SECRETARY KERRY'S PRESS AVAILABILITY IN SHARM EL-SHEIKH, EGYPT

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Press Availability in Sharm el-Sheikh
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt
March 14, 2015

SECRETARY KERRY: Good morning to all. I want to thank President al-Sisi and Foreign Minister Shoukry for their warm welcome here and for the tremendous work that the Egyptian Government has been doing with respect to the conference itself but equally importantly the larger issue of development and the reforms and initiatives that are necessary to really kick development off in Egypt at this point.

The United States, as I’ve said previously – I said last night – is committed to strengthening the partnership with Egypt. And we’ve been working hard at that over the last years. How Egypt develops in the coming years, how it succeeds, and how it recharges its economy will not only affect, obviously, the near 90 million people who are in Egypt, but it will also have a profound impact on the entire region. It is strategically important to this region and to all of us who are looking for stability and for a better standard of living and greater inclusivity and participation by citizens. It is important to make certain that Egypt can move along the road to development and to the full achievement of its democratic aspirations. And that’s something the United States will remain committed to.

So I came here today – came here over this weekend to this conference to reiterate the support of President Obama and the Obama Administration and the people of the United States for Egypt as it undertakes significant reforms and works toward the economic transformation that all the people of Egypt are hoping for.

Over the past few days, I have met with a range of American business leaders in order to discuss the specific concerns that they have raised with my economic team both in Washington as well as here in their visits. And I had a very candid and constructive conversation with President Sisi and Foreign Minister Shoukry about how to will improve the business climate, specific steps that, in some cases, they’ve already made the decision and need implementation and in other cases will still need further legislation.

But all of these things are key to attracting new investment. Everybody knows that money, capital, behaves in fairly predictable ways. And those who make decisions about investment look for certainty. They look for confidence. They look for the knowledge that, if they invest, what they’re investing in will be a transparent and accountable transaction.

The Egypt Economic Development Conference underscores, I think, in the breadth of the numbers of people who were here – the high-level participation says a lot about the deep well of support for Egypt, the shared hopes for Egypt, which are really reflected in that. And also, it underscores the challenges that Egypt faces as it works to meet the democratic aspirations of its people.

We also discussed the importance of respect for human rights and for Egypt’s security and stability, including a free press, a free speech and assembly, and due process under the law. And there is no question that Egypt is stronger when all of its citizens have a say and a stake in its future, and that includes a strong and active and independent civil society.

President Sisi and Foreign Minister Shoukry and I also continued our conversation about the important role that Egypt is playing in the coalition against ISIL and the challenges of extremism, violent religious extremism that is manifested in many ways in the region. We have all been deeply shocked and saddened by the recent terrorism attacks, including of those in Egypt and the grotesque murder of 21 Egyptian Copts in Libya.

The United States supports Egypt’s efforts to combat the threat of terrorism in the Sinai and throughout the country. And these atrocities that we have all witnessed around the world simply cannot be rationalized, they cannot be excused, they must be opposed, and they must be stopped.

Now I also met, as I think many of you know, with President Abbas and King Abdullah and President Sisi in a side meeting to the conference. And particularly at this week’s conference, which underscores the powerful connection between investments in business and investments in peace, we discussed efforts to develop a healthy, sustainable, and private sector-led Palestinian economy, one that could transform the fortunes of the Palestinian people and all of their neighbors in the region.

Before I take your questions, let me also just say a word quickly about the P5+1 talks with Iran. From the beginning, these talks have been tough and they’ve been intense, and they remain so. And we’ve made some progress, but there are still gaps, important gaps, and important choices that need to be made by Iran in order to be able to move forward.

Now I want to be very clear. Nothing in our deliberations is decided until everything is decided. And the purpose of these negotiations is not just to get any deal; it is to get the right deal. President Obama means it when he says, again and again, that Iran will not be permitted to get a nuclear weapon. As you all know, Iran says it doesn’t want a nuclear weapon, and that is a very welcome statement that the Supreme Leader has, in fact, incorporated into a fatwa. And we have great respect – great respect – for the religious importance of a fatwa. And what we are effectively trying to do is translate that into legal language, into everyday language within the framework of a negotiated agreement that everybody can understand, which requires everybody to have certain obligations and ultimately be able to guarantee that Iran’s program, its nuclear program, will be peaceful now and peaceful forever.

Now sanctions alone can’t achieve that. We need a verifiable set of commitments. And we need an agreed-upon plan that obviously provides the access and the opportunity to be able to know what is happening so that you can have confidence that the program is, indeed, peaceful. That’s what we’re negotiating about. And we need to cover every potential pathway – uranium, plutonium, covert – that there might exist towards a weapon, and only an agreement can do that.

So what’s the alternative? In previous years, when U.S. policy was not to talk to Iran and insist at the same time that they could have no nuclear program whatsoever, the number of centrifuges skyrocketed. Every time negotiations have broken down in the past, Iran’s nuclear program has advanced. Only the joint plan, which Iran agreed to and fully implemented, has actually succeeded in freezing Iran’s program for the first time in nearly 10 years, and even rolled it back in some cases. And they agreed to that, because they have an interest in proving that their plan is peaceful.

The comprehensive plan will lock in, with greater specificity and breadth, if we can arrive at it, the ways in which Iran will live up to its international obligations under the NPT for the long term. So we continue to be focused on reaching the right deal, a deal that would protect the world, including the United States and our closest allies and partners, from the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran could pose. We still don’t know whether or not we will get there, and that’s why I will travel to Lausanne in Switzerland tomorrow in order to meet with Foreign Minister Zarif and once again engage in talks to see if we can find a way to get that right deal.

As I have said previously, it may be that Iran simply can’t say yes to the type of deal that the international community is looking for. But we owe it to the future of everybody in the world to try to find out. If we cannot get to a diplomatic agreement, make no mistake, we obviously do have other options. But those options will mean no transparency, they will mean no verifiable set of commitments, and they don’t close off Iran’s potential pathways to a nuclear weapon for nearly as long as a negotiated agreement can, if it’s the right agreement. And so we will return to these talks, recognizing that time is of the essence, the clock is ticking, and important decisions need to be made.

And with that, I would be very happy to answer a few questions.

MS. HARF: Great. Our first question is from Margaret Brennan of CBS. And I think we have mikes coming to you.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, thank you. With the deadline for a deal so close, do you believe that a deal is within reach? And given the recent comments by the Supreme Leader as well as some of U.S. allies, do you think that the GOP letter has undermined the diplomacy and made reaching of an agreement that much harder?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, the deadline is approaching. As you all know, we have set the end of the month as the deadline. And so we will be going into this understanding that time is critical. I can’t tell you whether or not we can get a deal or whether we’re close. And one reason I can’t tell you is because we have heard some comments from the Supreme Leader regarding the letter that was sent by the 47 senators. And until I engage in those conversations, I cannot gauge on a personal level that reaction – though I can tell you from common sense that when the United States Senate sends a letter such as the 47 senators chose to send the other day it is a direct interference in the negotiations of the executive department. It is completely without precedent, and it is almost inevitable that it will raise questions in the minds of the folks with whom we are negotiating as to whether or not they are negotiating with the executive department and the President, which is what the Constitution says, or whether there are 535 members of Congress.

Let me make clear to Iran, to our P5+1 counterparts who are deeply involved in this negotiation, that, from our point of view, this letter – the letter was, in fact, incorrect in its statements about what power they do have. It was incorrect in its assessments of what type of agreement this is. And as far as we are concerned, the Congress has no ability to change an executive agreement per se. So we will approach these negotiations in the same way that we have approached them to date, not affected externally but looking at as this Administration, according to President Obama’s instructions, to get the right deal that will accomplish what we need to for the security interest of the United States, our friends and allies in the region, and for the long-term security of everybody who cares about nonproliferation.

MS. HARF: Great. Our --

SECRETARY KERRY: And with respect --

MS. HARF: Go ahead. Sorry. Go ahead, sir.

SECRETARY KERRY: No, no. That’s it. Thank you.

MS. HARF: Okay. Our next question is from Ronda Abulazin of Al Arabiya. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, welcome. You came here with – okay, can you hear me now? You came to Egypt with a very strong message in support of its – reform its economy, its security. However the United States is still holding part – a big part of its military aid to Egypt, which is very crucial for its fight – Egypt’s fight against terrorism, whether in Sinai or to protect its border. So when will the United States release the military aid? And does it include F16?

My other part of the question, the war against ISIL in Iraq. The scene there looks very – really bizarre. Did the Iraqi prime minister allow the contribution of Iranian Qods brigade and Hizballah without the U.S. knowledge, especially that the U.S. is providing military counsel on the ground and military operation room? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much. With respect to the aid and assistance, I really expect a decision very soon. We look at this conference as a very important step, mostly because this conference is focused on private sector contributions and private sector engagement in the future of Egypt. We applaud those countries who have put very significant amounts of money on the table in order to help Egypt over the hump, if you will, over these hurdles of the immediate budget crisis. And it’s a very important part of the overall effort to sustain and kick into higher gear Egypt’s economy.

But in the long run, unless Egypt transforms its economy with more private sector investment, creating long-term jobs and opening up new capabilities, you will just keep repeating the cycle of emergency assistance and aid. So we think the most important thing that we can do is help provide access to those companies and help to leverage the relationships that can create jobs for the people of Egypt.

