FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
November 16, 2014
FACT SHEET: The G-20 Brisbane Summit
The G-20 is the world’s premier forum for economic policy cooperation – where Leaders representing economies generating 85 percent of global GDP assemble around the table to promote strong, sustainable and balanced growth and to address urgent global economic challenges.
The Brisbane G-20 Summit – the eighth that President Obama has attended since taking office – focused on growth and jobs. With the global economic recovery still fragile, G-20 Leaders sent a clear signal of their commitment to take decisive steps, recognizing that the global economy is being held back by a shortfall in demand. G-20 Leaders announced a Brisbane Action Plan of individual country commitments and collective actions that could increase the G-20’s combined output by 2.1 percent or more over the next five years.
Leaders agreed on a number of specific steps to strengthen the resilience of the global economy and to address challenges such as climate change. These include new initiatives on infrastructure investment, female labor force participation, combating corruption, and remittances. Leaders also issued a separate statement about Ebola and global health security.
Among the most significant agreements were:
launching the Global Infrastructure Initiative to unlock private financing for infrastructure investment worldwide, including the creation of a Global Infrastructure Hub to support best practices and coordination;
a commitment by each country to close the gap between its male and female labor-force participation rates by 25% by 2025; this will bring an estimated 100 million additional women into the labor force by that year;
principles that would help prevent the abuse of anonymous shell companies to facilitate illicit financial flows stemming from corruption, tax evasion, and money laundering a commitment to addressing the challenge of climate change including communicating post-2020 domestic climate targets as soon as possible and preferably by the first quarter of 2015. G-20 leaders also stressed the importance of climate finance, including additional contributions to the Green Climate Fund following the United States’ $3 billion commitment to the GCF;
an Energy Efficiency Action Plan that includes, among other initiatives, a program to increase fuel quality and reduce carbon emissions by heavy-duty vehicles;
advancing the implementation of the international financial reform agenda;
agreement to complete by the end of 2015 an implementation plan on combating tax avoidance by multinational companies; and agreement on principles on energy markets that could serve as the basis for ongoing discussions on reform of the international energy architecture.
Building a Stronger Global Economy through Jobs and Growth
The United States is a major source of strength in the global economy, with 56 straight months of private sector job growth creating 10.6 million jobs. The Administration’s comprehensive response to the economic crisis — including through macroeconomic and structural policies — has laid the foundation for growth in the United States.
The pace of global economic growth and job creation, however, has disappointed since the recovery from recession began in 2009. Economic activity in advanced countries has been particularly weak, while growth in emerging markets is uneven. As the G-20 Leaders acknowledged, there is a shortfall in global demand.
To help strengthen medium-term potential growth, G-20 Leaders endorsed the Brisbane Action Plan to boost collective G-20 growth by 2 percent or more over the next five years. The Action Plan includes a U.S. Growth Strategy based on Administration priorities such as infrastructure investment, raising household income, increasing access to quality skills development, increasing trade, comprehensive immigration reform, and assisting working families. The U.S. reform commitments were critical in allowing the G-20 to meet its 2 percent goal.
Increasing Infrastructure Investment
A key constraint to growth across the G-20 is inadequate infrastructure. At the same time, infrastructure investment creates construction jobs and can provide a strong impetus to growth. This year, the G-20 launched a Global Infrastructure Initiative, paired with a new Global Infrastructure Hub that will be based here in Australia, to help tap into the large pool of potential private financing for infrastructure investment.
We’ve also made significant advances in expanding the amount of money that the World Bank and other multilateral development banks can deploy to emerging economies through more efficient use of their existing balance sheets.
Female Labor Force Participation
The G-20 made a new commitment to bring more women into the workforce and improve the quality of their jobs. All G-20 countries committed to reduce the gap between the share of men and women in the workforce by 25 percent by 2025. That would bring an additional 100 million women into the formal workforce and increase global GDP.
Fighting corruption
The G-20 has taken significant steps over the last four years to fight the scourge of corruption in our own countries and overseas. In Brisbane, Leaders adopted a two-year plan to strengthen enforcement, enhance transparency, and facilitate the recovery of assets stolen by corrupt officials. This includes meaningful steps to ensure that corrupt actors cannot exploit our financial and legal systems. The G-20 also reached a significant agreement to end the abuse of anonymous shell companies by endorsing implementation of “Beneficial Ownership” principles. The G-20 will work to ensure that corrupt actors can no longer use these shell companies to evade taxes or launder the proceeds of their crimes, and the Administration has proposed legislation to end the use of anonymous shell companies in the United States.
Remittances and Financial inclusion
G-20 leaders today agreed on a set of concrete steps that will reduce the cost of sending money home for people working overseas. These remittances are a life-line for millions of people in the developing world and a critical source of development financing for emerging and developing economies. This action plan will lower the cost of remittances to an average of 5 percent by increasing competition and expanding access to money transfer services, making the financial system more inclusive for billions of people and again demonstrating the G-20’s capacity to make the global economy work better for everyone.
Enhancing Energy Efficiency and Addressing Climate Change
G-20 leaders increased their commitment to energy and climate change through energy deliverables and a strong endorsement of the need for action to address climate change. Leaders agreed to:
Endorse a new set of Principles on Energy Collaboration that outline key elements for future G-20 energy and climate change work. These principles can set the agenda for future discussions of how we should adapt the global energy architecture to reflect recent transformations in the world’s energy markets – including the energy revolution in the United States.
An Energy Efficiency Action Plan that will guide efficiency work in six important sectors. Central to this Action Plan is an agreement to develop country-specific plans in 2015 to improve efficiency of heavy-duty vehicles – trucks, buses, and other large vehicles which account for as much as half of all vehicle emissions even though they represent only 10 percent of all vehicles. Three quarters of these vehicles globally are sold in G-20 countries. The plan will lead to cleaner fuel, lower fuel consumption and carbon emissions, and reduced public health costs. The United States is a global leader in heavy-duty vehicles standards for tailpipe emissions, fuel quality and efficiency, as well as green freight programs.
