SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS IN BRUSSELS, BELGIUM

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Solo Press Availability at NATO
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
NATO Headquarters
Brussels, Belgium
December 3, 2013


SECRETARY KERRY: Good evening, everybody. Before we get to a discussion of the NATO business, I’d like to just spend a brief moment, if I can, saying something about events that the whole world is watching, and that is the situation in Ukraine. The powerful expressions of support for Europe in cities all across the Ukraine have really been quite extraordinary. People of all different backgrounds are giving voice to their very real and very deep aspirations, and we urge the Ukrainian Government to listen to the voices of its people who want to live in freedom and in opportunity and prosperity. And we urge all sides to conduct themselves peacefully. Violence has no place in a modern European state. And to work together, we think that is really the goal that everybody in the Ukraine should be pursuing, work together to get the Ukraine back on the road to European integration and to economic health. And we hope that that can happen as rapidly as possible.

Let me say that I’m very pleased to be back in Brussels and to be here working alongside my 27 fellow allied foreign ministers to prepare for the NATO summit in Wales that will take place in September of next year. 2014 is really going to be a pivotal time for NATO and for a transformation that is taking place with respect to NATO engagement and responsibilities. It will be a pivotal time for our alliance and for the transatlantic relationship.

We will mark a number of very important anniversaries in the U.S.-European relationship next year: 100 years since Sarajevo and the outbreak of World War I; 70 years since Normandy; 25 years since the Berlin Wall fell; and 15, 10, and 5 years since NATO’s post-Cold War enlargements. As our nation honors those anniversaries and comes together for both the EU and the NATO summits, we have to take every single opportunity in order to renew our commitment to the transatlantic relationship and to cement NATO’s role as the transatlantic core of a global security community.

The Secretary General has outlined three key areas for the South Wales summit: first, the way forward in Afghanistan; second, the capabilities that NATO will need to continue as the most successful political and security alliance that the world has ever seen; and third, NATO’s critical partnerships with countries from outside of the alliance.

Today, we discussed and we will discuss at much greater length tomorrow the tremendous progress that has been made in transitioning to full Afghan leadership in providing for that country’s security. We will also address the importance of maintaining a strong commitment to Afghanistan even after we end the NATO combat mission next year. The United States is committed to do its part in contributing to the new mission to train, advise, and assist Afghan security forces after 2014.

As that combat mission comes to a close, we must keep or make certain that we keep NATO finely tuned to be able to invest in the capabilities, the exercises, and the training that will enable all of our nations to be able to address the challenges of the future.

One lesson that we can certainly draw from NATO’s history, and that is the value of helping to support local security forces, particularly as a means of stabilizing post-conflict situations. We now need to institutionalize this ability to be able to train, and we need to do what we can to help countries that need and want our support in that training exercise.

Today, we also spoke about how we can energize existing partnership frameworks like the ones that exist in the countries of the Mediterranean and the Gulf, and how we can deepen cooperation with our key operational partners, those most capable are willing to deploy with us when and if needed. Both of these objectives will be critical parts of protecting our ability to deploy whenever and wherever needed.

We also recognized that the security threats of the future are not going to look like the security threats that we face today in many respects. I joined Minister Paet in signing a U.S.-Estonian Cyber Partnership Statement earlier today, and that commits both of us to do even more together in order to combat this real and growing security concern within the cyber sphere.

When NATO was established more than 60 years ago, President Truman remarked, “If there is anything inevitable, if there is anything unconquerable in the world today, it is the will of the people of all nations for freedom and peace.” Since then, NATO has played an absolutely essential role in supporting that will around the globe. As we build on today’s discussions and focus on our partnerships, our capabilities, and our enduring commitment to Afghanistan, I personally have every confidence that NATO will continue to protect freedom, continue to try to push for and bring about peace, and it will do so for decades to come.

So I thank you very much for being here and I’d be delighted to answer any questions.

MS. PSAKI: The first question will be from Michael Gordon of the New York Times.

