U.S. STRATEGIC COMMANDER DISCUSSES CHALLENGES

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

Stratcom Chief Outlines Deterrence Challenges

By Terri Moon Cronk

DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, July 11, 2014 – Strategic deterrence in the 21st century is complicated, challenging and vastly different from that of the Cold War, the commander of U.S. Strategic Command said yesterday.

Navy Adm. Cecil D. Haney said extremist organizations, significant regional unrest, protracted conflicts, budgetary stresses and competition for natural resources could have strategic implications for the United States and the world.
“While terrorism remains the most direct threat to our nation -- particularly weapons of mass destruction -- we are also dealing in advances in state and nonstate military capabilities across air, sea, land and space domains, and cyber security,” the admiral told an audience at the State Department’s George Marshall Conference Center.

Some nations continue to invest in long-term modernization with strategic capabilities, he added, some are replacing their older systems, while others are modernizing based on their perceived need in the geopolitical situation. He cited India, Pakistan, Russia, Iran, North Korea and China as examples of nations developing modern military capabilities.

When Russia recently invaded Ukraine and overtook Crimea, Haney said, Russian troops also exercised “their strategic ability, not just their conventional capabilities.” On May 8, he said, “Russia conducted a major strategic force exercise involving significant nuclear forces and associated command control six months from the last one. And I don’t mean just moving it around. I mean demonstrating firing each part of their associated arsenal.”

While adversarial threats grow against the United States, the nation still retains the strategic advantage, he said, although potential adversaries are moving quickly in their development of destructive capabilities.

“While we have improved and increased our cyberspace capabilities, the worldwide threat is growing in sophistication in a number of state and nonstate actors,” he said. “As we monitor developments, we must not lose sight of nation states and non-nation-state actors [that] continue to have goals of obtaining proliferation,” Haney said. “As long as these threats remain, so too does the value of our strategic capabilities to deter these threats.”

The Stratcom commander emphasized the importance of the U.S. nuclear triad.
“Each element of the nuclear triad has unique and complementary attributes in strategic deterrence,” Haney said. “As we look at ballistic missiles and air response capabilities to the survivable leg of our submarine capability to the heavy bombers, the real key is integration of all three that make a difference in the deterrence equation for any country that would want to take us on. And it works.”
Haney pointed out that while the United States has sought to have a world free of nuclear weapons, those weapons still have a role in strategic deterrence and in the foundational force, “until we can get rid of them.”

“We must continue to lean forward with arms-control agreements while continuing to provide assurance and deterrence,” he said. “As a nation, we must create strategies and policies to deal with this diverse, multidisciplinary-problem world we live in, because we have to deliver strategic stability and effective solutions in a conscious manner, given today’s fiscal environment.”

Haney urged students in the audience to challenge traditional thinking.

“Successful 21st-century strategic deterrence lies in our understanding that this is not about a Cold War approach,” he said. “It’s about understanding that deterrence is more than nuclear.”

And while U.S. nuclear weapons are just as salient today as in the past, Haney said, “it’s understanding that what our adversaries are willing to risk requires deep understanding.”

PRESIDENT OBAMA, AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER ABBOT MAKE REMARKS AFTER MEETING

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister Abbott of Australia After Bilateral Meeting

Oval Office

12:16 P.M. EDT

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, it’s wonderful to have an opportunity to visit with Prime Minister Abbott.  We had a chance to meet when I had the great honor of addressing the Australian Parliament.  And we are so glad to be able to return the favor in the Prime Minister’s first visit here to the Oval Office.

We don’t have a better friend in the world, as well as the Asia Pacific region, than Australia.  They are a treaty ally.  We cooperate on a whole range of issues.  Historically, there hasn’t been a fight that the United States was in that Australia wasn’t standing shoulder to shoulder with us.  And most recently, in Afghanistan, Australian troops have made enormous contributions and made enormous sacrifices, and we’re very grateful to them for that.

We had the opportunity this morning to discuss a wide range of issues, many of them focused on the importance of the Asia Pacific region.  We discussed the security cooperation that is continuing to deepen between our two nations as treaty allies.  In addition to the Marines that are now in Darwin and the rotations that have been established, we actually have arrived at additional agreements around force postures that will enhance the bilateral cooperation between our militaries and give us additional reach throughout this very important part of the world.  And we’re grateful for the cooperation there.

I should note that Australia, under the Prime Minister’s leadership, is increasing its defense budget, even under tough times, recognizing that we all have to make sure that we’re doing our fair share to help maintain global order and security.

We had an opportunity to discuss the strong commercial ties between our two countries.  And both of us have been very invested in trying to bring the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the TPP, to a successful outcome.  Negotiations continue, but Australia has been a very constructive partner in that process, and we both agree that not only can this agreement help to bring about jobs and growth for our respective populations, but it will also help establish the kinds of norms and free market principles throughout the region that will be important for our long-term prosperity.

We had an opportunity to discuss the work that we try to do in the region with organizations like ASEAN to maintain basic rules of the road when it comes to maritime issues, the South China Sea.  Obviously, both the United States and Australia have enormous trade relationships with China, and we both agree that it’s important to continue to see China prosper and rise.  But what’s also important is that as China emerges as this great world power that it also is helping to reinforce and abide by basic international law and norms.

And we had an opportunity to discuss some of the hotspots and international concerns that are on the front page of the papers over the last several weeks and months.  I shared with him my views after my trip to Europe about the situation in Ukraine and the possibility of still resolving that issue in a diplomatic fashion, but thanked the Australians for joining with us and being firm with the Russians about their need to abide by international law and the application of sanctions and other consequences when they do not.

We discussed the situation in the Middle East, and obviously the concerns that we have around Iraq and Syria.  Both our countries are potentially threatened by jihadists and freedom fighters, as they call them, that are going into Syria, getting trained in terrorist tactics and then potentially coming back to our countries and could end up being a significant threat to our homeland, as well.

And we also had an opportunity to talk about North Korea and the continuing threat there and the importance for us to maintain vigilance, including additional coordination around protection from potential missile strikes from North Korea.

Finally, I indicated to the Prime Minister that I’m very much looking forward to visiting Australia -- one of my favorite countries to visit -- for the G20.  And I assured him that we want to cooperate in any ways that we can to ensure that Australia’s renowned hospitality is also coupled with a very productive set of G20 meetings to talk global growth. 

So I think that the Prime Minister and I share a whole range of concerns, but we also see a whole range of opportunities out there for increased cooperation.  And I’m very glad that he’s had the chance to come by today and have a very productive meeting. 

So thank you, Tony.

PRIME MINISTER ABBOTT:  Well, thank you so much, Barack.  This has been a really full and thorough engagement over the last hour or so.  Obviously, I’m here to thank the United States for its deepening engagement in our region.  I’m here to further entrench our security and our economic cooperation.  I’m here to celebrate the extraordinary friendship between the Australian and the American peoples.  And I’m thrilled to have you coming to the G20 in November, because we have a very important job in November in Brisbane to accelerate economic growth around the world so that we have more prosperity and more jobs.

Obviously, right now, there are a whole range of security issues which the United States is leading on and where Australia is doing our part to secure the freedom and the safety of the world and its citizens.  I want to assure the President that Australia will be an utterly dependable ally of the United States.  The United States has had to bear many burdens, many burdens.  The United States has paid a very high price to secure freedom and prosperity for many countries, not just itself.  And the United States should never have to do all that work on its own. 

So it’s been a terrific discussion.  And I think that many good things will come from this meeting today.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Thank you, Tony.  I’m going to take just one question.  Nedra. 

Q    Mr. President, are you considering drone strikes or any sort of action to stop the insurgence in Iraq?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, this is an area that we’ve been watching with a lot of concern not just over the last couple of days but over the last several months, and we’ve been in close consultation with the Iraqi government.  Over the last year, we have been providing them additional assistance to try to address the problems that they have in Anbar, in the northwestern portions of the country, as well as the Iraqi and Syrian border.  That includes, in some cases, military equipment.  It includes intelligence assistance.  It includes a whole host of issues.

But what we’ve seen over the last couple of days indicates the degree to which Iraq is going to need more help.  It’s going to need more help from us, and it’s going to need more help from the international community. 

So my team is working around the clock to identify how we can provide the most effective assistance to them.  I don’t rule out anything, because we do have a stake in making sure that these jihadists are not getting a permanent foothold in either Iraq or Syria, for that matter. 

