Showing posts with label RUSSIA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RUSSIA. Show all posts

Friday, July 11, 2014

U.S. STRATEGIC COMMANDER DISCUSSES CHALLENGES

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Stratcom Chief Outlines Deterrence Challenges
By Terri Moon Cronk
DoD News, Defense Media Activity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Haney urged students in the audience to challenge traditional thinking.

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

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

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY'S PRESS STATEMENT ON 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF JOURNALIST PAUL KLEBNIKOV'S MURDER

FROM:   U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Marking the 10th Anniversary of the Murder of American Journalist Paul Klebnikov

Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
July 9, 2014


Ten years ago today, an American journalist was shot and killed as he left his Moscow office. Paul Klebnikov did more than write about politics and business in Russia. He was a voice of conscience in the fight against corruption.

Paul’s senseless murder was a sickening punch in the gut. Ten years later, we remain deeply troubled that the mystery of who ordered the murder is still unsolved. We continue to call on Russia, as we have over the last decade, to bring the perpetrators of this heinous crime to justice.

It’s not lost on any of us that the unvarnished truth-telling and investigative journalism to which Klebnikov dedicated his life continues to be under attack in Russia. The space for independent voices in Russian media is rapidly shrinking.

Today of all days, we honor the memory of Paul Klebnikov and the other journalists in Russia who have lost their lives. We call on the Russian government to protect journalists from attacks and to respect fundamental freedoms of expression.

Thursday, July 3, 2014

WHITE HOUSE READOUT: VP BIDEN'S CALL WITH UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT POROSHENKO

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

Readout of the Vice President's Call with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko

Vice President Biden spoke with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko today to discuss the latest situation in eastern Ukraine and diplomatic efforts to pursue a sustainable ceasefire that would be respected by the separatists and fully supported by Russia, and would allow for the implementation of the peace plan laid out in Poroshenko’s inaugural address. The Vice President underscored that the United States remained focused on Russia’s actions, not its words. The Vice President noted the United States is prepared to impose further costs on Russia if it fails to withdraw its ongoing support for the separatists, including the provision of heavy weapons and materiel across the border.

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

CHAIRMAN JOINT CHIEFS SAYS WORLD SECURITY ENVIRONMENT IS CONFUSED

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, speaks with service members during a town hall on Fort Shafter, Hawaii, June 30, 2014. Dempsey told U.S. Army Pacific soldiers that he hopes the military services can retain their own unique field uniforms, adding that having separate military services brings perspectives to the table that are the epitome of “jointness.” DoD photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Daniel Hinton.  

World Faces Confused Security Environment, Chairman Says
By Jim Garamone
DoD News, Defense Media Activity

FORT SHAFTER, Hawaii, July 1, 2014 – The world faces a confused security environment, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said here yesterday, but the United States can deal with it.

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey told soldiers of U.S. Army Pacific during an all-hands call that it is the right time and the right thing to rebalance U.S. interests in the Asia-Pacific theater.

Different areas of the world mean different security situations, the chairman explained.

“In this region of the world, there’s a rising sense of nationalism among the countries,” the chairman said. “The effort and intent of China to emerge on the world stage presents a different type of security challenge.”

In the Middle East, he told the soldiers, nationalism is breaking down amid fragmentation of national identity and the emergence of extremist groups.
The situation in Europe is somewhere between that in Asia and the Middle East, the general said. “There’s a group of nations trying to pull Europe together with organizations like NATO and the European Union,” he added, but he noted that in parts of Europe, there’s also a countervailing trend to see things in terms of national interests and ethnic identities.

Worldwide, Dempsey said, the security environment is confused. “It’s something we have to address,” he added. “You take the world as you find it, not as you hope it to be. And fortunately, we’ve got a great group of leaders and men and women in uniform that are willing to do just that.”

This security environment means the U.S. military must be prepared for different operations in different parts of the world, the nation’s top military officer said. “In this region, it is nations competing with other nations,” Dempsey said. “In the Middle East, it is about groups who don’t even care about borders competing with each other. In Europe, it is something in-between. That makes it very difficult to understand how to build the force.”

In the Asia-Pacific region, the threat of conventional conflict -- nation versus nation -- is higher than anywhere else, he said. In the Middle East, the risk is the long campaign against global terrorism.

“The use of military power in the Middle East is very much different than it would be if something broke out in the Pacific,” Dempsey said. “In Europe is a new challenge with Russian aggressiveness and assertiveness that we are trying to shape through NATO.”

American service members need to be ready to confront a myriad of threats, Dempsey said. “I wouldn’t put away your field manuals that describe how to do maneuver and combined arms effects and traditional conflict,” the chairman said. “It’s probably a little early. We need to do both.”

The Asia-Pacific region has many security interests for the United States -- so many interests and implications for the region and the world, the chairman said, that the U.S. rebalance really is the right thing to do and the right time to do it.
South Asia and Southeast Asia alone have 17 percent of the world’s land mass, he noted, but 50 percent of its population.

“Frankly, the distractions we are facing elsewhere shouldn’t distract from our interests and to posture ourselves better in the Pacific,” Dempsey said.

Friday, June 27, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY'S PRESS AVAILABILITY AT NATO HEADQUARTERS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Press Availability at NATO Headquarters

Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Brussels, Belgium
June 25, 2014


SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. Excuse me. As you know, this is the last foreign ministers gathering before NATO’s next Heads of State Summit in September. Excuse me, let me just get a little water here. (Laughter.) I’ve got the travel whatever. So today, we had a chance to take stock of the strong measures that have been taken in order to provide reassurance to our eastern allies on the land, on sea, and air, and we’ve taken measures that demonstrate that our Article 5 commitment is absolutely rock solid. We also affirmed NATO’s open door policy as well as the vital importance of having strong, capable partners.
Today we spent a significant amount of time in our discussions focused on Ukraine and our allies’ sustained support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and the right of its people to determine their own future. The Ukrainian Government has recently taken a series of important steps to forge a more inclusive society for all Ukrainians, no matter what language they speak or what region the country they live in or what their ethnic background may be. And after a free and fair election, the Ukrainian people celebrated a peaceful transfer of power earlier this month and are now implementing a ceasefire and a peace plan which offers constitutional reform, broad decentralization of power, and local autonomy to Ukraine’s regions and communities.
The United States commends the Ukrainian Government for reaching out to separatists and to the Russian Government. And now we believe it is critical for President Putin to prove by his actions, not just his words, that he is indeed fully committed to peace. It is critical for him to stop the flow of weapons and fighters across the border, to call publicly for the separatists to lay down their arms, to pull Russian forces and equipment back, and to help get OSCE hostages released.

Until Russia fully makes that kind of commitment to the peace process and to the stability of Ukraine, the United States and Europe are compelled to continue to prepare greater costs, including tough economic sanctions, with the hopes that they will not have to be used. But that is dependent on the choices that Russia and its president make in the next days and weeks.
As Secretary General Rasmussen has said, Russia’s recent moves in Ukraine served as a wakeup call. As our economies begin to grow again, a strong NATO requires defense spending by all, and President Obama is committed that the United States will do its part, and he has asked Congress for an additional $1 billion for defense spending in Europe.
As we head to the Wales summit, every ally spending less than 2 percent of their GDP needs to dig deeper and make a concrete commitment to do more. And all you have to do is look at a map in order to understand why – Ukraine, Iraq, Syria – all threats to peace and to security, and they surround the region.

On the minds of all of us today also is the situation in Iraq. Earlier this week, I traveled to Baghdad and Erbil at the request of President Obama, and while here I briefed my fellow foreign ministers on the conversations that I had with Iraq leaders. Iraq is obviously facing an extraordinary security challenge and a set of political challenges and choices. The United States is also working to support Iraq in its fight against ISIL. We need to remember that ISIL is a terrorist army that threatens not only Iraq, but threatens every country in the region which is opposed to it, and Europe and the United States.

Succeeding in this fight is going to require Iraqis to come together, finally, in order to form an inclusive government. And in every meeting with leaders of each of Iraq’s main communities, I stressed the importance, the urgency of them coming together to do just that.

President Obama has also asked me to travel to Saudi Arabia on Friday in order to meet with His Majesty King Abdullah and to discuss regional issues, including the situation in Iraq and how we can counter the shared threat that is posed by ISIL, as well to discuss our support for the moderate opposition in Syria. None of us need to be reminded that a faraway threat can have tragic consequences at home in the most unexpected way at the most unexpected moment.

Just a few months ago right here in Brussels, a man who had recently returned from fighting in Syria shot three people at a local museum. NATO allies in the entire international community must remain focused on combatting the growth of extremism. With the Wales summit in September, our alliance has the chance to become far more adaptable in how we meet emerging threats and far more capable in how we build the capacity of our countries to be able to not only respond to them but, more importantly, to preempt them.