Reaffirm the G-20 commitment to rationalize and phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies. The United States, China, and Germany have committed to undergo fossil fuel subsidy peer reviews, which can help countries assess their subsidies and provide recommendations for reform. The European Union has also offered to participate as a reviewer.
Send a clear signal that G-20 Leaders support strong and effective action to address climate change by reaffirming their resolve to adopt a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force at the UN climate negotiations in Paris in 2015. In order to accomplish this, G-20 Leaders committed to communicate their post-2020 domestic climate targets as soon as possible and preferably by early 2015. They also stressed the importance of contributions to the Green Climate Fund, and the United States announced a $3 billion commitment to the GCF.
Ebola and Global Health Security
The G-20 also demonstrated its ability to respond to new and fast-breaking challenges to the global economy, such as the threat posed by the Ebola epidemic. In a statement released yesterday, G-20 leaders called for faster action to end the Ebola epidemic in West Africa. Participating countries also committed to take steps to build the capacity to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to future outbreaks – before they become epidemics. And to make sure these aren’t just idle promises, the G-20 will review progress in building that capacity in at a major international meeting next May. These steps are consistent with the Global Health Security Agenda, which the United States helped launch in February and the President hosted for an event at the White House in September.
For the three countries whose economies have been devastated by this epidemic, G-20 leaders also endorsed an IMF initiative to provide them with $300 million in low-cost or no-cost financing and debt relief.
Strengthening the Global Financial System and addressing tax evasion and avoidance
The G-20 came into being during the financial crisis, and repairing and strengthening the resilience of the global financial system has been one of the most important elements of our cooperation. While there is critical work to be done, this year we are close to finalizing the majority of the work on new rules to strengthen the financial system, end too-big-too fail, and promote a level playing field around the world.
U.S. leadership has played a transformational role by engaging others in a “race to the top” to improve the quality of regulation and level the playing field across major and emerging financial centers. The United States led the way in this area with our Dodd-Frank reforms. Now the key is for all G-20 countries to implement these commitments. After the damage wrought by the financial crisis, we owe it to our citizens to complete our work in creating a safer and more resilient financial system.
This year, the G-20 took significant steps forward to strengthening bank capital and liquidity by reducing leverage, addressing “too big to fail” by ensuring tax payers will not have to bear the costs of resolution for large financial institutions, committing to make the derivatives markets more transparent and safe, and addressing the systemic risks posed by shadow banking.
A PUBLICATION OF RANDOM U.S.GOVERNMENT PRESS RELEASES AND ARTICLES
Showing posts with label INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Monday, November 10, 2014
LEADERS MAKE STATEMENT ON TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP (TPP)
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
November 10, 2014
Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders’ Statement
November 10, 2014
We, the Leaders of Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam, welcome the significant progress in recent months, as reported to us by our Ministers, that sets the stage to bring these landmark Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations to conclusion. We are encouraged that Ministers and negotiators have narrowed the remaining gaps on the legal text of the agreement and that they are intensively engaging to complete ambitious and balanced packages to open our markets to one another, in accordance with the instructions we gave them in Bali a year ago. With the end coming into focus, we have instructed our Ministers and negotiators to make concluding this agreement a top priority so that our businesses, workers, farmers, and consumers can start to reap the real and substantial benefits of the TPP agreement as soon as possible.
As we mobilize our teams to conclude the negotiations, we remain committed to ensuring that the final agreement reflects our common vision of an ambitious, comprehensive, high-standard, and balanced agreement that enhances the competitiveness of our economies, promotes innovation and entrepreneurship, spurs economic growth and prosperity, and supports job creation in our countries. We are dedicated to ensuring that the benefits of the agreement serve to promote development that is sustainable, broad based and inclusive, and that the agreement takes into account the diversity of our levels of development. The gains that TPP will bring to each of our countries can expand even further should the open approach we are developing extend more broadly throughout the region. We remain committed to a TPP structure that can include other regional partners that are prepared to adopt its high standards.
Our fundamental direction to our Ministers throughout this process has been to negotiate an outcome that will generate the greatest possible benefit for each of our countries. In order to achieve that, our governments have worked to reflect the input we each have received from our stakeholders in the negotiation. Continued engagement will be critical as our Ministers work to resolve the remaining issues in the negotiation.
November 10, 2014
Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders’ Statement
November 10, 2014
We, the Leaders of Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam, welcome the significant progress in recent months, as reported to us by our Ministers, that sets the stage to bring these landmark Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations to conclusion. We are encouraged that Ministers and negotiators have narrowed the remaining gaps on the legal text of the agreement and that they are intensively engaging to complete ambitious and balanced packages to open our markets to one another, in accordance with the instructions we gave them in Bali a year ago. With the end coming into focus, we have instructed our Ministers and negotiators to make concluding this agreement a top priority so that our businesses, workers, farmers, and consumers can start to reap the real and substantial benefits of the TPP agreement as soon as possible.
As we mobilize our teams to conclude the negotiations, we remain committed to ensuring that the final agreement reflects our common vision of an ambitious, comprehensive, high-standard, and balanced agreement that enhances the competitiveness of our economies, promotes innovation and entrepreneurship, spurs economic growth and prosperity, and supports job creation in our countries. We are dedicated to ensuring that the benefits of the agreement serve to promote development that is sustainable, broad based and inclusive, and that the agreement takes into account the diversity of our levels of development. The gains that TPP will bring to each of our countries can expand even further should the open approach we are developing extend more broadly throughout the region. We remain committed to a TPP structure that can include other regional partners that are prepared to adopt its high standards.
Our fundamental direction to our Ministers throughout this process has been to negotiate an outcome that will generate the greatest possible benefit for each of our countries. In order to achieve that, our governments have worked to reflect the input we each have received from our stakeholders in the negotiation. Continued engagement will be critical as our Ministers work to resolve the remaining issues in the negotiation.
Monday, July 30, 2012
PRESS ROUNDTABLE IN ATHENS, GREECE WITH PHILIP H. GORDEN
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Press Roundtable in Athens, GreecePress Availability
Philip H. Gordon
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
Athens, Greece
July 27, 2012
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Thank you. It’s very nice to be back in Athens. It’s nice to see some of you again. I think I’ve seen you on a number of occasions including in this very room.
