U.S. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS TO KOREAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks to the Korean Chamber of Commerce and Industry in the United States
Remarks
Daniel R. Russel
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs
New York City
May 27, 2015
As Prepared for Delivery

Thank you, Chairman Ha for that introduction. Thank you all for coming - Consul General Kim and consular officials, Korean business promotion organizations, and all KOCHAM members and distinguished guests.

I’m glad to talk to business groups, such as KOCHAM, because economic relations have to be such a large part of our overall relationship with Korea. Your companies are big investors in America, accounting for a huge share of Korea’s FDI stock in the U.S., which is now over $31 billion dollars. Thank you.

In 1962, Dow Chemical, a storied American firm, became the first outside company to enter the Republic of Korea after it opened to foreign investment. Since then, your country’s economy has developed rapidly, and our commercial ties have blossomed with it.

The individual investments of KOCHAM members are far too numerous to list, so I’ll just name a few. Korean Air’s hotel in Los Angeles. Lotte’s move to participate in America’s shale energy boom by building a chemical plant in Louisiana. Doosan is using its expertise and capital to build up Bobcat, a great American global brand, and preserving and creating good jobs for Americans in the process. The banks, insurance providers, shipping and travel companies, consultants, and trade promotion agencies represented here provide essential capital and services that everyone else depends on to get business done. All of your companies are essential to modern life.

But, of course, I there’s one more important field – the field that really separates the 20th century from the 21st – and too often separates us parents from our children – digital technology, and mobile tech in particular.

Tech is one of the best known areas of partnership between our two countries. Just over a week ago, I was with Secretary Kerry in Seoul where he delivered a major speech on cyber policy. He chose to give this speech in Seoul because the Republic of Korea is such an important global leader in the digital world. When you consider the fact that South Korea is one of the most connected countries on earth; one of the biggest economic success stories of the last fifty years; one of the most important inventors of digital technology; and one of the biggest manufacturers of tech products; I think it’s fair to say that no other country has benefitted more from the digital revolution.

The U.S. has benefitted immensely from technology as well. As the most innovative country on earth, we have driven the tech revolution. So it’s natural that Koreans and Americans are partners in tech in so many ways. Just in the past month, Samsung made two interesting announcements: that it was investing $250 million in Silicon Valley, and that its CEOs and senior execs would be spending more time in the U.S. on a regular basis, to interact and share ideas with their counterparts at other companies in the U.S. This move is striking because it shows that despite all that Samsung, and other US and RoK companies, have done to help people connect over great distances, we still want to see each other in person. That’s part of why you all are living here for an extended period, and why many Americans live in Korea.

We appreciate the investments, and the jobs you’re creating. And we know you appreciate the talent you’re getting – from creative coders and marketers at LG, to hard-working line workers and expert engineers at Hyundai and Doosan. Our work together at the same facilities brings our nations closer, and it’s good for Korean Air, for Asiana – and for Delta and United as well.

As we look at the many connections between the U.S. and Korean economies, it’s clear that business is good. And that reflects the broader state of our bilateral relationship – the United States and the Republic of Korea have never been closer.

So today, I will give an overview of our bilateral relations, our strong alliance, and our global partnership that tackling issues from climate to economic development and advocating for our shared values around the globe. Then I’ll say a few words about our forward-looking economic relationship, and open it up for discussion.

The shared values and shared challenges we face form the core of our bilateral relationship. So I’d like to use the rest of my time here to talk about that relationship – to give you the larger context of what our two countries are doing together, for each other, and for the world.

The U.S.-ROK relationship is as strong as it has ever been. I was just in Seoul with Secretary Kerry, and it was a highly successful visit. We are very much looking forward to President Park’s upcoming visit in June. These are just the latest in what have been a series of productive meetings between our countries’ senior leaders.

In addition to these leaders’ meetings, we’ve also concluded, in the last couple years, a series of very important negotiations that have moved the relationship forward. We’ve strengthened our alliance through a new agreement on operational control of alliance forces during wartime—the agreement takes into account the evolving security situation in the region and the critical defense capabilities needed to address the North Korea threat. And we signed a new agreement which ensures the continued R.O.K. resources our troops need to “fight tonight.”

Even as we hope and plan and prepare for a brighter, more peaceful, united future for the Korean peninsula, we must still guard against the perils of the present, from North Korea’s nuclear, ballistic missile, and cyber threats, to natural disasters, to ISIL, pandemic disease, and climate change—global challenges that affect us all.

Just last month, we concluded negotiations on a successor civil-nuclear, or “1-2-3,” agreement. This state-of-the art agreement reflects the Republic of Korea’s status as a major global nuclear supplier while reaffirming the great importance we both place on non-proliferation, security, and safety.

And throughout the year, we’ve made progress on implementing the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement. This helps ensure that our two economies continue to provide the foundation of shared prosperity that strengthens all aspects of the relationship.

Beyond our bilateral relations, we’re working to make the region safer and more prosperous.

South Korea, along with Japan, Australia, and others, is a key partner in the regional institutions that put our shared values into practice.

We see the emergence of Global Korea in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ “ASEAN plus three” group, and in APEC and the G20.

As two democracies, free market economies, and two important allies of the U.S., it’s difficult to overstate the importance we place on good relations between the Republic of Korea and Japan. I am hopeful that we will see continued progress on sensitive, important legacy issues, and an enduring improvement in overall relations in 2015.

President Park’s Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative, and the concept of trustpolitik, show her commitment to contributing to the broader discussion of the Asia-Pacific region’s future.

Of course, one critical issue we never lose sight of is curbing the threat from North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and advocating for the human rights of the North Korea’s people.

We’ve strongly supported new Security Council sanctions and increased enforcement to block proliferation and stem illicit activities that fund or support North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs. At the same time, we and our partners in the Six-Party Talks continue to make clear to North Korea’s leadership that a brighter future is available if it chooses a different path.

We have gone the extra mile to reach out to North Korea’s government and encourage it to engage in an authentic and credible negotiating process.

But for negotiations to have any chance of success, North Korea must demonstrate a willingness to fulfill its denuclearization obligations and commitments, including those it undertook in the September 2005 Joint Statement.

At the same time, the U.S. and R.O.K. have worked with our partners on behalf of the North Korean people, to shine a bright light on the North’s human rights horrors, and to highlight the responsibility of the country’s leaders.

Last year, the landmark Commission of Inquiry report laid out these violations in devastating detail. There was a multilateral, high-level event on North Korean human rights at the U.N. General Assembly for the first time. And the General Assembly and Human Rights Council overwhelmingly passed strong resolutions calling on the North to address its deplorable human rights situation.

North Korea is feeling the heat. Last year, they even felt the need to send their Foreign Minister to the General Assembly in New York for the first time in 15 years, as part of an apparent charm offensive around the world.

