand together to prevent mass atrocities and continue to do all we can to make good on the pledge of “never again.”  We also renew our commitment to help finish the task of bringing to justice those who inflicted such tragedy upon such a beautiful land.    

While we remain haunted by the genocide, we also draw hope and inspiration from the people of Rwanda, who are building a brighter future.  We commend their determination to continue to make important progress toward healing old wounds and lifting people out of poverty.  The United States will continue to work tirelessly in partnership with Rwanda and with other nations to help prevent such atrocities and advance dignity and peace for all.

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT U.S. EMBASSY IN LONDON

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
02/21/2015 04:31 PM EST
Remarks at Press Availability
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
U.S. Embassy London
London, United Kingdom
February 21, 2015

SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. Appreciate everybody’s patience. Well, good evening, everybody. It’s a pleasure for me to be back in London, and I’m very grateful to my friend Philip Hammond, foreign secretary of the U.K., not just for his hospitality but for his partnership in wrestling with some very difficult issues today.

The United States and the United Kingdom have a long tradition of great cooperation, and frankly, that tradition was reinforced today and it continues. Under President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron’s leadership, our two nations are helping to articulate the path forward in many areas of concern for the global community. And this evening I want to focus on a number of them that we discussed here today.

First, the foreign secretary and I reviewed the progress in degrading and ultimately defeating Daesh. Throughout our history, we have faced significant threats together – genocide, aggression, chaos, dictatorship, the battle against fascism and tyranny. Today we’re asked away to a new campaign against a new kind of enemy. The battlefield is very different and the weapons are different, so the strategies that we employ have to be different too in order to overcome that enemy.

I am confident that based on the choices we are making we will degrade and ultimately defeat Daesh. And in my judgment, there should be no question about that. Working together, we have brought together a coalition of more than 60 countries and it is growing still. We’ve seen progress in Iraq. Daesh was defeated at Kobani. Territory is now being taken back. The Iraqi army is beginning to stand up. Their communications, the communications of Daesh, have been disrupted. Their ability to be able to move in convoys has been disrupted. Their supply lines are being disrupted. The transportation networks they utilized are being disrupted.

And so we have started this great enterprise. We’re engaged and we’re coordinating. But obviously, there is a lot more to be done. We understand that, and that’s what we talked about today. Toward our common goal of unity and action, President Obama hosted a summit in Washington this week that brought together leading figures from local and national governments, from civil society and the private sector, people from all around the world who came together, including a robust U.K. delegation led by Home Secretary Theresa May. We’re very grateful for her contribution .

Our goal with the summit was really very simple: to expand the global conversation, and more importantly to listen to each other, share best practices, learn the lessons where things haven’t worked particularly well if they haven’t, and clarify an action agenda that identifies, shares, and deploys those best practices in preventing and countering violent extremism.

In this effort, frankly, we decided – and I think everybody agreed on this yesterday and the day before – there’s a role for every country. There’s something for everybody to be able to do in this.

Together, we committed to help countries that are at immediate risk to be able to grow stronger and to be able to fight back. And Philip Hammond and I discussed some of the things we could do to accomplish that today.

We also committed to interrupt financial flows so that the terrorist become as bankrupt in financial terms as they are in any kind of ideology or program or morality. We committed to stop the recruitment into the terrorist ranks and to work very hard in order to be able to deprive terrorists of the access that they have to those who are disillusioned or disconnected to their particular countries or societies.

We committed to help areas of the globe that are on the front lines or the ones that are next in line as targets, and particularly those that might be subject to the potential of terrorist infiltration. We also committed to work hard to create greater opportunity of positive role models for young people everywhere, and we committed to teach skills and work to improve the economies of many countries where there is a ready pool for the potential of terrorism in order to reduce the numbers of people who might be attracted to the misguided appeals that have brought, frankly, too many people to the battlefield.