One of the first tests of NATO’s ability to forge stronger, more capable partners will be resolute support – NATO’s post-2014 train, advise, and assist mission with the people of Afghanistan. And today we discussed our coordinated efforts to wind down our combat presence in Afghanistan while continuing our commitment to combatting terrorism and preserving the gains made by the people of Afghanistan. NATO, significantly, has succeeded as an alliance for more than six decades now because it has always recognized that security threats of the future will not always look like the security threats that you face today, and certainly not like those of the past.

Remarkably, this gathering that is now discussing Afghanistan – 50 nations – has come together and stayed together for 12 years. At a time when people doubt the ability of multilateral efforts to make a difference, the meeting here today stands in stark testimony to the contrary. It does make a difference. It has made a difference. And at the Wales conference – summit, I am confident that NATO will demonstrate strength at home in its unity and in meeting, in new ways, many of the 21st century challenges that we face today.

So I’d be happy to take some questions.

MS. PSAKI: The first question will be from Anne Gearan of The Washington Post.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, you said a moment ago that Russian President Putin will be judged by his actions, not his words, on Ukraine. He did call this week for the rescinding of the invasion powers for Ukraine, and that was acted on today. Is that enough, in your view, to at least start the conversation about what the West might do in response – specifically, not taking the sectoral sanctions step? Is there anything really practical that you want to see Putin do in the next couple of days before the EU meets on Friday to continue that conversation? The things you outlined are much more long term. What do you want to see him do in the next like 36 hours that would change that conversation on Friday?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, first of all, we are not announcing a new round of sanctions today, but we are going to continue to take steps to prepare in the event that the circumstances on the ground warrant those sanctions. And so we’re coordinating with our European partners in order to prepare for that.

Now, we are delighted that President Putin put to the Duma the retraction of that law which empowered Russia to take action in Ukraine. That’s important. It’s a great step. But it could be reversed in 10 minutes, and everyone knows that. The greatest difference will be made by the president publicly calling for the separatists to lay down their arms, by President Putin engaging his diplomatic service actively in the effort to help empty buildings, helping to get people to disarm, helping to convene the meetings that need to take place in order to negotiate and to move forward.

There are concrete actions – moving forces out, not allowing tanks and rocket launchers to actually cross the border. There are many concrete things that would make a difference, and we intend to work as cooperatively as possible. These aren’t – what we’re trying to do is make a set of concrete suggestions that really make the difference to what is happening on the ground. Yesterday, a helicopter – a Ukrainian helicopter was shot down and nine Ukrainian soldiers were killed. And it was shot down with a Russian weapon, with a MANPAD RPG capacity that took that helicopter out. And so it is – there are concrete steps, and we are prepared to work very, very closely with Russia in an effort to implement those steps.

And likewise, Ukraine also can take steps in a mutual way, and they’re prepared to do that. President Poroshenko obviously has done so by unilaterally putting in place a ceasefire and by taking great political heat himself in doing so. Now’s the time for this moment to really come together, and that is why the allies are talking about preparing sanctions – not implementing them today, but preparing them in the event that this effort were to fail.

MS. PSAKI: The next question is from Erik Eenlo from Baltic News Service.

QUESTION: Yes. This readiness action plan that NATO is preparing – is that something that addresses the Russian arms buildup and increasing number of military provocations in the Baltic Sea region?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, it certainly – that is part of it. But it’s also much broader than that. It’s an effort to recognize that we’re living in a different world. The type of threats that existed in the past are not what played out in Crimea, where you had soldiers who were hiding behind masks and without any identification on them, and a massive public relations campaign simultaneously denying the reality of what everybody was seeing on the ground; where you had this incredible capacity for deception, for denial, which was both a surrogate effort of a government and a linkage to activists, terrorists, and others.

That’s a new animal in a sense, and I think we’re seeing with ISIL crossing from Syria and moving rapidly into Iraq a similar kind of hybrid new form of effort, which is going to require people to think through strategically intelligence gathering, preparations, response, response times, nature of response. And that’s what the NATO alliance has always done effectively, and that’s what the – a lot of today’s discussion focused on, is how do you have not just permanent basing in certain places, but permanent vigilance and permanent capacity to be ahead of the curve. And that’s really the – that’s what readiness really means, and that will be a lot of the focus of the Wales summit.

MS. PSAKI: The final question is from James Rosen of Fox News.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I wanted to ask about two different facets of the Iraq crisis, if I may. First, I presume you saw the comments that Prime Minister al-Maliki made in his weekly address, in which he spoke of a “national salvation government,” quote unquote, as a coup against constitutional processes in Iraq and one in which he declared his refusal to participate. I wonder what you make of those comments, whether you regard them as helpful or not to the task of government formation in Iraq, and whether it is still the professed position of the United States Government that the Obama Administration is utterly disinterested in the question of whether al-Maliki stays or goes.

And the second facet of the crisis I’d like to ask you about is this: I wonder if the disclosure that Iran has been secretly flying drones over Iraq – from an airfield in Baghdad, no less – and has been secretly shipping literally tons of military equipment to the central government in Baghdad serves effectively to complicate the United States’ own evolving military operations and diplomatic mission in Iraq, and whether in fact it represents a widening of the war there.

SECRETARY KERRY: So let me take each question. With respect to the prime minister’s remarks about a so-called salvation government, that is not something that I discussed with him. That is not something that was on the table in the context of our meetings while we were there. In fact, there was no discussion that I had with any of the leaders there regarding a so-called salvation government. And I’ve heard reports about it, but I’m not sure exactly what it is that he rejected or spoke to.

What I do know is that in the prime minister’s remarks today he did follow through on the commitments that he made in our discussions. He clearly committed to completing the electoral process, he committed to meeting on the 1st of July and having the Council of Representatives come together, and he committed to moving forward with the constitutional processes of government formation. And that is precisely what the United States was encouraging. He also called on all Iraqis to put aside their differences to unite in their efforts against terrorism. That is also what we had discussions about.

So what he said today with respect to the things we talked about was entirely in line with the conversations that I had with him when I was there. And the constitutional process that we’ve urged all Iraqis to commit to at this time, we believe is critical to the ability to form a government.

Now, Iraqis will decide that. And the United States is not disinterested in what happens in a future leadership, but the United States is not going to engage in the process of suggesting to Iraqis who that ought to be. It’s up to Iraqis to make those decisions. And we have stated clearly that we have an interest in a government that can unite Iraqis that, like Grand Ayatollah Sistani said, will not repeat the mistakes of the past and go backwards but can actually bring people together. It’s up to Iraqis to decide who has the ability to do that and who represents that future.
With respect to Iran and its intentions and role in Iraq, frankly, you should best direct that question to Iran and to the Government of Iraq. But from our point of view, we’ve made it clear to everyone in the region that we don’t need anything to take place that might exacerbate the sectarian divisions that are already at a heightened level of tension. And so it’s very important that nothing take place that contributes to the extremism or could act as a flash point with respect to the sectarian divide. And --

QUESTION: Has the war been widened?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, widened from what? Widened from five minutes ago, an hour ago, yesterday? It’s been widened, obviously, in the last days with the reports of IRGC personnel, of some people from Iran being engaged in Iraq, with perhaps even some Syrian activities therein. And that’s one of the reasons why government formation is so urgent so that the leaders of Iraq can begin to make decisions necessary to protect Iraq without outside forces moving to fill a vacuum.

And again, President Obama is very, very clear that our priority is that government formation, and we’re going to take every step we can over the next days. We had conversations about it here. There are people here who will be encouraging that to take place. I know William Hague, the foreign secretary of Great Britain, will be traveling there. He will be having conversations. This is a multiple allied interest in having a unity government that can move Iraq to the future and pull it back from this precipice. And all of us remain hopeful that in the next days that can happen.

Thank you all.

Thursday, June 26, 2014

READOUT PRESIDENT OBAMA'S CALL WITH ITALY'S PRIME MINISTER RENZI

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 
June 25, 2014
Readout of the President’s Call with Prime Minister Renzi of Italy

The President spoke today with Prime Minister Renzi of Italy about the latest developments in Ukraine.  They agreed on the importance of the Government of Ukraine and the separatists continuing discussions to implement the peace plan put forward by President Poroshenko.  They also stressed the need for Russia to use its influence over separatist groups to persuade them to abide by the cease-fire and for Russia to take immediate concrete steps to stop the flow of weapons and militants across the border.  The leaders agreed we will continue to coordinate measures to impose additional costs on Russia if it fails to take rapid action to deescalate the situation in eastern Ukraine.