Part of the challenge -- and I’ve said this directly to Prime Minister Maliki, and Vice President Biden has said this in his very frequent interactions with the Iraqi government -- is that the politics of Shia and Sunni inside of Iraq, as well as the Kurds, is either going to be a help in dealing with this jihadist situation, or it’s going to be a hindrance.  And frankly, over the last several years, we have not seen the kind of trust and cooperation develop between moderate Sunni and Shia leaders inside of Iraq, and that accounts in part for some of the weakness of the state, and that then carries over into their military capacity.

So I think it’s fair to say that in our consultations with the Iraqis there will be some short-term, immediate things that need to be done militarily, and our national security team is looking at all the options.  But this should be also a wakeup call for the Iraqi government.  There has to be a political component to this so that Sunni and Shia who care about building a functioning state that can bring about security and prosperity to all people inside of Iraq come together and work diligently against these extremists.  And that is going to require concessions on the part of both Shia and Sunni that we haven’t seen so far. 

The last point I’ll make -- what’s happened over the last couple of days I think underscores the importance of the point that I made at my West Point speech:  the need for us to have a more robust regional approach to partnering and training partner countries throughout the Middle East and North Africa.  We’re not going to be able to be everywhere all the time, but what we can do is to make sure that we are consistently helping to finance, train, advise military forces with partner countries, including Iraq, that have the capacity to maintain their own security.  And that is a long and laborious process, but it’s one that we need to get started. 

That’s part of what the Counterterrorism Partnership Fund that I am going to be calling for Congress to help finance is all about, giving us the capacity to extend our reach without sending U.S. troops to play Whac-A-Mole wherever there ends up being a problem in a particular country.  That’s going to be more effective.  It’s going to be more legitimate in the eyes of people in the region, as well as the international community.  But it’s going to take time for us to build it.  In the short term, we have to deal with what clearly is an emergency situation in Iraq.

PRIME MINISTER ABBOTT:  Perhaps, Barack, I might take one question.

Q    Mr. President, just on that point you made there about limitations of American power -- what would it take for militarization, be it in the Middle East, be it in the Asia Pacific region?  Where is the line drawn?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I gave a very long speech about all this, so I probably would refer you to that as opposed to repeating it.  But the basic principle obviously is that we, like all nations, are prepared to take military action whenever our national security is threatened.  Where the issues have to do with the broader international order -- humanitarian concerns, concerns around rights to navigation, concerns around our ability to deal with instability or fragile states or failed states, and the consequences for populations there and refugee flows -- those sorts of international issues, wherever we can, our preference should be to partner with other countries.  We’re going to be more effective if we can work with other nations.

Q    What does --

THE PRESIDENT:  And that’s why -- well, that’s part of where Australia is so important to us.  There are a handful of countries in the world that we always know we can count on, not just because they share our values, but we know we can count on them because they’ve got real capacity.  Australia is one of those countries.  We share foundational values about liberal democracies and human rights, and a world view that’s governed by international law and norms.  And Aussies know how to fight, and I like having them in a foxhole if we’re in trouble.  So I can’t think of a better partner.  

Part of our task now in a world where it’s less likely that any particular nation attacks us or our treaty allies directly, but rather more typically that you have disorder, asymmetric threats, terrorist organizations -- all of which can be extraordinarily disruptive and damaging, but aren’t the traditional types of war that so often we’ve been equipped to fight -- it becomes that much more important for us to start building new partners who aren’t going to be as capable as the Australians, aren’t going to be as capable as our own troops.  And that’s going to take some time.  It’s going to take some resources, but we need to start now.  We’ve learned some lessons over the last decade and we need to start applying them. 

Thank you, everybody.

END

U.S.-JAPAN JOINT STATEMENT ON ASIA-PACIFIC FUTURE

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

U.S.-Japan Joint Statement: The United States and Japan: Shaping the Future of the Asia-Pacific and Beyond

The relationship between the United States of America and Japan is founded on mutual trust, a common vision for a rules-based international order, a shared commitment to upholding democratic values and promoting open markets, and deep cultural and people-to-people ties. The U.S.-Japan Alliance is the cornerstone for regional peace and security as well as a platform for global cooperation.  The U.S. rebalance to the Asia-Pacific and Japan’s policy of “Proactive Contribution to Peace” based on the principle of international cooperation both contribute to the Alliance playing a leading role in ensuring a peaceful and prosperous Asia-Pacific.  

Close U.S.-Japan cooperation is essential in managing and responding to long-standing and emerging threats and challenges in Asia and around the world.  Recent events underscore the importance of coordinated action to uphold regional and global rules and norms.  At the March 25 Trilateral Summit in The Hague, the leaders of the United States, Japan, and the Republic of Korea urged North Korea to take concrete actions to meet its international obligations on nuclear and missile issues and to address, without delay, humanitarian concerns, including the abductions issue.  In concert with our G-7 partners, the United States and Japan have condemned Russia over its illegal attempt to annex Crimea and are consulting closely on further measures against Russia over its deplorable conduct, while strongly urging Russia to deescalate tensions in Ukraine.  Together, we are taking concrete steps to support Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and economic stability.  The United States and Japan are working collaboratively to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue, support Middle East peace efforts, contribute to Afghan reconstruction, and improve the situation in Syria, including through the disposal of its chemical stockpiles.  The United States and Japan recognize that China can play an important role in addressing all of these challenges, and both countries reaffirm their interest in building a productive and constructive relationship with China. 

The United States and Japan, as maritime nations with global trade networks that depend on open seas, underscore the importance of maintaining a maritime order based upon respect for international law, including the freedom of navigation and overflight.  The United States and Japan share strong concern over recent actions that have raised tensions in the East China Sea and South China Sea, such as the uncoordinated declaration of an Air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea.  Our two countries oppose any attempt to assert territorial or maritime claims through the use of intimidation, coercion or force.  The United States and Japan urge the establishment of confidence-building measures among governments and militaries in the region to address these tensions.  In the South China Sea, we call on countries concerned to clarify the basis of their maritime claims in accordance with international law.  We support efforts for the early establishment of an effective Code of Conduct as a way to reduce the risk of an unintended incident.  The United States and Japan fully support the use of diplomatic and legal means, including international arbitration, to settle maritime disputes in the South China Sea. 

Given the common security challenges our two countries face, the United States and Japan are strengthening and modernizing our security alliance as directed by the Security Consultative Committee, including through the revision of the Guidelines for U.S.-Japan Defense Cooperation.  The United States has deployed its most advanced military assets to Japan and provides all necessary capabilities to meet its commitments under the U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security.  These commitments extend to all the territories under the administration of Japan, including the Senkaku Islands.  In that context, the United States opposes any unilateral action that seeks to undermine Japan’s administration of the Senkaku Islands. The United States appreciates Japan’s establishment of a National Security Council and creation of a legal framework for information security that will facilitate enhanced policy and intelligence coordination between the two countries.  The United States welcomes and supports Japan’s consideration of the matter of exercising the right of collective self-defense.  The United States and Japan reaffirmed the importance of the U.S. extended deterrence to maintain regional security.  The United States and Japan are also making sustained progress towards realizing a geographically distributed, operationally resilient and politically sustainable U.S. force posture in the Asia Pacific, including the development of Guam as a strategic hub.  The early relocation of Futenma Marine Corps Air Station to Camp Schwab and consolidation of bases in Okinawa will ensure a long-term sustainable presence for U.S. forces.  In this context, we reaffirm our commitment to reducing the impact of U.S. forces on Okinawa. 

The United States and Japan also coordinate closely in multilateral financial and economic fora to advance trade liberalization and promote economic growth.  Our joint efforts are grounded in support for an international economic system that is free, open, and transparent, and embraces innovation.  In order to further enhance economic growth, expand regional trade and investment, and strengthen the rules-based trading system, the United States and Japan are committed to taking the bold steps necessary to complete a high-standard, ambitious, comprehensive  Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement.  Today, we have identified a path forward on important bilateral TPP issues. This marks a key milestone in the TPP negotiations and will inject fresh momentum into the broader talks. We now call upon all TPP partners to move as soon as possible to take the necessary steps to conclude the agreement.  Even with this step forward, there is still much work to be done to conclude TPP.

We also support Japan’s Chairmanship in the OECD Ministerial Council Meeting on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of its accession to the OECD and support China’s hosting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and Australia’s hosting of the G20 this year.  We are working together in the APEC and the G20 on the promotion of the role of women, which is an important domestic and foreign policy priority for both countries.  Through the Equal Futures Partnership and upcoming events such as the White House Summit on Working Families and Japan’s international symposium on women’s empowerment, the two countries are committed to ensuring women’s full participation in society.  Furthermore, the United States and Japan continue to be world leaders in high-technology, where our collaboration is expanding the frontiers of robotics, space, and medical science. 