We will continue to maintain pressure on the D.P.R.K. To that end, we support and look forward to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights opening a field-based structure in Seoul that will monitor and document the human rights situation in the DPRK in order to help seek justice for those accountable.

But it’s also important to note that U.S.-South Korea cooperation, and the R.O.K.’s global role, go way beyond dealing with the North.

Secretary Kerry said it simply, “The Republic of Korea has emerged as a key global player dedicated, as the United States is, to universal values like human rights, democracy, and the rule of law.”

It has been a dramatic time for the R.O.K.’s relations with the world, and our global work together. Let me mention just a few highlights…

Last year in Dresden, Germany, President Park Geun-hye laid out a comprehensive vision for peaceful reunification.

She also hosted Chinese President Xi Jinping, making him the first PRC president to visit Seoul before visiting Pyongyang—or even meeting the North Korean leader—a very significant event.

The R.O.K. hosted the Conference of the International Telecommunication Union, which produced the Busan Consensus.

As the dangers of Ebola heated up, South Korea stepped forward. We are pleased that the ROK provided both financial assistance, and three teams of health care workers on the ground in Sierra Leone. The Ebola outbreak is not done, and we must all remain vigilant.

The U.S. and Korea work together to spur development and seize economic opportunities around the globe. The U.S. Agency for International Development and the Korea International Cooperation Agency signed a memorandum of understanding just last year that highlights our strengthened collaboration on maternal and child health in Ghana and Ethiopia; our cooperation on developing the energy sector in Ghana in support of the Power Africa Initiative; our cooperation on climate change in Vietnam; and our partnership on innovative approaches to what we call “Grand Challenges for Development,” and public-private partnerships.

This year, Korea is poised to drive further progress on all these issues…

It will be an important player in fighting disease as host of the Global Health Security Agenda.

Within the last month, Korea has pledged $11 million and sent more than 50 medical, and search and rescue workers to assist in Nepal earthquake relief efforts.

As we face water challenges around the world, South Korea is hosting the triennial World Water Forum, a hugely important gathering of tens of thousands of water policymakers and practitioners.

Korea is hosting the secretariat of the new U.N. Green Climate Fund, to address perhaps the greatest threat facing our entire planet—global warming.

The R.O.K. is an important player at the United Nations, here in Manhattan and around the world.

This is remarkable when you take a moment to think about it. Twenty-five years ago, South Korea wasn’t even a full member of the U.N. I had the privilege of working with a young Korean diplomat, who is now your foreign minister Yun Byung-se, to change that.

Now, we have a South Korean as Secretary-General. And last year, the RoK wrapped up a very active two-year stint on the Security Council. Korea’s diplomats led discussions on pressing topics, such as how to protect civilians in armed conflict, and how to counter the proliferation of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons.

Our ability to advocate for our priorities and advance our values around the world is strengthened by our economic success, so we have accomplished much in recent years to advance our shared prosperity.

An already-strong relationship has grown even stronger under the Korea-U.S. Free Trade agreement, or KORUS. And I don’t have to tell you that your companies have been among the biggest beneficiaries. KORUS also helps supply chains – Korean companies are buying U.S. inputs more often and U.S. companies can more easily use Korean inputs – a win-win that makes both our economies more competitive in the rest of the world.

And more broadly, KORUS has benefitted both our economies. Under the agreement, Korea has become the United States’ 6th largest trading partner with two-way trade in goods totaling over $145 billion in 2014. Nearly 95 percent of consumer and industrial products will be duty free by 2017, creating opportunities for our countries to engage in joint ventures, to make products together, and to engage in friendly competition.

American carmakers, for instance, aim to keep Hyundai-Kia on its toes, even in its home market. Ford had its best year in Korea in 2014, and its best month ever in Korea just last month, selling innovative hybrid and diesel vehicles. It is Korea’s fastest-growing brand. But more important than the performance of any one company is the principle of fair competition – the belief at the heart of the American system that well-regulated competition drives every firm to do better; to be more innovative; to take the risks that drive progress.

Of course, it’s important that KORUS be fully implemented, so that American and Korean companies benefit fully.

Our economic relationship and cooperation extends beyond KORUS. While we are working to conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership with our current negotiating partners, we do welcome the RoK’s interest in joining in the future. And aside from TPP, there are many things we can do to strengthen US-Korea economic relations.

I encourage you to support strong intellectual property protections in Korea and abroad. We have a clear shared interest in this—your companies are among the world’s most innovative, and any short-term gain from undermining IP protections will hurt us all more in the long run.

Some of the most important, innovative, world-changing companies in America didn’t even exist, or barely existed 20 years ago—like Google, Facebook, and Twitter. Secretary Kerry, in his remarks in Seoul last week, mentioned some of the newer Internet and tech companies cropping up in the RoK, and I hope you view them more as potential collaborators than as simply competitors.

As major beneficiaries of the global trading system and free trade, I ask you to push—both at home in Korea and abroad—for a level playing field for investors; for free trade and global standards; for fair, transparent, and predictable regulations in Korea, to make the Korean market more dynamic, ultimately benefitting all Koreans.

And I ask you to continue giving back to the communities that you’ve joined across America. Samsung’s endowment of a scholarship in honor of Americans who served in the Korean War is greatly appreciated here. Now serving the children and grandchildren of those veterans and others, it continues to make an important impact in making college affordable.

Whenever I speak to American businesses, I encourage them to do the same thing across the region. Corporate philanthropy and social responsibility is at the core of the values that both our countries hold dear.

Building from the strong base of our security and economic ties, I’m confident that South Korea’s global contributions will only get stronger. Both because of the drive and ingenuity of the Korean people, and because of the strength of our friendship. That friendship goes beyond any one moment in time, beyond the relationships between any one set of companies or leaders.

Our relationship reaches back to the founding of the Republic of Korea, and even earlier. And we continuously nurture it, for instance with the large number of South Korean students studying in the United States, and Americans studying in Korea—a number that has risen by an eye-popping 300 percent over the last decade!

Last year, South Koreans were the ninth-largest group of visitors to the United States, spending $6 billion.

These students and visitors are building relationships that will last a lifetime, and as business leaders, you're thinking of an even longer horizon. I mentioned earlier that Dow made the first foreign investment in the Republic of Korea over 50 years ago. And Dow has stayed in RoK, now partnering with LG, SKC, and Samsung to keep pushing innovation forward—both now, and, I’m confident, long after all of us have retired.

So it’s clear that in all things—in security, in business, in promoting our values—the people of the United States and the Republic of Korea go together. Katchi Kapshida!

WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT ON ISRAEL'S NEW GOVERNMENT

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE
May 07, 2015
Statement by the Press Secretary on the Formation of Israel’s New Government

The President congratulates the Israeli people, Prime Minister Netanyahu and the new governing coalition on the formation of Israel’s new government.  President Obama looks forward to working with Prime Minister Netanyahu and his new government.  As the President has emphasized, the United States places great importance on our close military, intelligence, and security cooperation with Israel, which reflects the deep and abiding partnership between both countries.  We also look forward to continuing consultations on a range of regional issues, including international negotiations to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and the importance of pursuing a two-state solution.