SECRETARY KERRY, FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS MAKE REMARKS AFTER MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Remarks With French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius After Their Meeting

Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Paris, France
June 26, 2014


SECRETARY KERRY: I want to thank Foreign Minister Fabius for France’s extraordinary hospitality and helping to provide the venue for a number of meetings today. And Foreign Minister Fabius and I discussed each of the individual many hotspots that we are challenged by today. We particularly agree on Iraq that we want a government formation as rapidly as possible that represents unity for the country. We are also deeply concerned about the challenge of Syria. We talked about that as well as the Iran nuclear talks, which we are deeply involved in and partnering in very significantly.

Ukraine, we are in full agreement that it is critical for Russia to show in the next hours, literally, that they are moving to help disarm the separatists, to encourage them to disarm, to call on them to lay down their weapons and begin to become part of a legitimate political process. And the European Community will be meeting on their component of the sanctions. We all agree that they need to be ready. But our preference is not to have to be into a sanctions mode. We would like to see a cooperative effort between the United States, Europe, and Russia and the Ukrainians. And we are going to try to encourage that as much as we can.

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: (In French.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Do you want to say anything in English for the American audience?

FOREIGN MINISTER FABIUS: Pidgin English. (Laughter.) And afterwards you say something in French.

We have discussed with Secretary John Kerry, as we are doing very frequently, nearly every day, at least every week, and particularly about Iraq and about Ukraine and Iran as well, and have insisted – we have insisted on the very, very difficult situation in Iraq where the ISIL group has shown terrible ferocity and brutality, and we are expecting from the Iraqi that it could get united. And it’s a necessity not only for Iraq but for the whole region, because it’s a menace for Iraq, for the region, for Europe, and for U.S. as well.

And we have discussed about Ukraine. There is some sort – but we will be very careful – of a de-escalation. There has been yesterday a long conversation between French president, German chancellor, Russian president, and Ukrainian president as well. There are commitments which have been taken, and we hope that it will be implemented today and in the coming days.

And we have discussed particularly about Iran and nuclear talks, because we are 5+1 and Iran on the other hand, and we want – we accept perfectly that Iran could have nuclear civil energy, but as sometime I am summarizing very briefly, atomic bomb, no.
Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Merci. Thank you.

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

SECRETARY TAKES PRESS QUESTIONS IN BRUSSELS, BELGIUM

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Press Availability at NATO Headquarters

Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Brussels, Belgium
June 25, 2014


SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. Excuse me. As you know, this is the last foreign ministers gathering before NATO’s next Heads of State Summit in September. Excuse me, let me just get a little water here. (Laughter.) I’ve got the travel whatever. So today, we had a chance to take stock of the strong measures that have been taken in order to provide reassurance to our eastern allies on the land, on sea, and air, and we’ve taken measures that demonstrate that our Article 5 commitment is absolutely rock solid. We also affirmed NATO’s open door policy as well as the vital importance of having strong, capable partners.
Today we spent a significant amount of time in our discussions focused on Ukraine and our allies’ sustained support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and the right of its people to determine their own future. The Ukrainian Government has recently taken a series of important steps to forge a more inclusive society for all Ukrainians, no matter what language they speak or what region the country they live in or what their ethnic background may be. And after a free and fair election, the Ukrainian people celebrated a peaceful transfer of power earlier this month and are now implementing a ceasefire and a peace plan which offers constitutional reform, broad decentralization of power, and local autonomy to Ukraine’s regions and communities.
The United States commends the Ukrainian Government for reaching out to separatists and to the Russian Government. And now we believe it is critical for President Putin to prove by his actions, not just his words, that he is indeed fully committed to peace. It is critical for him to stop the flow of weapons and fighters across the border, to call publicly for the separatists to lay down their arms, to pull Russian forces and equipment back, and to help get OSCE hostages released.

Until Russia fully makes that kind of commitment to the peace process and to the stability of Ukraine, the United States and Europe are compelled to continue to prepare greater costs, including tough economic sanctions, with the hopes that they will not have to be used. But that is dependent on the choices that Russia and its president make in the next days and weeks.
As Secretary General Rasmussen has said, Russia’s recent moves in Ukraine served as a wakeup call. As our economies begin to grow again, a strong NATO requires defense spending by all, and President Obama is committed that the United States will do its part, and he has asked Congress for an additional $1 billion for defense spending in Europe.
As we head to the Wales summit, every ally spending less than 2 percent of their GDP needs to dig deeper and make a concrete commitment to do more. And all you have to do is look at a map in order to understand why – Ukraine, Iraq, Syria – all threats to peace and to security, and they surround the region.

On the minds of all of us today also is the situation in Iraq. Earlier this week, I traveled to Baghdad and Erbil at the request of President Obama, and while here I briefed my fellow foreign ministers on the conversations that I had with Iraq leaders. Iraq is obviously facing an extraordinary security challenge and a set of political challenges and choices. The United States is also working to support Iraq in its fight against ISIL. We need to remember that ISIL is a terrorist army that threatens not only Iraq, but threatens every country in the region which is opposed to it, and Europe and the United States.

Succeeding in this fight is going to require Iraqis to come together, finally, in order to form an inclusive government. And in every meeting with leaders of each of Iraq’s main communities, I stressed the importance, the urgency of them coming together to do just that.

President Obama has also asked me to travel to Saudi Arabia on Friday in order to meet with His Majesty King Abdullah and to discuss regional issues, including the situation in Iraq and how we can counter the shared threat that is posed by ISIL, as well to discuss our support for the moderate opposition in Syria. None of us need to be reminded that a faraway threat can have tragic consequences at home in the most unexpected way at the most unexpected moment.

Just a few months ago right here in Brussels, a man who had recently returned from fighting in Syria shot three people at a local museum. NATO allies in the entire international community must remain focused on combatting the growth of extremism. With the Wales summit in September, our alliance has the chance to become far more adaptable in how we meet emerging threats and far more capable in how we build the capacity of our countries to be able to not only respond to them but, more importantly, to preempt them.

One of the first tests of NATO’s ability to forge stronger, more capable partners will be resolute support – NATO’s post-2014 train, advise, and assist mission with the people of Afghanistan. And today we discussed our coordinated efforts to wind down our combat presence in Afghanistan while continuing our commitment to combatting terrorism and preserving the gains made by the people of Afghanistan. NATO, significantly, has succeeded as an alliance for more than six decades now because it has always recognized that security threats of the future will not always look like the security threats that you face today, and certainly not like those of the past.

Remarkably, this gathering that is now discussing Afghanistan – 50 nations – has come together and stayed together for 12 years. At a time when people doubt the ability of multilateral efforts to make a difference, the meeting here today stands in stark testimony to the contrary. It does make a difference. It has made a difference. And at the Wales conference – summit, I am confident that NATO will demonstrate strength at home in its unity and in meeting, in new ways, many of the 21st century challenges that we face today.

So I’d be happy to take some questions.

MS. PSAKI: The first question will be from Anne Gearan of The Washington Post.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, you said a moment ago that Russian President Putin will be judged by his actions, not his words, on Ukraine. He did call this week for the rescinding of the invasion powers for Ukraine, and that was acted on today. Is that enough, in your view, to at least start the conversation about what the West might do in response – specifically, not taking the sectoral sanctions step? Is there anything really practical that you want to see Putin do in the next couple of days before the EU meets on Friday to continue that conversation? The things you outlined are much more long term. What do you want to see him do in the next like 36 hours that would change that conversation on Friday?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, first of all, we are not announcing a new round of sanctions today, but we are going to continue to take steps to prepare in the event that the circumstances on the ground warrant those sanctions. And so we’re coordinating with our European partners in order to prepare for that.

Now, we are delighted that President Putin put to the Duma the retraction of that law which empowered Russia to take action in Ukraine. That’s important. It’s a great step. But it could be reversed in 10 minutes, and everyone knows that. The greatest difference will be made by the president publicly calling for the separatists to lay down their arms, by President Putin engaging his diplomatic service actively in the effort to help empty buildings, helping to get people to disarm, helping to convene the meetings that need to take place in order to negotiate and to move forward.

There are concrete actions – moving forces out, not allowing tanks and rocket launchers to actually cross the border. There are many concrete things that would make a difference, and we intend to work as cooperatively as possible. These aren’t – what we’re trying to do is make a set of concrete suggestions that really make the difference to what is happening on the ground. Yesterday, a helicopter – a Ukrainian helicopter was shot down and nine Ukrainian soldiers were killed. And it was shot down with a Russian weapon, with a MANPAD RPG capacity that took that helicopter out. And so it is – there are concrete steps, and we are prepared to work very, very closely with Russia in an effort to implement those steps.

And likewise, Ukraine also can take steps in a mutual way, and they’re prepared to do that. President Poroshenko obviously has done so by unilaterally putting in place a ceasefire and by taking great political heat himself in doing so. Now’s the time for this moment to really come together, and that is why the allies are talking about preparing sanctions – not implementing them today, but preparing them in the event that this effort were to fail.