The United States and Japan view energy security as vital to prosperity and stability.  Both sides welcomed the prospect of U.S. LNG exports in the future since additional global supplies will benefit Japan and other strategic partners.  The United States welcomed Japan’s new Strategic Energy Plan, which includes global, peaceful and safe use of nuclear energy and acceleration of the introduction of renewable energy.  Both countries are working together to promote the development of clean energy, including by facilitating business cooperation and deepening civil nuclear cooperation.  These steps are part of a broader effort to address the urgent challenge of global climate change.  Both countries plan to put forward robust post-2020 nationally determined contributions, building on decisions taken at the 19^th Conference of the Parties (COP-19) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in order to promote the adoption of a protocol, another legal instrument, or an agreed outcome with legal force under the UNFCCC applicable to all Parties at COP-21 in Paris in December 2015.  We will continue to work with other countries on complementary initiatives to encourage reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. 

The United States and Japan are committed to promoting peace, stability, and economic growth throughout the world, including in Africa.  Through our recently launched senior-level U.S.-Japan Development Dialogue, we are expanding our development cooperation in these areas.  Furthermore, the United States and Japan are continuing bilateral policy coordination to address other global challenges and promote our common agenda, such as women’s empowerment, human security, humanitarian assistance, disaster risk reduction, the post-2015 development agenda, global health, climate change, counter-terrorism and transnational organized crime, cyber policy, the goal of a world without nuclear weapons, nuclear security, and cooperation at the United Nations, including in peacekeeping.  The United States looks forward to a reformed UN Security Council that includes Japan as a permanent member.  Our two countries are continuing to cooperate in the field of disaster risk management based on the experience of the Great East Japan Earthquake. 

The United States and Japan renew our commitment to deepening diplomatic, economic, and security cooperation with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), recognizing the importance of ASEAN unity and centrality to regional security and prosperity.  We are coordinating closely to support ASEAN and its affiliated fora as its members seek to build a regional economic community and address trans-border challenges, including cybersecurity and cybercrime.  In this context, the two countries view the East Asia Summit as the premier political and security forum in the region.  We support the Asian Development Bank work to address the region’s infrastructure and connectivity needs.  The United States and Japan are collaborating to assist Southeast Asian littoral states in building maritime domain awareness and other capacities for maritime safety and security so that they can better enforce law, combat illicit trafficking and weapons proliferation, and protect marine resources.  The robust U.S. and Japanese civilian and military response to Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines demonstrated our ability to collectively assist the region in disaster relief and risk reduction. 

To achieve our shared objectives of promoting peace and economic prosperity in the Asia-Pacific and around the globe, the United States and Japan are strengthening trilateral cooperation with like-minded partners, including the Republic of Korea, Australia, and India. 

The United States and Japan reaffirm our long-standing and indispensable partnership in shaping the future of the Asia-Pacific and beyond through close cooperation and collaboration.

ANNEX:  Leaders Statement on U.S.-Japan Bilateral Exchanges

# # #

  ANNEX:  Leaders Statement on U.S.-Japan Bilateral Exchanges

 Broad people-to-people exchange between Japan and the United States has been a key pillar of our Alliance since its inception.  Close ties and shared values between the people of the United States and the people of Japan form the foundation of the global partnership between our nations.

To ensure the future strength of the U.S.-Japan relationship, the two governments share the goal, established by the U.S.-Japan Conference on Cultural and Educational Interchange (CULCON), of doubling two-way student exchange by the year 2020.

Recognizing that people-to-people exchange is an irreplaceable investment in the future of the Alliance, President Obama and Prime Minister Abe announced their intent to create a new bilateral exchange program that would enable Japanese youth to visit the United States, enhance their English language abilities, and develop professional skills through internship opportunities.  The leaders also intend to explore internship opportunities for U.S. youth in Japan.  

Furthermore, Japan is going to send 6,000 Japanese students to the United States in fiscal year 2014 through student exchange support programs, including public-private partnerships such as the TOBITATE! Young Ambassador Program, further contributing to reaching our shared goal established by CULCON.  Japan and the United States also plan to explore new avenues for exchange, including support for Japanese researchers and programs linking the next generation of Japanese and U.S. leaders and friends. 

The Japanese government’s program inviting Japanese-American leaders to Japan has promoted broad understanding and support for the U.S.-Japan Alliance.  Building on this successful effort, Japan intends to broaden the scope of this initiative in fiscal year 2014 to further deepen mutual understanding. 

The Japanese government’s ongoing KAKEHASHI Project, under which a total of 4,600 young Japanese and U.S. citizens are expected to visit each other’s countries in exchange programs, has made a significant contribution to fostering mutual understanding.  In addition, following the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, the U.S. government and the U.S.-Japan Council launched the TOMODACHI Initiative, a path-breaking public-private partnership that engages the private sector in promoting U.S.-Japan youth exchange.  To date, with the support of over eighty U.S. and Japanese companies, organizations, and individuals, more than 2,300 Japanese and U.S. youth have participated in TOMODACHI exchange programs. 

These initiatives build on established programs, such as the binational Fulbright Program, which has benefited nearly 10,000 Japanese and U.S. students and scholars over more than 60 years; the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) Program; the Student Exchange Support Program and the Japanese Government Scholarship provided by the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology; the National Science Foundation’s Summer Institutes in Japan, funded in cooperation with the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; the Japan-U.S. Training Exchange Program for English Language Teachers (JUSTE); and the Mansfield Fellowship Program.  These programs have for years expanded and strengthened people-to-people connections between our countries. 

These government programs are complemented by the many non-governmental programs linking the people of our two countries, such as the Japan-America Societies, the U.S.-Japan Council, and the more than 400 sister-city and sister-state and prefecture relationships between Japan and the United States.  Such programs are indispensable, as are the dozens of academic associations, university linkages, and privately-funded exchanges, for example the Crown Prince Akihito Scholarship; the United States-Japan Bridging Foundation Scholarships, the Grew Bancroft Scholarship; and the Japan-America Student Conference, which celebrates its 80^th anniversary this year.  Japan and the United States aim to further encourage new and expanded non-governmental dialogues to bring together opinion leaders from both nations. 

Symbolizing the grassroots friendship uniting our nations, the U.S. government and a range of private sector partners have created the Friendship Blossoms Initiative, which is currently planting 3,000 American dogwood trees throughout Japan on behalf of the people of the United States, to reciprocate the City of Tokyo’s gift of 3,000 flowering cherry trees to Washington, DC in 1912.  The 1912 gift from Japan is celebrated each year during the National Cherry Blossom Festival, an iconic spring event in Washington, D.C. 

The President and Prime Minister welcomed the invigoration of exchanges between the U.S. Congress and the Diet of Japan, praising the work of the U.S.-Japan Caucus and the Congressional Study Group on Japan in the United States Congress, the Japan-U.S. Parliamentary Friendship League in the Diet of Japan, as well as the U.S.-Japan Legislative Exchange Program and the Japan-U.S. Senate Inter-parliamentary Conference.  Nearly 200 Diet Members visited the United States in fiscal year 2013, and the number of Members of Congress visiting Japan in 2013 more than doubled over the previous year and continues to increase in 2014. 

Finally, the United States and Japan note that millions of Japanese and U.S. citizens visit each other’s country every year to visit family and friends, enjoy tourist sites and cultural experiences, and conduct the business transactions that underpin the tight economic relationship between two of the world’s largest economies.  To facilitate this travel, the United States and Japan plan to expedite work to establish a reciprocal arrangement, including through Japan’s participation in the U.S. Global Entry program, to streamline border formalities for trusted travelers from both our countries, and to make travel between the United States and Japan easier, faster and more secure. 

DEFENSE COOPERATION DISCUSSED AT PENTAGON BY U.S., SOUTH KOREA AND JAPAN

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

U.S., Japan, South Korea Meet on Defense Cooperation

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 18, 2014 – The United States, Japan and the South Korea held what officials called “a productive, substantial meeting” at the Pentagon to promote trilateral defense cooperation.

The two days of meetings, which wrapped up today, grew out of the trilateral summit hosted by President Barack Obama in The Hague on March 25.
In a joint statement summarizing the meeting, officials said the three nations reaffirmed that they will not accept North Korea as a nuclear-armed state and that they agreed to coordinate closely to deter North Korean provocations.
The three countries also reaffirmed the necessity for a coordinated response and close cooperation with the international community with respect to the threat to international security posed by the North Korea's nuclear, ballistic missile, and proliferation programs, the statement said.

In addition, the three countries shared the understanding of the importance of cooperating on nontraditional security issues such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief and counterpiracy, and discussed additional ways to cooperate in these areas.