Now, make no mistake: The rise of violent extremism remains a challenge for everyone, and it is particularly a challenge to global rule of law. Foreign Secretary Hammond and I agreed that we believe we have made the right initial choices, that we are on the right path, we are confident about the future, but we’re also realistic about those places where we still need to do more to meet the challenge. The reason we are confident is, frankly, because the terrorists have absolutely nothing positive to offer anyone and because nations are coming together across every boundary, every boundary – the boundaries of territory, the boundaries of creed, of religion, of ideology, of governance – in order to move forward in the name of decency, civility, and reason.

Foreign Secretary Hammond and I also discussed the egregious Russian and separatist violations of the February 12th Minsk agreement in Ukraine which embraced the September agreements and set forth a very clear path for what was needed to be done to be able to put a cease-fire in place and begin to live up to those agreements.

One of the most egregious violations is obviously the assault, the full-scale assault on the city of Debaltseve and the violations of the cease-fire in the resupply of the separatists by Russia. Let me be clear: We know to a certainty what Russia has been providing, and no amount of propaganda is capable of hiding these actions. And for anyone who wants to make gray areas out of black, let’s get very real. The Minsk implementation agreement is not open to interpretation. It’s not vague. It’s not optional. It’s called for a complete cease-fire that was to take effect on the night of February 15th with full OSCE access to the conflict zone, and the pullback of all heavy weapons from the line of contact.

So far, Russia and the separatists are only complying in a few areas selectively, not in Debaltseve, not outside Mariopol, and not in other key strategic areas. And that is simply unacceptable. If this failure continues, make no mistake: There will be further consequences, including consequences that would place added strains on Russia’s already troubled economy. We’re not going to sit back and allow this kind of cynical, craven behavior to continue at the expense of the sovereignty and integrity of another nation. And I am confident that the United States and the United Kingdom and others are prepared to stand up and take the measures necessary to add to the cost of these actions.

Foreign Secretary Hammond and I also discussed the concerns that we share about the continued viability of the Palestinian Authority if they do not receive funds soon. If the Palestinian Authority ceases or were to cease, security cooperation – or even decide to disband as a result of their economic predicament, and that could happen in the near future if they don’t receive additional revenues – then we would be faced with yet another crisis that could also greatly impact the security of both Palestinians and Israelis. And that would have the potential of serious ripple effects elsewhere in the region.

So we’re working hard to try to prevent that from happening, and that’s why we’ve been reaching out to key stakeholders in order to express these concerns but also to try to work together to be able to find a solution to this challenge.

Finally, Foreign Secretary Hammond and I discussed the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with Iran. Our governments remain in lockstep with our international partners on the importance of cutting off Iran’s pathways to the potential of a nuclear weapon. And will travel to Geneva tomorrow to meet with Foreign Minister Zarif to see if we can make progress in these talks. A unified P5+1 has put on the table creative ideas to achieve our objective, and now we will find out whether or not Iran is able to match its words about its willingness to show that its program is fully peaceful with the verifiable actions and verifiable decisions that are necessary to accomplish that goal.

Finally, I meant to say a moment ago we also discussed Syria today. The challenge of the Assad regime, which continues to drop barrel bombs on innocent civilians, the challenge of a country that is continuing to be torn apart by this violence. The jihadis who are attracted to Syria because of Assad’s presence and the extraordinary spillover of impact on Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, the region, as a consequence of the numbers of refugees that continue to be created by this violence.

So it is our hope that with good effort over the course of the next weeks and months, we might even be able to find a way to have a greater impact on finding the negotiated path, which is the only ultimate path which will resolve the question of violence and restore stability and integrity to a potentially unified, secular, and stable Syria.

With that, I would be happy to take some questions.

MS. HARF: Great. The first question is for Rosiland Jordan of Al-Jazeera. I’m going to bring the microphone to you.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. First on Ukraine, you described in general terms what came out of your discussions with Foreign Minister Hammond. How likely is it, first, that more economic sanctions and travel bans are going to be imposed? How long is the U.S. willing to wait to see whether the Minsk cease-fire of the past week actually is going to take full effect? Why is it realistic to think that even more economic sanctions are going to persuade Vladimir Putin and his government to change course? Their economy has now been rated at junk bond status and they still seem to be intent on spreading their influence using separatists and Russian troops.

