FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at a UN Security Council Open Debate on the Protection of Journalists in Conflict Situations
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
May 27, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Thank you, Foreign Minister Linkevicius, for chairing this session and for Lithuania’s consistent effort to integrate the issue of press freedom – and threats to it – across the work we do at the Council. I also want to thank our guest briefers, Mr. Deloire and Ms. Pearl, for your powerful words today, and for the tremendous work that you are doing to advance this most critical cause. Ms. Pearl, you have been a tremendous force for good in the world. As a mother and a former journalist I’m in awe of your strength. And a special thanks to your son Adam for being here today. You’re the best reminder – he’s paying attention – you’re the best reminder we have for why we need to do more to protect journalists, so thank you for being here.
Nearly two years ago, in July 2013, when the Council last met to discuss the issue of protection of journalists, the United States raised the case of Mazen Darwish, the head of the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression. Darwish had been held incommunicado since February 2012, when he was detained by regime officials along with several colleagues. Today, he remains behind bars along with two fellow staff members, Hani Al-Zantani and Hussein Ghrer. On May 13th, earlier this month, their trial was suspended for the 24th time – little surprise given that their only “crime” was to report the truth about the Assad regime’s atrocities. Since the beginning of this month, the whereabouts of the three men have been unknown.
Mazen’s brave wife, Yara Badr, who has lead the Center since his arrest and campaigned all around the globe for his release, is here with us in the chamber today. Thank you, Yara, for all that you’re doing.
Darwish’s case exemplifies the first of three challenges I want to highlight today with respect to the protection of journalists: How does the international community protect journalists from parties that deliberately target them? In the four-plus years since the Syrian conflict began, more than 80 journalists have been killed, and at least 90 more abducted, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, CPJ. Countless more have been threatened, attacked, wounded, barrel-bombed or disappeared.
They have been targeted by both the Assad regime and violent extremist groups like ISIL, whose grotesque executions of journalists – alongside humanitarian aid workers, foreign soldiers, and people of different religions or political beliefs – seem aimed both at using their victims’ suffering as a recruiting tool, and at dissuading other journalists from covering the conflict. Unfortunately, their tactics seem to be working, as the videos of their executions are widely disseminated on social media, while both international and national coverage of the Syrian conflict itself has declined dramatically.
What the Assad regime, ISIL, and other State and non-State actors like them that target journalists have in common is that they do not want people to see them for what they really are – whether that is a regime willing to torture, bomb, gas, and starve its people in order to hold onto power, or a group masquerading as religious that routinely desecrates the basic dignity of human beings. That is why the Mazen Darwishes, James Foleys and Daniel Pearls of the world are so dangerous to these groups and governments. Their reporting strips away the façade and shows us what lies beneath.
This brings me to the second challenge: How do we protect journalists and, more broadly, press freedoms, in situations in which violence is escalating and there is a risk of mass atrocities? This is important, as we know that a robust press can play a key role in helping prevent crises from metastasizing into full-blown conflicts and mitigating the conditions in which grave human rights violations tend to occur.
We are seeing this right now in Burundi. After the ruling party’s announcement of the candidacy of President Nkurunziza for what would be his third term, despite the explicit two-term limit set by the Arusha Agreement, there were large public protests. The government responded by shuttering the country’s most important media outlets.
Not long after members of the military attempted to oust the Nkurunziza government, the offices and equipment of at least four independent radio stations – which have generally been critical of the Nkurunziza government – were attacked and their equipment destroyed.
Since the unlawful attempt to seize power was quashed, several independent journalists report being told that they are on a list of people to be arrested, and many more reportedly have been threatened with death, torture, and disappearance, leading them to go into hiding. One Burundian journalist said in an interview, “no journalists feel safe enough to look for information.” That is right now, in Burundi.
Even in countries that are not experiencing conflicts or at imminent risk of sliding into unrest, the erosion of press freedoms is often a harbinger of the rolling back of human rights that are critical to healthy democracies. This is the third challenge I’d like to raise: How do we – and by we I mean the UN, bodies such as the Security Council, and our individual Member States – push back against the erosion of press freedoms by governments intent on silencing critical voices and other key outlets of free expression?
Look to any region, and you will see alarming warning signs of how the crackdown on press freedom is coupled with a broader crackdown on civil and political rights. Take Ethiopia, where nine journalists, six of them bloggers from the collective Zone 9, which covers political and social news, have been imprisoned since April 2014 under Ethiopia’s Anti-Terrorism Proclamation. After 20 administrative hearings, their trial finally began on March 30th. If convicted under the Proclamation, they could face up to more than a dozen years in prison.
Take Azerbaijan, where Khadija Ismayilova, a contributor to Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty’s Azerbaijani Service, remains incarcerated on charges widely viewed as politically motivated. Ismayilova is known for her reporting on corruption.
After arresting her in December 2014 on charges of inciting a man to commit suicide, authorities raided RFE/RL’s Baku office, interrogated its staff, confiscated reporting notes, and sealed the newsroom. New charges have been added to Ismayilova’s case as she awaits her trial, including embezzlement, illegal business, and abuse of power.