U.S. FISSILE MATERIAL REDUCTIONS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Arms Control and International Security: U.S. Support for Fissile Material Reductions
05/05/2015 12:24 PM EDT

U.S. Support for Fissile Material Reductions

Reductions

The total U.S. highly enriched uranium inventory as of 2004 was 686.6 MT. In declarations in 1994 and 2005, the United States declared that a significant portion of that inventory totaling 374 MT of HEU would be removed from further use as fissile material in nuclear warheads.

To date, the United States has down-blended more than 146 MT of HEU—enough material for more than 5,800 nuclear weapons.

The landmark 1993 United States-Russia HEU Purchase Agreement eliminated 500 metric tons of Russian weapons- origin HEU, which was converted to LEU and shipped to the United States where it was used for peaceful purposes as fuel in American nuclear power reactors. The amount downblended was equivalent to roughly three warheads worth of HEU per day for most of the last two decades.

In 2009, the United States reported the plutonium inventory was 95.4 metric tons. In 1994 and 2007, 61.5 metric tons of plutonium had been declared excess and removed from further use as fissile material in nuclear warheads.

The U.S.-Russian Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement requires each state to dispose of no less than 34 metric tons of plutonium declared excess.
Consolidations

Since the early 1980s, the size of the U.S. nuclear complex has shrunk to approximately half of its original size and reduced the workforce by two-thirds.
Looking forward, the United States anticipates shifting from retaining large numbers of non-deployed nuclear warheads towards a more responsive infrastructure. Investing in a more modern physical infrastructure can allow for further reductions in total nuclear forces.

VP BIDEN SWEARS IN ASHTON CARTER AS U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

Right:  Vice President Joe Biden swears in Ash Carter as the 25th defense secretary as Carter's wife, Stephanie, looks on during a private ceremony at the White House, Feb. 17, 2015. DoD screen shot.  
Carter Takes Oath of Office in White House Ceremony
By Cheryl Pellerin
DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, Feb. 17, 2015 – With his wife, Stephanie, holding the Bible upon which he swore to support and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, Ash Carter took the oath of office as the 25th secretary of defense in a ceremony at the White House today.

Vice President Joe Biden administered the oath in the Roosevelt Room, characterizing Carter as a genuine scholar of strategic military affairs and nuclear weapons policy and as a profoundly capable manager “with universal respect and affection from the people you work with, reflected in a near-unanimous vote in the U.S. Senate.”

“For me,” Carter said after taking the oath, “this is the highest honor, to be the 25th secretary of defense. I'm grateful to [President Barack Obama] and the vice president for your trust and confidence, and to the U.S. Senate as well for their trust and confidence.”

Attending the ceremony were Carter’s son, Will, Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Navy Adm. James A. Winnefeld Jr., members of Carter’s transition team, and several men and women in uniform.

A Driving Intellectual Force

In his introduction, Biden called Carter a “physicist and a genuine expert on the acquisition and technical capabilities that are going to help guarantee the U.S. military is second to none in the world.”

Carter has a driving intellectual force behind all he does and all the administration has been doing, the vice president added, including strengthening the nation's cyber capabilities, improving the way the Pentagon does business, and implementing the Asia-Pacific rebalance, including deepening defense cooperation with India.

“Most important of all, you've been a fighter,” Biden told Carter, “like the men and women in uniform here today, for the women and men who serve in uniform.”

The defense secretary, like his predecessor, Biden added, “understands that while this country has many obligations, it only has one truly sacred obligation, and that's to equip and protect those we send to war, care for their families while they're there, and care for them and their families when they come home.”

Tough Missions Ahead

Many tough missions lie ahead, the vice president said, from fighting against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, strengthening NATO, and rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific region, to maintaining the nation’s technological edge and continuous efforts to make the most out of every dollar invested in defense.
“Dr. Carter,” Biden said, “as you take leadership of the greatest military in the history of mankind, … you do so with the confidence of everyone in your building, confidence of the United States Senate, confidence of President Obama and me, and so many other people who admire your work.”

Carter thanked his wife and children, his transition team and the team he joins at the Pentagon, including Work, Dempsey, Winnefeld and others.

The defense secretary characterized the defense of the nation as “the highest calling,” and he made three commitments to the men and women of the Defense Department, to the president and vice president, and to his fellow citizens.
Three Commitments

“The first is to help our president make the best possible decisions about our security and the [world’s] security, and then to ensure that our department executes those decisions with its long accustomed competence and effectiveness,” he said.

While dealing with challenges to national security, Carter said, he wants to help the nation’s leadership grab hold of opportunities that lie before the country, and to help make the world safer and a better place for the next generation.
“My second commitment is to the men and women of the Department of Defense, whom I will lead, to reflect in everything I do and to honor the commitment and dedication that brought them into service,” Carter said, “and to protect their dignity, their safety, their well-being, [and] to make decisions about sending them into harm’s way with the greatest reflection and care.”

A Force for the Future

Carter’s third commitment was to the future, he said, “to building a force for our future that involves not only securing the resources we need but making … the best use of the taxpayers’ dollar, making sure we embrace change so that years from now, … we continue to be a place where America's finest want to serve, and a place that is a beacon to the rest of the world.”

As Obama enters the fourth quarter of his presidency, the defense secretary added, “these commitments, … I think, will help me help him and help the vice president to ensure that those years are productive, and that they leave our country's future in the best possible place -- in the best possible hands.”

PRESIDENT'S LETTER REGARDING IMPOSING ADDITIONAL SANCTIONS ON NORTH KOREAN ENTITIES, INDIVIDUALS

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 
January 02, 2015
Letter -- Imposing Additional Sanctions with Respect to North Korea
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), I hereby report that I have issued an Executive Order (the "order") with respect to North Korea that expands the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13466 of June 26, 2008, expanded in scope in Executive Order 13551 of August 30, 2010, and relied upon for additional steps in Executive Order 13570 of April 18, 2011. The order takes additional steps to address North Korea's continued actions that threaten the United States and others.

In 2008, upon terminating the exercise of certain authorities under the Trading With the Enemy Act (TWEA) with respect to North Korea, the President issued Executive Order 13466 and declared a national emergency pursuant to IEEPA to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the existence and risk of the proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material on the Korean Peninsula. Executive Order 13466 continued certain restrictions on North Korea and North Korean nationals that had been in place under TWEA.

In 2010, I issued Executive Order 13551. In that order, I determined that the Government of North Korea's continued provocative actions destabilized the Korean peninsula and imperiled U.S. Armed Forces, allies, and trading partners in the region and warranted the imposition of additional sanctions, and I expanded the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13466. In Executive Order 13551, I ordered blocked the property and interests in property of three North Korean entities and one individual listed in the Annex to that order and provided criteria under which the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, may designate additional persons whose property and interests in property shall be blocked.