I am here to express our support and solidarity of the Greek people, and the Greek government as it undertakes some very difficult but we think really important economic reforms. We’re following these developments very closely and have a great stake in the outcome, not just for the sake of our friends and partners in Greece, but for the sake of the entire European area and the U.S. economy and the world economy. So we have great interest and we admire what the government is doing in undertaking, again, what we consider to be essential reforms, not just to convince world markets and European lenders of the soundness of the Greek economy, but for the sake of the Greek economy itself. In other words, we think these reforms are worth undertaking because they will lead to a more prosperous and sound Greek economy, let alone stabilize the eurozone.
We also appreciate Greece’s continued partnership with the United States on a number of regional and global issues, notwithstanding the economic difficulties. I had a chance to meet with the Foreign Minister. I also met earlier today with some of the other party leaders in the coalition. The latter mostly to talk about the economic situation, but obviously with the Foreign Minister, not just the economic situation but regional and global affairs. And as we discussed, world events don’t -- you don’t get to hit the pause button while you deal with the economy. There are still a lot of issues between Greece and Turkey and the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, so we exchanged views on those and I expressed our appreciation for Greece’s partnership in dealing with those, even as it faces the economic difficulties.
So again, a big agenda. It’s very important to the United States, so I came here to try to get a better understanding of what’s going on in Greece and the region. I’ll be going on to Turkey from here. But as I began with, I also came to express support for what the government and the people of Greece are doing.
With that, I’ll be happy to take any questions.
QUESTION: One of the priorities of the new Greek government in foreign policy is to declare the exclusive economic zone. Do you believe it can go ahead with this or before that have an agreement or something like that with Turkey?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I think it’s important to avoid unilateral steps. The United States recognizes countries’ rights to declare exclusive economic zones but these things aren’t done in a vacuum and you’d have to understand the full context. We don’t think it would be in Greece’s interest to do it without full cooperation with neighbors including Turkey.
Fortunately you have mechanisms in place, and over the past number of years have developed bilateral channels in which these things can be discussed and I know that they have already contributed to progress and we would strongly encourage Greece to use those channels to have these conversations so that any steps in this area are done cooperatively in the interests of all parties.
They’re complicated issues and it’s not as simple as being able to declare an EEZ or not being able to declare an EEZ, and that’s precisely why it should be done cooperatively.
QUESTION: In order to get the economy started, which is the big issue for Greece, it is crucial to attract more and more investment. What do you believe should be the main reforms that Greece has to make in order to attract investment?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: That’s a good question, because attracting investment is clearly a critical aspect to turning the Greek economy around. You need foreign investment. I think frankly over the years there has been a perception in Greece that it wasn’t friendly enough to foreign investment, that there were too many rules, too much bureaucracy, too slow approval rates, and investors need certainty and transparency. They want to be sure what the rules are, the regulations -- that they’re not going to be changing. So I think creating a more investor-friendly climate is critical.
There are other less direct measures, but are still important measures, and those are the ones that I think the government is already working on in strengthening the overall economy so that you get growth and buying power, purchasing power, so that it’s worth making the investments. But I would start with the question of bureaucracy, rules and regulations. I think you can look at, there are rankings of countries in terms of, for example, how quickly an investment can be approved and I think Greece needs to advance on that list.
QUESTION: I will stick to the economy because that’s what’s troubling us. I don’t know if you could say a few words about the meetings that you had with the other two governmental partners. And we had the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury a few days ago and I was wondering, the idea is, especially ahead of the American elections, there is this notion and I think it’s understandable that the United States is beginning to lose patience not with Greece, but the way the European leaders are handling the crisis since Greece and Ireland are not a problem right now. Nothing compares to what will happen if Spain or Italy fail or these growing costs continue.
So it would be great if you would give us your insight on this, and what is worrying the United States, and apart from declarations of support, which are good, or that you have to do something. If you have any other idea of how you could convince the European leaders to move on the next step and do something decisive.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Sure. As I said right from the start, we are following it extremely closely because we have such a great stake in the outcome. We have a great stake because we care about the hundreds of millions of people who live in Europe and their prosperity, but we also even have a more direct national interest at stake, our economy is so dependent on growth and stability and that of our largest trading and investment partner in the world by far. I think it’s accurate to say that some of the drag on the U.S. economy right now are questions about the eurozone, and so that’s why we’re so committed.
We acknowledge also that we don’t have a direct say in some of the key decisions to be made in Europe. The question of how big is the firewall or whether there are bailout funds or whether the ECB should be buying bonds at a certain level are not issues on which we get a vote. But because we are so engaged and so committed and so intertwined with Europe, we have views and we share those views and I can tell you at the highest levels, including our President there are regular conversations with European leaders about the way forward.
You mentioned American impatience. I wouldn’t describe it as impatience. I would acknowledge that --
QUESTION: Losing patience. I think it’s right.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: That’s different. Yes. We would like a comprehensive solution tomorrow or yesterday, but we also understand these are complicated decisions. They’re not easy. The reforms will take time. I think Angela Merkel but other leaders across Europe keep trying to explain that as well, that there is no magic bullet and there is no quick solution to this problem and we understand that. At the same time, we are urging leaders and I think have been for some time to be as decisive as possible as quickly as possible because the stakes are so great.
In terms of what -- you asked about my meetings with the party leaders and what needs to be done -- I would say I was encouraged from what I heard in the sense that the coalition members seemed determined to implement the agreements that have been reached. They seemed to have an appreciation that markets and governments need to see results and real efforts and structural reforms before they will respond positively. It goes back to the question that I was asked about investments.
Of course they took the opportunity to explain to me how difficult it was on the Greek people and the Greek economy, which we know and appreciate, but they also demonstrated a real understanding that only by taking these difficult measures will eurozone governments, the European Central Bank, and private investors be convinced that they can really put their money in Greece.
That’s what I encourage them to do as well, as quickly as possible and as decisively as possible, demonstrate in deed as well as in word, that there really is a new Greece, that Greece gets it, that it’s doing the things that are necessary to make clear that this is a place that you can really do business, and in this highly competitive globalized world there are a lot of places where you can send your money, as investors and hedge funds and others demonstrate every single day. And if they have the slightest doubts about a country’s ability to pay its debts or about what would be the fate of their investment, they’ll just go elsewhere.