And finally on Ukraine, is it time to give the Ukrainian military lethal weapons so that they can better defend their own territory, especially given that there isn’t a NATO commitment to Ukraine’s security?

And then on the Iran nuclear talks --

SECRETARY KERRY: I’ve got to get a pencil here to write all those questions down. (Laughter.) I need a piece of paper, actually. You’ve got a few more questions there than (inaudible).

QUESTION: Regarding the talks, sir –

SECRETARY KERRY: On what now?

QUESTION: On Iran.

SECRETARY KERRY: We’re Iran now?

QUESTION: Yes, we’re on Iran. Will the U.S. and Iran actually achieve a political framework for a deal by March 31st? How urgent in your estimation is the sentiment on both sides to achieve this deal? Does the fact that the U.S. Energy Secretary Dr. Moniz and his Iranian counterpart, Dr. Salehi, to discuss the technical issues mean that the really tough stuff is getting worked out and that everyone is getting very close to this deal?

And then we have to look at the prospect of what you and the President have said in the past: “No deal is better than a bad deal.” If there is no deal by March 31st, is the U.S. willing to walk away from the table, leave behind the efforts of the JPOA, and essentially reestablish the status quo regarding Iran’s nuclear program?

SECRETARY KERRY: Okay. So let me begin with the last of the questions with respect to Ukraine and then I’ll deal with the other questions on Ukraine. With respect to lethal weapons, we’ve made it very, very clear that that is a discussion that it taking place in Washington both in the Congress as well as in the Administration. No decision has been made by the President at this point in time, and I think we have to see what happens in the next few days with respect to the events that are taking place now on the ground.

With respect to the events that are taking place now on the ground, I think I’ve spoken to them in the course of my opening comments very, very clearly. But the fact is that yes, sanctions are being considered because there are a number of more serious sanctions that yet remain available to the European Community and the United States and others who are sharing in the implementation of these sanctions.

And they are having an impact; there is no question about it. Now, it may not have yet succeeded in presenting President Putin with a choice that he’s been willing to make, but I am confident that in Russia generally there will be an increasing amount of questioning of the course that he is on should additional sanctions be implemented. And there are some yet very serious sanctions that can be taken which have a profound increased negative impact on the Russian economy.

I have said persistently, as President Obama has, that we’re not seeking to hurt the people of Russia, who regrettably pay a collateral price as a result of these sanctions, and we’ve tried to target them as effectively as possible to be able to have an impact on the decision making of those in government itself. But increasingly, there will be an inevitable broader impact as the sanctions ratchet up.

So in the next few days, I anticipate that President Obama will evaluate the choices that are in front of him and will make his decision as to what the next step will be. But there is serious discussion taking place between us and our European allies as to what those next sanction steps ought to be and when they perhaps ought to be implemented. And I am confident that some additional steps will be taken in response to the breaches of this cease-fire and to the process that had been agreed upon in Minsk.

QUESTION: And regarding the Iranian talks?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, regarding the Iranian talks, the presence of Secretary Ernie Moniz is a reflection of the fact that these talks are very technical, and because we are pushing to try to come to agreement on some very difficult issues, it was deemed necessary and appropriate to be able to have our technical people be able to sit with their technical people at the highest level in order to try to resolve any differences that may exist.

I would not read into it any indication whatsoever that something is about to be decided as a result of that. There are still significant gaps. There is still a distance to travel. And with respect to the end date that you asked about, President Obama has no inclination whatsoever to extend these talks beyond the period that has been set out with a feeling that it is imperative to be able to come to a fundamental political outline and agreement within the time span that we have left. And if that can’t be done, that it would be an indication that fundamental choices are not being made that are essential to doing that.