In 2011, I issued Executive Order 13570 to further address the national emergency with respect to North Korea and to strengthen the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874. That Executive Order prohibited the direct or indirect importation of goods, services, and technology from North Korea.

I have now determined that that the provocative, destabilizing, and repressive actions and policies of the Government of North Korea, including its destructive, coercive cyber-related actions during November and December 2014, actions in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1718, 1874, 2087, and 2094, and commission of serious human rights abuses, constitute a continuing threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.

The order is not targeted at the people of North Korea, but rather is aimed at the Government of North Korea and its activities that threaten the United States and others. The order leaves in place all existing sanctions imposed under Executive Orders 13466, 13551, and 13570. It provides criteria for blocking the property and interests in property of any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State:

to be an agency, instrumentality, or controlled entity of the Government of North Korea or the Workers' Party of Korea;

to be an official of the Government of North Korea;

to be an official of the Workers' Party of Korea;

to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, the Government of North Korea or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to the order; or to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the Government of North Korea or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to the order.

In addition, the order suspends entry into the United States of any alien determined to meet one or more of the above criteria.

I have delegated to the Secretary of the Treasury the authority, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA, as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the order. All executive agencies are directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of the order.

I am enclosing a copy of the Executive Order I have issued.

Sincerely,

BARACK OBAMA

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT FRIENDS OF COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR-TEST-BAN MINISTERIAL

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Remarks At The Friends of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Ministerial

Remarks

John Kerry

Secretary of State

United Nations Headquarters

New York City

September 26, 2014

Thank you, Fumio. Thank you very, very much. Mr. Secretary-General, let me begin by thanking you for an extraordinary week here at the United Nations. I think this has been an UNGA that’s been as seized with the issues of the day as forcefully and as directly as at any time, and we’re very appreciative for all of the UN’s efforts to make that happen. And I can tell you that everybody here with respect to the CTBT will say “Ban forever,” I promise you. (Laughter.)

It’s a privilege to join the friends of the CTBT ministerial because we are here in pursuit of a very noble goal, and that is to ensure that one day our children and our grandchildren will live in a world where the very real threat of nuclear weapons is a subject to be read about in the history books and not in the newspapers, not as a matter of daily currency. And I am mindful of what Fumio said about representing the one country in the world that has seen nuclear weapons in time of war. We learned, all of us, the awesome power that we’ve sought to contain ever since that time, and I believe it is containable. And I might say that I’m proud that President Obama has been pushing to reduce America’s arsenal along with Russia, and that we did manage to pass, when I was in the Senate, the START Treaty.

But the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban treaty has thus far eluded for various reasons. It remains a critical part of our effort to strip the world of these weapons. Some people don’t think that’s possible. I don’t agree. It’s interesting when you have Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, former secretaries of Defense and State all joining together saying it is possible. So people need, obviously, to embrace the notion that how we resolve conflicts has to change dramatically. That’s the purpose of the UN. How we deal with each other has to change. But if we lose the ability to envision that change, we lose something very special in the human spirit, and I think everybody here understands what I mean. We have to believe in the possibility of changing the way we resolve conflict, and if we do, then deterrence by nuclear weapons is something that can change.

So any time we work cooperatively to address the threat of nuclear weapons, we do make the world a safer place, and I have said to people who are doubters about the capacity to take this deterrence away – I’ve said to them, “Every step you take towards it – whether you get there tomorrow or in 50 years or what – makes the world a safer place. There is no question about that.”

The interim agreement that we struck with Iran, the P5+1, has made the world safer because a nuclear stockpile that was at 20 percent has been reduced to 1 – and nothing. And inspections are taking place and there is greater certainty about possibilities than there was before it went into place. And it remains our fervent hope that Iran and the P5+1 can in the next weeks come to an agreement that would benefit the world and it would deal, ultimately, with the issues that are contained in the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty.

So I come here to reiterate the Obama Administration’s unshakable commitment to seeing this treaty ratified and entered into force. And though we have not yet succeeded in ratifying it for pure political, ideological reasons – not substance, I assure you – we nevertheless are pledged to live by it, and we do live by it, and we will live by it.

Last week, U.S. Secretary of Energy Ernie Moniz made clear a very compelling case for the value of stockpile stewardship in the context of this treaty. And I’ll say just a word about our commitment to the verification regime. Part of that commitment means engaging the American people, our citizens, on the treaty’s merits. And I know some members of the United States Senate still have concerns about this treaty. I believe they can be addressed by science, by facts, through computers and the technology we have today coupled with a legitimate stockpile stewardship program.

So let me be crystal-clear about what this treaty is and what it isn’t. This treaty is about diminishing our reliance on nuclear weapons. It’s about reducing dangerous competition among nuclear powers. It’s about responsible disarmament, and ultimately it’s about advancing international peace and security by building a different structure on which we can all rely.

I also want to be clear about what this treaty isn’t. This treaty isn’t just a feel-good exercise. It’s in all of our national security interests, and it’s verifiable. In fact, its verification regime is one of the great accomplishments of the modern world. The international monitoring system is nearly complete; it is robust, it is effective, and it has contributed critical scientific data on everything from tsunami warnings to tracking radioactivity and nuclear reactor accidents.

What this treaty does is simple: It sets standards and enforces the kind of verification measures that the United States already has in place, and that’s why we remain a strong supporter of the treaty. And we continue to be the single largest contributor to its budget. In fact, we’ve already provided more than 40 million above our assessment over the past two years. As the United States Senate considers ratification, it will require assurances not only that an effective, operational, and sustainable verification regime is in place, but that other nations are committed to sustaining it. That’s why we urge the seven other Annex II states to accelerate their efforts to ratify the treaty and urge all signatory states to provide the resources necessary to complete the verification regime. Let me be clear: There is no reason for the Annex II states to wait for the United States before completing their own ratification process, and this treaty is a national security imperative for all of us.

So I close by just saying that President Obama and I believe that this time we’re living in, with all the conflict of ISIL and failed and failing states and Ebola and conflicts that we wish did not exist, still could become an age of construction, not destruction. A lot of that depends on the people in this room and on the leaders who are not here but were here this week, and it certainly depends on our willingness to fulfill a promise to our children and what they will inherit.

So we have to act with courage in the months ahead – days, weeks, and months ahead, and we know that our goal of a nuclear-free world may be a lofty one. But believe me, it is absolutely one worth fighting for, especially in an age where dirty bombs and nuclear materials and all of these other dangers exist. We would be better off, clearly, emphasizing the passage of the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty so that we will never again see additional nuclear powers, and so that the existing nuclear powers will continue to move to eliminate these weapons from Earth.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary-General. (Applause.)