Mark Lippert, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s chief of staff; Yoo Jeh-seung, deputy minister for policy in South Korea’s Defense Ministry; and Hideshi Tokuchi, director-general of the Japanese Defense Ministry's Defense Policy Bureau, headed the delegations for the meetings.

DEFENSE SECRETARY HAGEL TOUTS IMPORTANCE OF U.S.-JAPAN PARTNERSHIP

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel waves to the pilots of a UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter after landing at Hardy Barracks in Tokyo, April 5, 2014. Hagel met with troops at Yokota Air Base earlier in the day and will continue his three-day stay in Japan, meeting with the Japanese prime minister and the defense and foreign ministers. DOD Photo by Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo  

FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Hagel: U.S.-Japan Partnership Critical to Regional Security
By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service

TOKYO, April 5, 2014 – Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel landed in Japan today as part of his fourth official trip to the Asia-Pacific region to reassure the nation’s leaders that the U.S.-Japan relationship is one of America’s strongest partnerships, friendships and treaty relationships.

This evening Hagel met with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. According to Pentagon Press Secretary Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby, the secretary thanked Abe for his leadership and for helping the two militaries maintain a strong relationship.
Hagel expressed his firm commitment to the U.S.-Japan treaty of mutual cooperation and security and to working closely with the leadership of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces to improve the nations’ collective capabilities, Kirby said.

The leaders discussed a range of regional security issues, including recent provocations by North Korea, Chinese maritime claims and military activities, and the need for a continued focus on dialogue and cooperation among the United States, Japan and South Korea.

Hagel affirmed strong U.S. support for Japanese efforts at defense reform and thanked Abe for supporting the Japanese government last December in securing a landfill permit for the Futenma replacement facility.

Tomorrow, Hagel will meet with Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera, Foreign Affairs Minister Fumio Kishida and U.S. Ambassador to Japan Caroline Kennedy.
“There are challenges in this part of the world that include Japan’s future,” the defense secretary told reporters traveling with him.

“I’m visiting Japan … not just [to] reconnect and recommit U.S. efforts but to build on the recent meeting President {Barack] Obama had with Prime Minister Abe and South Korean President Park [Geun-hye],” Hagel said, “as we look at new opportunities and challenges in this part of the world.”

He added, “The Japanese-American partnership is a very critical anchor to peace and stability and security in this part of the world, so I look forward to conversations here in the next couple of days with the senior leaders of Japan.”
Even before he landed in Tokyo, Hagel initiated and hosted in Honolulu an informal meeting of defense ministers of the 10 countries that make up the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN. The meeting was the first ever held in the United States.

“The ASEAN defense ministers conference was an important first step in what I’m doing here in the region because it represented the initial effort we have been working on as we continue to collaborate and coordinate with and strengthen our relationships in the Asia-Pacific,” Hagel said.

As President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John F. Kerry and Hagel himself have said many times, ASEAN is an important organization now and will continue to be important, the secretary said, because it represents the collective interests of the region.

ASEAN member countries are Burma, Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

“When you add to [this] the ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting-Plus members [which consists of the 10 ASEAN defense ministers and defense ministers from the United States, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, New Zealand and Russia] … that’s a significant representation of this part of the world,” Hagel observed.
The U.S. strategy of rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific region “is very much based on these relationships and all their variances and dimensions,” the secretary said, “so to start [his fourth trip to the region in less than 12 months] spending a couple of days with ASEAN members was important.”

Hagel landed here today at Yokota Air Base, whose host unit is the 374th Airlift Wing, and his first visit was with 200 U.S. service members and Japanese Self-Defense Forces troops.

In a hangar on a stage in front of giant flags of the United States and Japan, the secretary brought greetings from President Obama and thanked those from U.S. Forces Japan and their families for their service and sacrifice.
Hagel also thanked those from Japan’s Self-Defense Forces “for what you do for your country and for our partnership, and for helping keep peace and stability in this part of the world.”

In Hagel’s discussions with Japanese leaders, a senior defense official traveling with the secretary said Hagel will have an opportunity to maintain the positive forward motion initiated in Tokyo last fall during the historic Two Plus Two meeting he attended with Kerry.

That progress, the official said, involved work on the bilateral U.S.-Japan alliance to revise the defense guidelines, move forward with the realignment of U.S. military forces in Japan, and strengthen and orient the alliance to focus on 21st century challenges.

Hagel and the Japanese leaders also will discuss building a common understanding of the regional and global security environment.

“Here the secretary will … share perspectives with the Japanese prime minister and defense minister on what they’re seeing on the Korean Peninsula, in the East China Sea and in the South China Sea,” the official said, and conduct important alliance consultations on opportunities and challenges of the international security order.

The senior defense official said Hagel and Japanese officials also would discuss Japan’s relationships with other countries in the region.

“The president and Prime Minister Abe and South Korean President Park had a historic trilateral summit on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit at the Hague recently,” the official said, “and there will be an opportunity to continue underscoring the importance … we see in greater trilateral cooperation among the United States, Japan and South Korea, and the United States, Japan and Australia, and how to move those relationships forward.”

In Washington on April 17-18 the United States, South Korea and Japan will hold a sixth round of Defense Trilateral Talks, the official said, and in late April President Obama will visit Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and Malaysia.
\

DOD REPORTS SYRA SLOW TO TRANSPORT CHEMICAL MATERIALS FOR DESTRUCTION

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Syria Slow in Meeting Obligations, DOD Spokesman Says
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 27, 2014 – Chemical materials designated for destruction are slowly being transported for consolidation at the Syrian port of Latakia, and the United States is urging the Syrian government to accelerate this process, Defense Department spokesman Army Col. Steven Warren told reporters here today.

The U.S. vessel MV Cape Ray has been specially fitted to accommodate destruction of the Syrian chemical materials, and it arrived Feb. 13 in Rota, Spain, to stand by for the mission.

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons announced yesterday that the Syrian government had transported a fourth shipment of chemical materials to Latakia, Warren said. This shipment contained sulfur mustard, he added.
“Of note,” Warren said, “the materials in this shipment are the first which will ultimately be transloaded to the Cape Ray for follow-on destruction.”
The United States continues to urge the Syrian government to meet its obligation and accelerate efforts to deliver the entire declared stockpile to Latakia for transportation and destruction, Warren said. The plan for transloading the chemical weapons onto the Cape Ray, he added, further increase the need for Syria hasten its efforts.

“The plan is that there will be one transload onto the Cape Ray,” he said. “So we have to wait until all the chemicals are out of Syria and on the Danish or Norwegian ships. They’ll then be moved onto the Cape Ray … [and] then be destroyed. We are calling on the Syrians to accelerate their movement of these chemical weapons into the port of Latakia so we can get them all onto the Danish and Norwegian ships and transload them onto the Cape Ray.”

The Syrians, he noted, have obligations that they need to live up to. “These are international obligations, and I know they’ve submitted a plan for a 100-day long extension, and we find that unacceptable,” Warren said. “They have to live up to their obligation. They have to get those chemical weapons out of the country so we can destroy them.”

The DOD spokesman also provided observations on North Korean missile tests conducted yesterday, and the situation in Ukraine.

North Korea launched several short-range scud missiles late last night, Warren said. They impacted off North Korea’s east coast and didn’t appear to target anyone, he added.

“We view this as an unannounced weapons test we see somewhat regularly,” Warren said, noting two to four missiles were launched.
Meanwhile, Warren said, officials are monitoring developments in Ukraine closely. He affirmed America’s strong support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.

“We expect other nations to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and avoid provocative actions,” Warren said. “We expect Russia to be transparent about its activities, particularly its recently announced training exercise. We urge them not to take any steps that could be misinterpreted or lead to miscalculation during this delicate time.”

SECRETARY KERRY'S PRESS AVAILABILITY IN BEIJING, CHINA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Solo Press Availability in Beijing, China
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
JW Marriott Hotel
Beijing, China
February 14, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY: I know you all have been waiting a while, so my apologies. Our meetings ran a little longer than anticipated, and you’re patient, and I appreciate it very, very much.

It’s a pleasure for me to be back in Beijing, and particularly tonight with the Festival of the Lanterns and the start of the Lunar New Year, the Year of the Horse. And the Lunar New Year always, here and in other parts of this region, is an exciting time, a time of renewal, as it is for everybody, and a profound sense of optimism, I think, as we heard from the leadership throughout the day.

It’s an auspicious time to visit, and I want to thank all of the leadership of China – the president – President Xi Jinping and the premier, the state councilor, and the foreign minister – for their generous welcome, and for the in-depth and serious conversations that we had today on almost every subject of concern between the United States and China and the region.