That’s why it’s really incumbent on the country in question to take decisive, necessary measures. But as I say, from my meetings here I was convinced, I think it was in the first place encouraging to see the Greek people vote for parties that understood that, because the alternative would, in our humble estimation, really not serve Greece’s interests well. And it was encouraging to hear from those party leaders that they understand that and they’re determined to finish the job.
QUESTION: I would like to insist on the European economy matters. Are you worried about the possibility of a eurozone breakup and how possible do you find it? Because you see there were, even from German official, statements the past days about Greece leaving the eurozone, so --
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I would say a couple of things. First, we’re confident that the eurozone will stay together, that the governments have the commitment and the means to keep it together, and we believe that’s in our common interest. So we don’t want to see a breakup of the eurozone.
I would add that we’re not alone in thinking that. I think it’s worth pointing out that notwithstanding all of the questions about the viability of the eurozone, all of the costs involved to certain countries in keeping it going, all of the real pressures on certain members including Greece to do difficult things to stay in, notwithstanding all of that, every single member of the eurozone and governments across the European Union remain committed to it. If you want to simplify, both the lender countries and the debtor countries, they still remain committed. Even in Greece where we know you’ve borne great costs to do the necessary things to stay in, the Greek government is committed to it, and the Greek people voted consciously for parties who are also committed to it, notwithstanding the costs. I think that shows a real recognition of the values of preserving the eurozone.
You point to German leaders speculating about a breakup. If you listen carefully -- first of all the main German leader, the Chancellor, has been absolutely clear that she wants to preserve the eurozone and I think you see that in her actions when Germany puts up money to keep everybody in the eurozone -- and so what you’ve had is a couple of leaders most recently say they’re no longer appalled by the notion of one country leaving the eurozone. That’s still a very long way from saying we should abandon the eurozone, it’s not in our interest. On the contrary, I think all evidence points to a real recognition that it’s in everybody’s interests.
Then take I think even just yesterday Mario Draghi, head of the ECB, saying we’ll do -- you can check the quote exactly -- but something along the lines of whatever it takes. So I think there’s a recognition among all key actors that as painful and difficult as it is, it is really worth preserving. That will in itself I think help support the eurozone.
QUESTION: I would like to ask two questions. One is [inaudible] be positive on an extension of the Greek adjustment program from two years to four years so that it’s easier for the people to accept it. The second is the situation in Syria seems to get out of control. The Obama administration has shown that any action that could possibly be taken should be in a collective manner. But do you believe that the only way to do this is through the UN Security Council? Or possibly if the situation gets even worse we should explore other possibilities like a coalition of the willing?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Thanks. Two separate things. First, on the question of an extension of the timetable for Greece’s program, that’s really between Greece and the Troika, which is the source of the original deal. It’s not for us to say what schedule it should be on.
That said, I would share my sense that the first thing Greece needs to do is demonstrate that it’s committed to the program and it is undertaking real reforms. I think, being perfectly frank, it’s too soon to start asking for an extension. Your election was what, less than two months ago. The government has started to undertake a number of important steps, but I think that receptivity in Europe to any talk of extensions now is premature. On what basis would they do that? So I don’t think it’s something that should be ruled out, but I think in terms of sequencing it should be first things first. Demonstrate over a period of time that you are genuinely committed to these difficult steps in implementing the program, and then on the basis of that effort I think the prospects for discussing timetables or flexibility would be much better than doing it in the other order.
As for Syria, we’re obviously very concerned about the situation in Syria. It has become clear to us for some time that there needs to be a political transition in Syria, that Syria will never be stable and peaceful under Assad who has used violence against his own people. And yes, we have gone to great efforts to work with the international community. This is not just a U.S. view. The international community, including most importantly all of Syria’s neighbors practically and the Arab League, are focused on a political transition as well.
Yes, our strong preference has been to work on it through the UN Security Council, that’s why we’ve been back to it three times for proposing different resolutions focused, as we say, on political transition. Unfortunately, every single time it didn’t pass in the Security Council because there was a veto by Russia and China, including most recently just two weeks ago, and, I might add, by nobody else. There were two abstentions and two vetoes. In the previous one it was 13 to 2. We regret that Russia and China have stood in the way of what clearly the rest of the international community believes to be the need for a resolution supporting political transition.
So yes, in that sense the Security Council route is blocked. We will continue to act with our international partners. There have been a number of meetings of the Friends of the Syrian People with participation of 40, 60, 80 countries and international entities, and we’ll continue to work through that channel and others to increase the pressure on the regime, change the balance on the ground, and support and coordinate the opposition so that when Assad does go, and he will, there is a better prospect for a more stable, inclusive government in Syria than otherwise. And we’re going to continue to work it. On that, we appreciate Greece’s support in those efforts.
QUESTION: Mr. Gordon, do you believe that the Greek-Turkish relations could be deteriorated, could be affected in some way because of the Syrian crisis and the complicated issues that emerge in the region with say the efforts of the Israeli and the [inaudible] to be more close to [inaudible], for example?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I don’t see any reason why the developments in Syria should be harmful to Greek-Turkish relations. In fact I think Greek and Turkish interests in Syria, and even policy in Syria, is aligned, which is aligned with the United States as well, to increase pressure on Assad and foster a political transition and support the opposition. There’s no reason that Turkish policy in Syria should be a problem for Greece or vice versa.
I’m encouraged that even with other complicated things going on in the region and even with political change in Greece, the Greek-Turkish relationship seems to continue to improve. That’s an important factor of stability throughout this region, especially at a time when unfortunately the Turkey-Israel relationship is not improving, it remains frozen at best for the past couple of years. Obviously relations between Turkey and Cyprus are complicated and potential tensions over energy. So this is a region that needs more progress in bilateral and trilateral and quadrilateral relationships and it’s all the more important for Greece and Turkey to be preserving their relationship.