MS. PSAKI: The next question is from Erik Eenlo from Baltic News Service.

QUESTION: Yes. This readiness action plan that NATO is preparing – is that something that addresses the Russian arms buildup and increasing number of military provocations in the Baltic Sea region?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, it certainly – that is part of it. But it’s also much broader than that. It’s an effort to recognize that we’re living in a different world. The type of threats that existed in the past are not what played out in Crimea, where you had soldiers who were hiding behind masks and without any identification on them, and a massive public relations campaign simultaneously denying the reality of what everybody was seeing on the ground; where you had this incredible capacity for deception, for denial, which was both a surrogate effort of a government and a linkage to activists, terrorists, and others.

That’s a new animal in a sense, and I think we’re seeing with ISIL crossing from Syria and moving rapidly into Iraq a similar kind of hybrid new form of effort, which is going to require people to think through strategically intelligence gathering, preparations, response, response times, nature of response. And that’s what the NATO alliance has always done effectively, and that’s what the – a lot of today’s discussion focused on, is how do you have not just permanent basing in certain places, but permanent vigilance and permanent capacity to be ahead of the curve. And that’s really the – that’s what readiness really means, and that will be a lot of the focus of the Wales summit.

MS. PSAKI: The final question is from James Rosen of Fox News.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I wanted to ask about two different facets of the Iraq crisis, if I may. First, I presume you saw the comments that Prime Minister al-Maliki made in his weekly address, in which he spoke of a “national salvation government,” quote unquote, as a coup against constitutional processes in Iraq and one in which he declared his refusal to participate. I wonder what you make of those comments, whether you regard them as helpful or not to the task of government formation in Iraq, and whether it is still the professed position of the United States Government that the Obama Administration is utterly disinterested in the question of whether al-Maliki stays or goes.

And the second facet of the crisis I’d like to ask you about is this: I wonder if the disclosure that Iran has been secretly flying drones over Iraq – from an airfield in Baghdad, no less – and has been secretly shipping literally tons of military equipment to the central government in Baghdad serves effectively to complicate the United States’ own evolving military operations and diplomatic mission in Iraq, and whether in fact it represents a widening of the war there.

SECRETARY KERRY: So let me take each question. With respect to the prime minister’s remarks about a so-called salvation government, that is not something that I discussed with him. That is not something that was on the table in the context of our meetings while we were there. In fact, there was no discussion that I had with any of the leaders there regarding a so-called salvation government. And I’ve heard reports about it, but I’m not sure exactly what it is that he rejected or spoke to.

What I do know is that in the prime minister’s remarks today he did follow through on the commitments that he made in our discussions. He clearly committed to completing the electoral process, he committed to meeting on the 1st of July and having the Council of Representatives come together, and he committed to moving forward with the constitutional processes of government formation. And that is precisely what the United States was encouraging. He also called on all Iraqis to put aside their differences to unite in their efforts against terrorism. That is also what we had discussions about.

So what he said today with respect to the things we talked about was entirely in line with the conversations that I had with him when I was there. And the constitutional process that we’ve urged all Iraqis to commit to at this time, we believe is critical to the ability to form a government.

Now, Iraqis will decide that. And the United States is not disinterested in what happens in a future leadership, but the United States is not going to engage in the process of suggesting to Iraqis who that ought to be. It’s up to Iraqis to make those decisions. And we have stated clearly that we have an interest in a government that can unite Iraqis that, like Grand Ayatollah Sistani said, will not repeat the mistakes of the past and go backwards but can actually bring people together. It’s up to Iraqis to decide who has the ability to do that and who represents that future.
With respect to Iran and its intentions and role in Iraq, frankly, you should best direct that question to Iran and to the Government of Iraq. But from our point of view, we’ve made it clear to everyone in the region that we don’t need anything to take place that might exacerbate the sectarian divisions that are already at a heightened level of tension. And so it’s very important that nothing take place that contributes to the extremism or could act as a flash point with respect to the sectarian divide. And --

QUESTION: Has the war been widened?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, widened from what? Widened from five minutes ago, an hour ago, yesterday? It’s been widened, obviously, in the last days with the reports of IRGC personnel, of some people from Iran being engaged in Iraq, with perhaps even some Syrian activities therein. And that’s one of the reasons why government formation is so urgent so that the leaders of Iraq can begin to make decisions necessary to protect Iraq without outside forces moving to fill a vacuum.

And again, President Obama is very, very clear that our priority is that government formation, and we’re going to take every step we can over the next days. We had conversations about it here. There are people here who will be encouraging that to take place. I know William Hague, the foreign secretary of Great Britain, will be traveling there. He will be having conversations. This is a multiple allied interest in having a unity government that can move Iraq to the future and pull it back from this precipice. And all of us remain hopeful that in the next days that can happen.

Thank you all.

Thursday, June 5, 2014

PRESIDENT OBAMA, U.K. PRIME MINISTER CAMERON MAKE REMARKS AT PRESS CONFERENCE

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 
Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom in Joint Press Conference
Justus Lipsius Building
Headquarters of the Council of the European Union
Brussels, Belgium

3:35 P.M. CET

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Good afternoon, everybody.  It is good to be here with my great friend and partner, Prime Minister David Cameron.  Earlier this afternoon we concluded our summit with our fellow G7 leaders.  And I want to thank His Majesty King Philippe, the Prime Minister, as well as the Belgian people for welcoming us back to Brussels.

David and I also just had the opportunity to meet and discuss some pressing challenges -- including Syria, Libya and Iran, as well as the process of ending our combat mission in Afghanistan.  We spoke about the deepening partnership that we have on issues like Nigeria, in support of our shared goal of safely returning the kidnapped girls to their families.  But what I want to focus on briefly before we take questions are two issues that dominated our discussion over the last two days, and that’s the situation in Ukraine and energy security.

Originally, of course, our summit was supposed to be in Sochi.  But after Russia’s actions in Ukraine, our nations united quickly around a common strategy.  We suspended Russia from the G8 and we cancelled the Sochi meeting, making this the first G7 held without Russia in some 20 years.  All seven of our nations have taken steps to impose costs on Russia for its behavior.  Today, in contrast to a growing global economy, a sluggish Russian economy is even weaker because of the choices made by the Russia’s leadership.  Meanwhile, our nations continue to stand united in our support and assistance to the Ukrainian people.  And the G7 Summit was an occasion for me, David and our fellow leaders to ensure that we’re in lockstep going forward.

On Ukraine, I shared the results of my meeting yesterday with President-elect Poroshenko.  Like so many Ukrainians, he wants to forge closer ties with Europe and the United States, but also recognizes that Ukraine will benefit from a constructive relationship with Russia.  So I believe his inauguration provides an opportunity, particularly since he has demonstrated a commitment to reach out to the east, and pursue reforms.  Russia needs to seize that opportunity.  Russia needs to recognize that President-elect Poroshenko is the legitimately elected leader of Ukraine and engage the government in Kyiv.

Given its influence over the militants in Ukraine, Russia continues to have a responsibility to convince them to end their violence, lay down their weapons, and enter into a dialogue with the Ukrainian government.  On the other hand, if Russia’s provocations continue, it’s clear from our discussions here that the G7 nations are ready to impose additional costs on Russia.

I also briefed David on the new initiative I announced in Warsaw to bolster the security of our NATO allies, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as our focus on building counterterrorism capabilities across the Middle East and North Africa.  David will be hosting the next NATO Summit in Wales in September, and I appreciated him updating me on the preparations for that summit.  We agree that it’s going to be an opportunity for every ally to make sure they’re carrying their share and investing in the capabilities our alliance needs for the future.

The situation in Ukraine has also highlighted the need for greater energy security.  At the G7, we agreed to help Ukraine reduce its energy risks to include diversifying its supplies.  We’re going to help countries in Central and Eastern Europe strengthen their energy security as well.  And following the review I called for in the United States earlier this year, every G7 country will conduct an energy assessment to identify the possible impact of any potential disruptions and to offer ways we can better prevent disruptions and recover from them more quickly.

Related to this, we agreed at the G7 to continue to lead by example in the fight against climate change, which poses a danger to our environment, our economies, and our national security.  I made it clear that the United States will continue to do our part.  Earlier this week, we took a major step -- proposing new standards that, for the first time, would limit carbon pollution from our existing power plants.  This is one of the most ambitious steps that any nation has taken to combat climate change.  It would reduce carbon emissions from our electricity sector by 30 percent.  It will help us meet the commitments that we made when I first came into office, at Copenhagen.  And it will improve our public health.  It’s also going to be good for our economy -- by helping to create more clean energy jobs and ultimately lower electricity bills for Americans.  So it’s the right thing to do.