Now we’re already doing that. Last year, before this conference, 160 American businesspeople, representing some 70 companies from the United States, came to Cairo. I think President Sisi spent about two hours with them, and they had long conversations about what Egypt’s needs are. Out of that have come a number of deals, which will create jobs in Egypt. I know General Electric, for instance, signed deals with respect to the Suez and other provision of power – other deals were made.

But in addition to that, we are providing economic assistance in the hundreds of millions of dollars that will be directed to small business enterprises and to new startups, because we want to see a sustainable economy grow in Egypt. Right now, the United States of America is providing over 20 percent of all foreign direct investment in Egypt. It’s a total of about $2.2 billion. And it is the number-two largest foreign direct investor in Egypt. So I hope that will share with the people of Egypt and the government a sense of our commitment to this. And we have top executives who are here, part of this conference, in order to try to grow the private sector entrepreneurial component of job creation in Egypt.

With respect to Iraq and the question of --

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

SECRETARY KERRY: I said the decision – I think we’ll come – that’s what I said, very soon, very soon.

With respect to Iraq, we absolutely have known of Iran’s engagement in the northeastern parts of Iraq and, indeed, we’ve had conversations with Prime Minister Abadi about it. He doesn’t hide it, and we’re not blind to it. We know that Iran has been engaged. We know that General Soleimani has been on the ground. We know that they have an interest. We understand that. And we fully understand some of their engagement with some of the militia. At the same time, they are deeply opposed to Daesh. And while we are not coordinating with Iran – we do not have conversations with Iran about this – we work through the Iraqi Government. We do so with the knowledge that they are also opposed to Daesh and are working for Daesh’s defeat.

Now going forward, I would also note that part of this operation in Tikrit also involves significant participation by Sunni tribes and Sunni participants from the region. And the governor in Salah al-Din province was well aware of what is happening and of this whole-of-government initiative, whole-of-coalition effort, to continue to press the fight against Daesh. And even while the fighting in Tikrit is taking place, there are several other fights taking place nearby which involve significant Sunni participation, U.S. support, and others.

So what we made clear some months ago when we first announced the coalition, lots of countries will make lots of different kinds of contributions, and every country can make some kind of contribution, and all of us are committed to the defeat of Daesh. And the sooner that can happen, the better.

Now the real measure of the Tikrit operation will not be just in the clearing; it will be in how people are treated afterwards. It will be in whether or not there is a inclusivity or whether there is, in fact, a breakdown into a kind of sectarian division. So we’ll watch that carefully. We will work with the Government of Iraq very carefully to do our best to minimize or avoid that. But we are not surprised at all by the participation such as it has been with respect to the Tikrit operation itself.

MS. HARF: Great. Our final question is from Lesley Wroughton, Reuters. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, do you want to see the Israeli-Palestinian process restarted after next week’s election? With the center left holding a solid lead in the election, does that brighten for you the prospects when it comes to moving forward on the Middle East peace process? When – do you expect that after the politics of the election has passed a new spirit can be brought to this process?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me just say that the position of the United States, with respect to the long expressed hopes of Republicans and Democrats alike, of many presidents over the last 50 years or more, has always been for peace. And President Obama remains committed to a two-state solution and remains hopeful that when there – whatever choice the people of Israel make, that there will be an ability to be able to move forward on those efforts.

I’m not going to say anything more whatsoever about any aspect of that because there is an election in, what, three days, three and a half, four days, and I don’t want any comment I make misinterpreted in any way by anybody. And therefore, I will simply reiterate the longstanding commitment of the United States to peace and our hopes that the choice that the people of Israel make will not only meet their needs domestically and their hopes in their country, but obviously meet the hopes for peace, which I think everybody shares.

MS. HARF: Thank you very much.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, all. Thank you very much, everybody. Appreciate it. Thank you.

QUESTION: One question on --

SECRETARY KERRY: Did you have one? One more.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS. HARF: Okay. Wait, wait. Okay. We can do one more, if Secretary has some time. We’ll do Dalia Ashraf of Al Nahar TV.

SECRETARY KERRY: Dalia? Who’s Dalia?

MS. HARF: Sorry. Dalia.

SECRETARY KERRY: This is Dalia here?

QUESTION: Yes, of course. Egyptians felt yesterday in your speech to the American Chamber of Commerce that you that expressed more U.S. support for Egypt. Can you explain this change?

SECRETARY KERRY: That I did what?

QUESTION: More support, more American support for Egypt. Can you explain this? In your speech yesterday --

SECRETARY KERRY: That I expressed --

QUESTION: Yeah.

SECRETARY KERRY: -- more support for Egypt?

QUESTION: Yeah.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, we are supportive. I was very clear about our hopes for Egypt to move down the road of the democratic process, to continue to make progress in its internal relationship with the people of Egypt. We’ve always expressed that. But we’ve also expressed the connection of jobs and of economic opportunity to help provide stability and help provide the basis for all the other aspects of civil society to be able to come together. The stronger the economy, the more opportunity there is, the more that young people coming out of university can find a future that they want here, the stronger Egypt will be. And what I expressed yesterday was our commitment to the continued steps to move towards a full democratic process, a respect for rights, a respect for speech, as I mentioned earlier, the full participation of people in the society, at the same time as they are making very serious commitments to the social fabric and the economic opportunities that actually strengthen that social fabric.

So that’s really what I was talking about. It’s the link to those businesses. It’s why what I just said about America being the number-two nation in foreign direct investment in Egypt is so important, because that’s how you build the capacity of the society to embrace all of these other hopes and aspirations that the people have.

MS. HARF: Okay. That really is it, guys. Thank you very much for coming.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY MAKES REMARKS WITH GERMAN FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Ben Franklin Room
Washington, DC
March 11, 2015

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, good evening, everybody. It’s a distinct pleasure for me to welcome someone who’s become a really good friend in the course of our diplomatic travels, Frank-Walter Steinmeier of Germany, a man who may spend as many hours as I do in the air, moving around.

We saw each other, literally, just about a week ago in Paris, where we met with our British counterpart, the British foreign secretary, and Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius of France. And there we had a long discussion about a number of issues, most importantly about the Iran negotiations. As everybody knows, this is a P5+1 negotiating process. Our critical partners in this effort are every member – Russia, China, Germany, France, Great Britain – and we are united in our position, all of us, that it is critical to be able to have accountability and certainty with respect to the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program.

We spoke at length in Paris about the areas where we are still witnessing gaps, and we hope very much that over the course of the next days, we can close those gaps. But Germany has been an indispensable partner in this process. The German scientists, German nuclear experts have spent significant time analyzing proposals, helping us to understand options, and have really contributed significantly to our ability to be at a critical moment in these negotiations. And I think we would agree, both of us, that now it is inherent in – it’s really important that Iran make fundamental choices, as we are making fundamental choices, in order to try to prove to the world as effectively as possible that there will be no path to a nuclear weapon and that the world can be certain of the activities that Iran is engaged in.

In many ways – I don’t know if you’ve seen – there’ve been some articles recently that have been written about the indispensable role that Germany is playing in many different areas, and I want to second that. I agree. Germany is Europe’s chief facilitating officer, to quote one of those articles, and German-French leadership has been essential with respect to the effort to try to create a Minsk agreement that has meaning. I personally admire and respect the efforts that Chancellor Merkel made together with President Hollande to take a risk for peace, to take a risk to go to Minsk when nobody knew with certainty what the outcome would be, and to make their best effort to give some diplomatic energy to the effort to bring about peace.

We all have still some outstanding questions regarding that process – all of us, including Germany. We all insist that the withdrawal of heavy weapons needs to take place on both parts, and we all insist that it is critical that Russia cease its support for violations of the integrity of Ukraine and its sovereignty. And it is vital to the ability to be able to guarantee a Europe that is whole and peaceful and free to be able to make certain that this Minsk agreement is, in fact, implemented.

Just today, Frank, we announced an additional round of sanctions with respect to Ukraine on a number of different individuals, on a number of entities, bank, and also on some Yanukovych associates. And so we are all anxious to get to a day when this is de-escalated and when we can see a different prospect for minimizing the possibilities of confrontation.

Finally, let me just say that Germany’s leadership and partnership with respect to Afghanistan has also been critical. As we look at the issue of continued engagement with President Ghani and Afghanistan and the efforts to try to sustain the troop training program that is taking place, Germany is also playing a key role in that. So it is with pleasure that I welcome my counterpart from Germany here. I look forward to reciprocating. We spent a wonderful evening in Berlin, where we had an opportunity to talk into the late hours. I’m afraid it’s already late for our traveling friends – (laughter) – so we’ll have to arrange a different scenario here, but it’s really a pleasure to have you here, Frank. Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER: (Via interpreter.) Thank you, John, for inviting me to Washington. Thank you very much indeed for the time that you are devoting to me at the end of a very long day that you’ve already put behind yourself. I remember our last and latest meeting. We met only at the end of last week in Paris, and I think in the days preceding that weekend, we met at least every week, if not even more often than that, be it in Berlin, Munich, Vienna, Geneva, Brussels, London, or in many other places on this earth. It’s simply necessary in times like these, where we are confronting with a great number of different crises and have to tackle these crises.

But let me also be very clear I have very fond memories of your last visit to Berlin, because we not only had a political exchange, it was also a visit that came about because we celebrated a particular anniversary: the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. And we talked to those people who put their lives at risk in order to bring down the Wall or to climb over the Wall at the time where it was still standing in order to get into the western part of Berlin, and many of them gave their lives in that attempt. We spoke with young people during your visit who haven’t had any experience of the Wall because they were born after the Wall came down. And for me, too, that was a very moving experience, a moving day, the day where you came to Berlin to celebrate with us.