So our target remains, as the President has said, towards the end of March, and I am absolutely confident that President Obama is fully prepared to stop these talks if he feels that they’re not being met with the kind of productive decision making necessary to prove that a program is, in fact, peaceful.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS. HARF: Great. Our final question is from Nick Childs of the BBC.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. In view of the Ukraine crisis, the issues of the broader relationship now with Russia, and in particular how NATO as an alliance responds to it, the United Kingdom is one of the few countries within NATO now that currently maintains the 2 percent minimum defense spending level, but at the moment the British Government has no formal commitment to sustain it beyond 2016. With the backdrop of everything that is going on, would you welcome a firmer commitment from the United Kingdom Government to sustain the 2 percent defense spending level into the future, perhaps to encourage others?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me just say that I don’t want to inadvertently find myself getting in the way of – in any kind of domestic debate that may be going on with respect to an election that is not too far away. And so I’ll answer it in a way that is straightforward but nevertheless not, I think, different from where we’ve been in the past with respect to this issue.

It is standing policy of NATO, standing policy of the United States, which we have expressed through the years frequently and I have personally expressed recently in Brussels, the importance of all NATO members adhering to the 2 percent level. We’re not looking for some kind of reaffirmation or restatements that go well out into the future or something. What we’re looking for is this year’s budget, and that’s what’s important given what has happened in Ukraine, given the pressures on frontline states and the need to have a shared responsibility in order to meet the overall challenge of sustaining NATO as the vital alliance that it is and has been, and being able to send a message to anybody who were to challenge it that people are prepared to live up to their obligations and not just keep it strong but strengthen it at this particular moment. We’ve engaged in a very significant reassurance plan to a number of countries – the Baltics particularly, Poland, others – who are on the front lines. And I think it’s important for them to know that their fellow members of the NATO alliance are doing their share at the same time.

So we’re very pleased that Great Britain has been and remains a steadfast member and contributor to that alliance, one of the leaders of the alliance, in fact. And we have great respect for the armed force capacity and partnership that Great Britain provides with respect to its military obligations and efforts. And I’m confident that the prime minister and the current government will continue to do that. Thank you.

MS. HARF: Thank you, everyone.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks, all. Appreciate it.

QUESTION: Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STATEMENT ON 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF RWANDAN GENOCIDE

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

Statement by the President on the 20th Commemoration of the Genocide in Rwanda

We join with the people of Rwanda in marking twenty years since the beginning of the genocide that took the lives of so many innocents and which shook the conscience of the world.  We honor the memory of the more than 800,000 men, women and children who were senselessly slaughtered simply because of who they were or what they believed.  We stand in awe of their families, who have summoned the courage to carry on, and the survivors, who have worked through their wounds to rebuild their lives.  And we salute the determination of the Rwandans who have made important progress toward healing old wounds, unleashing the economic growth that lifts people from poverty, and contributing to peacekeeping missions around the world to spare others the pain they have known.  

At this moment of reflection, we also remember that the Rwandan genocide was neither an accident nor unavoidable.  It was a deliberate and systematic effort by human beings to destroy other human beings.  The horrific events of those 100 days—when friend turned against friend, and neighbor against neighbor—compel us to resist our worst instincts, just as the courage of those who risked their lives to save others reminds us of our obligations to our fellow man.  The genocide we remember today—and the world’s failure to respond more quickly—reminds us that we always have a choice.  In the face of hatred, we must remember the humanity we share.  In the face of cruelty, we must choose compassion.  In the face of intolerance and suffering, we must never be indifferent.  Embracing this spirit, as nations and as individuals, is how we can honor all those who were lost two decades ago and build a future worthy of their lives. 