QUESTION: Sir, the former commander of NATO and American forces in Afghanistan, General John Allen, a man whom you’ve asked to help with the Middle East peace process, wrote last week in an op-ed article that it was a mistake to insist that President Karzai sign a BSA this year. And his basic argument was that the United States should not let one man – a departing president, no less – stand in the way of an agreement. As he wrote, “The United States should stay patient. It can say to Mr. Karzai if you want to reinforce Afghan democracy by letting your successor sign this security deal, we can live with that.”

Given all the sacrifices and the stakes involved, why is it – why shouldn’t the United States wait till after the next election, which is in April, for the agreement to be signed? What is the real deadline? And the NATO Secretary General just told us that he himself is not setting an exact date.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m not going to get into – I don’t think I’ve ever spoken with respect to a hard, fixed specific date except that the President of the United States has urged him to sign it by a period of time – urged him. I don’t think he set an ultimatum.

But the reason, Michael, is very clear. I mean, we’re not – this is not fooling around. This is serious business. There are over 50 nations who are engaged here through NATO in trying to help Afghanistan. And those nations have budget cycles. Those nations have planning requirements. Those nations have equipment requirements. They have deployment requirements. And all of those things are best managed with planning.

So what we are asking for is the optimum, which is to try to manage this transition in Afghanistan. And it is interesting that the vast majority of people in Afghanistan – the Loya Jirga, which President Karzai himself made the decision to go to – came out with a judgment that this ought to be signed so that it would optimize the opportunities for this transition in Afghanistan.

Now, can you maybe muddle through? Can you do other things? That’s not the issue here. The issue is: How do you get the best transition possible? How do you do the best planning possible? How do you lay the best groundwork possible? How do you give confidence to people in Afghanistan? How do you give confidence to the military that is in the midst of training? How do you give confidence to all those people running for office next year who are looking for some certainty as to what the basis and foundation of that election might be about?

And I think that it is important for the agreement to try to move forward. Now, it doesn’t have to be – his minister of defense can sign it, the government can sign it, somebody can accept responsibility for this. But I think it is important for planning purposes, for people who have been extraordinarily patient, who are trying to allocate major amounts of money to sustaining this effort in Afghanistan, to have knowledge of where they’re going.

We negotiated this agreement. I personally negotiated it with him and we came to a conclusion, and the President agreed and stood up and said this is what we’re going to do, we’re going to send it to the Loya Jirga, and if they approve, then we’ll send it to parliament and go forward. Now, I don’t believe in renegotiating unilaterally, and I don’t believe in and I don’t think President Obama appreciates, the amount of sacrifice that has been made by our troops, by the American people to contribute to the future of Afghanistan, that this somehow is being left in doubt at this critical moment. And I think all of our colleagues here today voiced a desire for their planning purposes and for the confidence that comes with the knowledge that we are moving in the same direction, that they all voiced hope that this can be done sooner, not later. And I think that’s what we need to aim for is sooner, not later, because that is what is best for Afghanistan.

MS. PSAKI: The next question will be from Ana Pisonero from Europa Press.

QUESTION: Secretary General, what more – what can NATO do to influence events on the ground in Ukraine? I mean, would the U.S. support maybe a more radical change of doing EU sanctions or something against Ukraine, or is this not something that we should think about at this time and just give space to both parties?

SECRETARY KERRY: I think NATO has done what it has done today, which is make a statement about it, but I don’t think NATO has a role. NATO is a defense alliance. It’s a national – it’s a security alliance. And NATO has spoken out, out of its concern, but it does not have a role, does not play a role, and is not contemplating a role. This is really something that the people of the Ukraine need to work out with their leadership, and the leadership needs to listen to the people and work out with the people.

Clearly, there is a very powerful evidence of people who would like to be associated with Europe and who had high hopes for their aspirations to be fulfilled through that association. And we stand with the vast majority of the Ukrainians who want to see this future for their country, and we commend the EU for keeping the door open to that. But that is not a NATO piece of business, beyond the statement that it has issued today.

MS. PSAKI: The final question is from Elise Labott of CNN.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, if I could just follow up on that, I mean, NATO is a defense alliance, but the U.S. gives a lot of money to Ukraine; it does have a lot of influence. So what can the U.S. do in particular? And to add to that, Russia has been taking a lot of heavy-handed tactics to stop this – people who have greater desires for economic integration with Europe. For months, they’ve taken a number of punitive measures to discourage East European nations from forming trade agreements with the EU, such as in Moldova where you’re visiting. So why aren’t you speaking out more forceful on this?