That is a day that reminded us of the great values that both our countries stand up for and for which we are willing to stand up and fight for. I’ve back – I’ve been back in office for roughly a year now, and I’m in a position to look back to, let pass and review the many crises that we’re confronted with, be it Libya or Syria; be it Iraq or African countries, African conflicts. Afghanistan – our job is not quite done yet there. A new mission has begun. All of that illustrates that we need to be in close touch, need to exchange views and coordinate actions, need to talk to each other – not only on occasions like your visit to Berlin or my visit today here in Washington. We’re in regular contact, in touch, be it on the phone or be it directly, trying to coordinate our actions and the next steps.

That is a good thing, and we will keep up that practice, especially with an eye to the two major conflicts in which both our countries are engaged, trying to develop solutions – Ukraine, that is; Iraq, on the other hand – Iran, on the other hand. The negotiations that took place in Minsk on the 12th of February – this Minsk package, as we call it – and I made that point more than once – may not be perfect, but it may – it is probably the only, perhaps even the last possibility, given the process of escalation, to reduce the level of violence, to initiate a process of de-escalation, and to make sure that the number of casualties we’ve seen on a daily basis is being brought down.

Today, we’re at a point where it’s far too early to pat our shoulders and take pride in what we have achieved. Both of us are far from being happy or satisfied with what we have been able to achieve so far. We have to keep up the pressure on the conflict parties. On the way to Washington, I once again used the opportunity to talk to Sergei Lavrov on the phone in order to make it very clear that wherever the ceasefire is violated, both sides have to try to make sure that the daily violations of the ceasefire come to an end, so as to allow us to enter another stage in the process of implementing the Minsk agreements. To begin that is to prepare the ground for a political settlement. First steps have been taken, but much still needs to be done, especially with an eye to the urgently-required economic stabilization of the country. The country is under enormous pressure. The decisions of the IMF can serve as a first step of providing help and assistance here.

Now, as far as Iran is concerned – and John Kerry made the point earlier – we used the opportunity last week in Paris to talk to our European partners, France and Great Britain, and to harmonize a common approach which hopefully will take us into the final round of negotiations in the search for a solution. For more than a decade, that conflict has been with us. I have been involved with – in this process in different positions, in different functions – as the foreign minister during my first stint; now again. Thus, I may be permitted to say that for the very first time in those 10 years, I’m under the impression that negotiations in the last year have been of a serious nature. Progress has been visible. But again, both of us are convinced that not all impediments have been cleared away, and thus everyone is called upon to continue to – Iran is called upon to continue to negotiate in a spirit – in a serious spirit. And we ask and urge Iran to show and express its readiness to enter into a compromise.

This is not a choice between a good or a bad deal. It’s very clear what we want to see. We want to be very clear in that what we want to see is that it is made impossible for Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb. It has to be made clear – unequivocally clear. It has to be something that can be reviewed, and we want to see that achieved on a long-term basis. Thank you very much.

SECRETARY KERRY: I also forgot to mention that we are providing some $75 million to Ukraine immediately in nonlethal military assistance, including vehicles, MRAPs[1], and so forth. And I’m sure one of the things we’ll discuss tonight is what further assistance might or might not be necessary going forward. So also, vielen dank.

FOREIGN MINISTER STEINMEIER: Vielen dank. Thanks.

IRANIAN SENTENCED TO PRISON FOR STEALING U.S. PILOTS IDENTITY

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, March 9, 2015

Iranian Pilot Sentenced to 27 Months in Prison for Stealing U.S. Pilot’s Identity to Obtain Federal Aviation Administration Credentials

An Iranian man was sentenced today in Houston to serve 27 months in prison for using personally identifying information stolen from a U.S. pilot to fraudulently obtain a U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate and flight instructor certificate.  At today’s sentencing hearing, the government indicated that the defendant sought the FAA credentials to allow him to fly aircraft for profit, and that there was no evidence that he was engaged in any terrorism-related activity.

Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson of the Southern District of Texas made the announcement.

Nader Ali Sabouri Haghighi, 41, of Iran, pleaded guilty on Nov. 3, 2014, to four counts of identity theft related to his use of the victim pilot’s passport and personally identifying information to fraudulently obtain the FAA credentials at issue.  U.S. District Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt of the Southern District of Texas imposed the sentence.

An ATP certificate is the highest grade of certificate issued by the FAA.  It authorizes the holder to pilot multi-engine aircraft under U.S. aviation regulations.

At his plea hearing, Haghighi admitted that he stole the identity of the victim pilot, which he used to obtain certain FAA credentials.  These credentials permit a pilot to fly multi-engine aircraft, and have strict requirements for training, knowledge and experience.  Haghighi had never been issued these specific credentials, and a general pilot’s license he had previously been issued had been revoked by the FAA.

Haghighi admitted that he used the victim pilot’s information to log onto the Airman Services Records System, an on-line database used by the FAA to monitor and regulate persons authorized to fly aircraft, posing as the victim pilot.  He then changed the contact information associated with the victim pilot’s profile and requested a replacement ATP certificate and flight instructor certificate.

Haghighi also admitted that he fraudulently obtained a credit card in the victim pilot’s name and used the credit card to pay for the replacement FAA credentials.

According to court records, on Sept. 15, 2012, Haghighi crashed an airplane in Bornholm, Denmark, while in possession of the victim’s ATP certificate.  After facing criminal charges in Denmark and Germany, Haghighi returned to Iran, only to later resurface in Indonesia.  He was finally arrested in Panama, where he waived extradition to the United States in August 2014.

The case was investigated by the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Transportation, with significant assistance from the Federal Aviation Administration, the Diplomatic Security Service of the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigations.  The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs and the FBI also provided significant assistance in Haghighi’s apprehension and extradition.  Assistance was also provided by the Bornholms Politi (Denmark Police).  The case was prosecuted by Senior Trial Attorney William A. Hall Jr. of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Craig Feazel of the Southern District of Texas.

SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF ROBERT LEVINSON'S DISAPPEARANCE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Eighth Anniversary of Disappearance of Robert Levinson
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
March 9, 2015

We ask the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to work cooperatively with us on the investigation into Robert Levinson’s disappearance so we can ensure his safe return.

Mr. Levinson went missing from Kish Island, Iran, eight years ago today. He has spent more than 2,900 days separated from those who love him, and is one of the longest held U.S. citizens in history. Year after year, the family has endured the pain of his absence.

It is time for him to come home.

We remain committed to the safe return of Mr. Levinson to his family and appreciate the support and assistance from our international partners. We remain concerned about Mr. Levinson’s health given his age and the length of his disappearance.

Today, the FBI announced it has increased its reward for information that could lead to Mr. Levinson's safe return to up to $5 million from $1 million.

We call on anyone with information about this case to contact the FBI.

SECRETARY KERRY, FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS MAKE REMARKS IN PARIS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Quai d'Orsay
Paris, France
March 7, 2015

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (In French.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Laurent, thank you very, very much. Thank you for hosting us here today. I really appreciate the welcome, as always. It’s always wonderful to be in Paris, though obviously only for a few hours today.

I want to begin by expressing President Obama’s and my deepest condolences to the families of the French, Belgian, and Malian victims of this appalling shooting in Bamako this morning. As Foreign Minister Fabius made clear just now in his comments, this is an act of cowardice. And these horrific and cowardly attacks, these acts of terrorism, which Paris experienced too much of most recently, but an act of opening fire in a restaurant filled with innocent civilians – in the end, that only strengthens our resolve to fight terrorism in all of its forms wherever it exists. And we are pleased that together with France we have a present-day manifestation of an old relationship as we join together to express our revulsion at this kind of act, and our unity, our partnership, and our alliance in standing up to it and continuing to fight.

So rather than intimidate us, it has the exact opposite effect. It strengthens our partnership and it strengthens our commitment to see this moment, this generational challenge, through. And we will.

Today, we talked at some length – in a short span of time, obviously, but we talked about Daesh. We talked about the challenge in Syria, in Iraq, and the need to continue, and ways in which we can strengthen what we’re doing. We talked also about the need for transition in Syria and the increased efforts with respect to the Assad regime and the need to leverage him to a negotiation. We talked about Libya – the threat, obviously, of Daesh and other extremist groups taking advantage of the lack of adequate governance and the adequate resolution politically of the challenges there. And we committed to redouble our efforts together in order to focus on that.

As many of you know, I’ve spent the past week traveling in Europe and in the Middle East discussing a number of important issues. But obviously, my primary focus for this week has really been the Iran nuclear talks. And after a couple of days of very intense negotiations with the Iranians in Switzerland, I traveled to Saudi Arabia, where I updated our allies and our partners in Riyadh and throughout the Gulf. And here in Paris today, I appreciate Foreign Minister Fabius bringing people together and hosting us for our opportunity to be able to have a discussion about what is a partnership. This is not a bilateral negotiation; this is a multilateral P5+1 negotiation. And all of our partners are consistently exchanging and sharing information, sharing ideas, working together, meeting, and helping to try to drive this to the good conclusion that we want.

As Foreign Minister Fabius said a moment ago, we want an agreement that’s solid. We want an agreement that will guarantee that we are holding any kind of program that continues in Iran accountable to the highest standards so that we know that it is, in fact, a peaceful program. All of us in the P5+1 are deeply committed to ensuring that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. And we continue to believe that a comprehensive deal that includes intrusive access and verification measures, and blocks each of the pathways to securing fissile material for a bomb and then to try and make a bomb itself, that the best way to achieve the goal is to shut off those pathways.