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO UN SUSAN E. RICE TALKS ABOUT ATROCITIES PREVENTION BOARD

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Statement by Ambassador Susan E. Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, on the Launch of the Atrocities Prevention Board
Susan E. Rice
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
U.S. Mission to the United Nations New York, NYApril 23, 2012
Nearly nine months ago, President Obama declared the prevention of mass atrocities and genocide “a core national security interest and core moral responsibility” of the United States in the 21st century and set in motion an unprecedented review of our national capacity to foresee, prevent, and respond to them. In doing so, the President expressed his determination to ensure an end to history’s bitter succession of mass killings and to make “never again” not just a reminder to future generations, but a hallmark of American policy.
Today, at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, an institution dedicated to the imperatives of memory and action, President Obama announced sweeping initiatives generated by his directive. The President ordered steps—including the establishment of an Atrocity Prevention Board—that will lay the foundation for a stronger, better-organized U.S. and international response to early warnings of mass atrocities and genocide, presenting policymakers with better prevention options before the costs of action rise.

Atrocities are not inevitable. They are perpetrated by those who choose cruelty, preach hate, and seek power through division and death. They need not—and should not—happen anywhere. Not in Cote d’Ivoire, nor Libya, nor Syria. Yet, as the President has said, “History has taught us that our pursuit of a world where states do not systematically slaughter civilians will not come to fruition without concerted and coordinated effort.” Today and every day, let us work together to apply the lessons of the past and to strengthen the world’s will and capacity to make “never again” an enduring reality.

PRESIDENT OBAMA STRENGTHENS U.S. ABILITY TO DEAL WITH GENOCIDE AND MASS ATROCITIES

FROM AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Obama Announces Strategy to Counter Atrocities

By Karen Parrish
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 23, 2012 - President Barack Obama today announced a strategy to strengthen the U.S. government's ability to foresee, prevent, and respond to genocide and mass atrocities, and extended U.S. troops' efforts to do just that in Central Africa.

During a visit to the Holocaust Memorial Museum here, Obama said preventing mass atrocities and genocide is a core national security interest and a core moral responsibility for the United States.

"That does not mean that we intervene militarily every time there's an injustice in the world," the president said. "We cannot and should not. It does mean we possess many tools, diplomatic and political and economic and financial and intelligence and law enforcement, and our moral suasion."

Obama's strategy calls for the Defense Department to develop doctrine and increase training and planning efforts emphasizing mass atrocity prevention and response.

Obama announced the creation of the Atrocities Prevention Board, which will include Defense Department representatives as well as those from the departments of State, Treasury, Justice, and Homeland Security; the U.S. Agency for International Development, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, the office of the director of National Intelligence, the CIA, and the office of the vice president, according to White House officials.

The board will help identify and address atrocity threats, and will oversee institutional changes to make the U.S. government "more nimble and effective" is response to such threats, administration officials said.

The strategy also increases diplomatic and intelligence efforts to identify and respond to atrocities, they said.

Obama said the United States over the past three years has helped to counter mass atrocities in Libya, South Sudan and Cote d'Ivoire.

The military mission to help counter the Lord's Resistance Army, a terrorist group in central Africa led by Joseph Kony, demonstrated how U.S. forces can support national and international efforts to quell atrocities, Obama said.

About a hundred U.S. military advisors, mostly from the Army's Special Forces, have been working since October with the militaries of Uganda, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan to capture or kill Kony and other LRA commanders under an Obama executive order.

When he announced that mission, the president directed the National Security Council to review its progress after 150 days.

Today, Obama said, "I can announce that our advisers will continue their efforts to bring this madman to justice and to save lives. It is part of our regional strategy ... to end the scourge that is the LRA and help realize a future where no African child is stolen from their family and no girl is raped and no boy is turned into a child soldier."

The LRA is composed mostly of kidnapped children forced to execute Kony's terrorist tactics over the past 20 years, administration officials have said. Tens of thousands of people have been murdered and as many as 1.8 million have been displaced by the LRA, they said.

Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt. John Kirby told reporters today the U.S. advisors in central Africa have had "a significant impact ... improving the capabilities of indigenous forces there to put pressure on the LRA."

The advisors' role, Kirby emphasized, is training and assistance, not combat. He added that the U.S. assistance is helping.

"We've seen indications that [Kony] and his followers are less active and less effective," he said.