QUESTION: Are you now more optimistic about Greece’s future in the eurozone than you were before coming to Athens? And I’m wondering, if you had a vote, you said the U.S. is not a member of the eurozone. If you have a vote, what would you say to the Germans? We all see there is a strong conflict between the U.S. and Germany.
QUESTION: You have a vote in the IMF.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: We do have a vote in the IMF, and that’s really the only sort of direct way that we have a role. But the IMF is only one-third of the troika and we’re only, I won’t say one vote because we are more than one vote in the IMF, but one voice within the IMF.
On the first part of your question about optimism, I would just repeat what I said. I was encouraged to hear from the party leaders I met with their commitment to the reforms that we think are necessary to stabilize the Greek economy and to persuade markets and governments to work with Greece moving forward. That’s most critical of all, because obviously the coalition was elected to do certain things and it needs to stick with its agreements, it needs to demonstrate that, and so to hear directly from those party leaders that they get it, that they’re committed to doing it, they know how difficult it is, but they are not wobbling under these pressures is critically important. In that sense I am optimistic.
I think it matters less what I think than what the markets think and I think markets are voting in favor as well. You’ve seen some money start to flow back to Greece, whereas there was great question, especially the run-up to the election, that you would see bank runs and see money start to flow out. I think since the election of the government some of the steps that they’ve taken, people are more confident that Greece really is on the right track. So that is reassuring.
As for the latter, I won’t speculate on -- you asked hypothetical membership in the European Union, but I think I’ve already said and the President and Secretary of Treasury and State have indicated the types of things that we think are necessary. We have urged more decisive action on the part of eurozone governments, I think we have stressed that while fiscal consolidation is critical, the entire weight of the reform effort can’t be borne by fiscal consolidation alone. You can’t just cut your way out of this crisis. I think that evidence over the past two years gives some credence to that notion, that there needs to be also an emphasis on growth, on liberalization and other structural reforms that will restore Europe to growth and competitiveness and jobs. I think that view is growing throughout the European Union, which we’re encouraged by.
We have urged that a substantial firewall be put in place not because we want it to be used, we don’t. The point of a firewall is precisely so that it will not have to be used and that you reassure markets that they can put their money somewhere and there’s less of a risk of default.
So I think in general while it’s not for us to give a precise prescription as to what Europeans should be doing, we’ve given general indications of what we think is the right direction. I think it’s fair to say that things have largely moved in that direction over time and they continue to do so, and if that balanced package continues to move forward, reforms and fiscal consolidation in the countries under pressure and solidarity and support from the countries in a position to do so, I think the future looks much more positive.
QUESTION: Are you worried about the moves of the Russian navy in the Eastern Mediterranean and the relation that [inaudible]has with Moscow ?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: On the first point, we’ve been very clear about the question of Russians arms deliveries to Cyprus -- Sorry, let me be clear, to Syria. I’m not breaking any news here. [Laughter].
QUESTION: [Inaudible].
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Exactly. Russian arms deliveries to Syria which we think are only fueling a government that is using violence against its own people. And you heard Secretary Clinton talk about the attack helicopters that the Russians were planning to deliver. The Russians say they’re not signing new arms deals with Syria, just fulfilling old ones. Obviously we welcome that they’re not signing new ones but we regret that they’re fulfilling old ones because we think the last thing anyone needs is more arms in the hands of the Syrian government. So on that we’re clear.
Russia says it’s not taking sides, it wants to be balanced. But it’s hard for us to interpret arms deliveries to the Assad regime as anything else than supportive and lending legitimacy to a government that we think has clearly lost its legitimacy.
On Cyprus, I’m not sure if what you’re getting at is the loan question. We’re aware that Cyprus is considering a loan from Russia. It’s obviously up to the government of Cyprus where it gets its loans if it needs loans. We know they’re also obviously talking to the European Union and others. We would just hope that, there’s always a concern that financial dependency can lead to political dependency and that’s clearly something we wouldn’t want to see, but it’s really in the end a decision for the government of Cyprus if it wants to pursue a loan from some other sources.
QUESTION: Russians are concerned about the so-called Islamic bowl that emerged after Arab Spring in relations. How do you comment this [inaudible]?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: There are different aspects to it. You may be referring specifically to Egypt and the trend in Egypt, election of a Muslim Brotherhood government in the wake of the fall of the Mubarak regime.
I think the first thing to keep in mind on questions like this is a certain sense of humility about our own role in the future of this region. It’s not up to us. It wasn’t up to us whether Mubarak stayed in power or not. It wasn’t up to us who the Egyptians chose to represent them, and once Mubarak was gone we felt there should be free and fair elections and it’s up to the Egyptian people who to support and they supported a Muslim Brotherhood government, and we reached out to that government. Secretary Clinton was there within the past couple of weeks. And we’ll look forward to working with them.
So we stand by our principles in those terms. When it comes to what we want to see is rule of law, fair treatment of all citizens of the countries including women, minorities, transparent elections, peace with neighbors. And if a government is willing to abide by those principles, then it’s up to the people what government should be in place.
Russian concerns about extremism we share. That’s a difference that we have with them when it comes to Syria where they talk about the risks that if Assad goes you could have extremism and al-Qaeda. Obviously that’s something we’re concerned about as well, but in our view that’s all the more reason to accelerate the transition or put the opposition and strengthen those groups that support the principles that are dear to us, as opposed to either do nothing or support the Assad regime which we fear will just lead to ongoing violence, civil war, and precisely the extremism that they’re worried about.
Thanks everybody. It’s nice to talk to you.
QUESTION: You’re going to visit the Halki School?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I am.
QUESTION: It’s the first time American officers visit the Halki?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I think our current Ambassador was there during his current tenure. President Clinton went to the Halki Seminary. So it’s not the first and it’s just a continued --
QUESTION: You’re going to press [inaudible].
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: That’s my point about it being consistent with our longstanding policy. We’re encouraged by what we’ve heard out of Turkey in terms of hopes to open it. It’s been our longstanding position that it should be open, so it’s just an opportunity to express our support for that.
Press Roundtable in Athens, GreecePress Availability
Philip H. Gordon
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
Athens, Greece
July 27, 2012
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Thank you. It’s very nice to be back in Athens. It’s nice to see some of you again. I think I’ve seen you on a number of occasions including in this very room.