Now, I agree with Laurent. We have exactly the same assessment. We have made progress, but there remain gaps – divergences, as he said. And we need to close those gaps. And that is our goal over the course of the next days. We have a critical couple of weeks ahead of us. We’re all mindful that the days are ticking by. But we’re not feeling a sense of urgency that we have to get any deal. We have to get the right deal. And it is frankly up to Iran – that wants this program, that wants a peaceful program, that asserts that they have a peaceful program – to show the world that it is indeed exactly what they say. That’s the measure here. And we planned a return to the talks. Starting next Sunday, different folks will be having different conversations, and we look forward to trying to drive this thing to an appropriate conclusion. And we will find out whether or not Iran is prepared to take the steps to answer the questions that the world has a right to get answers to.

I’d be happy to take any questions. Laurent, you --

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (In French.)

Hello. Madam (inaudible).

QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Foreign Minister, you said yesterday the deal doesn’t go far enough in the extent and duration of Iran’s commitments. What are your primary areas of concern? Is it enrichment capacity, breakout time, how long Iran will accept constraints on its enrichment activities, what happens when the agreement expires? Did you make specific suggestions to Mr. Kerry today on how the agreement can be improved?

And Mr. Secretary, also relating to the Foreign Minister’s comments yesterday, do you agree the deal does not go far enough in terms of the extent and duration of commitments? What will you say to your partners today to reassure them about the progress of the talks? Also, Iran’s nuclear chief, Ali Akbar Salehi, said today Iran has put forward technical proposals to the U.S. to overcome their concerns. He said the impasse over technical issues is over. Do you share this assessment? Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (In French.)

Under no circumstances Iran will never seek nor possess any nuclear weapon.

(In French.)

SECRETARY KERRY: I agree completely with the comments of Foreign Minister Fabius, particularly with respect to the picture that he just drew of what happens if you don’t have a good, solid agreement. All of us have an interest in making certain that the countries in the region feel sufficiently convinced that this agreement is meaningful – that it will hold, that it’s real, and that they’re secure – so that they don’t in fact make matters worse by all engaging in the development of a program because they feel threatened.

So our obligation is, as Laurent just said, not to each other, not just to those of us in the talks. It’s to a much broader community – in fact, to the world. Because we are also deeply involved in trying to denuclearize North Korea, and there are any number of other players in the world who might at some point think that they would be advantaged by proceeding down this road. So this – the stakes here are higher than just this P5+1-plus-Iran negotiation.

I also agree – and I said at the beginning of my comments, we are on the same page. If we didn’t think that there was further to go, as Laurent said, we’d have had an agreement already. The reason we don’t have an agreement is we believe there are gaps that have to be closed. There are things that have to be done to further strengthen this. We know this. And we have not resolved – now, like Laurent, I’m not going to stand here now and negotiate with you in public and give you a whole bunch of differentials. That’s what we’re going to go do, all of us together.

But the bottom line is that everybody knows what matters here: the length of this – the length and duration, the levels of visibility, the control, as Laurent said, the issue of verification and knowledge. All of these are key. This is an arms control agreement. They have been negotiated for a long period of time, particularly before between the Western world and the former Soviet Union. So we know something about these. We have a track record of standards. We have a track record of IAEA requirements. We have a track record of mistakes and we understand what we need to do.

So the proof will be in an agreement if it is reached. And none of us are going to, I think, publicly start to lay out numbers and equations here. We know what we’re chasing after, and we’re chasing after the same thing, all of us in the P5+1. That’s what’s important.

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (In French.)

QUESTION: (Inaudible), Al Arabiya (inaudible). Secretary Kerry, you have said on Thursday that Iran is still supporting terrorism, while General Dempsey was telling senators that Iran’s role in Iraq might be positive. Does that mean that according to the United States, Iran is fighting terrorism in Iraq and supporting it in Syria and in Yemen? Would you clarify this divergence between the two statements?

(In French.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me answer that very directly. The advance on Tikrit is an Iraqi-designed and an Iraqi-controlled advance. And Prime Minister Abadi himself went out to the front several days beforehand. He briefed our people and others on what their plans were. There are Sunni tribes involved in this effort. There are Iraqi armed forces involved. And yes, there are some militias involved, and yes, some of those militias are receiving direction from General Soleimani and from Iran. That’s a fact.

But we’re not coordinating with them. We’re not discussing this with them. I think what General Dempsey said is a matter of pure common sense and fact. If Iran kills a bunch of ISIL/Daesh on the ground, and it serves the interests of Iraq and the rest of us, that might wind up helping, but it doesn’t mean that we accept in any way their behavior with respect to other things they’re doing in Yemen, in Beirut, in Damascus, elsewhere.

So yes, they have been engaged in these other activities. That’s why they are a designated country. And the truth is that’s not on the table in this discussion. Our goal is ultimately to change the behavior and ultimately try to affect these other places. But for the moment, the key is to prevent them from having a nuclear weapon. Because if this country that is engaged in these other activities has a nuclear weapon, you got a whole different ballgame.

So let’s keep our eye on the priority. Priority number one is to not have a pathway to a nuclear weapon and guarantee that this program is peaceful. And as I have said to our friends in the region and elsewhere, the next day, if we get an agreement, we continue to have disagreements over these other kinds of activities. And that will be the next layer of effort, is to try to work at changing the whole dynamic. But that’s not what’s on the table here right now. And I think General Dempsey was simply speaking to a kind of common sense judgment about one moment, but only a moment in this unfolding process.

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (In French.)

PRESS AVAILABILITY: SECRETARY KERRY AND SAUDI ARABIAN FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
03/05/2015 12:57 PM EST
Press Availability with Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Riyadh Air Base
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
March 5, 2015

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Via interpreter) In the name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful. At the beginning, it pleases me to extend thanks and appreciation to the custodian of the two holy mosques, King Salman Bin Abd al-Aziz for the care and attention the – accorded to me during my recent treatment period recently. I also express sincere love and cordiality to the current Saudi people for their noble feelings. Moreover, I would like to seize this opportunity to express the national happiness for the return of the Saudi diplomat, Abdullah al-Khalidi, to homeland with the protection and care of Allah. In this connection, I extend many thanks and appreciation and great (inaudible) to all the government, but as – and security agencies that participated in his safe return with direction from the generous leadership, particularly His Royal Highness, the deputy crown prince, second deputy premier, and minister of interior, Prince Muhammad Bin Nayef Bin Abd al-Aziz, who accorded this issue extreme care since the first day of the diplomat’s abduction.

I welcome now Secretary John Kerry and his accompanying delegation to Saudi Arabia. His extensive schedule was full of meetings that started this morning by meeting the GCC foreign ministers, then he was received by King – by the king, and then we held bilateral talks. Overall, the talks were fruitful, constructive, in-depth, and transparent, as always the case of our meetings. We examined a wide range of bilateral relations, issues, between our two countries, in addition to discussing the regional and international issues of mutual interest. The meeting explored the developments in Yemen, Syria, Libya, and the efforts of the international coalition for countering terrorism, in addition to the developments of talks on Iranian nuclear program, the Middle East peace process, and other issues.

With regard to Yemen, as you all see there is full international accord on rejecting the Houthi coup d’etat on the legitimacy and their endeavors to impose the status quo with force and refusal of the procedures resulting from this coup d’etat, including the so-called constitutional declaration by the Houthi militia. The international community expressed its full support to the legitimate government in Yemen led by President Abd Rabu Mansour Hadi. This is clearly reflected in the statements issued by GCC, the Arab League, and the UN Security Council.

Noting these positions and efforts and resulting resolutions and measures, Saudi Arabia renews its emphasis upon the importance of resuming the political process based on the GCC initiative and its executive mechanisms and the outcomes of the Yemeni national dialogue. Saudi Arabia stresses the importance of helping the (inaudible) Yemeni people out of their ordeal that led to these hazardous actions in a way that maintains Yemen’s stability, territorial integrity, stability in the region. We discussed the efforts of the international coalition to fight terrorism, and the ISIL in particular, including the ongoing military efforts to fight the organization, the ongoing military security, intellectual, financial and media actions. Saudi Arabia underscores the importance of this coalition in fighting ISIL both in Iraq and Syria.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia opines the importance of providing the military the necessary means – necessary military means to fight this challenge on the ground, and that campaign should have comprehensive strategic perspective fighting terrorism, wherever it may be, and whatever the organizations that stands behind it in order to uproot terrorism. Our talks included as well the negotiations of the Iranian nuclear program. Saudi Arabian Government supports the efforts of 5+1 in view of its keenness to solve this file peacefully, to reach successful agreement that dissipates the doubts and ensures not shifting to a military program that threatens the region and the world. Saudi Arabia also supports the 5+1 position in seeking a firm international and inspection system to ensure that Iran is not seeking manufactured opposition of nuclear weapons, together with maintaining Iran’s right and all regions – countries of the region rights to the peaceful use of nuclear energy according to IAEA standards, requirements, and inspection.