ROSE GOTTEMOELLER'S REMARKS AT ANNUAL DETERRENCE SYMPOSIUM

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Remarks at the Annual Deterrence Symposium

Remarks

Rose Gottemoeller

Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security 

U.S. Strategic Command

Omaha, Nebraska

August 14, 2014

---

Thank you for that kind introduction. I am always honored to be a speaker here at the Annual Deterrence Symposium and of course, I am glad to be here at the invitation of Admiral Cecil Haney. Turn about is fair play: The Admiral gave a great speech at my invitation last month in Washington to a group of young people on the threshold of their careers. More on that later. Thank you, Admiral, for all you do for this nation.

While we are gathered here today in Omaha, the world is facing serious challenges: The threats to Ukraine’s sovereignty and Russia’s flagrant disregard for international law, the continuing conflicts in the Middle East, a dangerous Ebola outbreak in West Africa. It goes without saying that most people are not focused on nuclear weapons or nuclear deterrence. But we all know that we have important work to do and we do it. My admiration for this community, in and out of uniform, knows no bounds. We are ready to work. That is the theme I’m striking today: We who focus on the foundation of our nation’s nuclear deterrent are ready to work.
Strategic stability is the cornerstone of American national security, but as all of you know, it is not a static state of being. Threats to strategic stability can surface quickly and it is incumbent upon all of us to recognize those threats, anticipate them when we can, and make moves to counter them. We must be prepared for the unpredictable, and constantly on the look-out so that we see threats emerging while they are still over the horizon. My role as a diplomat is different from your roles on the military side, but our goals are no different. As President Obama said five years ago in Prague, as long as nuclear weapons exist, we will maintain a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal. And that is as we seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.

Violation of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF)

One threat to strategic stability has made news in the last month. As you all know, the Department of State recently delivered the Annual Arms Control Compliance Report to Congress with the determination that the Russian Federation is in violation of its INF Treaty obligations not to possess, produce, or flight-test a ground-launched cruise missile with a range capability of 500 to 5,500 kilometers, or to possess or produce launchers of such missiles.
We have been attempting to address this very serious matter with Russia for some time, as the United States is wholly committed to the continued viability of the INF Treaty. We are asking Russia to return to compliance with the Treaty in a verifiable manner.

This groundbreaking treaty serves the mutual security interests of the parties – not only the United States and Russia, but also the 11 other states bound by its obligations. Moreover, this Treaty contributes to the security of our allies and to regional security in Europe and in the Far East.

When we notified Russia of our determination of a violation, we made it clear that we are prepared to discuss this in a senior-level bilateral dialogue immediately. We hope that this dialogue begins soon, with the goal that Russia return to compliance with its obligations under the Treaty.

There is an expert debate in Russia about its nuclear modernization programs and about the contribution of the INF Treaty to Russia’s security. It is important for Russia to take into account that no military decisions happen in a vacuum. Actions beget actions. Our countries have been down the road of needless, costly and destabilizing arms races. We know where that road leads and we are fortunate that our past leaders had the wisdom and strength to turn us in a new direction. Let us hope that debate in and out of the government leads to a decision to return Russia to compliance with all of its international obligations.

New START and Future Reductions

Despite our serious concerns about Russia’s violation of the INF Treaty, we believe that the New START Treaty is in the national security interest of the United States. The New START Treaty enhances our national security and strategic stability with Russia and both the United States and Russia are implementing the Treaty’s inspection regime.

Current tensions with Russia highlight the importance of both the verification and confidence provided by data exchanges and on-site inspections under the Treaty, and the security and predictability provided by verifiable mutual limits on strategic weapons. We take questions about compliance with arms control treaties very seriously and are closely monitoring Russian compliance with the New START Treaty. We assess that Russia is implementing and complying with the New START Treaty, and that the Treaty remains in our national security interest. The mutual predictability this gives to the U.S.-Russia relationship increases stability, especially during difficult times such as now.

With respect to future agreements, the United States will only pursue agreements that are in our national security interest and that of our allies. The offer that President Obama made in Berlin one year ago, of an up to one-third reduction in operationally deployed warheads beyond the New START limits, is a sound one, and worthy of serious consideration. We will continue to be open to discussion of agreements that would reduce nuclear and other military threats. Of course, we know that the situation is different than it was four years ago, four months ago, four weeks ago.

But cooperation in the arms control realm has been an important facet of strategic stability over the past forty years and it should remain so in the future. Moreover, we need nuclear cooperation with Russia and others to address new threats, first and foremost the risk that terrorists could acquire a nuclear weapon or the fissile materials needed to make one. We will continue to pursue arms control and nonproliferation tools, because they are the best - and quite frankly - the only path that we can take to effectively prevent a terrorist nuclear threat and reduce nuclear dangers more broadly.

The United States has taken steps to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy. We have clearly stated that it is in the U.S. interest, and that of all other nations, that the nearly 70-year record of non-use of nuclear weapons be extended forever.
We are taking time now to prepare the ground for the future. That includes more research into how we incorporate new technologies and innovations into verification and monitoring. We can also shape, maintain, and improve strategic stability through a variety of bilateral and multilateral dialogues, including in the Track 1.5 and Track 2 realms. These engagements reduce the potential for misunderstanding and provide the basis for future agreement and cooperation.

Multilateral agreements like a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) can also enhance global stability. The United States will continue to push for the commencement of negotiations on such an agreement.

And we are working to expand our public outreach and educational efforts on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty. As stated in the April 2010 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review: “Ratification of the CTBT is central to leading other nuclear weapons states toward a world of diminished reliance on nuclear weapons, reduced nuclear competition, and eventual nuclear disarmament.”

As we consider arms control and nonproliferation priorities, we will continue to consult closely with our allies and partners every step of the way. Our security and defense – and theirs – is non-negotiable.

Conventional Deterrence Tools

While nuclear deterrence is and will remain an important part of protecting our nation and our allies, we must also make full use of our non-nuclear capabilities – that includes regional and homeland missile defenses, security cooperation, assurances and conventional arms control.
Of course, the Russian Federation’s challenge to the security of Europe and Ukraine’s territorial integrity has to be factored into our work to modernize conventional arms control.
First and foremost, we need to make the best use of the regimes currently in place. The Vienna Document 2011 and the Open Skies Treaty, which are part of the conventional arms control regime in Europe, are vital tools to maintain stability and have provided transparency about military activities in and around Ukraine.

Second, we must consider our options for the future. We will continue the process of modernizing the Open Skies Treaty, including the upgrade to digital sensors to replace obsolescent film cameras.