This builds on the steps we’ve taken over the past five years to invest more in renewables like solar and wind, raise fuel standards for our cars and trucks, and make our homes and businesses more energy efficient.  And today we’re holding our carbon emissions to levels not seen in nearly 20 years.  So we’re making important progress, but my Climate Action Plan for climate change indicates that we’ve got to keep at it and do more.

I know this is a cause that David is also passionate about.  We agree that every nation has to do its share.  All the major economies, including the G7 and emerging markets like China, need to show leadership as we work on a new global climate agreement.  And that includes putting forward by March of next year ambitious long-term targets for reducing emissions.

So, again, I want to thank Prime Minister Cameron and our fellow leaders for our work here together in Brussels.  David, I believe that whenever our two nations stand together it can lead to a world that is more secure and more prosperous and more just.  And we’ll be reminded of that again tomorrow in Normandy as we mark the 70th anniversary of D-Day.

On that day, like so many others, American and British troops stood together and fought valiantly alongside our allies.  It didn’t just help to win the war; they helped to turn the tide of human history and are the reason that we can stand here today in a free Europe and with the freedoms our nations enjoy.  So theirs is the legacy that our two nations and our great alliance continue to uphold.  And I’m grateful to have a fine partner in David in making that happen.

Thank you, David.

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  Thank you.  And good afternoon.  And I’m delighted to be here with you today, Barack.  As we stand together in Europe on the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings, we should remind the world of the strength and steadfastness of the bond between the United Kingdom and the United States.

Seventy years ago, as you just said, our countries stood like two rocks of freedom and democracy in the face of Nazi tyranny.  Seventy years ago tonight, thousands of young British and American soldiers, with their Canadian and free French counterparts, were preparing to cross the channel in the greatest liberation force that the world has ever known.  Those young men were united in purpose:  to restore democracy and freedom to continental Europe; to free by force of arms ancient European nations; and to allow the nations and peoples of Europe to chart their destiny in the world.

Thousands of those young men paid the ultimate price, and we honor their memory today and tomorrow.  Shortly after D-Day, my own grandfather was wounded and came home.  We will never forget what they did, and the debt that we owe them for the peace and the freedom that we enjoy on this continent.

Today, in a new century, our two democracies continue to stand for and to uphold the same values in the world:  democracy, liberty, the rule of law.  And day in, day out, our people work together to uphold those values right across the globe.  And that approach has been at the heart of what we’ve discussed here at the G7 and in our bilateral meeting today.

We’ve talked about one of the greatest opportunities we have to turbocharge the global economy by concluding trade deals, including the EU-U.S. deal, which would be the biggest of them all -- the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership that would create growth and jobs.  A deal that could be worth up to 10 billion pounds a year for Britain alone.  It would help to secure our long-term economic success and generate a better future for hardworking families back at home.  That is why I was so determined to launch those negotiations a year ago in Lough Erne.  And since then, we’ve made steady progress but we’ve got to keep our eyes on the huge prize on offer and not get bogged down.

We also discussed what I believe is the greatest threat that we face:  How we counter extremism and the threat that terrorist groups operating elsewhere pose to the safety of our people, both at home and abroad.  This year we will bring our troops home from Afghanistan.  They can be proud of what they’ve achieved over the last decade -- denying terrorists the safe haven from which to plot attacks against Britain or the United States.  But at the same time as we’ve reduced the threat from that region, so al Qaeda franchises have grown in other parts of the world.  Many of these groups are focused on the countries where they operate, but they still pose a risk to our people, our businesses, and our interests.

Barack and I share the same view of how we tackle this threat in the fragile regions of the world where terrorist networks seek a foothold.  As I’ve said before, our approach must be tough, patient, intelligent, and based on strong international partnerships.  So when it comes to Syria, now the number-one destination for jihadists anywhere in the world, we’ve agreed to intensify our efforts to address the threat of foreign fighters traveling to and from Syria.  We’ll be introducing new measures in the UK to prosecute those who plan and train for terrorism abroad.

And here at the G7, we’ve agreed to do more to work with Syria’s neighbors to strengthen border security and to disrupt the terrorist financing that funds these jihadist training camps.

In Libya, we want to help the government as it struggles to overcome the disastrous legacy of Qaddafi’s misrule and to build a stable, peaceful and prosperous future.  Barack and I have both recently appointed envoys who will be working together to support efforts to reach a much-needed political settlement.  And we are fulfilling our commitment to train the Libyan security forces with the first tranche of recruits due to begin their training in the UK this month.

In Nigeria, we’re both committed to supporting the Nigerian government and its neighbors as they confront the scourge of Boko Haram.  The kidnap of the Chobok girls was an act of pure evil, and Britain and the United States have provided immediate assistance in the search.  In the longer term, we stand ready to provide more practical assistance to help the Nigerians and the region to strengthen their defense and security institutions, and to develop the expertise needed to counter these barbaric extremists.

And finally, as Barack said, we had an important discussion on Ukraine and relations with Russia.  From the outset of this crisis, the G7 nations have stood united, clear in our support for the Ukrainian people and their right to choose their own future, and firm in our message to President Putin that Russia’s actions are completely unacceptable and totally at odds with the values of this group of democracies.  That is why Russia no longer has a seat at the table here with us.

At this summit, we were clear about three things.  First, the status quo is unacceptable; the continuing destabilization of eastern Ukraine must stop.  Second, there are a set of things that need to happen.  President Putin must recognize the legitimate election of President Poroshenko.  He must stop arms crossing the border into Ukraine.  He must cease Russian support for separatist groups.  And third, if these things don’t happen, then sectoral sanctions will follow.  The next month will be vital in judging if President Putin has taken these steps, and that is what I will urge President Putin to do when I meet him later today.

Finally, we discussed the cancer eating away at the world’s economic and political systems:  corruption.  Corruption is the archenemy of democracy and development.  The best way to fight corruption and to drive growth is through what I call the three T’s:  greater transparency, fair tax systems, and freer trade.  That was at the heart of our G8 agenda in Lough Erne, and today we agreed to push for more action on fair tax systems, freer trade, and greater transparency -- things that are now hardwired into these international gatherings this year and for many years to come.

Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  All right.  We’ve got a couple questions from each press delegation.  We’ll start with Jeff Mason at Reuters.

Jeff.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  You’re going to France later this evening.  Since you last had French President Hollande’s visit in a state visit earlier this year, a lot of tensions have arisen in the relationship, including on BNP Paribas.  The French say that a potential multibillion-dollar fine on that bank could affect the global economy and could affect trade talks.  Do you believe those concerns are valid? And how do you expect to address them with him tonight and also U.S. concerns about the French selling Mistral warships to Russia?

And to the Prime Minister, do you feel isolated, sir, among your EU leaders about your position on Jean-Claude Juncker as the European Commission President?  And who would you like to see get the job?  And separately, do you feel any pressure from President Obama about your position on keeping the UK in the EU?  Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  First of all, the relationship between the United States and France has never been stronger.  On a whole range of issues we’re seeing intense cooperation.  And I’m looking forward to seeing President Hollande this evening to talk about a range of issues and continue some of the work that was done here in Brussels.

My answer on the banking case is short and simple.  The tradition of the United States is that the President does not meddle in prosecutions.  We don't call the Attorney General -- I do not pick up the phone and tell the Attorney General how to prosecute cases that have been brought.  I do not push for settlements of cases that have been brought.  Those are decisions that are made by an independent Department of Justice.

I've communicated that to President Hollande.  This is not a unique position on my part.  Perhaps it is a different tradition than exists in other countries, but it is designed to make sure that the rule of law is not in any way impacted by political expediency.  And so this will be determined by U.S. attorneys in discussion with representatives of the bank, and I'll read about it in the newspapers just like everybody else.

Q    He said he’s going to confront you about it tonight.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  He’ll hear the same answer from me tonight as he just heard at this podium.

Q    And Mistral?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I have expressed some concerns -- and I don't think I'm alone in this -- about continuing significant defense deals with Russia at a time when they have violated basic international law and the territorial integrity and sovereignty of their neighbors.  So President Hollande understands my position.  I recognize that this is a big deal.  I recognize that the jobs in France are important.  I think it would have been preferable to press the pause button.  President Hollande so far has made a different decision.

And that does not negate the broader cooperation that we've had with France with respect to its willingness to work with us on sanctions to discourage President Putin from engaging in further destabilizing actions and hopefully to encourage him to move in a more constructive direction.

We are at a point where Mr. Putin has the chance to get back into a lane of international law.  He has a President in Poroshenko who he can negotiate directly with.  Having spoken to President Poroshenko this morning -- or yesterday morning, it's clear that he recognizes that Ukraine needs to have a good relationship with Russia, but also, rightly, affirms the right of Ukraine to engage with the rest of the world.