As for the Syrian crisis and its common efforts here, we all feel – I think that we all felt that the continuity of this crisis not only led to the destruction of Syria, displacement of its people, and deepening their humanitarian suffering, it also made Syria a safe haven for terrorist organizations with endorsement of the legitimate – of the illegitimate Bashar al-Assad’s regime. This entails a threat to Syria, the region, and the world – the whole world. This urges us to intensify efforts to promote and support the moderate opposition with all ordnance and training to counter al-Assad’s terrorism and the terrorist organizations as well. And to expel the foreign occupier from the Syrian territories, we – at the same time, we stress that reaching the business solution, based on Geneva I conference, requires a military balance on the ground.

We have also discussed the peace process in the Middle East within the framework of the efforts exerted by the United States recently to revive the peace negotiations to reach a just, permanent, and comprehensive solution. These efforts are supported by the Arabs, Palestinians, and with patronage of the Arab League. Our view of the desired solution will always be based on the principles of the international legitimacy, its resolutions, and the Arab Peace Initiative aiming at creation of a viable, independent Palestinian state.

Unfortunately, these efforts are still not yielding its fruits. This is due to the Israeli stubbornness and procrastination and its unilateral forcible measures against the rights of the Palestinian people. A case in point: The recent Israeli detention of a 14-year-old girl, Malak al-Khatib – not exceeding 14 years old – and indicted by an Israeli military court and imprisonment for two months and a fine with the pretext of hurling stones. This verdict calls for severe rejection and grief. Particularly, it’s being passed under the sight and hearing of all the world and its justice organizations in a flagrant defiance to all human rights and agreements and women and children rights agreements.

On our part, we stress the importance of international community shouldering of its responsibility towards the inhumane practices of Israel against the Palestinian people, also to obligate Israel to respect the peace process and its principles and not to infringe the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.

I reiterate this is long, I renew my welcome of Secretary Kerry, and I leave the floor to him.

SECRETARY KERRY: Let me begin by saying how very pleased I am to be back here in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia here in Riyadh, and I am particularly pleased to be able to be here with His Royal Highness, Prince Saud al-Faisal, as he comes back from a brief period of dealing with medical issues and now returning to his full responsibility. And all of us, all of the ministers here today, we’re really pleased to be able to welcome Prince Saud back. We value his wisdom. He’s the longest-serving foreign minister of any country, and he has become a very good friend as well as a good counselor with respect to issues in this region. So I’m particularly personally appreciative that we are here today.

I want to begin by underscoring an important point that is on a issue different from those we discussed here today. The safety and security of our diplomats abroad is a top priority for me and for President Obama. And even as we join in congratulating Saudi Arabia on the skillful return of their diplomat from detention – and I congratulate Deputy Crown Prince Minister Mohammed bin Nayef on his role together with the foreign ministry – but we in the United States were deeply concerned to learn about a very vicious attack on our ambassador in South Korea in the Republic of Korea – Mark Lippert. And this attack took place earlier this morning, and I want to be very, very clear to anybody who contemplates or thinks about this kind of tactic – the United States of America will never be intimidated or deterred by threat or by anybody who harms any American diplomat. We will remain as resolved as ever to pursue what we believe is in the interests of our country and with respect to universal rights and values. And whoever threatens or harms our diplomats, I can assure them, will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

I had the opportunity to talk to Mark earlier this morning. He was in the hospital. I’m enormously relieved to be able to report that thanks to the care and the support that he is receiving in South Korea, he’s doing okay. I’ve known Mark for years, as has President Obama. One thing both of us could tell anybody is this man is as tough as they come. And as I told him over the phone this morning, the State Department is a family, and so we are all sending the thoughts of a family his way, we’re sending our prayers his way to his wife, Robyn, and to their baby boy, and we are wishing him a fast and complete recovery.

This morning, as Prince Saud said, we have discussed a great many issues. We’ve had a very full day. And that’s partly because we have a very full agenda, not all of it by our choice, but all of it we are determined to deal with. We joined with our counterparts from the rest of the GCC, the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait, in order to meet for the second time in the past month, which tells you something about the order of priority and the importance of the challenges we face. President Obama and I know that partnerships with the Gulf nations are absolutely essential in meeting any number of urgent challenges. It’s critical that we therefore keep in very close touch, particularly at such a complicated time when there are so many moving pieces in so many different places.

For that same reason, I also met today with His Majesty King Salman, with whom the United States looks forward to pursuing the very same kind of close and very personal relationship that we enjoyed with his predecessor, King Abdullah. And I also had a very productive lunch just now, a working lunch with Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef as well as with His Royal Highness, the Foreign Minister Prince Faisal.

As all of you know, I came here to Riyadh directly from Montreux, Switzerland where I spent the past few days engaged in with – negotiations with Iran on the nuclear issue that Prince Saud just discussed. Obviously, the outcome of these negotiations will be of major consequence to the United States, yes, but really to the entire world – and particularly to this region, and we understand that. With that fact comes a responsibility to all of us in the P5+1 to get it right. Preventing a nuclear-armed Iran will, as Prince Saud just said, address many of the concerns of the region. It will alleviate tension and remove barriers to regional security. It will reduce the pressure for a regional nuclear arms race, and it will increase the strength of the international nonproliferation regime. It will also vastly improve the prospects for peace both here and elsewhere.

So a large part of why I wanted to come to Riyadh today is to update our Gulf partners on exactly where the negotiations stand, on what our standards are, on what we are looking to achieve, and what we have done since the talks first started. And let me underscore: We are not seeking a grand bargain; nothing will be different the day after this agreement if we were to reach one with respect to all the other issues that challenge us in this region, except that we will have taken steps to guarantee that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. And that is a critical component of security for the region and for the world.

We are seeking to show that Iran’s program is exclusively peaceful and that we can block all of the pathways necessary to acquire the fissile material for a nuclear weapon and then to be able to move towards the production of that weapon. To date, we have made progress, but there do remain serious gaps, and those need to be resolved. We still don’t know whether we’ll get there. I said that in Switzerland; I say it again today. It may be that Iran cannot say yes to the type of deal that provides assurances that the international community requires. But we plan to return to the talks on the 15th of March, and we expect soon thereafter to know whether Iran will, in fact, be able to make the tough decisions that are required to get where we need to be.

Now, I also want to make clear, as I did in every one of my meetings today: Even as we engage with these discussions with Iran around its nuclear program, we will not take our eye off of Iran’s other destabilizing actions in places like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and the Arabian Peninsula – Yemen particularly. And whether or not we are able to reach a deal on the nuclear program, the United States will remain fully committed to addressing the full slate of issues that we have with Iran, including its support for terrorism.

Beyond Iran, we also discussed the situation in Yemen, where we recognize that it’s more important than ever for the United States and the GCC states to coordinate closely and where we need to continue to press all of the political parties, especially the Houthis, to commit to a consensus political solution that is based on the GCC initiative and the national dialogue outcomes.

We also, as Prince Saud said, discussed the situation in Syria. I think the whole world needs to see the war in Syria come to an end. Three quarters of the country are now displaced people, and the country is being torn apart by a leader who places his personal preservation ahead of the preservation of the state or the preservation of all of the people of his state. As President Obama and I have repeatedly made clear that we don’t see how a man who has gassed his people; dropped barrel bombs on children and on women, on schools; a man who has tortured more than 10,000 people, according to the evidence of photographs – how that person can become a leader in the future is beyond our consideration or capacity. He has lost any semblance of legitimacy.

But we have no higher priority than disrupting and defeating Daesh and other terror networks in order to give the people of Syria the chance that they deserve to recover and to build – rebuild their country. Ultimately, a combination of diplomacy and pressure will be needed to bring about a political transition. Military pressure particularly may be necessary, given President Assad’s unwillingness to negotiate seriously. And what we must do is strengthen the capacity for this political solution.

Now, obviously, everything we have just talked about emphasizes the fact that there is no shortage of urgent and complex challenges that face Saudi Arabia, the United States, the Gulf states, and our allies and friends. In the weeks and months and even years ahead, we will remain in close contact with our partners on the issues that I mentioned and more. And I am confident that based on the conversations with the king today, with all of our meetings, with the determination of the Gulf states, we will remain united and we will continue to examine how to best coordinate our efforts and bring the peace and the stability and the possibilities of the future that this region so deserves. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Let’s go to the American press first.

MS. PSAKI: Arshad Mohammed from Reuters.

QUESTION: Your Royal Highness, what concerns did you and your fellow GCC foreign ministers express today about the emerging Iran nuclear deal? And specifically, are you concerned that giving Iran sanctions relief will simply allow it to pursue its regional agenda in countries like Syria and Yemen more aggressively? Are you concerned that any deal would have an expiration date? And has the United States offered you and your fellow GCC countries any additional security assurances to guarantee your security once a deal has expired?

And Secretary Kerry, the State Department has said that it will review for public release the emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. My question is: Why shouldn’t the Department review all of the emails, including those that former Secretary Clinton has withheld from the Department, so that it is the U.S. Government that is determining what should ultimately go to the national archives or what should be released publicly rather than former Secretary Clinton’s office that is making that judgment?

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Inaudible) Iran (off-mike).

SECRETARY KERRY: He asked about Iran.

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: I don’t think I can be more specific in relating what guarantees the Secretary gave and he himself has done in this press conference. He has been very clear in the assurances he gave the country. And he has been very transparent in saying what the United States will adhere to in negotiating a deal with Iran. He has specifically specified that Iran – the intent is to keep it from developing an atomic bomb, which is to the good of all, international community as well as the Gulf countries. But he said that is not at the expense of forgetting everything else that Iran does. And that is really the main concern of the Gulf Cooperation Council.