With regard to the Vienna Document mechanisms, it is clear to us that there is room to improve provisions for notification of military activity and risk reduction, among other issues. Moving forward, the United States will work with others to update the Vienna Document in a way that builds on our recent experiences. NATO will also continue its review of the future of conventional arms control in Europe. We recognize that now is not the time to engage Russia on this, but we need to be thinking now about how in the future a revitalization of conventional arms control in Europe could contribute to improving mutual security in the Euro-Atlantic region.
Of course, we are not without good examples to follow. We can and will benefit from the experience of the so-called Dayton Article IV states. Eighteen years ago, these states in the Western Balkans were emerging from years of bloody conflict. Through hard work, they established military stability and security, despite a range of differences.

The architects of Dayton created a comprehensive arms control agreement that led to significant reductions in heavy weapons and equipment in just six months. Without as much as a breather, the states involved then turned their efforts to the harder step of fulfilling the obligations laid out in the Agreement, to sustain disengagement of military forces and create a stable security environment for all. The Dayton Article IV experience is a testament to what can be achieved through conventional arms control measures at a time when they are being sorely tested elsewhere in Europe.

Space and Cyber Deterrence

In addition to fully realizing the potential of conventional deterrence, we must make sure that we are ahead of the curve on space and cyber issues. I know this was the subject of a panel yesterday and rightly so - it is critical that we identify ways to stabilize behavior in both realms.
My colleague, Deputy Assistant Secretary Frank Rose spoke about strategic stability in space yesterday, highlighting the point that it is essential that all nations work together to adopt approaches for responsible activity in space in order to preserve this domain for future generations. China’s recent irresponsible and provocative ASAT test accentuates the importance of these efforts. Russia’s pursuit of anti-satellite weapons is also a matter of concern. Destabilizing actions like these threaten the long-term security and sustainability of the outer space environment.

In the cyber realm, the Department of State’s Office of the Coordinator for Cyber Issues, led by Chris Painter, is leading our efforts to promote an open, secure, and reliable information and communications infrastructure that supports international trade and innovation, strengthens international security, and fosters free expression.

As we move forward, we should continue to cooperate and coordinate both internally and with our friends and allies. Such efforts as the UN Group of Government Experts that convened last month will continue to enhance our common understanding of the ways in which international law is essential to maintaining peace and stability in cyberspace. Cyberspace can be the source of both great societal advances and significant threats. There is no doubt that domain will only remain stable through our collective efforts.

Deterrence in the Future

Of course, you know all of this - all of what we have been talking about - is moot if we don’t attract the next generation to nuclear policy jobs. As I said at the outset, this community is ready to work, but we can’t work forever. We have some recruiting to do. Frank Klotz struck this same note this morning: we need to bring the next generation into the nuclear deterrence enterprise.
That is why I was so pleased that Admiral Haney was able to join the Department of State’s 5th Annual Generation Prague Conference that was focused on engagement with the next generation of nuclear experts. It is one piece of ongoing efforts, but it is not enough. We need to be actively recruiting political scientists, lawyers, physicists, geologists, engineers, and more, if we want to make sure that this essential part of national security will be supported as long as it needs to be.

In closing, I want to leave you with a thought.

History has shown us that when faced with obstacles, we always have several paths. When it comes to our current situation with the Russian Federation, I, for one, want to follow the path that President Reagan took, the path that President George H.W. Bush took. When confronted with a difficult and sometimes unpredictable partner in the Soviet Union, they did not take their ball and go home. They did not let strategic stability become a political punching bag. They set about the hard task of building up strategic stability through arms control treaties and agreements, and they succeeded in making this world a safer place. They worked hard, and achieved much.

So let’s leave Omaha ready to work. In the world of nuclear stability and deterrence, there is much to do.

Thank you.

DEFENSE SECRETARY HAGEL SAYS U.S. COMMITTED TO ISRAEL'S SECURITY

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu make a joint statement in Jerusalem, May 16, 2014. DOD photo by Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo  

Hagel Reaffirms U.S. Commitment to Israel’s Security
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, May 16, 2014 – Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel today reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to Israel’s security during a joint statement to reporters with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before a meeting between the two leaders in Jerusalem.

“As you said in the United States earlier this year,” Hagel said to Netanyahu, “America's support for Israel is at an all-time high, and it is. And that applies especially to our defense relationship. Our defense relationship is strong, as we both know, and I think the people of Israel and the United States know it's strong because it's about a lot more than defense.

“The United States support for Israel is anchored in our nation's commitment to democracy and freedom and rights for our people,” Hagel continued. “America's commitment to Israel's security is resolute.”

The secretary noted to Netanyahu that the Juniper Cobra 14 military exercise he visited yesterday with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon demonstrates that commitment completely.

“It also demonstrates the cutting-edge work our nations are doing together on rocket and missile defense,” he added, “and I appreciate your comments on that point -- work that had strengthened Israel's security and saved lives.”
In his remarks, Netanyahu said that foremost among the topics he and Hagel would discuss is the danger posed to their countries and to world peace by Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. Hagel said the United States will do what it must to live up to its commitment to ensure Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.

The meeting also would touch on how to advance genuine peace and how to advance solid security in a region that is fraught with instability and insecurity, the prime minister said. “And I think that one of the things that creates an anchor of security is the close relationship between Israel and the United States, a relationship that is based both on value and a common determination to uphold our joint security,” he added.

THOMAS COUNTRYMAN'S REMARKS ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS RENUNCIATION BY UKRAINE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Twenty Years of Renunciation From Nuclear Weapons by Ukraine: Lessons Learned and Prospects of Nuclear Disarmament"

Remarks

Thomas M. Countryman

Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation

The Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations

New York City

April 28, 2014

---

Introduction
The 2014 PrepCom is an opportunity to strengthen the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and to reinforce our shared responsibilities to uphold it. The United States remains committed to full implementation of the 2010 Review Conference Action Plan. Through this PrepCom we will build on the momentum of the successful 2010 Review Conference and PrepComs in 2012 and 2013. As we approach the 2015 NPT Review Conference, the United States looks to all States Parties to work together towards strengthening this critical treaty which has underpinned international security for nearly 45 years.

I thank our Ukrainian friends for hosting us today. As President Obama and Secretary Kerry have said, the United States strongly supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Last week, Vice President Biden traveled to Kyiv in order to demonstrate our solidarity with the Ukrainian people. He discussed how the United States is supporting the international community’s efforts to stabilize and strengthen Ukraine’s economy and assist Ukraine in political reform and uniting the country. The Vice President announced a U.S. package of assistance totaling $50 million to help Ukraine pursue political and economic reform and strengthen our partnership. He made clear that Ukraine has a difficult road ahead, but it will not walk this road alone. And today the United States announced that it will impose new targeted sanctions on a number of Russian individuals and entities and restricting licenses for certain U.S. exports to Russia.

Budapest Memorandum Commitments

In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom made a commitment to respect the independence, sovereignty, and existing borders of Ukraine. The United States government remains committed to the Budapest Memorandum.
Our partnership with Ukraine goes back many years, and is particularly strong in the area of nonproliferation. We appreciate Ukraine’s continued leadership in this area.