And while I have you, on the issue of detained Americans, we have several serious cases pending right now. The case of Merrill Newman – can you discuss what’s being done to bring him home? Today is also the fourth anniversary of Alan Gross’s detainment in Cuba. He says his nation has abandoned him. What do you say to that?

Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me speak first of all to Ukraine. Europe and Europe’s friends all decline to engage in a rather overt, and we think, inappropriate bidding war with respect to the choice that might or might not be made. And that choice, obviously, is distinguishable between a choice made by the leadership versus the choice that is being made by the people. And that’s why people in unbelievable numbers are demonstrating across the Ukraine, because Mr. Yanukovych has obviously made a personal decision, and the people don’t agree with that decision.

We, like our European friends, believe that the people of Ukraine ought to have the right to be able to express themselves freely, without violence, and that the leadership in the Ukraine ought to listen to them. And there’s some evidence that in the last 24 hours that leadership has responded by saying that the door may, in fact, remain open and that they may relook at this issue. I don’t know.

I do know that we feel very strongly that they ought to make their own choice. They ought to be able to decide who they want to affiliate with, without a bidding war either in personal terms or in national terms, but rather based on the benefits that are available to them and the life that comes with it and the rights and benefits that they would like to be able to reach out to.

And I think that we’ve spoken out very, very clearly that we’re closely monitoring the situation on the ground. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland will be going there tomorrow and she will be joining other ministers who will be there for meetings. I personally will be going to Moldova in order to support that country’s European choice. And I look forward to visiting Ukraine when it, too, gets back on the path of European integration and economic responsibility. And we’ve spoken out very clearly about our desire to see the people of Ukraine be able to have their aspirations met by their own leadership in peaceful ways, without violence, which has no place in a modern European state.

That said, with respect to the number of American citizens who are being held in different places, we have been deeply involved in discussions on every one of those citizens. And we have been engaged behind the scenes – which is often the way these issues are best managed – in every single case in order to try to secure the safety of those people, and in order ultimately to be able to secure their release. And that is true of each of the individuals that you have listed.

In the case of Mr. Gross, we’ve had any number of initiatives and outreaches over the last several years and engagement with a number of different individuals who have traveled to Cuba, met with people individually there and elsewhere. And we are currently engaged in some discussions regarding that, which I’m not at liberty to go into in any kind of detail.

But the bottom line is that we have raised these issues not just in Korea – North Korea, not just in Cuba, but also with respect to a number of Americans who are held in Iran. And I have personally raised those names and those individuals with my counterpart as well as in other ways. And we are hopeful that in each case, at some point we will be able to win their freedom and have them rejoined with their families.

One day is too long to be in captivity, and one day for any American citizen is more than any American wants to see somebody endure. This has been too long in every case, and we will do everything we can and continue to. But these things are often best resolved in quiet diplomacy, under the radar screen, behind the scenes, and that is exactly what we have been pursuing. And when, in fact, we secure their release, the track record of those outreaches and those initiatives will speak for themselves as to how much effort and energy has been put into trying to secure their release. And God willing, we will get that done sooner rather than later, we hope.

MS. PSAKI: Thanks, everyone.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you.

ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER MEETS WITH MICHIGAN AIR NATIONAL GUARD

Estonian Prime Minister Andrus Ansip shakes hands with Airmen from the Michigan Air National Guard at Amari Air Base, Estonia, June 15, 2012. The Airmen were at Amari for Saber Strike 2012, a multi-national exercise based in Estonia and Latvia. Lt. Col. William Henderson is behind the prime minister. (Air National Guard photo by Tech. Sgt. Dan Heaton)

Estonian Prime Minister Andrus Ansip is briefed on the capabilities of a U.S. Air Force KC-135 Stratotanker by Lt. Col. Paul Beck, a pilot with the 171st Air Refueling Squadron. The aircraft was in Estonia for Saber Strike 2012, a multi-national exercise based in Estonia and Latvia. (Air National Guard photo by Tech. Sgt. Dan Heaton)

SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON MAKES COMMENTS IN ESTONIA

The following excerpt is from the Department of Defense American Forces Press Service:
Remarks With Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet After Their Meeting
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Treaty Room
Washington, DC
March 27, 2012

SECRETARY CLINTON: Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the State Department and a very warm welcome to my friend and colleague, the foreign minister of Estonia. We have been able to work closely together during my tenure, and I’ve had the pleasure of visiting Tallinn several times. And I’m delighted to have you here so that we can continue the conversation that we started several years ago. And we have just finished a very comprehensive discussion.

Over the last 20 years, Estonia has grown from a newly independent democracy to an important and respected voice in the international community, and the friendship between our two countries has only grown stronger. We look to Estonia as an important ally, a leader in promoting stability across the Euro-Atlantic area, a partner we can count on from the battle space in Afghanistan to cyber space. We share a wide range of concerns that we stay in close touch with each other about.

First, we discussed our shared effort to bring peace and stability to Afghanistan. This has been an important partnership. In addition to providing military personnel, Estonia has given critical support for civilian, humanitarian, and democratic programs, and we will continue to work closely with Estonia as we move toward the Chicago summit. We are both committed to a smooth security, economic, and development transition. So Chicago will be the next stop in this ongoing effort. Despite these challenging economic times, it’s more important than ever that NATO allies and partners come to Chicago with concrete commitments to support Afghan security forces beyond 2014.

Just as Estonia has been a strong NATO ally in Afghanistan, the United States takes our responsibilities to NATO very seriously, particularly our Article 5 obligation for collective defense. That’s why we strongly support the extension of NATO’s Baltic Air Policing Mission on a continuing basis with periodic reviews. A mission such as this underscores the importance of what Secretary General Rasmussen calls smart defense, sharing resources to maximize each partner’s contributions.

I also expressed our support to Urmas about Estonia’s work in helping countries build effective, free market, and democratic institutions. Estonia has maintained a strong assistance and development program in Eastern partnership countries, particularly Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova. And in addition, Estonia is increasingly active in the world of e-government, electronic government. From Eastern Europe to Africa to Haiti, governments look to Estonia for guidance on how technology can make them more efficient and effective.

And on that note, I am pleased to announce that the United States and Estonia have agreed to co-chair a new initiative in the Community of Democracies that will use technology to help strengthen democratic institutions. This program that we call LEND, L-E-N-D, the Network for Leaders Engaged in New Democracies, is an online platform that will connect leaders from emerging democracies with former presidents, prime ministers, and others who have helped lead democratic transitions in their own countries. We are particularly focused on working together in Tunisia. When the network is activated later this year, it will help accelerate the exchange of ideas among leaders who have the experience to share, and we’re very excited to be co-chairing this initiative with Estonia.

So again, Foreign Minister, thank you for the great work that you do on behalf of your country, and thanks to Estonia for the great partnership we have.

Foreign minister Paet: Well, thank you very much for the very positive and nice comments. And I also would like to start with thanking – thanking you personally, Hillary, and the United States for friendship and support and cooperation we have done between U.S. and Estonia. And of course, we will continue.

Also for us, when we speak about upcoming NATO summit, it is absolutely important to get clear decisions how to move forward with Afghanistan. Estonia’s clear position here is that what concerns military commitment then, of course we, together with our allies, and also going to make next possible steps together with our allies, and what concerns development, humanitarian cooperation, then we’re also ready to continue our activities and our support after 2014 together with our partners and allies in Afghanistan.
It’s also important to get strong, positive message to countries which want to get NATO membership in foreseeable future, countries like Georgia, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. And of course, once more, to stress the strong security of transatlantic relations, but also strong security of Europe, including Article 5, it is also from our point of view absolutely important as one of the outcomes of Chicago summit.