We are, of course, worried about atomic energy and atomic bomb. But we’re equally concerned about the nature of action and hegemonistic tendencies that Iran has in the region. And these elements are the elements of instability in the region. We see Iran involved in Syria and Lebanon and Yemen and Iraq and God knows where. This (inaudible) must stop if Iran is to be part of the solution of the region and not part of the problem.

SECRETARY KERRY: If I can, Arshad, I’m just going to comment very quickly on that also, because I want to emphasize a couple of things. First of all, making the Gulf states safer and providing for greater security begins, notwithstanding Iran’s other activities, which we all object to – it begins by preventing them from having a nuclear weapon. So the first step is make sure they don’t have a nuclear weapon.

But nothing else changes the next day with respect to our joint commitment to stand up against any other kind of interference or violation of international law or support for terrorism. And Iran remains a labeled state supporter of terrorism. So those efforts will continue.

And in order to make sure that everybody is clear as we go forward and we work together cooperatively, we are inviting our GCC friends to come to Washington sometime in the next month or so – somewhere in the next months, certainly in next couple of months – in order to continue to review together those cooperative efforts and arrangements that can be made with respect to security and cooperation as we go forward in this endeavor.

We have a long task ahead of us, and it’s not going to be solved by one agreement, nor deterred by one agreement. And I think we’re all in agreement on that.

With respect to Secretary Clinton’s emails, the State Department has had access to a wide array of Secretary Clinton’s records, including emails, between her and Department officials with the state.gov accounts, as well as cables, as they do for every secretary of state. And last year, the Department sent a letter to representatives of the former secretaries of state requesting that they submit any records in their possession for proper preservation. In response, Secretary Clinton provided the Department with the emails that span her time at the State Department. And after reviewing those emails, the Department produced about 300 responsive to the requests from the select committee.

So we are now in the process of appropriately reviewing those for public release, as we do for any document for public release. And we will undertake this task as rapidly as possible in order to make sure that we’re dealing with the sheer volume of this in a responsible way and we’ll conclude it as soon as we can and get those released publicly.

QUESTION: But my question is why couldn’t the Department look at all these emails and make its own judgment about which ones should go to the archives.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, the Department has the emails. We’re --

QUESTION: Has every one of them, or just the ones that were provided?

SECRETARY KERRY: I’d have to check on that. I believe we have all the ones that – I think we have all the ones that are state.gov, which are appropriately the ones in the purview of the Department. But let me check on that when I actually have time to pay attention to such an important issue when I get home.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) (inaudible) newspaper. Your Highness, what is – what are you going to do since the stubbornness of the Houthis in Yemen?

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Via interpreter) In fact, GCC countries took the initiative in taking procedures in this direction since the Houthi coup d’etat of the state, as the president was held a legitimate president. We are trying to stress the legitimacy and this is the only way for the safety of Yemen.

Consequently, we were happy for the arrival of Mr. – President Hadi to Aden, to southern Yemen, and the statements he made from that, that he stresses his legitimacy and he stresses not accepting any of the procedures taken by the Houthis, so that even GCC countries took the initiative to support this president. And the secretary general of GCC went to Aden, other ambassadors of GCC countries were supported this position of the president, and as you know, the president is holding meetings outside of Yemen and he wants – and particularly the meeting for the negotiations will be most likely in Saudi Arabia. If he asks this, we agree to this. We will take the help of what is in the GCC initiative to help him restore the order in Yemen.

MS. PSAKI: Jo Biddle from AFP.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. (Inaudible) thank you for your gracious hospitality to us all today. Shukran. Could I ask you how concerned Saudi Arabia is about the reports of deep Iranian involvement in Iraq at the moment, particularly for the battle of Tikrit, with reports that General Qasem Soleimani is actually on the ground, the head of the Qods Force, coordinating the battle?

And if I may, could I also ask you: After your talks today, have your received assurances from Secretary Kerry that the United States is committed to regime change in Syria? And what role do you believe Saudi Arabia could do to help the Syrian people?

And Secretary Kerry, if I could just quickly ask for your view on what is happening in Tikrit. What is the U.S. involvement? How much are you monitoring the situation? And how concerned are you about the civilians who are trapped in the town?

And finally, just one other quick question, my apologies. The King Faisal Foundation has just given a $200,000 award to a leading Islamic scholar from India who apparently called the 9/11 attacks in the United States an inside job, suggesting that the Bush Administration was behind it. Could I have your reaction to that? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Whose reaction?

QUESTION: That was for you, sir.

SECRETARY KERRY: Can I have the – what foundation? The King Faisal --

QUESTION: The King Faisal Foundation. And the name of the scholar was Zakir Naik.

SECRETARY KERRY: And they gave it to whom?

QUESTION: To this gentlemen, who is an Islamic scholar who claims that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job. Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Inaudible) if you keep asking more than one question we tend to forget. (Inaudible) I’ve already forgotten the second question.

And the situation in Tikrit is a prime example of what we’re worried about. Iran is taking over the country. The act of the war and peace is no longer in the hand of the countries involved with Iran (inaudible) but in the hands of Iran. And these (inaudible) in Iraq. This is what is fomenting sectarian struggles in Iraq. We shared no sectarian struggles before the involvement of Iran in Iraq (inaudible).

The second question was --

QUESTION: Syria. Syria. Whether you have assurances now that the United States will (inaudible) regime change.

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: Well, we all agree with the United States that Bashar al-Assad has lost legitimacy. We all agree that the solution – and it must be based on Geneva I. That means that the transition government is going to be established, and that means that Saddam Hussein and those involved --

PARTICIPANT: Bashar al-Assad.

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: -- that Bashar – it’s the same, anyways – (laughter) – that they have to follow the political solution, as is suggested by the Geneva conference. We don’t have any differences at all on the basis of a solution or settlement in Syria. We want a political settlement. We want a political settlement giving peace and stability to Syria and unity of (inaudible) and territorial integrity. We want the troops that are illegally there to be withdrawn. We want the Syrians to unite under one house where there is no difference between Shia and Sunni, a Christian or (inaudible) nationality or sects in Iraq, and that is what we hope for.

SECRETARY KERRY: So with respect to Tikrit, Prime Minister Abadi himself has confirmed that this is an operation of Iraqi forces, consisting of a regular Iraqi Security Force militia – regular Iraqi Security Force contingent of militias and tribes, and it is specifically underway in order to liberate the Salahuddin province from ISIL control, and it is an Iraqi-led operation – Iraqi-designed, Iraqi-led. Is General Soleimani – has he been on the ground, is he playing a role? The answer’s yes. We’ve got information to that effect. But we are encouraged that as part of this operation, Prime Minister Abadi ensured the support of the Sunni leaders, including the governor of Salahuddin province and other local tribal leaders, as well as the speaker of the parliament, Salim al-Jubouri.

Now, there’s close coordination between the national and the local leaders throughout this operation. That’s the only way it’s ultimately going to be successful. Everybody has known that there are some movement of Iranian forces, both in and out of the northern part of Iraq, who have been engaged in fighting since the very beginning. But it is not coordinated. We are not coordinating with them. And Prime Minister Abadi went to the front a day or two before this initiative began and made it clear that this is Iraqi-sanctioned and Iraqis’ design and Iraqis’ desire to achieve.

Additionally, the spokesman for the Sunni tribal council of Salahuddin province issued a statement calling for all of the tribes of Salahuddin who are Sunni to stand side by side with the Security Forces and support the restoration of the province and stressing that they want to avoid any kind of risk to unarmed civilians and to do as much as possible to preserve homes and property.

Prime Minister Abadi also committed to take the upmost care to protect civilian lives during this operation, and we have urged all Iraqi forces to avoid and prevent the abuse to civilians of any kind of activity that violates international norms, fuels the sectarian fears, and promotes sectarian divides, and that includes Iran in terms of their activities or perception or whatever.

So I think it’s clear as the Iraqi army stands up more and more, militias and external actors are going to be less and less imperative and needed. But that’s not where they are, and this is – and I emphasize this is not American-designed operation. This was put together by the Iraqis, formulated by the Iraqis, executed by the Iraqis, and that’s the best thing all of us could, frankly, ask for. So we take it the way it is and we’ll hope for the best results and move from there.

With respect to your other question, I really don’t know anything about the award, the process, the – I know, obviously, something of the individual, but let me find out more before I make any comment on it.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) (inaudible) from Riyadh Radio. Your Highness, so far Iran was not nominated as a terrorism-supporting country, despite Iran is occupying two islands from Emirates and an Arab country as well, also Syria. You’re always blessing the Iranian fight. So far, you have not talked about the Iranian – the Israeli nuclear file. Israel is acting against the human rights. You say the – are trying – so as not to attack any civilians in Iraq. Israel is always infringing the rights of the population in Palestine. The nuclear – the Israeli nuclear file have not been – has not been studied here.

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Via interpreter) Let me tell you, Iran doing what it is doing, interference in affairs of Arab countries, it is always a neighbor – it’s also a neighbor. We do not harvest any antagonism against it. If it’s – if it continues on its current positions, (inaudible) it will place itself directly against the Arab interest and against the moral values the international – against the international values. It promotes terrorism and occupies lands. These are not the features of countries which want peace and seeks to improve its relations with the neighboring countries.

We hope that Iran – before the situation develops and antagonism takes place between its neighbors, Iran should stop and listen to the advices of the wise Iranians and leave intervening in the internal affairs of Arab nations. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Is that it?

FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (In Arabic.) Thank you.