I want to emphasize that President Obama and the United States take our role in the Asia Pacific very seriously. As President Obama and I have made clear on any number of occasions, we are committed to strengthening our enduring presence in this dynamic region, and to working with our partners in order to promote long term stability and prosperity. And I think everybody knows that the United States has been a Pacific nation for almost all of our history, throughout the 1800s, 1900s, and now into the 21st century. And our partnership with China is critical to our effort to provide for that stability and prosperity.

As the world’s two largest economies, we really have a particular role, a particular set of responsibilities that we can exercise, and together, if we exercise them in concert with one another, we have an opportunity to make real progress, and also to send important signals to people throughout the world – people who are watching China rise and wonder where it is headed, and people who watch the United States continue to exercise its leadership and to press for the expression of our values and our interests to be met according to the rule of law and according to the highest international standards.

Our partnership with China we view as one of great potential. It is one that is continuing to be defined, and we are convinced that both regional and global challenges that we face, China and the United States, when they can act together in concert with common purpose, have the opportunity to be able to make a significant difference.

As President Obama and President Xi made clear at Sunnylands last year, they are committed to building an historic bilateral relationship based on two most critical elements: one, practical cooperation, and two, constructive management of differences – and there are differences, and we were honest about that today.

In our meetings, we had an opportunity to discuss particularly some key issues, and I’ll just review those very quickly for you. First of all, we spoke about the commitment that the United States and China share to achieve a denuclearized North Korea, as well as the special role that China can play in helping to make that goal a reality. We agree, along with our international partners, that the DPRK must take meaningful, concrete, and irreversible steps towards verifiable denuclearization, and it needs to begin now. I’m pleased that at every level in all of our conversations today, China could not have more forcefully reiterated its commitment to that goal, its interests in achieving that goal, and its concerns about the risks of not achieving that goal – in terms of what it might mean, in terms of stability on the Peninsula, as well as the potential for an arms race in the region. I encourage the Chinese to use every tool at their disposal, all of the means of persuasion that they have, building on the depths of their long and historic and cultural and common history that has brought them together – though while not allies, they have a relationship.

We also discussed – excuse me – we also discussed climate change and clean energy. And this is another area where we are already cooperating closely and where we are looking for even more cooperation. The United States and China, unhappily, are the two largest emitters of greenhouse gasses on the planet, and they contribute together as a result to the fact of climate change. Together, the United States and China account for some 40 percent of the carbon pollution that is released into the atmosphere. It is imperative for us to work together in order to ensure that an ambitious international climate agreement that the united – the UN Climate Summit in 2015 can be achieved. So we talked about that today.

On my last visit to Beijing, last April, we took an important step forward when we came together to launch the climate change working group. That is working, and they are engaged, but there’s a lot more work to do as the science that has been pouring in over the course of the last year tells us every single day, and as the facts on the ground with droughts, fires, and disasters, and acidification of the ocean, and other things happening at an increased pace, it is more urgent that we join together to respond to this problem.

So we need to implement the initiatives that the climate change working group has already identified, but we need to do more than that. We need to see if working together we could identify any further steps that we may be able to take, specifically with respect to arrival at meaningful targets with respect to the 2015 climate change conference that will take place in Paris in December of next year.

In addition, it’s also important that we make good on the promise that was made at Sunnylands last year when our presidents agreed to face down the hydrofluorocarbons – or HFCs, as they’re called. And HFCs are some of the most potent climate pollutants in the world. And if we follow through on all of the fronts that are available to us, we have an opportunity to make real progress in the fight against climate change.

In addition, today, we spoke about our shared interest in preventing Iran from ever acquiring a nuclear weapon. Our close cooperation, which we agreed will absolutely continue, will go a long way towards helping to make the P5+1 negotiations continue. There are many areas where we are able to cooperate closely. But it’s equally important for us to acknowledge areas where our governments disagree and where, most importantly, we need to take steps in order to manage those disagreements appropriately and constructively.

In that spirit today, we did discuss – had a frank discussion about some human rights challenges and the role of rule of law and the free flow of information in a robust, civil society; the challenges of the cyber world that we live in today; the economic challenges; and I emphasized that respect for human rights and for the exchange of information in a free manner contributes to the strength of a society in a country.

Recent arrests of peaceful advocates for reform run counter, in our judgment, to all of our best interests and the ability to make long term progress. I emphasized today that the United States remains concerned about these situations here in China, human rights situations – especially with respect to the Tibetan and the Uighur areas.

I also expressed our concern about the need to try to establish a calmer, more rule-of-law-based, less confrontational regime with respect to the South China Sea, and the issues with respect to both the South China Sea and the East China Sea. And this includes the question of how an ADIZ might or might not come about. We certainly expressed the view that it’s important for us to cooperate on these kinds of things, to have notice, to work through these things, and to try to do them in a way that can achieve a common understanding of the direction that we’re moving in, and hopefully a common acceptance of the steps that are or are not being taken. Certainly, with respect to the South China Sea, it’s important to resolve these differences in a peaceful, non-confrontational way that honors the law of the sea and honors the rule of law itself. And we encourage steps by everybody – not just China, by all parties – to avoid any kind of provocation or confrontation and to work through the legal tools available.

I think it’s important that the same approach of rule of law clarify whatever claims are being made by any party. That’s why we have – the United States, though not yet ratified, lives by and will follow the rules of the Law of the Sea, and we hope others and everybody else chooses to do so, too.

I also shared our interests in China and ASEAN making rapid strides in negotiating the code of conduct, and I think China’s ready and wanting to try to achieve that goal. That would help reduce tensions that stem from the territorial and maritime disputes, and in the meantime, it’s very important that everybody build crisis management tools and refrain from coercive or unilateral measures to assert whatever claims any country in the region may have.

Finally, on Syria, which we also discussed, I stressed the importance of China’s support in the United Nations for the Security Council efforts to help deal with the planet’s greatest humanitarian crisis today. The Syrian people have gone without humanitarian aid for so long that there are people starving to death – children, women. There have been horrendously graphic pictures of both torture and starvation that have indicated the craven depravity that is the hallmark of what is happening in Syria today. And the Syrian people deserve to have the international community stand up and fight for them, since they are not in a position, most of them, to be able to fight for themselves. It is important for the Security Council to speak to this. And I underscored today that no country should stand in the way of increased humanitarian access for the Syrian people, and we are going to continue to press for that.

Our cooperation, frankly, on issues of enormous importance in the world should not go unnoticed. China and the United States are cooperating on big-ticket items. We’ve worked together in the P5+1 on Iran. We’ve worked together on Afghanistan. We have worked together on Syria. We are working together on other issues like South Sudan and the prevention of violence there. And we appreciate enormously the Chinese efforts with respect to those kinds of initiatives. Not many people know that that kind of cooperative effort is underway.

I think today we agreed that it is important for us, as the two most powerful economies in the world, to look for the opportunities to be able to work together and try to cooperate, to try to manage the differences, but most importantly to engage in a practical cooperation that can have an influence on other countries in the world that wonder where these two great powers are headed. And I found today constructive. I thought the tone was excellent. It was frank. There were some differences, needless to say, but they were managed and handled exactly as they should be, in an appropriate exchange and an appropriate kind of discussion. And my hope is that today, particularly with respect to the climate that we discussed, where were are going to work again some more tonight, and even tomorrow morning I have a meeting and I hope out of that will come further definition to the steps that we want to take, and also with respect to North Korea, where we both had thoughts about how to proceed, and I think we both are taking them under advisement. And I will certainly report back to President Obama on what may or may not prove to provide a road ahead. And that is certainly our hope.

So I look forward to the rest of my meetings and to continuing our work with our Chinese partners on these many issues. And I look forward to taking some questions.

MS. PSAKI: The first question will be from Arshad Mohammed of Reuters.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, did you make any tangible headway in getting specific assurances from China that they would actually pursue their maritime claims in line with international law or that they would actually submit them to some kind of international or diplomatic process, such as actually starting negotiations on an ASEAN code of conduct? Or did you not actually get assurances on any of those?

And you’ve made reference to discussing the importance of cooperating on declaring ADIZ. Did you specifically warn China against unilaterally establishing a second ADIZ in the South China Sea? And did you specifically say, as a senior NSC official recently said, that if China did so it – the United States could alter its military posture in the region?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m not going to go into all of the specifics of the conversation, except to say that yes, we did discuss this specific road ahead with respect to resolving these claims in the South China Sea. And the Chinese have made clear that they believe they need to be resolved in a peaceful and legal manner, and that they need to be resolved according to international law and that process.

And I think they believe they have a strong claim, a claim based on history and based on fact. They’re prepared to submit it, and – but I think they complained about some of the provocations that they feel others are engaged in. And that is why I’ve said all parties need to refrain from that. Particularly with respect to some of the islands and shoals, they feel there have been very specific actions taken in order to sort of push the issue of sovereignty on the sea itself or by creating some construction or other kinds of things.