I am here to express our support and solidarity of the Greek people, and the Greek government as it undertakes some very difficult but we think really important economic reforms. We’re following these developments very closely and have a great stake in the outcome, not just for the sake of our friends and partners in Greece, but for the sake of the entire European area and the U.S. economy and the world economy. So we have great interest and we admire what the government is doing in undertaking, again, what we consider to be essential reforms, not just to convince world markets and European lenders of the soundness of the Greek economy, but for the sake of the Greek economy itself. In other words, we think these reforms are worth undertaking because they will lead to a more prosperous and sound Greek economy, let alone stabilize the eurozone.
We also appreciate Greece’s continued partnership with the United States on a number of regional and global issues, notwithstanding the economic difficulties. I had a chance to meet with the Foreign Minister. I also met earlier today with some of the other party leaders in the coalition. The latter mostly to talk about the economic situation, but obviously with the Foreign Minister, not just the economic situation but regional and global affairs. And as we discussed, world events don’t -- you don’t get to hit the pause button while you deal with the economy. There are still a lot of issues between Greece and Turkey and the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, so we exchanged views on those and I expressed our appreciation for Greece’s partnership in dealing with those, even as it faces the economic difficulties.
So again, a big agenda. It’s very important to the United States, so I came here to try to get a better understanding of what’s going on in Greece and the region. I’ll be going on to Turkey from here. But as I began with, I also came to express support for what the government and the people of Greece are doing.
With that, I’ll be happy to take any questions.
QUESTION: One of the priorities of the new Greek government in foreign policy is to declare the exclusive economic zone. Do you believe it can go ahead with this or before that have an agreement or something like that with Turkey?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I think it’s important to avoid unilateral steps. The United States recognizes countries’ rights to declare exclusive economic zones but these things aren’t done in a vacuum and you’d have to understand the full context. We don’t think it would be in Greece’s interest to do it without full cooperation with neighbors including Turkey.
Fortunately you have mechanisms in place, and over the past number of years have developed bilateral channels in which these things can be discussed and I know that they have already contributed to progress and we would strongly encourage Greece to use those channels to have these conversations so that any steps in this area are done cooperatively in the interests of all parties.
They’re complicated issues and it’s not as simple as being able to declare an EEZ or not being able to declare an EEZ, and that’s precisely why it should be done cooperatively.
QUESTION: In order to get the economy started, which is the big issue for Greece, it is crucial to attract more and more investment. What do you believe should be the main reforms that Greece has to make in order to attract investment?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: That’s a good question, because attracting investment is clearly a critical aspect to turning the Greek economy around. You need foreign investment. I think frankly over the years there has been a perception in Greece that it wasn’t friendly enough to foreign investment, that there were too many rules, too much bureaucracy, too slow approval rates, and investors need certainty and transparency. They want to be sure what the rules are, the regulations -- that they’re not going to be changing. So I think creating a more investor-friendly climate is critical.
There are other less direct measures, but are still important measures, and those are the ones that I think the government is already working on in strengthening the overall economy so that you get growth and buying power, purchasing power, so that it’s worth making the investments. But I would start with the question of bureaucracy, rules and regulations. I think you can look at, there are rankings of countries in terms of, for example, how quickly an investment can be approved and I think Greece needs to advance on that list.
QUESTION: I will stick to the economy because that’s what’s troubling us. I don’t know if you could say a few words about the meetings that you had with the other two governmental partners. And we had the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury a few days ago and I was wondering, the idea is, especially ahead of the American elections, there is this notion and I think it’s understandable that the United States is beginning to lose patience not with Greece, but the way the European leaders are handling the crisis since Greece and Ireland are not a problem right now. Nothing compares to what will happen if Spain or Italy fail or these growing costs continue.
So it would be great if you would give us your insight on this, and what is worrying the United States, and apart from declarations of support, which are good, or that you have to do something. If you have any other idea of how you could convince the European leaders to move on the next step and do something decisive.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Sure. As I said right from the start, we are following it extremely closely because we have such a great stake in the outcome. We have a great stake because we care about the hundreds of millions of people who live in Europe and their prosperity, but we also even have a more direct national interest at stake, our economy is so dependent on growth and stability and that of our largest trading and investment partner in the world by far. I think it’s accurate to say that some of the drag on the U.S. economy right now are questions about the eurozone, and so that’s why we’re so committed.
We acknowledge also that we don’t have a direct say in some of the key decisions to be made in Europe. The question of how big is the firewall or whether there are bailout funds or whether the ECB should be buying bonds at a certain level are not issues on which we get a vote. But because we are so engaged and so committed and so intertwined with Europe, we have views and we share those views and I can tell you at the highest levels, including our President there are regular conversations with European leaders about the way forward.
You mentioned American impatience. I wouldn’t describe it as impatience. I would acknowledge that --
QUESTION: Losing patience. I think it’s right.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: That’s different. Yes. We would like a comprehensive solution tomorrow or yesterday, but we also understand these are complicated decisions. They’re not easy. The reforms will take time. I think Angela Merkel but other leaders across Europe keep trying to explain that as well, that there is no magic bullet and there is no quick solution to this problem and we understand that. At the same time, we are urging leaders and I think have been for some time to be as decisive as possible as quickly as possible because the stakes are so great.
In terms of what -- you asked about my meetings with the party leaders and what needs to be done -- I would say I was encouraged from what I heard in the sense that the coalition members seemed determined to implement the agreements that have been reached. They seemed to have an appreciation that markets and governments need to see results and real efforts and structural reforms before they will respond positively. It goes back to the question that I was asked about investments.
Of course they took the opportunity to explain to me how difficult it was on the Greek people and the Greek economy, which we know and appreciate, but they also demonstrated a real understanding that only by taking these difficult measures will eurozone governments, the European Central Bank, and private investors be convinced that they can really put their money in Greece.