SUSAN E. RICE'S REMARKS AT AIPAC

 FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE

Remarks As Prepared for Delivery at AIPAC Annual Meeting by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice
February 2, 2015


Good evening everyone.  It’s great to be back at AIPAC.  Rosy, thank you so much for your warm introduction.


I want to thank Bob Cohen, Michael Kassen, Lillian Pinkus, my old friend Lee Rosenberg, and all of AIPAC’s board and members for welcoming me tonight.  I want to thank all the Members of Congress who represent America’s strong bipartisan support for the State of Israel; and all the young people here today, some 3,000, who represent the bright future of the U.S.-Israel special relationship.


I brought one of those young people with me, my seventeen year-old son Jake, who insisted he had to come to AIPAC.  But, I want to take a moment before I begin, to remember three young men who aren’t with us today.  I want to call us back to those terrible days last summer, when we were united in grief over the horrifying kidnapping and murder of Naftali Fraenkel, Gilad Shaer, and Eyal Yifrah.  As a mother, my heart breaks for such unspeakable loss.  Those boys were our boys, and we all continue to mourn their tragic loss.


The last time I spoke at AIPAC, it was to the synagogue initiative lunch.  This group tonight is… a little larger.  But, when I finished that speech, more than 400 rabbis sang to me.  In Hebrew.  Now, that is something I will never forget.  And the words of their song reflect the spirit that brings me here tonight.  Hinei ma’tov uma-nayim, shevet achim gam yachad.  “How good it is and how pleasant when we sit together in brotherhood.”  It’s a great psalm—though I will admit that where I first encountered it – in church – it was not in the original Hebrew.  That psalm always reminds me how much we can do together when we unite in common purpose.  And, it goes to the heart of what AIPAC is all about—what the relationship between Israel and the United States is all about.  Brotherhood.  Togetherness.  Unity.


That’s because the U.S.-Israel alliance is not just rooted in our mutual interests, vital as they are. It’s also rooted in the values of freedom and democracy that we share.  It’s in the friendship and fellowship between ordinary Israelis and Americans.  And, for me personally, it’s a warmth that’s rooted in my very first visit to Israel.  I was just 14, traveling with my younger brother and my beloved late father.  My Dad was on the Board of TWA – some of you are old enough to remember that once-great airline.  We arrived on one of the first-ever flights from Egypt to Israel, just after the Camp David Accords were signed.  We had an unforgettable visit, the power of which has stayed with me all my life.  We bowed our heads in sorrow at Yad Vashem.  We walked the lanes of the Old City, climbed Masada, floated in the Dead Sea, and picked fruit at a kibbutz.  I learned by heart the words of the sh’ma.  My first memories of Israel remain etched in my soul.


Put simply, the relationship between the U.S. and Israel is not just one between states.  It is between two peoples and the millions of intimate, personal connections that bind us.  Our relationship has deepened and grown through different presidents and prime ministers for nearly 70 years.


It was President Truman, a Democrat, who—just 11 minutes after David Ben-Gurion declared Israel’s independence—made the United States the first country to recognize the State of Israel.


It was President Nixon, a Republican, who made sure America stood with Israel as it fought for survival one terrible Yom Kippur, so that its people could declare am Yisrael Chai --“the people of Israel live.”


It was President Carter who helped Israel forge an historic peace with Egypt that endures to this day.  And, it was President Clinton and President George W. Bush who backed Israel as it took more brave steps for peace, and as it endured terrorist attacks from Hezbollah and Hamas.


The relationship between the United States and the State of Israel is not a partnership between individual leaders, or political parties.  It’s an alliance between two nations, rooted in the unbreakable friendship between our two peoples.  It is not negotiable.  And it never will be.


Our alliance grows l’dor va’dor, from generation to generation. That’s what counts.  That’s what we have to protect.  As John F. Kennedy said, back in 1960, “friendship for Israel is not a partisan matter.  It is a national commitment.”


No one knows this better than all of you.  For decades, AIPAC has built bipartisan support for America’s special relationship with Israel.  That’s why every President—from Harry Truman to Barack Obama—has begun from a fundamental, unshakable premise: strengthening the security of Israel is in the national interest of the United States of America.


President Obama’s commitment to Israel is deep and personal.  I know, because I see it every day.  I first saw it when I accompanied then-Senator Obama to Israel in 2008.  I saw it when he surveyed with horror the stacks of charred rockets that Hamas had fired on Israel, and when he walked through the hollowed out homes of Sderot.


That same year, President Obama came to this conference, still a senator, and he made a promise.  He said, “Israel’s security is sacrosanct.”  And, each day, over the past six years, President Obama has kept that promise.  The President is profoundly committed to ensuring that Israel is never alone.  That’s why, today, security cooperation between our countries is not just strong.  It’s stronger than it has ever been.  Both President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu have called it “unprecedented.”  And that’s the way it’s going to stay.


President Obama has met with Prime Minister Netanyahu more times than with almost any other world leader.  As national security advisor, I am in nearly constant communication with Yossi Cohen, my friend and my Israeli counterpart, who I am so pleased is here tonight.  Thank you, Yossi.  Together, we host the U.S.-Israel consultative group to ensure we’re working closely across the highest levels of our governments.  Our armed forces conduct extensive exercises together, and our military and intelligence leaders consult continually.


Under this Administration, in times of tight budgets, our security assistance to Israel has increased.  Since President Obama took office, the United States has provided Israel with more than $20 billion in foreign military financing.  Last year, we provided Israel with the largest package of security assistance ever.  That’s money well spent, because it goes directly to bolstering Israel’s ability to defend itself in a very tough neighborhood, to protecting Israeli citizens, and to strengthening a vital American ally.


We are maintaining Israel’s qualitative military edge with new defense technologies and access to the most advanced military equipment in the world.  President Obama is determined to ensure that Israel can defend itself, by itself.  So, when Israel receives the F-35 joint strike fighter next year, it will be the only nation in the Middle East with a fifth-generation aircraft.


Since 2009, we’ve invested hundreds of millions of dollars in developing and producing the David’s Sling missile defense program and the Arrow anti-missile system.  We’ve invested more than $1 billion dollars in the Iron Dome system.  When I visited Israel last May, I saw this technology first-hand at Palmachim air force base.  And, last summer, as Hamas’ terrorist rockets rained down on Israeli cities, the world saw how Iron Dome saved lives, literally, every day.


During the height of that conflict—with sirens wailing and Israeli civilians huddling in bomb shelters—the United States stood up for Israel’s right to defend itself against rocket and tunnel attacks, even as we worked with the Israeli government to find a diplomatic resolution to the conflict.  And, when the Israeli government made an urgent request for an additional $225 million to support Iron Dome’s batteries, President Obama’s response was immediate and clear: “Let’s do it.”  Within days, legislation was drafted, passed through Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support, and President Obama signed it into law.  At that critical moment, we replenished Israel’s arsenal of Iron Dome interceptor missiles.  That’s what it means to be an ally.





Our unwavering commitment to Israel’s lasting security is why we will also never give up on a just and comprehensive peace between Israelis and Palestinians.  It will require hard decisions, but the United States will remain a steadfast partner.  Like past administrations, Republican and Democratic, we believe that a truly lasting peace can only be forged by direct talks between the two parties.  Like past administrations, we are concerned by unilateral actions that erode trust or assault Israel’s legitimacy.  Like every administration, Republican and Democratic, since the Six Day War, we oppose Israeli settlement activity—and we oppose Palestinian steps that throw up further obstacles to peace, including actions against Israel at the International Criminal Court.  The only path to ensure Israel’s long-term security is to bring about a viable, sovereign Palestinian state living side-by-side in peace and security with a democratic, Jewish State of Israel.


Israel’s security—our mutual security—is also at the heart of one of President Obama’s most important foreign policy objectives: ensuring that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.  As President Obama has repeated many times: we are keeping all options on the table to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.  As he said in Jerusalem: “Iran must not get a nuclear weapon. This is not a danger that can be contained.”  And he added, “America will do what we must to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran.”


President Obama said it.  He meant it.  And those are his orders to us all.


That is still the way we see the danger of a nuclear Iran today.  Given Iran’s support for terrorism, the risk of a nuclear-arms race in the region, and the danger to the entire global non-proliferation regime, an Iran with a nuclear weapon would not just be a threat to Israel – it’s an unacceptable threat to the United States of America.


We understand the unique concerns of our Israeli friends and partners.  In Jerusalem, President Obama made plain: “when I consider Israel’s security, I also think about a people who have a living memory of the Holocaust, faced with the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iranian government that has called for Israel’s destruction.  It’s no wonder Israelis view this as an existential threat.  But this is not simply a challenge for Israel; it is a danger for the entire world, including the United States.”


I want to be very clear: a bad deal is worse than no deal.  And, if that is the choice, there will be no deal.


Negotiations continue.  And, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.  As of today, significant gaps remain between the international community and Iran.  I’m not going to get into details about ongoing negotiations – nor should sensitive details of an ongoing negotiation be discussed in public.  But, I do want to make five key points about our approach to the negotiation.


First, with the Joint Plan of Action, we have already succeeded in halting Iran’s nuclear program and rolling it back in key areas.  Let’s recall what has been achieved over the last year.  Iran is doing away with its existing stockpile of its most highly enriched uranium.  Iran has capped its stockpile of low enriched uranium.  Iran has not constructed additional enrichment facilities.  Iran has not installed or operated new centrifuges, including its next-generation models.  Iran has stopped construction at its potential plutonium reactor at Arak.  In short, Iran is further away from a nuclear weapon than it was a year ago—and that makes the world safer, including Israel.