Ukraine’s Nonproliferation Record

This year marks the twentieth anniversary of Ukraine’s historic decision to remove the third largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world from its territory and to accede to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear-weapon state. Ukraine’s unwavering commitment to its obligations under the NPT demonstrates that when a country places itself squarely within the NPT and diligently adheres to all of the Treaty’s obligations, all nations benefit.
Since 1994, Ukraine has a strong record of supporting nuclear nonproliferation and threat reduction. With support from the “Nunn-Lugar” Cooperative Threat Reduction program, Ukraine dismantled an enormous stockpile of ICBMs, heavy bombers, and related delivery systems. In 2004, it began an augmented program with the U.S. Department of Defense that includes weapons of mass destruction proliferation prevention and border security initiatives. By hosting the multilateral Science and Technology Center in Ukraine (STCU), Ukraine has engaged over 20,000 scientists from the former Soviet weapons program in peaceful activities. The United States has been proud to be a partner in those efforts.

Ukraine brought its IAEA safeguards agreement into force in 1995; it signed the Additional Protocol in 2000 and brought it into force in 2006. Ukraine joined the Global Partnership against the spread of WMD in 2005, in 2007 it was one of the first countries to join the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. Ukraine participated actively in all three Nuclear Security Summits. In 2012, Ukraine fulfilled its pledge to remove all highly enriched uranium from Ukraine, a highlight of the 2012 Summit.

In 2013, we extended the U.S.-Ukraine Cooperative Threat Reduction Umbrella Agreement for another seven years, as well as an agreement to increase safety and risk reduction at civilian nuclear facilities in Ukraine. Recent events in Ukraine underline the importance of bringing to closure to the legacy of Chernobyl by finishing construction of a landmark shelter to durably protect the population and environment, a project to which the United States has pledged approximately $337 million. Last month, a joint U.S. – Ukraine project to construct a Neutron Source Facility at the Kharkiv Institute for Physics and Technology was completed, providing Ukraine with new research capabilities and the ability to produce industrial and medical isotopes. In short, U.S. – Ukrainian cooperation on nuclear security and nonproliferation is broad and deep.

U.S. Commitment to Nonproliferation

We applaud Minister of Foreign Affairs Deshchytsia’s reaffirmation of Ukraine’s longstanding commitment to its nonproliferation obligations at the Nuclear Security Summit last month. Like Ukraine, the United States is committed to achieving the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. This is a central element of President Obama’s nuclear agenda. There is a long road ahead, but we are working to create the conditions for its eventual achievement. As President Obama said in Berlin in June, 2013, the United States can ensure its security and that of its allies while safely pursuing further nuclear reductions with Russia of up to one-third in the deployed strategic warhead level established in the New START Treaty.
As next steps toward nuclear disarmament, the United States remains committed to pursuing entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and consensus to start negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty.

I would like to highlight the work done at the P5 Conference earlier this month in Beijing toward implementing the Action Plan adopted at the 2010 NPT Review Conference
The NPT serves as a key element of international security and the basis for international nuclear cooperation. We will continue to address the serious challenges of cases of noncompliance with Treaty obligations, and will continue to support expanding access to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We look forward to a productive Preparatory Committee meeting, and reaffirm our commitment to ensuring the Treaty’s contributions to international peace and security are strengthened.

I thank our Ukrainian hosts again for today and congratulate them again on this important anniversary and their continued leadership within the NPT. I look forward to working with Ukraine, and with all other NPT Parties, over the coming weeks to ensure that the NPT remains strong.

As Secretary Kerry stated last week, the world will remain united for Ukraine.

REMARKS BY FIRST LADY MICHELLE OBAMA AT STANFORD CENTER AT PEKING UNIVERSITY

FROM:   THE WHITE HOUSE  

Beijing, China

MRS. OBAMA:  (Applause.)  Thank you.  Well, ni-hao.  (Laughter.)  It is such a pleasure and an honor to be here with all of you at this great university, so thank you so much for having me.

Now, before I get started today, on behalf of myself and my husband, I just want to say a few very brief words about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.  As my husband has said, the United States is offering as many resources as possible to assist in the search.  And please know that we are keeping all of the families and loved ones of those on this flight in our thoughts and prayers at this very difficult time.

Now with that, I want to start by recognizing our new Ambassador to China, Ambassador Baucus; President Wang; Chairman Zhu; Vice President Li; Director Cueller; Professor Oi, and the Stanford Center; President Sexton from New York University, which is an excellent study abroad program in Shanghai; and John Thornton, Director of the Global Leadership Program at Tsinghua University.  Thank you all for joining us.

But most of all, I want to thank all of the students who are here today.  And I particularly want to thank Eric Schaefer and Zhu Xuanhao for that extraordinary English and Chinese introduction.  That was a powerful symbol of everything that I want to talk with you about today.

See, by learning each other’s languages, and by showing such curiosity and respect for each other’s cultures, Mr. Schafer and Ms. Zhu and all of you are building bridges of understanding that will lead to so much more.  And I’m here today because I know that our future depends on connections like these among young people like you across the globe.

That’s why when my husband and I travel abroad, we don’t just visit palaces and parliaments and meet with heads of state.  We also come to schools like this one to meet with students like you, because we believe that relationships between nations aren’t just about relationships between governments or leaders -- they’re about relationships between people, particularly young people.  So we view study abroad programs not just as an educational opportunity for students, but also as a vital part of America’s foreign policy.

Through the wonders of modern technology, our world is more connected than ever before.  Ideas can cross oceans with the click of a button.  Companies can do business and compete with companies across the globe.  And we can text, email, Skype with people on every continent.

So studying abroad isn’t just a fun way to spend a semester; it is quickly becoming the key to success in our global economy.  Because getting ahead in today’s workplaces isn’t just about getting good grades or test scores in school, which are important.  It’s also about having real experience with the world beyond your borders –- experience with languages, cultures and societies very different from your own.  Or, as the Chinese saying goes:  “It is better to travel ten thousand miles than to read ten thousand books.”

But let’s be clear, studying abroad is about so much more than improving your own future.  It’s also about shaping the future of your countries and of the world we all share.  Because when it comes to the defining challenges of our time -– whether it’s climate change or economic opportunity or the spread of nuclear weapons -- these are shared challenges.  And no one country can confront them alone.  The only way forward is together.

That’s why it is so important for young people like you to live and study in each other’s countries, because that’s how you develop that habit of cooperation.  You do it by immersing yourself in one another’s culture, by learning each other’s stories, by getting past the stereotypes and misconceptions that too often divide us.

That’s how you come to understand how much we all share.  That’s how you realize that we all have a stake in each other’s success -- that cures discovered here in Beijing could save lives in America, that clean energy technologies from Silicon Valley in California could improve the environment here in China, that the architecture of an ancient temple in Xi’an could inspire the design of new buildings in Dallas or Detroit.  