So the bottom line is there was a very specific statement with respect to the importance of rule of law in resolving this and the importance of legal standards and precedent and history being taken into account to appropriately make judgments about it.

With respect to the ADIZ, we have, indeed, made clear our feelings about any sort of unilateral announcements. And I reiterated that again today. And I think hopefully that whatever falls in the future will be done in an open, transparent, accountable way that is inclusive of those who may or may not be concerned about that kind of action. But we’ve made it very clear that a unilateral, unannounced, unprocessed initiative like that can be very challenging to certain people in the region and therefore to regional stability. And we urge our friends in China to adhere to the highest standards of notice, engagement, involvement, information sharing, in order to reduce any possibilities of misinterpretation in those kinds of things.

MS. PSAKI: The next question will be from Paul Richter.

QUESTION: Just to make clear on the DPRK issue, you said that the Chinese voiced their commitment to taking action on this. Did you receive a specific commitment from China to do more to try to prevent North Korean provocations?

On a second issue, President Obama last Friday said that, because of his frustration about the lack of a solution to the Syrian war, that the Administration is reviewing, once again, the options to do more on Syria. I wonder if you could address that. Is the Administration thinking about doing more than providing humanitarian aid and perhaps non-lethal assistance? Have options been presented to senior officials?

SECRETARY KERRY: What was the first part of the question?

QUESTION: About the DPRK.

SECRETARY KERRY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Did you receive a specific --

SECRETARY KERRY: Yeah. On the DPRK, China could not have been more emphatic or made it more clear that they will not allow a nuclear program over the long run, that they believe deeply in denuclearization, that denuclearization must occur, that they are committed to doing their part to help make it happen, and that they also will not allow instability and war to break out in the region. They believe it has to be done in a political negotiation and through diplomacy. That is their preference.

But they made it very clear that if the North doesn’t comply and come to the table and be serious about talks and stop its program and live up to an agreed-upon set of standards with respect to the current activities that are threatening the people, that they’re prepared to take additional steps in order to make sure that their policy is implemented. And when I say “their policy,” their shared policy together with the other participants of the Six Party group and those in the region. And there is a very firm commitment to achieving that.

Now what we’re talking about are some of the specifics of how you do that. And they put some ideas on the table, and we put some ideas on the table. And both of us are taking those under evaluation. I will report back to the President those things that the Chinese thought might be helpful, and they are taking under advisement – I shared with each leader at each level our thoughts about what must be done and what we need in order to proceed forward. And they have agreed to take that under advisement. And we will continue this dialogue in the days ahead in a very serious way with a great sense of the urgency of time and purpose.

With respect to Syria, the President is always considering the options. This is not a one-time thing. But I think it is fair to say that because of the increase of the humanitarian crisis, because of the unwillingness of the Assad regime to engage fully in Geneva I talks – which is the sole purpose of Geneva II, to implement Geneva I. And Geneva I makes it clear that you have to have a transition government with full executive authority arrived at by mutual consent. Those are the terms.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has stood up beside me in Moscow, in Paris, in Geneva, and elsewhere – not beside me in Geneva, but said in Geneva that is the purpose of our doing Geneva II. There is no question about what this is about. And any efforts to try to be revisionists or walk back or step away from that, frankly, is not keeping word or keeping faith with the words that have been spoken and the intent of this conference.

So it is clear that the crisis of Syria is growing, not diminishing. There’s been a 50 percent increase in the number of external refugees. There’s a 33 percent increase in the number of internally displaced people since last October, when the presidential statement was passed at the United Nations. Almost nothing positive with respect to those refugees or the internal displacement has happened. In fact – what am I saying? – it’s gotten worse, dramatically worse, since the UN issued a presidential statement, which was all that could be achieved because of the opposition of certain countries.

So now we’re back at the United Nations because the situation demands that the civilized world stand up and fight for those people who are the victims day to day of violence that comes from barrel bombs dropped from helicopters and from Scud missiles fired on innocent civilians and starvation and siege that is being laid to over 200,000, 250,000 people trapped in places where they can’t get food. This is grotesque. And the world needs to take note and figure out what the appropriate response is.

President Obama said at his press conference with President Hollande of France that he is deeply concerned about it and deeply concerned about the fact that at Geneva the talks are not producing the kind of discussion of transition government that they are supposed to. And so he is, indeed – he’s asked all of us to think about various options that may or may not exist. The answer to the question have they been presented, no, they have not. But that evaluation by necessity, given the circumstances, is taking place at this time. And when these options are right and when the President calls for it, there will undoubtedly be some discussion about them.

MS. PSAKI: Thank you, everyone.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you all very much. Thanks. Appreciate it.

REMARKS BY SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES ON NORTH KOREA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks to Press at Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Remarks
Glyn Davies
Special Representative for North Korea Policy 
Tokyo, Japan
November 25, 2013

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: What I would like to do very much – first of all, let me thank you all for coming out. I appreciate that very much. I would like to say something at the beginning since it’s been a long visit here to North Asia and I’ve had good talks in Tokyo. First of all, I want to thank Director General Ihara and Assistant Chief Cabinet Secretary Kanehara for giving me so much time today here in Tokyo. We had very in-depth and useful talks, and I believe that our visit here today and the talks I’ve had in Tokyo today demonstrate our close collaboration on North Korea.

We talked of course about the nuclear issue. Japan and the United States are in complete agreement, complete sync about that. We also talked about North Korean human rights – we’ll do more of that in a minute at lunch – and touched on the abductions issue. And we’ll again have more to say about that at lunch. I want to reiterate again, as I always do here in Tokyo, about how we in the United States share the pain and the suffering of abductee families and the Japanese people and pledge once again that we will work tirelessly in cooperation with Japan to try to resolve this important matter.

But as I wrap up a very productive week in the three key North Asian capitals – Beijing, Seoul, and Tokyo – I want to report a strong convergence of views on North Korea. All of us are in quite close alignment, and I believe Russia, an essential partner in the Six-Party process, agrees that we will not accept North Korea as a nuclear weapons state. There are of course some differences among the five – but not at all among the three allies, who are in complete solidarity – but some differences over secondary issues such as the precise threshold or timing of talks, but there is unanimity on what North Korea must do: North Korea must abandon its nuclear weapons and agree to begin that process.

So we are looking for concrete indications from Pyongyang of its commitment to do that. This is because the core purpose of the Six-Party process is the complete, verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula on a clear and quick timetable.

North Korea, however, is moving in the opposite direction. They have made clear through words and actions that they reject that premise. We have heard them say repeatedly that instead they demand acceptance as a nuclear weapons state, that they demand prior lifting of sanctions, that they demand a weakening of the U.S.-ROK alliance, which has kept the peace on the Korean Peninsula now for 60 years. I’ve spoken – I did so in Beijing – about North Korea’s “Byungjin” policy of prioritizing nuclear weapons development, which I call a dead end.

I also want to underscore that Pyongyang’s attempts to engage in dialogue while keeping its program running are completely unacceptable. So it’s understandable, we believe, after so many broken promises, after the nuclear and missile tests, the threats against its neighbors and the United States, that not just its negotiating partners in the Six-Party process, but the international community writ large would have high standards of evidence to measure North Korean intentions.

That’s why the United States and its allies call on North Korea to make convincing indications, take concrete steps to demonstrate its seriousness of purpose. We will continue this process of joining with our partners – especially China, given its unique role – to keep the onus for action on North Korea.

With that, I’m very happy to take any questions that you have.

QUESTION: Could you be more specific about what is the concrete step you want North Korea to take?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: Well, this is now a matter of diplomatic discussion among the diplomatic partners in the five-party process, so I don’t want to go into a great deal of detail now. We’re talking about this between governments. We commend China for its tireless efforts to try to move forward on this discussion of what the appropriate threshold for Six-Party Talks would look like. My friend and colleague Ambassador Wu Dawei was just in Washington, some weeks ago, and we had the opportunity there to talk about it, and of course I followed up in Beijing on that same subject. And of course the discussions we had in Washington with separately the ROK and Japan, and then we had a trilateral session, and then again out here in the region – all are meant to define to our collective satisfaction what the threshold for talks should look like. So with your permission I do not plan at this stage to go into a great deal of detail about it.

The North Koreans know full well the kinds of things that we are looking for and talking about. We’ve been at this diplomacy now for a generation, through bilateral talks, trilateral talks, quadrilateral talks and Six-Party Talks, and we’ll keep it up.