And the steps that David outlined earlier and that the G7 unanimously agrees with, which is for Mr. Putin to take -- seize this moment, recognize Poroshenko is the legitimate leader of Ukraine, cease the support of separatists and the flow of arms, work with Ukraine to engage those in the east during this process of constitutional and economic reform -- if Mr. Putin takes those steps, then it is possible for us to begin to rebuild trust between Russia and its neighbors and Europe.  Should he fail to do so, though, there are going to be additional consequences.

And one of the important things that came out of this meeting today was the recognition on the part of all of us that we can't simply allow drift.  The mere fact that some of the Russian soldiers have moved back off the border and that Russia is now destabilizing Ukraine through surrogates, rather than overtly and explicitly, does not mean that we can afford three months, or four months, or six months of continued violence and conflict in eastern Ukraine.

We will have a chance to see what Mr. Putin does over the next two, three, four weeks.  And if he remains on the current course, then we've already indicated the kinds of actions that we're prepared to take.

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  You asked a couple of questions about Europe.  It’s worth setting the context.  We've just had a set of European elections where -- to take two countries at random, France and Britain -- in France, the Front National, an openly anti-European party, won; and an anti-European party in my country won.  And when these things happen you can stick your head in the sand and wish these results would go away, or you can have a strategy for addressing the concerns of the people that you represent in your country.  I have a strategy to represent and understand and reflect those concerns.

And that's why I think it's important that we have people running the institutions of Europe who understand the need for change, the need for reform.  And I would argue that that is a view that is quite widely shared amongst other heads of government and heads of state in the European Union.

As for Britain’s future, I'm very clear what I want to achieve -- is to secure Britain’s place in a reformed European Union.  And I have a strategy for delivering that.  It’s about renegotiating our position.  It’s about recovering some important powers.  It's about making some significant changes, and then putting that decision in a referendum to the British people but very much recommending that we stay in a reformed European Union.

Again, it's a strategy for dealing with an issue which I think if we just walked away from it we’d see Britain drift towards the exits, and I don't want that to happen.

Q    Do you feel any pressure from the United States about that?

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  No.  We have good discussions about these issues as we discuss everything else.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Absolutely.

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  Let’s have a question from the BBC.

Q    Mr. President, even if you don't have a meeting scheduled face-to-face with Vladimir Putin yourself, are you going to end up talking with him face-to-face in France?  And do you see real possibilities of opening up a path away from the crisis by you engaging with him?

And Britain is potentially facing, Mr. President, two major decisions -- whether or not Scotland stays part of the United Kingdom, and whether the United Kingdom stays a part of the European Union.  What do those decisions mean to you and to the people of the United States?

Prime Minister, you’ll be the first leader I think after this summit to engage with Vladimir Putin face-to-face.  Despite everything you’ve said, is there something of an olive branch in your hand?  After all, Mr. Putin has not actually denounced the electoral process which brought the new President to power in Ukraine.  Is there a way out, and is that what you're really going to be exploring with him this evening?

And do you accept that Germany may not come to your aid and stop Jean-Claude Juncker becoming Commission President?  Will that actually potentially blow your entire strategy off course?  You think you may be able to negotiate a brilliant reform of the European Union, but if Jean-Claude Juncker becomes President of the European Commission, will your credibility be so damaged in Britain that people may simply vote to leave the Union?

Finally, who are you more afraid of -- Angela Merkel or Theresa May?  (Laughter.)

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  Great question.  Do you want to go?  Let me take those.

  First of all, my meeting with Vladimir Putin -- I think it's just important to have this communication about some very important messages about what’s happening now is not acceptable; about the changes that need to take place.  I think as the President said, there is an opportunity for diplomacy to play a role and to chart a path, because we've had these elections, the Ukrainian people have chosen a President; he’s a capable man and it's quite possible that he could have a proper relationship with Putin and there could be a proper relationship between Ukraine and Russia.  But change is needed in order for that to happen, and that's the message that I will be delivering this evening.

In terms of your other questions, look, on this issue of who runs the European Commission, the European institutions, what matters is people who understand the need for change, who understand the need for reform, who realize that if things go on as they have this Union is not going to work for its citizens.  And that was the message that I think was loudly received in these European elections.

As for who -- as you put it, Angela Merkel or Theresa May  -- look, I'm very fortunate in my life to work with some extremely strong and capable women, of which they are undoubtedly two.  (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I have no doubt that I'll see Mr. Putin. And he and I have always had a businesslike relationship, and it is entirely appropriate that he is there to commemorate D-Day, given the extraordinary sacrifices that were made by the people of the Soviet Union during World War II.

And should we have the opportunity to talk, I will be repeating the same message that I've been delivering to him throughout this crisis.  Keep in mind that although we haven't had formal meetings, I've spoken to him by phone repeatedly from the outset of the protests in the Maidan.  And my message has been very consistent, and that is that Russia has a legitimate interest in what happens in Ukraine, given that it's on its border and given its historical ties, but ultimately it is up to the people of Ukraine to make their own decisions -- that Russian armed forces annexing pieces of a neighbor is illegal and violates international law, and the kinds of destabilizing activities that we now see, funded and encouraged by Russia, are illegal and are not constructive; and that there is a path in which Russia has the capacity to engage directly with President Poroshenko now -- he should take it.  If he does not, if he continues a strategy of undermining the sovereignty of Ukraine, then we have no choice but to respond.

And perhaps he’s been surprised by the degree of unity that's been displayed.  I do think the fact that he did not immediately denounce the outcome of the May 25th election perhaps offers the prospect that he’s moving in a new direction.  But I think we have to see what he does and not what he says.

With respect to the future of the United Kingdom, obviously ultimately this is up to the people of Great Britain.  In the case of Scotland, there’s a referendum process in place and it's up to the people of Scotland.

I would say that the United Kingdom has been an extraordinary partner to us.  From the outside, at least, it looks like things have worked pretty well.  And we obviously have a deep interest in making sure that one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains strong, robust, united, and an effective partner.  But ultimately these are decisions that are to be made by the folks there.

With respect to the EU, we share a strategic vision with Great Britain on a whole range of international issues, and so it's always encouraging for us to know that Great Britain has a seat at the table in the larger European project.  I think in light of the events that we're going to be commemorating tomorrow, it's important to recall that it was the steadfastness of Great Britain that, in part, allows us to be here in Brussels, in the seat of a unified and extraordinarily prosperous Europe.  And it's hard for me to imagine that project going well in the absence of Great Britain.  And I think it's also hard for me to imagine that it would be advantageous for Great Britain to be excluded from political decisions that have an enormous impact on its economic and political life.

So this is why we have elections, and we'll see the arguments made and I'm sure the people of Great Britain will make the right decision.

Stephen Collinson.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  Have you been surprised by the backlash that's been whipped up by your decision to do a deal to free Bowe Bergdahl?  And what do you think is motivating that?  In retrospect, do you think you could have done more to consult with Congress or announce the deal in a way that might have spared him and his family being caught up in a political crossfire?

And, Prime Minister, how do you respond to criticism that your decision to meet Vladimir Putin and his meetings with other key European leaders are actually devaluing the punishment that was meted out to Russia by throwing it out of the G8?  And finally, should Qatar be deprived of the right to host the World Cup?  And if so, is England willing to host it?  (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I'm never surprised by controversies that are whipped up in Washington.  (Laughter.)  Right?  That's par for the course.  But I'll repeat what I said two days ago.  We have a basic principle:  We do not leave anybody wearing the American uniform behind.

We had a prisoner of war whose health had deteriorated and we were deeply concerned about, and we saw an opportunity and we seized it.  And I make no apologies for that.

We had discussed with Congress the possibility that something like this might occur.  But because of the nature of the folks that we were dealing with and the fragile nature of these negotiations, we felt it was important to go ahead and do what we did.  And we're now explaining to Congress the details of how we moved forward.  But this basic principle that we don’t leave anybody behind and this basic recognition that that often means prisoner exchanges with enemies is not unique to my administration -- it dates back to the beginning of our Republic.

And with respect to how we announced it, I think it was important for people to understand that this is not some abstraction, this is not a political football.  You have a couple of parents whose kid volunteered to fight in a distant land, who they hadn’t seen in five years and weren’t sure whether they’d ever see again.  And as Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces, I am responsible for those kids.  And I get letters from parents who say, if you are in fact sending my child into war, make sure that that child is being taken care of.  And I write too many letters to folks who unfortunately don’t see their children again after fighting the war.

I make absolutely no apologies for making sure that we get back a young man to his parents and that the American people understand that this is somebody’s child and that we don’t condition whether or not we make the effort to try to get them back.

Did you have a second question?

Q    For the Prime Minister.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Oh, okay.  You can ask him about football.