That’s what I encourage them to do as well, as quickly as possible and as decisively as possible, demonstrate in deed as well as in word, that there really is a new Greece, that Greece gets it, that it’s doing the things that are necessary to make clear that this is a place that you can really do business, and in this highly competitive globalized world there are a lot of places where you can send your money, as investors and hedge funds and others demonstrate every single day. And if they have the slightest doubts about a country’s ability to pay its debts or about what would be the fate of their investment, they’ll just go elsewhere.
That’s why it’s really incumbent on the country in question to take decisive, necessary measures. But as I say, from my meetings here I was convinced, I think it was in the first place encouraging to see the Greek people vote for parties that understood that, because the alternative would, in our humble estimation, really not serve Greece’s interests well. And it was encouraging to hear from those party leaders that they understand that and they’re determined to finish the job.
QUESTION: I would like to insist on the European economy matters. Are you worried about the possibility of a eurozone breakup and how possible do you find it? Because you see there were, even from German official, statements the past days about Greece leaving the eurozone, so --
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I would say a couple of things. First, we’re confident that the eurozone will stay together, that the governments have the commitment and the means to keep it together, and we believe that’s in our common interest. So we don’t want to see a breakup of the eurozone.
I would add that we’re not alone in thinking that. I think it’s worth pointing out that notwithstanding all of the questions about the viability of the eurozone, all of the costs involved to certain countries in keeping it going, all of the real pressures on certain members including Greece to do difficult things to stay in, notwithstanding all of that, every single member of the eurozone and governments across the European Union remain committed to it. If you want to simplify, both the lender countries and the debtor countries, they still remain committed. Even in Greece where we know you’ve borne great costs to do the necessary things to stay in, the Greek government is committed to it, and the Greek people voted consciously for parties who are also committed to it, notwithstanding the costs. I think that shows a real recognition of the values of preserving the eurozone.
You point to German leaders speculating about a breakup. If you listen carefully -- first of all the main German leader, the Chancellor, has been absolutely clear that she wants to preserve the eurozone and I think you see that in her actions when Germany puts up money to keep everybody in the eurozone -- and so what you’ve had is a couple of leaders most recently say they’re no longer appalled by the notion of one country leaving the eurozone. That’s still a very long way from saying we should abandon the eurozone, it’s not in our interest. On the contrary, I think all evidence points to a real recognition that it’s in everybody’s interests.
Then take I think even just yesterday Mario Draghi, head of the ECB, saying we’ll do -- you can check the quote exactly -- but something along the lines of whatever it takes. So I think there’s a recognition among all key actors that as painful and difficult as it is, it is really worth preserving. That will in itself I think help support the eurozone.
QUESTION: I would like to ask two questions. One is [inaudible] be positive on an extension of the Greek adjustment program from two years to four years so that it’s easier for the people to accept it. The second is the situation in Syria seems to get out of control. The Obama administration has shown that any action that could possibly be taken should be in a collective manner. But do you believe that the only way to do this is through the UN Security Council? Or possibly if the situation gets even worse we should explore other possibilities like a coalition of the willing?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Thanks. Two separate things. First, on the question of an extension of the timetable for Greece’s program, that’s really between Greece and the Troika, which is the source of the original deal. It’s not for us to say what schedule it should be on.
That said, I would share my sense that the first thing Greece needs to do is demonstrate that it’s committed to the program and it is undertaking real reforms. I think, being perfectly frank, it’s too soon to start asking for an extension. Your election was what, less than two months ago. The government has started to undertake a number of important steps, but I think that receptivity in Europe to any talk of extensions now is premature. On what basis would they do that? So I don’t think it’s something that should be ruled out, but I think in terms of sequencing it should be first things first. Demonstrate over a period of time that you are genuinely committed to these difficult steps in implementing the program, and then on the basis of that effort I think the prospects for discussing timetables or flexibility would be much better than doing it in the other order.
As for Syria, we’re obviously very concerned about the situation in Syria. It has become clear to us for some time that there needs to be a political transition in Syria, that Syria will never be stable and peaceful under Assad who has used violence against his own people. And yes, we have gone to great efforts to work with the international community. This is not just a U.S. view. The international community, including most importantly all of Syria’s neighbors practically and the Arab League, are focused on a political transition as well.
Yes, our strong preference has been to work on it through the UN Security Council, that’s why we’ve been back to it three times for proposing different resolutions focused, as we say, on political transition. Unfortunately, every single time it didn’t pass in the Security Council because there was a veto by Russia and China, including most recently just two weeks ago, and, I might add, by nobody else. There were two abstentions and two vetoes. In the previous one it was 13 to 2. We regret that Russia and China have stood in the way of what clearly the rest of the international community believes to be the need for a resolution supporting political transition.
So yes, in that sense the Security Council route is blocked. We will continue to act with our international partners. There have been a number of meetings of the Friends of the Syrian People with participation of 40, 60, 80 countries and international entities, and we’ll continue to work through that channel and others to increase the pressure on the regime, change the balance on the ground, and support and coordinate the opposition so that when Assad does go, and he will, there is a better prospect for a more stable, inclusive government in Syria than otherwise. And we’re going to continue to work it. On that, we appreciate Greece’s support in those efforts.
QUESTION: Mr. Gordon, do you believe that the Greek-Turkish relations could be deteriorated, could be affected in some way because of the Syrian crisis and the complicated issues that emerge in the region with say the efforts of the Israeli and the [inaudible] to be more close to [inaudible], for example?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I don’t see any reason why the developments in Syria should be harmful to Greek-Turkish relations. In fact I think Greek and Turkish interests in Syria, and even policy in Syria, is aligned, which is aligned with the United States as well, to increase pressure on Assad and foster a political transition and support the opposition. There’s no reason that Turkish policy in Syria should be a problem for Greece or vice versa.
I’m encouraged that even with other complicated things going on in the region and even with political change in Greece, the Greek-Turkish relationship seems to continue to improve. That’s an important factor of stability throughout this region, especially at a time when unfortunately the Turkey-Israel relationship is not improving, it remains frozen at best for the past couple of years. Obviously relations between Turkey and Cyprus are complicated and potential tensions over energy. So this is a region that needs more progress in bilateral and trilateral and quadrilateral relationships and it’s all the more important for Greece and Turkey to be preserving their relationship.