QUESTION: Ambassador Davies, what is the U.S. currently doing to pull its citizen out of North Korea, and did you discuss it with the allies?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: Of course. This issue of the fate of American citizens who are in North Korean custody is one that we’ve raised – that I’ve raised at each stop, but particularly in Beijing, given their relationship with North Korea. I’m not going to get into, again, the specific discussion of the measures that we’re taking, but I will use this occasion to once again call on North Korea to make the right decision and to respect our concerns and let American citizens who are there go free. I also want to commend our Swedish protecting power. The Government of Sweden has been magnificent in trying every day to work on these issues in Pyongyang with the North Korean government, and that is very important. It is very important to us that this be resolved, that it be resolved quickly.

QUESTION: There have been reports that it is Mr. Newman who has been detained. Can you confirm that identity?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: I’m not at liberty to do that. We have a law that we take very seriously in the United States called the Privacy Act, and because there is no signed Privacy Act waiver, I’m not in position to speak specifically about that issue, out of respect for the law.

QUESTION: Ambassador, your opening remark was very strong, and it comes obviously after the deal with Iran. Is the United States ready to deepen the sanctions, to make the sanctions more strict, to make them more effective?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: Well, look, I’m glad you raised that. I actually – since I knew you’d raise the issue of Iran, and this gives me an occasion to talk about it, so let me say some general things about that, since I know it’s the topic of the moment. Other than the nuclear denominator, the cases could not be more different, frankly, between Iran and North Korea. The two states, simply put, are on opposite sides of the nuclear weapons divide. I would point you to the remarks just made by Secretary of State Kerry. He pointed out that there is the very significant difference on the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons that, as I think many of you know, North Korea is the only nation on earth to have first signed that treaty and then renounced its signature. Iran is a signatory of the non-proliferation treaty. Also North Korea has said repeatedly, with increasing frequency, has asserted that it is a nuclear weapons state. They have now placed provisions in their constitution to enshrine that. They’ve sought acceptance as a nuclear weapons state. Iran in contrast has pledged not to build nuclear weapons.

But the starkest contrast of all – and I think this is the most important point to make – is that in the 21st century, North Korea is the only nation on earth that has exploded nuclear devices. They’ve done it not once, not twice, but three times.

There are other differences between the two cases. North Korea walked away from its membership in the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, the agency where I spent several years representing the United States, that is now under the direction of Director General Yukiya Amano. Iran is and has always been a very active and engaged member of the IAEA although we have often had differences with them in the past. I would also remind that I’ve alluded to this before, that North Korea has elevated the pursuit of nuclear weapons to one of its two strategic priorities in its “Byungjin” policy that I spoke to a minute ago.

One way the cases are similar – and I think this is very important – is that pressure, particularly in the form of sanctions, do play a critical role. Sanctions helped convince Iran to agree to this interim deal that’s just been announced. We believe sanctions and pressure are key to sharpening the choices that Pyongyang faces. So given North Korea’s continued flouting of its international obligations and international law, given its testing of nuclear devices, given its repeated threats of nuclear attack, its elevation of its nuclear weapons program pursuit to its highest national priority, we will continue to keep pressure on North Korea, to keep the screws to North Korea.

But it’s pressure not for its own sake; it’s pressure with a purpose, and this is important because what we seek is a negotiated, diplomatic solution to this long-running problem. Here we believe we are making progress with our partners to define an appropriate threshold for resumed multilateral talks, and we will keep that up.

QUESTION: There have been many rumors that the two countries, Iran and North Korea, have been cooperating on nuclear programs. How do you address these concerns?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: Well, proliferation is a concern. It’s a big concern, and it’s something that we work on every day and about which we have conversations with our partners. I’m not going to get into what we do or don’t know about the state of affairs between North Korea and Iran. That would dip into intelligence matters which I can’t comment on, but this issue of proliferation of the spread of nuclear technologies, in particular from North Korea, remains an area of key concern to us, and of vigorous action.

QUESTION: Ambassador, regarding the sanctions, are you suggesting that we don’t have the right level or the right mix as we stand?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: Sanctions are always a work in progress. I mean, I think that there are always more sanctions we could put in place if needed. But what I want to put the emphasis on here is what I said at the end of my earlier remarks, that we want the sanctions to help clarify for Pyongyang the choices that they face. If they continue to defy the international community, pursue nuclear weapons and missile technologies, all they will do is continue to isolate themselves, quite frankly to impoverish their people, to keep North Korea outside the community of nations. So we’re saying to North Korea – and we’re doing this increasingly with one voice across not just the six parties, not just the northeast Asian region, but across the world – take a different approach; take a different decision; come in the direction of the concerns of the international community; give up your nuclear weapons; pledge to eliminate your nuclear program; stop this relentless pursuit of these technologies; stop threatening the outside world, testing weapons and declaring yourself at odds with the international community.

If you do that, there is hope going forward for diplomacy, but we’ve seen just the opposite. I’ve detailed that. I won’t go back into that. And that’s why we’re so concerned, that North Korea seems uninterested in meeting the concerns of the international community, and that’s where pressure and sanctions come into play. And so we will keep the pressure on North Korea, and if necessary if they cannot in the near term go in a different direction, we’ll have to ramp up that pressure in order to continue to try to bring home to them that this is a mistake, it’s not in their interest, and that if they wish a better relationship with the United States, their neighbors in the world, they have to give up the nuclear weapons.

QUESTION: What is the latest (inaudible)?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: I’ve talked about this before. I actually talked about it at length in Beijing, and I don’t want to really repeat myself. What I said was that it remains a matter of some wonderment that they haven’t understood that if, as they say, they want a better relationship with the United States, one thing they could do is release these Americans and answer our calls to take seriously our concerns about the fate of those being held there. And you know Kenneth Bae has been there for over a year. He’s been in North Korean custody longer than any American in quite a while. His family is understandably concerned. We talk to them frequently. They are keeping their hope up, and I believe that’s the case with the family of the other individual concerned. And we want them to know that we’re with them, and we’re doing everything we can to convince North Korea to let these men go.

QUESTION: The current level of sanctions hasn’t quite persuaded North Korea to think as you suggested. Is it time for a different tactic?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: Well, that time will come soon, but we’re not there yet. There’s still room for diplomacy. We’d like to get something going here, and that’s why the pace of diplomacy has increased, to see if we can’t agree on an appropriate threshold for Six-Party Talks. But at the same time, we keep up our pressure. We keep up our sanctions, and if we do not see signs of North Korean sincerity, if they do not act to demonstrate that they understand they must fulfill their obligations to give up their nuclear weapons, then there is more pressure that will be brought to bear on them.

QUESTION: Did you give them a deadline?

AMBASSADOR DAVIES: You know, I’m not in the business of giving deadlines. I’m not going to do that. Let me – if there’s one more question, I’m happy to take it, but I’ve been invited to lunch by Director General Ihara, and I would not like to be rude. I want to show up for that lunch, so any other questions here? No? Excellent. Thank you very much for coming here and listening to me. I really appreciate it. I look forward to seeing many of you in the near future either in Washington or back here in Tokyo. Thanks again. All the best.

REMARKS BY SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY AND PANAMANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER NUNEZ FABREGA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With Panamanian Foreign Minister Nunez Fabrega Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
November 13, 2013

SECRETARY KERRY: Good morning, everybody. My great pleasure to welcome the Foreign Minister of Panama to the State Department and to the United States. He’s been having meetings for the last couple of days, and I’m happy to be able to meet with him, actually, for the first time. We are both looking forward to the visit of Vice President Biden to Panama in a few days – next week – and we are particularly grateful to Panama for its work with us on a number of important issues.

First of all, I want to thank Panama for recently establishing diplomatic relations with Kosovo, a very important step. We are particularly grateful to Panama for its cooperation on Syria chemical weapons. They’ve been important and supportive of that. We have also worked together closely on the issue of how to destroy some old World War II chemical weapons munitions that are on San Jose Island, and we’re working on that issue as well as cooperating on counter-narcotics initiatives.

So we have a lot of cooperative efforts with Panama, obviously a critical nation in terms of both its interests, its values, our work we do together, as well as its location – their very important interdiction of a North Korean ship with illicit cargo. Panama has been working hard to do the job, get the job done, and to be a cooperative partner, and we’re very grateful for that.

And as we look towards 2014, there are elections coming up in Panama. We obviously support their efforts to have a democratic process that people will know is accountable and transparent, and we are appreciative for all of their efforts. They’re a great partner and we’re happy to have them here to talk through some of these issues.

Welcome.