It is worth noting that all around the world, for every individual or group targeted through prosecution, attacks and threats, there are countless more impacted – people who, seeing the risks, either begin to self-censor, go into hiding, or flee the countries that so desperately need their independent voices.
Given the critical importance of press freedoms in advancing so many of the goals of this Council, let me make four recommendations in closing as to how we can meet these challenges.
First, we must condemn the governments and non-State actors that attack journalists, as well as the overly restrictive laws and regulations that undermine their freedom. It is much easier to prevent these spaces from closing than it is to fight to reopen them.
Second, we must give the journalists the tools they need to protect themselves, particularly working in conflict zones and repressive societies. The $100 million that the United States has invested in training more than 10,000 at-risk journalists and human rights defenders in digital safety, and in providing them with anti-censorship tools, is one example. Another is the training provided by civil society groups such as the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, whose director in Iraq, Ammar al-Shahbander, was killed by a car bomb on May 2nd – a devastating loss for his family, the community of journalists he mentored, and his nation.
Third, we can be sure that the people who attack journalists are actually held accountable for their crimes. The failure to effectively investigate and prosecute these crimes sends a clear message to perpetrators that they can continue to commit these crimes without any consequences.
Fourth, and finally, we can help create programs to protect journalists operating in conflict zones, particularly those targeted for their work. Colombia shows how this can be done. The National Protection Unit established by the government in 2011 is empowered to protect nineteen vulnerable groups, including journalists and human rights defenders. As of last year, more than 80 journalists – this is extraordinary – were receiving protection measures ranging from cell phones and transport subsidies to bodyguards and armored cars. The program has an annual budget of $160 million, which speaks to Colombia’s commitment to protecting these individuals, and the country’s recognition of the crucial role that these groups play.
One of the journalists who has received protection is Jineth Bedoya Lima. In 2000, when Bedoya was 26 years old, she was heading into one of the country’s most dangerous prisons to report on paramilitary groups when she was abducted, drugged, and driven to a hideout, where she was raped and beaten by three men. As they were abusing her, one of her captors told her, “We are sending a message to the press in Colombia.” Later, they left Bedoya, bound, by a trash dump. She fled the country soon after.
Today, Bedoya is back in Colombia, reporting stories with the protection of bodyguards from Colombia’s unit. She still feels fear, but she perseveres, driven by a commitment to tell the stories that otherwise would go untold. And that includes her own. In speaking out about her own experience, Bedoya has helped make the serious – and seriously underreported – problem of sexual assault in Colombia’s long-running conflict more visible. And she has become a leading advocate of accountability, even as several of her own attackers continue to roam free. Bedoya also led a country-wide campaign to establish a National Day for the Dignity of Women Victims of Sexual Violence, which, last year, Colombia’s President Juan Manuel Santos, agreed to establish. Colombia just honored the day for the first time two days ago, on Monday, May 25th.
There are few greater living testaments to the value of protecting journalists than Bedoya’s story. We must not allow voices like hers to be silenced. Thank you.
Showing posts with label UN SECURITY COUNCIL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UN SECURITY COUNCIL. Show all posts
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Tuesday, May 19, 2015
SAMANTHA POWER'S REMARKS AT BARNARD COLLEGE COMMENCEMENT
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
May 17, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Good afternoon, President Spar, faculty, trustees, alumni, families and friends of the strong and beautiful Barnard graduates! Congratulations, class of 2015!
Columbia grad Madeleine Albright has said, “It used to be that the only way a woman could truly make her foreign policy views felt was by marrying a diplomat, and then pouring tea on an offending ambassador's lap.” I’m here to tell you that in 2015, we have other options! [Applause].
I’m truly honored to be here, and to be among the amazing women, and men, on this stage, and to be with the amazing class of 2015 – I’m so honored that I invited my parents to your graduation. [Applause] And while we’re at it, let’s give a huge round of applause to all the parents and loved ones in the audience.
Your great school came into existence largely due to the vision of a remarkable woman, Annie Nathan Meyer. Meyer didn’t get the kind of schooling you got, or I got. Her mother kept her home as a small child because she wanted company. Meyer read voraciously, finishing all of Dickens’ books by the age of seven. [Laughter]. Yeah, seriously. When she was eleven, her mother died, and while her father agreed to let her go to school, he was so overprotective that he kept her home whenever there was bad weather.
When Meyer learned about a special college course for women at Columbia University, she set about secretly studying for examinations, which she passed on her first try. When she finally told her father, she later wrote, “He drew me gently and lovingly to him and announced, ‘You will never be married…Men hate intelligent wives.’” Meyer decided to go to Columbia anyway.
It was not what she had hoped. Women were not allowed into lectures; instead, they were given a reading list, a short meeting or two with the professor, and then an exam. When Meyer sat for her first exam, she found the questions were based entirely on the lectures that she had been barred from attending. Feeling what she called a “devastating sense of desolation,” she answered as best she could. And though she passed, she eventually dropped out, and, soon after, started her full-court press to secure the education for women that she had been denied. Four years later, in 1889, as we know, Barnard College – your college – was founded.