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  First of all, on the issue of meeting President Putin, I think it’s right to have this dialogue, particularly if you have a clear message and a clear point to make.  And I think there’s a world of difference between having a dialogue with President Putin and excluding someone from an institution as significant as the G8, now the G7.  I think it was absolutely right to exclude Russia.  I think I was one of the first G8 leaders to make that point.  It was totally the right decision and there’s a world of difference between the meeting we’ve just held, which did not include Russia, and having a bilateral meeting where we discuss these issues about Ukraine.

On the issue of football, we should let the investigation run its course but, of course, England is the home of football as it’s the home and inventor of many sports -- tennis, rugby, golf, skiing, table tennis, cricket.  I don’t think we can lay claim to --

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Baseball, basketball.  (Laughter.)

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  Well, I’m not sure that it goes all the way --

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I just want to be clear here.

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  So we’re always happy to provide a home for these sports.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  You did invent the English language, though.

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  We did.  (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  We appreciate it.

PRIME MINSTER CAMERON:  You’ve made a few changes.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  We have.  (Laughter.)

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON.  You’ve made a few changes to it but they don’t hold us back.  (Laughter.)  Final question from Rageh Omaar of ITV, I think.

Q    Mr. President, Rageh Omaar, ITV News.  You spoke about the importance for you and your allies to be in complete lockstep on the crisis in Ukraine.  If this crisis shows no sign of deescalating, you say that the next step will be to add sectoral sanctions.  Are you confident that you will be in lockstep with all of the European allies and G7 allies?  Because there will be costs and consequences for them and their economies as sanctions get widened.

Prime Minister, my question to you is you spoke forcefully about the threat of extremist ideology at home and abroad, described it as the greatest threat to Britain and its allies.  And even by your own government’s estimate, there are several hundred British citizens learning to fight and kill in Syria.  With regard to extremist ideology at home, particularly in schools where there has been a lot of concern, don’t you think it’s not only unseemly but wrong for members of your own government to engage in an argument about whether the priority should be protecting British children against extremist ideology?  Thank you.

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  First of all, let me just say on the issue of sectoral sanctions and this issue of lockstep between the U.S. and countries of the European Union, I think it has been very striking, actually, over the last few months how we’ve been able to stay as unified as we have.  And I pay tribute to Barack for his understanding of how important it is for us to try and work together and deliver these messages together.  And I think it has surprised people.  And I hope it has surprised President Putin.

In terms of tackling extremism, I mean, I set up the UK Extremism Task Force, which I chaired after the appalling murder of Lee Rigby, because I wanted to make sure that government was doing everything that it could to drive extremism out of our schools, out of our colleges, off campuses, out of prisons -- in every part of national life.  And I think it’s very important that we recognize that you’ve got to deal not only with violent extremism but also the sink of extremism, of tolerating extremist views from which violence can grow.  And the whole government is signed up to that agenda and is driving through changes to deliver that agenda.

As for these issues for the last day or so, I will get to the bottom of who said what and what has happened, and I’ll sort it all out once I’ve finished these important meetings I’m having here.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I think what has been striking is the degree of solidarity between the United States and Europe in dealing with the Ukraine crisis.  I think a lot of people anticipated very early on that immediately the two sides would fly apart.  And, in fact, there has been consistency in affirming the core values that had been at the heart of a united and prosperous Europe.  And that’s despite the very real economic consequences that can arise by applying sanctions against Russia.

I think Europeans understand that the reason we’ve seen such extraordinary growth and peace on this continent has to do with certain values and certain principles that have to be upheld.  And when they are so blatantly disregarded, the choice is clear:  Europeans have to stand up for those ideals and principles even if it creates some economic inconvenience.

Now, having said that, sectoral sanctions are broader; they’d be more significant.  Our technical teams have been consulting with the European Commission to identify sanctions that would maximize impact on Russia and minimize adverse impacts on European countries.  And that work is ongoing.  My hope is, is that we don’t have to exercise them because Mr. Putin has made some better decisions.  I think, by the way, it would also be better for Russia because the Russian economy is not in good shape right now.  We’ve seen significant capital flight just from the sanctions that we’ve already applied; that could easily worsen.  And if we have sectoral sanctions, I think it will inevitably hit Russia a lot worse than it hits Europe, which have much more diversified and resilient economies.

Do I expect unanimity among the 28 EU members?  I have now been President for five and a half years, and I’ve learned a thing or two about the European Union, the European Commission, the European Council.  Sometimes I get them mixed up --

PRIME MINISTER CAMERON:  Welcome to the club.  (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  -- but the basic principle that if you’ve got 28 people sitting around a table, that not everybody is going to agree, I think we take that for granted.  And I also think that if, in fact, we have to move to sectoral sanctions, it’s important to take individual country sensitivities in mind and make sure that everybody is ponying up, that everybody is bearing their fair share.  Some people are going to be more concerned about defense relations, some people are going to be more concerned about the financial sector, others might be more concerned about trade and basic goods and services.  And so that’s the technical work that is being done.

Again, my hope is, is that we don’t have to use it.  But I’ve been heartened by the steadfastness of Europe thus far.  I think that people underestimate the degree to which, given the history of this continent -- certainly in the 20th century -- that people are not interested in seeing any chinks in the armor, and they recognize that that’s worth working for.

Thank you very much, everybody.  Thank you, David.

END
4:15 P.M. CET

REMARKS BY SECRETARY KERRY AND RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV BEFORE MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Paris, France
June 5, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY: Let me just say that it’s a pleasure for me to be able to welcome Foreign Minister Lavrov so that we have an opportunity to be able to discuss issues of obvious importance to the relationship between the United States and Russia, but obviously even more so important to everybody who wants to see peace and stability in Ukraine and progress on other issues of concern that we share together.

President-elect Poroshenko has made it clear that he wants to reach out to all of the people of Ukraine, and he intends to make a major effort to bring the country together. This is an opportunity we hope for Russia, the United States, and others – all of them to come together in an effort to try to make a Ukraine that is strong economically, whose sovereignty is respected, whose independence is respected, but which clearly is not the pawn in a tug-of-war between other nations, but rather an independent, sovereign country with the integrity of its borders and people, able to act as a bridge between east and west with trade, with engagement between all parties.

That’s our hope, and we hope that with Russia, together we have an ability to be able to find a way to cooperate in order to help make this happen. That’s our hope. And there obviously are difficulties. We understand that. That’s why we’re meeting today to talk about them before the celebrations in Normandy.

FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: Yeah. I can only subscribe to what Secretary Kerry just said. We would like to see Ukraine peaceful, stable, a place for all those who live in Ukraine – for them to be feeling equal, respected, heard, and listened to, living in peace, being a bridge, not being a pawn. And the Russian-American agenda is much broader than just Ukraine. We would like to see other countries like Iraq, Libya, Syria, many others, also to be in peace, not to be used as a pawn, and I hope that we can discuss all these things with the Secretary here today.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you all very much.

WHITE HOUSE RELEASES G-7 STATEMENT ON FOREIGN POLICY

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

G-7 Leaders Statement – Foreign Policy

Brussels, Belgium
June 4, 2014

Ukraine
  • We welcome the successful conduct under difficult circumstances of the election in Ukraine on 25 May. The strong voter turnout underlined the determination of Ukraine’s citizens to determine the future of their country.  We welcome Petro Poroshenko as the President-elect of Ukraine and commend him for reaching out to all the people of Ukraine.

  • In the face of unacceptable interference in Ukraine’s sovereign affairs by the Russian Federation, we stand by the Ukrainian government and people. We call upon the illegal armed groups to disarm. We encourage the Ukrainian authorities to maintain a measured approach in pursuing operations to restore law and order. We fully support the substantial contribution made by the Organisation for Security Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to the de-escalation of the crisis through the Special Monitoring Mission and other OSCE instruments. We commend the willingness of the Ukrainian authorities to continue the national dialogue in an inclusive manner. We welcome the "Memorandum of Peace and Unity" adopted by the Verkhovna Rada on 20 May and express the wish that it can be implemented rapidly.  We also encourage the Ukrainian parliament and the Government of Ukraine to continue to pursue constitutional reform in order to provide a framework for deepening and strengthening democracy and accommodating the rights and aspirations of all people in all regions of Ukraine.

  • The G-7 are committed to continuing to work with Ukraine to support its economic development, sovereignty and territorial integrity. We encourage the fulfilment of Ukraine's commitment to pursue the difficult reforms that will be crucial to support economic stability and unlock private sector-led growth. We welcome the decision of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to approve a $17 billion programme for Ukraine, which will anchor other bilateral and multilateral assistance and loans, including around $18 billion foreseen to date from G-7 partners.  We welcome the swift disbursement of macro-economic support for Ukraine. We support an international donor coordination mechanism to ensure effective delivery of economic assistance and we welcome the EU’s intention to hold a high-level coordination meeting in Brussels. We welcome ongoing efforts to diversify Ukraine's sources of gas, including through recent steps in the EU towards enabling reverse gas flow capacities and look forward to the successful conclusion of the talks, facilitated by the European Commission, on gas transit and supply from the Russian Federation to Ukraine.