We’re also very grateful for United States for their support to air police mission in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and also thank you for practical participation with your people and aircrafts. It’s also clear that step-by-step we should and we are ready to increase the host nation support and to make also for our partners it more convenient and positive to have concrete rotation periods in air policing in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania.
Cyber defense for us also important area where we see good chances to develop cooperation with the United States, but also with other NATO countries. In Estonia we have center for cyber defense accredited by NATO, and here we also see that this center can be – or can give more added value also to NATO cyber security issues and developments already in foreseeable future.

We are glad that also bilateral cooperation, what concerns development cooperation, for example, in Belarus. It works, and we’re looking forward to continue with bilateral development cooperation work in Tunisia, for example, and also I’m glad that U.S. participates in our center for eastern partnership in Estonia, supporting and sharing our experience to civil servants from Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, but also many other countries.

And with pleasure we join U.S. in organization called Leaders Engaged in New Democracies, or LEND. We see that there are many countries, including us, which are able and ready to share our experience to countries which want to change and which also want to share the values we are sharing.
So to sum up once more, thank you for friendship and cooperation and always glad to be also here in Washington and in the States. Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much.

MS. NULAND: We’ll take three questions today. We’ll start with CNN, Elise Labott.

QUESTION: Thank you, Madam Secretary. On Syria, what hopes do you have that President Assad will make good on his commitments to implement the Kofi Annan plan? And looking ahead towards Istanbul on Sunday, what do you expect to come out of this conference? And in particular, what are you looking for for the opposition to strengthen their message of how they see a post-Assad Syria? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, Elise. As you just referenced, the Joint Special Envoy Kofi Annan and the Syrian National Council both said this morning that it is an important initial step that the Assad regime has written the United Nations to accept the Annan plan. Let me just pause here to say, however, that given Assad’s history of over-promising and under-delivering, that commitment must now be matched by immediate actions. We will judge Assad’s sincerity and seriousness by what he does, not by what he says. If he is ready to bring this dark chapter in Syria’s history to a close, he can prove it by immediately ordering regime forces to stop firing and begin withdrawing from populated areas. He can also allow international aid workers unfettered access to those in need, and he can release political prisoners, permit peaceful political activity, allow the international news media unobstructed access, and begin a legitimate political process that leads to a democratic transition.

Now, as the regime takes steps, which we have yet to see, but assuming it does so, then Kofi Annan has pledged to work with the opposition to take steps of its own so that the bloodshed ends, that there won’t be violence coming from opposition forces, that humanitarian aid will be permitted to come into areas where the opposition has been holding, that the true political dialogue will begin, and that all Syrians will be welcomed to participate in an inclusive process. Now that’s a lot to look forward to seeing implemented, but given the response that we have had, we are going to be working very urgently between now and Istanbul to translate into concrete steps what we expect to see. And I’m hoping that by the time I get to Istanbul on Sunday we will be in a position to acknowledge steps that the Assad regime and the opposition have both taken. We’re certainly urging that those occur.

Specifically with respect to the opposition, they must come forward with a unified position, a vision if you will, of the kind of Syria that they are working to build. They must be able to clearly demonstrate a commitment to including all Syrians and protecting the rights of all Syrians. And we are going to be pushing them very hard to present such a vision at Istanbul. So we have a lot of work to do between now and Sunday.
MS. NULAND: Next question, Neeme Raud, Estonian Public Broadcasting.

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, thank you very much. My question is about our big neighbor, Russia. Today in the news, we hear news about conversation Mr. President had with Russian President Medvedev. Russia has accused you last year, Mr. Putin personally, intruding into their internal affairs. U.S. Ambassador McFaul was not received very warmly in Russia. At UN, when the talk is about Syria, there is a talk about new Cold War even with Russia. What is the U.S.-Russian relationship at this moment of transition in Russia? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think that we believe that it is a complex relationship. We’ve seen some positive, concrete accomplishments coming from the so-called reset. We are also engaged in a substantive bilateral dialogue that is quite comprehensive with many levels of the Russian Government and society. So we are committed to engagement with Russia.
Regarding the President’s comments in Seoul, he spoke to those himself and made clear that the issues we are dealing with concerning Russia are difficult and complex ones. Technical discussions have been ongoing with Russia over missile defense. That’s not a surprise to anyone. We have been consistent, both bilaterally and through NATO, in our invitation to the Russians to participate with us in missile defense. But this is going to take time. And whether or not there can be a breakthrough sometime in the future is yet to be determined, but we certainly look at this as a long-term engagement.