Moreover, we’re not taking anything on trust.  What matters are Iran’s actions, not its words.  That’s why, as part of the Joint Plan of Action, we’ve insisted upon—and achieved—unprecedented access to Iran’s nuclear program.  Before the Joint Plan, inspections happened only every few weeks, sometimes every few months.  Today, the International Atomic Energy Agency has daily access at Iran’s key nuclear sites at Natanz and Fordow, verifying that Iran is meeting its commitments.  If I can paraphrase, President Reagan, with a twist, our approach is “distrust and verify.”


Second, we’ve kept the pressure on Iran.  I know this firsthand because, when I was U.N. ambassador, President Obama personally directed me to make sure that the Security Council’s sanctions had bite—and they do.  Today, even with limited sanctions relief, Iran’s economy remains isolated from the international finance system and cut off from the vast majority of its foreign currency reserves.  Iran’s oil exports have dropped almost 60 percent since 2012.  The rial has depreciated by more than 50 percent.  And, Iran’s overall GDP has shrunk by almost 10 percent.  All told, sanctions have deprived Iran of more than $200 billion in lost oil revenues.


But sanctions are a tool, not an end in themselves.  The question now, after the pressure that we and our partners have brought to bear, is whether we can verify that Iran cannot pursue a nuclear weapon.  The question now is whether we can achieve a comprehensive deal.  A good deal.


This is my third point—a good deal is one that would verifiably cut off every pathway for Iran to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon.  Every single one.


Any deal must prevent Iran from developing weapons-grade plutonium at Arak, or anywhere else.


Any deal must prevent Iran from enriching uranium at its nuclear facility at Fordow—a site we uncovered buried deep underground and revealed to the world in 2009.



Any deal must increase the time it takes Iran to reach breakout capacity—the time it would take to produce a single bomb’s worth of weapons-grade uranium.  Today, experts suggest Iran’s breakout window is just two to three months.  We seek to extend that to at least one year.


Any deal must ensure frequent and intrusive inspections at Iran’s nuclear sites—including the uranium mills that produce the material fed into Iran’s enrichment and conversion facilities—to create a multi-layered transparency regime that provides the international community with the confidence it demands.  That’s the best way to prevent Iran from pursuing a covert path to a nuclear weapon—to stop Iran from working toward a bomb in secret.


Any deal must address the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program.  And, going forward, we will not accept a deal that fails to provide the access we need to ensure that Iran’s program is peaceful.


And, any deal must last more than a decade—with additional provisions ensuring greater transparency into Iran’s program for an even longer period of time.


That’s what we’re working toward—a good, long-term, comprehensive deal that verifiably prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.


This brings me to my fourth point —we cannot let a totally unachievable ideal stand in the way of a good deal.  I know that some of you will be urging Congress to insist that Iran forego its domestic enrichment capacity entirely.  But, as desirable as that would be, it is neither realistic nor achievable.  Even our closest international partners in the P5+1 do not support denying Iran the ability ever to pursue peaceful nuclear energy.  If that is our goal, our partners will abandon us, undermining the sanctions we have imposed so effectively together.  Simply put, that is not a viable negotiating position.  Nor is it even attainable.  The plain fact is, no one can make Iran unlearn the scientific and nuclear expertise it already possesses.


We must also understand what will happen if these negotiations collapse. I know that some argue we should just impose sanctions and walk away.  But let’s remember that sanctions have never stopped Iran from advancing its program.  So here’s what’s likely to happen without a deal.  Iran will install and operate advanced centrifuges.  Iran will seek to fuel its reactor in Arak.  Iran will rebuild its uranium stockpile.  And, we'll lose the unprecedented inspections and transparency we have today.


Congress has played a hugely important role in helping to build our sanctions on Iran, but they shouldn’t play the spoiler now.  Additional sanctions or restrictive legislation enacted during the negotiation would blow up the talks, divide the international community, and cause the United States to be blamed for the failure to reach a deal—putting us in a much weaker position and endangering the sanctions regime itself.  Meanwhile, the Iranians are well aware that if they walk away from a deal, Congress will pass new sanctions immediately—and President Obama will support them.


So, if Iran refuses to resolve this matter diplomatically—and is clearly to blame for that failure—its isolation will only increase.  The costs will continue to grow.


Finally, I know that some question a deal of any duration.  But, it has always been clear that the pursuit of an agreement of indefinite duration would result in no agreement at all.  The question is, what is the best way to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon?  A deal that extends for a decade or more would accomplish this goal better than any other course of action – longer, by far, than military strikes, which would only set back Iran’s program for a fraction of the time.  And, at the end of any deal, Iran would still be required to offer comprehensive access to its nuclear facilities and to provide the international community the assurance that it was not pursuing nuclear weapons.  And, if it failed to do so, we would have the ability to make our own decisions about how to move forward, just as we do today.  There’s simply no alternative that prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon better—or longer—than the type of deal we seek.


We can always bring consequences to bear for the sake of our shared security—harsh consequences.  But, precisely because this is such a serious issue, we must weigh the different options before us and choose the best one.  Sound bites won’t stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.  Strong diplomacy – backed by pressure – can.  And, if diplomacy fails, let’s make it clear to the world that it is Iran’s responsibility.


One final word on Iran: even if we succeed in neutralizing the nuclear threat from Iran, we will still face other threats—Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism, its gross violations of human rights, its efforts to destabilize neighboring states, its support for Assad and Hamas and Hezbollah, its intolerable threats against Israel.  Our sanctions against Iran on these issues will remain in place.  We will continue to counter Iran and the full range of threats it poses.  Tehran must understand—the United States will never, ever waver in the defense of our security or the security of our allies and partners, including Israel.


The bottom line is simple: we have Israel’s back, come hell or high water—and I’ve been right there with you all through some pretty high waters.  I was proud to fight again and again for Israel’s security and its basic legitimacy at the United Nations – from leading the charge against the deeply flawed Goldstone report to casting this administration’s only veto in the Security Council to block a counter-productive resolution.


As Ambassador Power described to you this morning, when it comes to combating the shameful bias against Israel at the U.N., Israel has no better friend than the United States.  Last March, we were the only ‘no’ vote in the Human Rights Council against anti-Israel measures five separate times.  Earlier today, Secretary Kerry told the Human Rights Council in Geneva, point blank, that its obsession with Israel risks undermining the credibility of the entire organization.  And last month, with Israel and the European Union, the U.S. organized the first U.N. General Assembly meeting to combat anti-Semitism.



No country is immune from criticism—take it from a former U.N. Ambassador.  But when criticism singles out one country unfairly, bitterly, viciously, over and over—that’s just wrong, and we all know it.  When one democracy’s legitimacy is attacked, over and over, uniquely among the U.N.’s member states, that’s ugly, and we all know it.  And, when anti-Semitism rears its head around the world, when Jews at a kosher supermarket in Paris are singled out and murdered by terrorists, when synagogues are attacked and cemeteries defaced, we have to call it by name.  It’s hate.  It’s anti-Semitism.  It reminds us of the most terrible chapters of human history.  It has no place in a civilized world, and we have to fight it.


These are big challenges.  But the United States and Israel have mastered plenty of big challenges before.  Israel and the United States are sister democracies built on the bedrock value that we are all created b’tzelem elokim—in the image of God.  And, like the Psalm says, how good it is when we sit in brotherhood together.  But God calls us to do more than sit.  God calls us to stand up.  To act.


This weekend, President Obama will travel to Selma, Alabama, to mark the 50th anniversary of the historic marches there.  He’ll pay tribute to those brave souls who took enormous risks for civil rights, including Jews and rabbis from across the country—from St. Louis and San Francisco; the Northeast and the Deep South.  They faced tear gas and billy clubs, Torahs in hand.  They were jailed.  They conducted Shabbat services behind bars, and they sang “Adon Olam” to the tune of “We Shall Overcome.”  They broke the fast of Esther in prison.  They even started a trend.  Some black marchers, moved by the solidarity of their Jewish brethren, started wearing yarmulkes—they called them “freedom caps.”


As you recalled last night, one of those on the front lines in Selma was the great teacher, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel.  After marching across the Edmund Pettus Bridge with Dr. King, he reflected, “our legs uttered songs.  Even without words, our march was worship.”  Our march was our worship.


The Jewish community amplified the rightness and the urgency of the civil rights movement with its own unassailable moral compass—guided by the basic principle that people should be free in their own land.  And, I stand before you knowing that I and many others would not be where we are today without all those who fought for equal rights – African Americans and white Americans, including so many Jewish Americans.  As we mark that Selma anniversary, as we gather here to celebrate an improbable dream that grew into the great State of Israel, we remember what we can accomplish together, when we’re at our best.


In a spirit of brotherhood, we have overcome so many trials to reach where we are—as nations, as peoples.  In a spirit of brotherhood, inspired by all those who marched and struggled and sacrificed before us, let us continue the work.  Let us never succumb to hopelessness or cynicism, to division or despair.  Let our legs utter songs, and let our hands reach out together. That is how we fulfill our common commitment to mend our imperfect world, to do the holy work of tikkun olam.  And, as we do, at home and around the world, the United States will always stand with our Israeli friends and allies.


That’s our enduring commitment.  That’s our sacred duty.  That’s the hope and the future for our children.  So, let us keep marching arm in arm together.


Thank you.