And that’s when the connections you make as classmates or labmates can blossom into something more.  That’s what happened when Abigail Coplin became an American Fulbright Scholar here at Peking University.  She and her colleagues published papers together in top science journals, and they built research partnerships that lasted long after they returned to their home countries.  And Professor Niu Ke from Peking University was a Fulbright Scholarship -- Scholar in the U.S. last year, and he reported -- and this is a quote from him -- he said, “The most memorable experiences were with my American friends.”

These lasting bonds represent the true value of studying abroad.  And I am thrilled that more and more students are getting this opportunity.  As you’ve heard, China is currently the fifth most popular destination for Americans studying abroad, and today, the highest number of exchange students in the U.S. are from China.

But still, too many students never have this chance, and some that do are hesitant to take it.  They may feel like studying abroad is only for wealthy students or students from certain kinds of universities.  Or they may think to themselves, well, that sounds fun but how will it be useful in my life?  And believe me, I understand where these young people are coming from because I felt the same way back when I was in college.

See, I came from a working-class family, and it never occurred to me to study abroad -- never.  My parents didn’t get a chance to attend college, so I was focused on getting into a university, earning my degree so that I could get a good job to support myself and help my family.  And I know for a lot of young people like me who are struggling to afford a regular semester of school, paying for plane tickets or living expenses halfway around the world just isn’t possible.  And that’s not acceptable, because study abroad shouldn’t just be for students from certain backgrounds.

Our hope is to build connections between people of all races and socioeconomic backgrounds, because it is that diversity that truly will change the face of our relationships.  So we believe that diversity makes our country vibrant and strong.  And our study abroad programs should reflect the true spirit of America to the world.

And that’s why when my husband visited China back in 2009, he announced the 100,000 Strong initiative to increase the number and diversity of American students studying in China.  And this year, as we mark the 35th anniversary of the normalization of relationships between our two countries, the U.S. government actually supports more American students in China than in any other country in the world.

We are sending high school, college and graduate students here to study Chinese.  We’re inviting teachers from China to teach Mandarin in American schools.  We’re providing free online advising for students in China who want to study in the U.S.  And the U.S.-China Fulbright program is still going strong with more than 3,000 alumni.

And the private sector is stepping up as well.  For example, Steve Schwarzman, who is the head of an American company called Blackstone, is funding a new program at Tsinghua University modeled on the Rhodes Scholarship.  And today, students from all kinds of backgrounds are studying here in China.

Take the example of Royale Nicholson, who’s from Cleveland, Ohio.  She attends New York University’s program in Shanghai.  Now, like me, Royale is a first-generation college student.  And her mother worked two full-time jobs while her father worked nights to support their family.  And of her experience in Shanghai, Royale said -- and this is her quote -- she said, “This city oozes persistence and inspires me to accomplish all that I can.”  And happy birthday, Royale.  It was her birthday yesterday.  (Laughter.)

And then there’s Philmon Haile from the University of Washington, whose family came to the U.S. as refugees from Eritrea when he was a child.  And of his experience studying in China, he said, “Study abroad is a powerful vehicle for people-to-people exchange as we move into a new era of citizen diplomacy.”

“A new era of citizen diplomacy.”  I could not have said it better myself, because that’s really what I’m talking about.  I am talking about ordinary citizens reaching out to the world.  And as I always tell young people back in America, you don’t need to get on a plane to be a citizen diplomat.  I tell them that if you have an Internet connection in your home, school, or library, within seconds you can be transported anywhere in the world and meet people on every continent.

And that’s why I’m posting a daily travel blog with videos and photos of my experiences here in China, because I want young people in America to be part of this visit.  And that’s really the power of technology –- how it can open up the entire world and expose us to ideas and innovations we never could have imagined.

And that’s why it’s so important for information and ideas to flow freely over the Internet and through the media, because that’s how we discover the truth.  That’s how we learn what’s really happening in our communities and our country and our world.  And that’s how we decide which values and ideas we think are best –- by questioning and debating them vigorously, by listening to all sides of an argument, and by judging for ourselves.

And believe me, I know how this can be a messy and frustrating process.  My husband and I are on the receiving end of plenty of questioning and criticism from our media and our fellow citizens.  And it’s not always easy, but we wouldn’t trade it for anything in the world.  Because time and again, we have seen that countries are stronger and more prosperous when the voices of and opinions of all their citizens can be heard.

And as my husband has said, we respect the uniqueness of other cultures and societies, but when it comes to expressing yourself freely and worshipping as you choose and having open access to information, we believe those universal rights -- they are universal rights that are the birthright of every person on this planet.  We believe that all people deserve the opportunity to fulfill their highest potential as I was able to do in the United States.

And as you learn about new cultures and form new friendships during your time here in China and in the United States, all of you are the living, breathing embodiment of those values.  So I guarantee you that in studying abroad, you’re not just changing your own life, you are changing the lives of everyone you meet.

And as the great American President John F. Kennedy once said about foreign students studying in the U.S., he said “I think they teach more than they learn.”  And that is just as true of young Americans who study abroad.  All of you are America’s best face, and China’s best face, to the world -- you truly are.

Every day, you show the world your countries’ energy and creativity and optimism and unwavering belief in the future.  And every day, you remind us -- and me in particular -- of just how much we can achieve if we reach across borders, and learn to see ourselves in each other, and confront our shared challenges with shared resolve.

So I hope you all will keep seeking these kinds of experiences.  And I hope you’ll keep teaching each other, and learning from each other, and building bonds of friendship that will enrich your lives and enrich our world for decades to come.

You all have so much to offer, and I cannot wait to see all that you achieve together in the years ahead.

Thank you so much.  Xie-Xie.  (Applause.)

 END                11:48 A.M. CST  

DEFENSE SECRETARY HAGEL HAS DISCUSSION OVER IRAN WITH ISRAELI DEFENSE MINISTER YAALON

FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Secretary Discusses Iran With Israeli Defense Minister
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 20, 2014 – During a phone conversation with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon yesterday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel expressed his deep concern about Yaalon’s reported comments on U.S. policy towards Iran and reiterated the U.S. commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, Pentagon Press Secretary Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby said in a Defense Department news release.

News reports say Yaalon had recently criticized the U.S. policy towards preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

During his conversation with Hagel, Yaalon clarified his remarks by underscoring his commitment to the strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship, Kirby said in the release.

Kirby added that Yaalon also provided Hagel with an update on Israel's security situation, and yesterday's Israeli operation against Syrian military and security targets on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights launched in retaliation for a March 18 bomb attack in the Golan Heights near the Syrian border that left four Israeli soldiers injured.

Hagel expressed his sympathy for the wounded Israeli forces and their families, Kirby said in the release, as well as his concern for the ongoing situation in Syria.
“The secretary and minister pledged to continue working closely with one another on the range of security issues facing the United States and Israel,” Kirby added.

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.