QUESTION: Are you now more optimistic about Greece’s future in the eurozone than you were before coming to Athens? And I’m wondering, if you had a vote, you said the U.S. is not a member of the eurozone. If you have a vote, what would you say to the Germans? We all see there is a strong conflict between the U.S. and Germany.
QUESTION: You have a vote in the IMF.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: We do have a vote in the IMF, and that’s really the only sort of direct way that we have a role. But the IMF is only one-third of the troika and we’re only, I won’t say one vote because we are more than one vote in the IMF, but one voice within the IMF.
On the first part of your question about optimism, I would just repeat what I said. I was encouraged to hear from the party leaders I met with their commitment to the reforms that we think are necessary to stabilize the Greek economy and to persuade markets and governments to work with Greece moving forward. That’s most critical of all, because obviously the coalition was elected to do certain things and it needs to stick with its agreements, it needs to demonstrate that, and so to hear directly from those party leaders that they get it, that they’re committed to doing it, they know how difficult it is, but they are not wobbling under these pressures is critically important. In that sense I am optimistic.
I think it matters less what I think than what the markets think and I think markets are voting in favor as well. You’ve seen some money start to flow back to Greece, whereas there was great question, especially the run-up to the election, that you would see bank runs and see money start to flow out. I think since the election of the government some of the steps that they’ve taken, people are more confident that Greece really is on the right track. So that is reassuring.
As for the latter, I won’t speculate on -- you asked hypothetical membership in the European Union, but I think I’ve already said and the President and Secretary of Treasury and State have indicated the types of things that we think are necessary. We have urged more decisive action on the part of eurozone governments, I think we have stressed that while fiscal consolidation is critical, the entire weight of the reform effort can’t be borne by fiscal consolidation alone. You can’t just cut your way out of this crisis. I think that evidence over the past two years gives some credence to that notion, that there needs to be also an emphasis on growth, on liberalization and other structural reforms that will restore Europe to growth and competitiveness and jobs. I think that view is growing throughout the European Union, which we’re encouraged by.
We have urged that a substantial firewall be put in place not because we want it to be used, we don’t. The point of a firewall is precisely so that it will not have to be used and that you reassure markets that they can put their money somewhere and there’s less of a risk of default.
So I think in general while it’s not for us to give a precise prescription as to what Europeans should be doing, we’ve given general indications of what we think is the right direction. I think it’s fair to say that things have largely moved in that direction over time and they continue to do so, and if that balanced package continues to move forward, reforms and fiscal consolidation in the countries under pressure and solidarity and support from the countries in a position to do so, I think the future looks much more positive.
QUESTION: Are you worried about the moves of the Russian navy in the Eastern Mediterranean and the relation that [inaudible]has with Moscow ?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: On the first point, we’ve been very clear about the question of Russians arms deliveries to Cyprus -- Sorry, let me be clear, to Syria. I’m not breaking any news here. [Laughter].
QUESTION: [Inaudible].
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: Exactly. Russian arms deliveries to Syria which we think are only fueling a government that is using violence against its own people. And you heard Secretary Clinton talk about the attack helicopters that the Russians were planning to deliver. The Russians say they’re not signing new arms deals with Syria, just fulfilling old ones. Obviously we welcome that they’re not signing new ones but we regret that they’re fulfilling old ones because we think the last thing anyone needs is more arms in the hands of the Syrian government. So on that we’re clear.
Russia says it’s not taking sides, it wants to be balanced. But it’s hard for us to interpret arms deliveries to the Assad regime as anything else than supportive and lending legitimacy to a government that we think has clearly lost its legitimacy.
On Cyprus, I’m not sure if what you’re getting at is the loan question. We’re aware that Cyprus is considering a loan from Russia. It’s obviously up to the government of Cyprus where it gets its loans if it needs loans. We know they’re also obviously talking to the European Union and others. We would just hope that, there’s always a concern that financial dependency can lead to political dependency and that’s clearly something we wouldn’t want to see, but it’s really in the end a decision for the government of Cyprus if it wants to pursue a loan from some other sources.
QUESTION: Russians are concerned about the so-called Islamic bowl that emerged after Arab Spring in relations. How do you comment this [inaudible]?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: There are different aspects to it. You may be referring specifically to Egypt and the trend in Egypt, election of a Muslim Brotherhood government in the wake of the fall of the Mubarak regime.
I think the first thing to keep in mind on questions like this is a certain sense of humility about our own role in the future of this region. It’s not up to us. It wasn’t up to us whether Mubarak stayed in power or not. It wasn’t up to us who the Egyptians chose to represent them, and once Mubarak was gone we felt there should be free and fair elections and it’s up to the Egyptian people who to support and they supported a Muslim Brotherhood government, and we reached out to that government. Secretary Clinton was there within the past couple of weeks. And we’ll look forward to working with them.
So we stand by our principles in those terms. When it comes to what we want to see is rule of law, fair treatment of all citizens of the countries including women, minorities, transparent elections, peace with neighbors. And if a government is willing to abide by those principles, then it’s up to the people what government should be in place.
Russian concerns about extremism we share. That’s a difference that we have with them when it comes to Syria where they talk about the risks that if Assad goes you could have extremism and al-Qaeda. Obviously that’s something we’re concerned about as well, but in our view that’s all the more reason to accelerate the transition or put the opposition and strengthen those groups that support the principles that are dear to us, as opposed to either do nothing or support the Assad regime which we fear will just lead to ongoing violence, civil war, and precisely the extremism that they’re worried about.
Thanks everybody. It’s nice to talk to you.
QUESTION: You’re going to visit the Halki School?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I am.
QUESTION: It’s the first time American officers visit the Halki?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: I think our current Ambassador was there during his current tenure. President Clinton went to the Halki Seminary. So it’s not the first and it’s just a continued --
QUESTION: You’re going to press [inaudible].
ASSISTANT SECRETARY GORDON: That’s my point about it being consistent with our longstanding policy. We’re encouraged by what we’ve heard out of Turkey in terms of hopes to open it. It’s been our longstanding position that it should be open, so it’s just an opportunity to express our support for that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)