When we negotiated the New START Treaty, we were engaging at the same time in consultations with Congress, of course with all elements of the United States Government, including the Defense Department, with our allies in NATO and elsewhere, because you can’t do something as serious as New START or missile defense without full buy-in from our government, bipartisan support in the Congress, and understanding and acceptance by our allies, particularly in NATO. So we will continue this effort. We may be somewhat surprising in our persistence and our perseverance in our engagement with Russia. It will continue with President-elect Putin, as it has with President Medvedev.
But let me hasten to say in the meantime we continue with the deployment of the Phased Adaptive Approach to missile defense that was agreed to at the Lisbon summit. We expect to announce further progress at the Chicago summit. And as the President made clear to President Medvedev in Seoul, we do not see this missile defense system as a threat to Russia; we do not see it as undermining Russia’s nuclear deterrent. The interceptors are for defensive uses only. They have no offense capability. They carry no explosive warheads, but they are part of our Article 5 collective defense obligation. That is a clear, unmistakable message that we have sent to our allies and that we continue to reiterate.
So yes, we want to cooperate with Russia on missile defense. We think it is in everyone’s interest to do so. But we will continue the work we are doing with NATO and we will be looking to complete that process in the years ahead.

MS. NULAND: Last question, Andy Quinn, Reuters.

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, if I could turn to Sudan, please. You’ve seen the statement out of the White House today urging restraint, but I was hoping I could get your analysis of what’s really going on there, and specifically how dangerous you feel it is. Are we on the brink of a new civil war? And what is the United States doing now to prevent a possible humanitarian catastrophe in Southern Kordofan? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Andy, this is deeply distressing to us, because it was certainly our hope and expectation that with the independence of South Sudan, the newest nation in the world, there would be the opportunity to continue fulfilling the requirements of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that included resolving border disputes, allocations of oil revenues and other contested matters between Sudan and South Sudan.
As you know, there has been almost continuing low-level violence in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile, and it is our goal to end the violence and to convince the parties to return to the negotiating table. We believed we were making progress on two contested matters. In fact, there was a summit between President Bashir and President Kiir scheduled for next week to finalize understandings on borders and national citizenship. We want to see that summit held. And we want to see both sides work together to end the violence. We think that the weight of responsibility rests with Khartoum, because the use of heavy weaponry, bombing runs by planes and the like are certainly evidence of disproportionate force on the part of the government in Khartoum.

At the same time, we want to see South Sudan and their allies or their partners across into Sudan similarly participate in ending the violence and working to resolve the outstanding issues. It is becoming a very serious humanitarian crisis. We have been reaching out to the government in Khartoum through international aid organizations. We stand ready on behalf of the United States to provide assistance to people fleeing the violence. It is compounded by the fact that the violence is making it possible for people to get into their fields, and there’s already adverse conditions because of drought that are compounded by the unfortunate violence.

So the bottom line is that the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that the United States, Norway, and the United Kingdom helped to broker in 2005 ended a conflict that had cost more than 5 million lives. We have seen the ongoing violence and displacement in Darfur, and now we are looking at an upsurge in violence in two other parts of Sudan. So it is incumbent upon the leaders of both countries to resume negotiations, and the United States stands ready to assist in working out the contested issues.

The final thing I would say – because I’ve been following this closely and it’s been a painful problem to see the deterioration into conflict again – there is a win-win outcome here. South Sudan has oil. Sudan has the infrastructure and the transportation networks to get the oil to market. Because of the feeling on the part of the South Sudan Government that they were being treated unfairly by Sudan, they shut down their oil wells and the pipelines. So the economic condition in both countries is deteriorating. So I would call upon the leaders to look for a way to resolve these very hard feelings. You don’t make peace with your friends. There are decades of grievances that have to be overcome in order to work through these very challenging issues. But it is incumbent upon the leaders of both countries to attempt to do so.
Thank you.

MS. NULAND: Thank you very much.

FOREIGN MINISTER PAET: Thank you very much. Welcome to Estonia.