  • We are united in condemning the Russian Federation’s continuing violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.  Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea, and actions to de-stabilize eastern Ukraine are unacceptable and must stop. These actions violate fundamental principles of international law and should be a concern for all nations.  We urge the Russian Federation to recognize the results of the election, complete the withdrawal of its military forces on the border with Ukraine, stop the flow of weapons and militants across the border and to exercise its influence among armed separatists to lay down their weapons and renounce violence. We call on the Russian Federation to meet the commitments it made in the Geneva Joint Statement and cooperate with the government of Ukraine as it implements its plans for promoting peace, unity and reform.

  • We confirm the decision by G-7 countries to impose sanctions on individuals and entities who have actively supported or implemented the violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and who are threatening the peace, security and stability of Ukraine. We are implementing a strict policy of non-recognition with respect to Crimea/Sevastopol, in line with UN General Assembly Resolution 68/262. We stand ready to intensify targeted sanctions and to implement significant additional restrictive measures to impose further costs on Russia should events so require.

  • The projects funded by the donor community to convert the Chernobyl site into a stable and environmentally safe condition have reached an advanced stage of completion. While recognizing the complexity of these first of a kind projects, we call upon all concerned parties to make an additional effort to bring them to a satisfactory conclusion and call upon project parties to keep costs under control. This remains a high priority for us.
Syria
  • We strongly condemn the Assad regime’s brutality which drives a conflict that has killed more than 160,000 people and left 9.3 million in need of humanitarian assistance. We denounce the 3 June sham presidential election: there is no future for Assad in Syria. We again endorse the Geneva Communiqué, which calls for a transitional governing body exercising full executive powers and agreed by mutual consent, based on a vision for a united, inclusive and democratic Syria.  We strongly condemn the violations of international humanitarian law and human rights and indiscriminate artillery shelling and aerial bombardment by the Syrian regime. There is evidence that extremist groups have also perpetrated grave human rights abuses. All those responsible for such abuses must be held to account. We welcome the commitment of the National Coalition and Free Syrian Army to uphold international law.  We deplore Russia and China’s decision to veto the UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution draft authorizing referral to the International Criminal Court and demanding accountability for the serious and ongoing crimes committed in Syria.

  • We are committed to supporting the neighboring countries bearing the burden of Syrian refugee inflows and deplore the failure to implement UNSC Resolution 2139 on humanitarian assistance. We urge all parties to the conflict to allow access to aid for all those in need, by the most direct routes, including across borders and conflict lines, and support further urgent action by the UNSC to that end. In our funding we decide to give particular support to humanitarian actors that can reach those most in need, including across borders. We call for the international community to meet the enormous funding needs of the UN appeals for Syria and its neighbours. We resolve to intensify our efforts to address the threat arising from foreign fighters travelling to Syria. We are deeply concerned by allegations of repeated chemical agent use and call on all parties in Syria to cooperate fully with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) fact-finding mission. We call on Syria to comply with its obligations under UNSC Resolution 2118, decisions of the Executive Council of the OPCW and the Chemical Weapons Convention to ensure the swift removal of its remaining chemical stockpile for destruction, and to destroy its production facilities immediately and answer all questions regarding its declaration to the OPCW.
Libya
  • We reaffirm our support for a free, prosperous and democratic Libya which will play its role in promoting regional stability.  We express serious concern at the recent violence and urge all Libyans to engage with the political process through peaceful and inclusive means, underpinned by respect for the rule of law.  We urge continued and coordinated engagement by the international community to support the Libyan transition and efforts to promote political dialogue, in coordination with the UN and with the UN Support Mission in Libya fulfilling its mandate in that respect.   We ask all in the international community to respect fully Libyan’s sovereignty and the principle of non-intervention in its affairs. In this framework, we commend the proposal of the High National Electoral Commission, endorsed by the General National Congress, to convene the elections on June 25. We emphasize the importance of these elections in restarting the political process and appreciate the vital work of the Constitution Drafting Assembly.
Mali and Central African Republic
  • We welcome the ceasefire signed on May 23 by the Malian Government and armed groups in the North of Mali, thanks to efforts by the African Union, through its Presidency, and the UN. We reaffirm our strong commitment to a political solution and to an inclusive dialogue process that must start without delay, as prescribed by the Ouagadougou agreement and UNSC decisions. We fully support the United Nation’s Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali efforts in stabilizing the country and, with the commitment of neighboring countries, including Algeria, Mauritania and the Economic Community of West African States, in working for a durable settlement respectful of the unity, territorial integrity and national sovereignty of Mali.
  • We commend the role played on the ground in the Central African Republic by the AU-led International Support Mission to the Central African Republic, together with the forces sent by France and the European Union, to support the transition and encourage the Transitional Authorities to take urgent concrete steps toward holding free, fair, transparent and inclusive elections. We fully support the UN efforts in the areas of security, reconciliation, preparation of the elections, and humanitarian assistance.
Iran
  • We reaffirm our strong commitment to a diplomatic resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue and welcome the efforts by the E3+3, led by High Representative Ashton, and Iran to negotiate a comprehensive solution that provides confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme. We underline the importance of the continuing effective implementation by the E3+3 and Iran of the Joint Plan of Action. We call on Iran to cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency on verification of Iran's nuclear activities and to resolve all outstanding issues, including, critically, those relating to possible military dimensions.   We strongly urge Iran to fully respect its human rights obligations. We call on Iran to play a more constructive role in supporting regional security, in particular in Syria, and to reject all acts of terrorism and terrorist groups.
North Korea
  • We strongly condemn North Korea's continued development of its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.  We urge North Korea to abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and to comply fully with its obligations under relevant UNSC resolutions and commitments under the September 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks. We call on the international community to implement fully UN sanctions. We reiterate our grave concerns over the ongoing systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations in North Korea documented in the report of the UN Commission of Inquiry, and urge North Korea to take immediate steps to address these violations, including on the abductions issue, and cooperate fully with all relevant UN bodies. We continue to work to advance accountability for North Korea's serious human rights violations.
Middle East Peace Process
  • We fully support the United States’ efforts to secure a negotiated two-state solution.  We regret that greater progress has not been made by the parties and urge them to find the common ground and political strength needed to resume the process. A negotiated two-state solution remains the only way to resolve the conflict. We call on both sides to exercise maximum restraint and to avoid any unilateral action which may further undermine peace efforts and affect the viability of a two-state solution.
Afghanistan
  • We renew our long-term commitment to a democratic, sovereign, and unified Afghanistan and our enduring partnership with the Government of Afghanistan based on the principles of mutual respect and mutual accountability. The first round of presidential elections and the provincial council elections marked a historic achievement, especially for the more than 2.5 million women who voted, and we look forward to the completion of the electoral process. We continue to assist the Government of Afghanistan to strengthen their institutions of governance, reduce corruption, combat terrorism, support economic growth, and counter narcotics.  We continue to actively support an inclusive Afghan-led and Afghan-owned process of reconciliation.
Maritime Navigation and Aviation
  • We reaffirm the importance of maintaining a maritime order based upon the universally-agreed principles of international law. We remain committed to international cooperation to combat piracy and other maritime crime, consistent with international law and internationally recognized principles of jurisdiction in international waters. We are deeply concerned by tensions in the East and South China Sea. We oppose any unilateral attempt by any party to assert its territorial or maritime claims through the use of intimidation, coercion or force. We call on all parties to clarify and pursue their territorial and maritime claims in accordance with international law. We support the rights of claimants to seek peaceful resolution of disputes in accordance with international law, including through legal dispute settlement mechanisms.  We also support confidence-building measures. We underscore the importance of the freedom of navigation and overflight and also the effective management of civil air traffic based on international law and International Civil Aviation Organization standards and practices.
Other Issues
  • We reaffirm our commitment to the protection and promotion of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including religious freedom, for all persons. We recognise the need to show unprecedented resolve to promote gender equality, to end all forms of discrimination and violence against women and girls, to end child, early and forced marriage and to promote full participation and empowerment of all women and girls. We look forward to the Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict taking place in London later this month.
  • We reiterate our condemnation of terrorism and our commitment to cooperate in all relevant fora to prevent and respond to terrorism effectively, and in a comprehensive manner, while respecting human rights and the rule of law. We condemn the kidnapping of hundreds of schoolgirls by Boko Haram as an unconscionable crime and intend do everything possible to support the Nigerian government to return these young women to their homes and to bring the perpetrators to justice.
  • We confirm that non-proliferation/disarmament issues remain a top priority and welcome the G-7 Non-proliferation Directors Group statement issued today.

Search This Blog

Translate

White House.gov Press Office Feed