FOREIGN MINISTER FABREGA: Thank you very much. Well, I’m glad to be here. We’ve had a longstanding relationship with the United States. It has evolved after the transfer of the canal into a mutually rewarding relationship where we have the same goals and we have the same ideas on how to get and meet those goals. I think it’s important that we have a very good bilateral agenda that we have to run through, and of course, one of the major things is the visit of Vice President Biden, which will be arriving in Panama on the 18th at night, and we expect to show him the new locks of the new canal. And we continue to support all of the initiatives that jointly we have developed throughout these years, and I’m glad to be here.

SECRETARY KERRY: We’re happy to have you.

FOREIGN MINISTER FABREGA: Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Welcome. Thank you. We’re going to go have a conversation. Thank you. Thank you very much.

ROSE GOTTEMOELLER'S REMARKS AT 68TH FIRST COMMITTEE GENERAL DEBATE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Statement by Rose E. Gottemoeller, Acting Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
Remarks
Rose Gottemoeller
Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security 
68th UNGA First Committee General Debate
New York, NY
October 9, 2013

As Delivered

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations, Ambassador Ibrahim Dabbashi, on your election as Chair of the First Committee during its 68th session. We pledge to support your leadership and the work of this committee. We look forward to a productive session.

This is the fourth year in a row that I have spoken to the UNGA First Committee on behalf of the United States. I look back to 2009 and I am proud of all we have accomplished. That said, we have a long path in front of us.

The conditions for a world free of nuclear weapons do not yet exist, but together we are completely capable of creating these conditions. I am sure of this, because of the examples of our predecessors.

As you all may know, tomorrow is the 50th anniversary of the entry into force of the Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT). This groundbreaking Treaty went from a seemingly unattainable goal on the horizon to an international law on the books within a year of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Perhaps it was those dark days that helped solidify U.S. President Kennedy’s view that it was possible – in fact, imperative – that we work to address nuclear dangers through multilateral diplomacy.

“Peace need not be impracticable,” he said, “and war need not be inevitable. By defining our goal more clearly -- by making it seem more manageable and less remote -- we can help all people to see it, to draw hope from it and to move irresistibly towards it.”

Mr. Chairman, that idea should be our touchstone as we move forward with the Committee’s work. If our predecessors could accomplish a Treaty like the LTBT in the midst of the Cold War, surely we can find ways to work on further arms reductions, increased transparency, banning the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons and more.

Over the last fifty years, we have had many unprecedented successes. We have gone from the brink of nuclear war to successful strategic reduction treaties – the latest of which will bring us by 2018 to the lowest number of deployed strategic nuclear weapons since the 1950s.

We have continued to limit nuclear explosive testing over the years through treaties, including the Threshold Test Ban Treaty (TTBT) that prohibited the United States and the Soviet Union from conducting a nuclear explosive test in excess of 150 kilotons. Before the TTBT entered into force, some voiced concerns that the parties had different ways to measure explosive yields. To deal with this problem, the United States and the Soviet Union undertook an unprecedented step in transparency and confidence-building. They invited each other to their respective nuclear test sites to observe a nuclear test and use their preferred methods for measuring explosive yields as they applied to the TTBT. That event, known as the Joint Verification Experiment, happened 25 years ago and it paved the way for subsequent negotiations of new verification protocols for both the TTBT and the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty (PNET). Our joint work would ultimately help the international community negotiate a total ban on nuclear explosive testing, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).

This year also marks a significant nonproliferation accomplishment: the 1993 United States-Russian Federation Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) Purchase Agreement will reach a major milestone with the final delivery of low enriched uranium (LEU) derived from downblending 500 metric tons of Russian weapons origin HEU. The LEU that results from this downblending process is delivered to the United States, fabricated into nuclear fuel, and used by nearly all U.S. nuclear power plants to generate approximately half of the nuclear energy in the United States. Approximately 20,000 nuclear warheads have been eliminated under this unique government-industry partnership. Over the past 15 years, nuclear fuel from this source has accounted for approximately 10% of all electricity produced in the United States.

We expect to meet with our Russian partners this November to observe the loading in St. Petersburg of the final containers of LEU downblended under the Agreement, and we will meet again in the United States when that ship delivers this important cargo in December. We look forward to jointly celebrating this historic achievement.

Another success that flies under the radar is the Open Skies Treaty. It just marked its 1000th completed mission in August. It is a great example of a Euro-Atlantic transparency and confidence building measure, and it has proven itself as a valuable arms control monitoring tool, for both strategic and conventional purposes.

As I said at the beginning of my remarks, the Obama Administration, working with international partners, has made many of its own significant achievements in nonproliferation and disarmament: entry into force of the New START Treaty, the launching of the Nuclear Security Summit process, an agreement between the United States and the Russian Federation to each verifiably dispose of 34 tons of weapons grade plutonium, and more recently, signature of an agreement between the United States and Russia on threat reduction that reinforces our longstanding partnership on nonproliferation.

But it is not enough: the United States and Russian Federation still possess over ninety percent of the nuclear weapons in the world, and it is time we move beyond Cold War postures.

That is why in June, the President announced in Berlin that we would pursue further reductions of deployed strategic nuclear weapons. This decision flowed from the Administration’s extensive analysis of the current strategic environment and deterrence requirements. That analysis confirmed that the United States can ensure its security and that of our allies, and maintain a strong and credible strategic deterrent, while reducing our deployed strategic nuclear weapons by up to one-third below the level established by the New START Treaty. The President said on that occasion, “I intend to seek negotiated cuts with Russia to move beyond Cold War postures.” Toward that end, we will pursue a treaty with the Russian Federation.

We are also making sure our lines of communication on strategic issues are solid. On Monday in Bali, U.S. Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov signed a new agreement to strengthen the connection between our Nuclear Risk Reduction Centers (NRRCs). Today’s NRRC-to-NRRC relationship and communications link continue to provide vital transparency in strategic and conventional forces, facilitate verification of arms control treaties and agreements, and support strategic stability. Actually, we just passed a significant milestone -- the two Centers have now exchanged over five thousand New START Treaty notifications since its entry into force, which provide us day-to-day updates on the status of each others' nuclear forces. These are joined by the 97 on-site inspections that we have now conducted under New START, which give us even more insights into each others' nuclear forces, thus enhancing predictability for both countries.

We are also working with the other Nuclear Weapons States (P5) on disarmament-related issues to support implementation of the NPT and the 2010 NPT Action Plan. The P5 have now had four official conferences, with China hosting the fifth meeting next year. But we are not just meeting; through dialogue at the political level and concrete work at the expert level, our engagement has moved from concepts to concrete actions.

For example, P5 experts are meeting to address issues related to the CTBT, especially those relating to the On-Site Inspection (OSI) element of the CTBT’s verification regime and to the OSI Integrated Field Exercise to be conducted in Jordan in 2014. The objective of this effort is to define and engage in technical collaborative work based on our unique expertise with past nuclear explosive tests.

In the broader multilateral context, the United States continues to hold to its long-standing position calling for the immediate commencement of long delayed negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) in the Conference on Disarmament (CD). This treaty is the obvious next step in multilateral disarmament and it is time to get to the table. We hope that the upcoming UN Group of Governmental Experts on FMCT will provide useful impetus. Another priority for the United States is to continue to build support for the ratification of the CTBT, as affirmed by President Obama this past June. We encourage all Annex 2 nations to join us in this pursuit.

Mr. Chairman, we will have a lot of things to discuss and debate this session, from cyber and space security to conventional arms control, from humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons to a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. It is critical that we continue our work together. Two weeks ago, the international community reached a landmark with UN Security Council Resolution 2118 and the Executive Council decision of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Together, they enable a strong international partnership to eliminate chemical weapons from Syria and end this threat to the Syrian people.

And elsewhere, we should be cautious, but cognizant of potentially historic opportunities. We must continue our push to bring Iran back into line with its international nuclear obligations. We will also continue to make clear to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) that should it meet its own denuclearization commitments, it too can have an opportunity to reintegrate into the international community. The United States is ready to talk, we are ready to listen, we are ready to work hard, and we hope that every country in this room is ready to join us.

It is no secret there are issues on which we disagree. This does not mean that we stop trying to move ahead in a step-by-step fashion. Even in the darkest days of the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union found it in our mutual interest to work together on reducing the nuclear threat. Of course, today, this is not just the responsibility of the United States and Russia. All states can and must contribute to the conditions for disarmament, as well as nonproliferation; they are two sides of the same coin.

Mr. Chairman, the road toward the next steps might not be familiar and it will require difficult negotiations and complicated diplomacy. Nevertheless, armed with patience and persistence, we can keep our compasses pointed at the one reason we are here: to pursue disarmament in ways that promote mutual security, because it is in our mutual interest.

The United States asks that we all commit ourselves to the hard work ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.