As Barnard finishes its 125th school year, it is safe to say that the cause of equality has come a very, very, very long way. But what I want to talk to you about today is how some of the remaining barriers to true equality can, and must, be overcome.
First, true equality will mean not letting our doubts silence our voices.
We live in a time where women have made tremendous strides, particularly here in the United States. And you all know the statistics. Women earn 60 percent of all undergraduate and graduate degrees; hold more than half of all professional-level jobs; and study after study shows that companies employing greater numbers of women outperform their competitors. And you know that, at the end of your four years, you are as well-equipped as any Barnard graduating class to make your mark. So why do you still feel that persistent self-doubt? That fear of making mistakes? And why do those doubts sometimes get in the way of your voices being heard?
I wish I had the answer. Instead, all I can tell you is that we all experience that feeling – even if it’s not obvious on the outside. I have even adopted a name for it – the Bat Cave; it’s that dark place in your head where all the voices tell you every reason you can’t do something.
Let me give you an example. Rewind to August 2008. I am working as a senior advisor on the campaign for then-Senator Barack Obama – who has just earned the Democratic nomination for President. And I find out that I’m pregnant with my first child. Now, I have an amazing husband, and this news – it’s seismic. I am over the moon.
And I tell no one at work. Lots of nods, I bet, back here and up there [Laughter].
I have never gone through this before, and I am worried that if I advertise my blissful state, it will affect how seriously I will be taken by the campaign, and potentially even shut me out of the kind of job that could make an impact. Everything I know of then-Senator Obama and the people around him tells me at the time that this makes zero sense. After all, this is a man who was raised by a single, working mother. A man whose brilliant wife worked while raising two daughters. A man who would go on to demonstrate daily as President his commitment to supporting working moms and dads. But at the time, I am way too deep in the Bat Cave to see any of that.
Eventually, it is my body that tells people the news – not me. And I acquired quite a collection of scarves.
I ended up having two babies while spending four years at the White House, and thereafter still managed to get to serve in my dream job, representing the United States at the United Nations [Applause]. But if I felt the way I did with a boss like mine, I can only imagine how other women feel – the ecstasy of a pregnancy clouded by the fear it could cause severe professional damage.
Last year, when the Ukraine crisis began, I momentarily experienced another version of this anxiety. Russia, a permanent member on the UN Security Council, is trying to lop off part of its neighbor, Ukraine – a clear violation of the rules that the United Nations was created to defend. An urgent UN Security Council session is called on Russia’s attempted takeover of Crimea. I take my seat, and my mind recalls Prague 1968, Budapest 1956, and some epic occasions in the twentieth century when Ambassadors Adlai Stevenson, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Madeleine Albright, and other legends made memorable, forceful interventions at the United Nations on behalf of the United States.
Then it dawns on me: that’s me now! I’m the United States!
Deep in the Bat Cave, I think of the consequences if my response – the United States’ response – is too forceful, or not forceful enough. I think of the overwhelming responsibility that comes with speaking on behalf of America and the ideals we stand for. And I think of the people of Ukraine who are counting on me. And I speak.
The fact is that doubt – and his more lovable big sister, self-awareness – both are more pronounced among women. Turns out Batwoman’s cave often has more square footage than Batman’s.
True equality will not mean shedding our doubts or our self-awareness – but rather not letting them quiet us when we should be speaking up. There are more than enough forces out there doing that without needing our help. And it will mean that, while everyone will have moments of uncertainty – and humility is an especially prized quality – women should not have to worry that if we stumble, it will be more noticed than when men do the same [Applause].
But it is not enough to find our own voices. True equality also requires that we learn to hear, and lift up, the voices of those whom others choose not to hear. This is my second point: You have to teach yourself to see the people and communities who live in society’s blind spots. Of course, everyone should strive to do this. But as women who, even to this day, know what it feels like to be unheard or unseen, we have an additional responsibility. I think the burden of being treated differently is also our strength – because it gives us the capacity to notice when others are treated differently. To see the blind spots.
That includes the discussion of gender identity on campus, which the Barnard community – and particularly your class – has embraced [Applause]. We must see that seemingly simple actions that most of us don’t have to think twice about – the bathroom we walk into; the gender listed on our driver’s licenses; the name people use to address us; the boxes “male” and “female” on a college application – can be a source of profound anguish for others. We must recognize the cruel and hostile treatment that transgender people experience in so many communities, which, according to one study, has contributed to 40 percent of transgender people in the United States attempting suicide during the course of their lives.
We must all work toward the goal of ensuring equal rights for all people – lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. And while we have a very long way to go, I’m extremely proud to work for an administration that has lifted Medicare’s ban on covering gender reassignment surgery, and whose Justice Department has decided to take on cases of discrimination based on an individual’s gender identity, including transgender status, under the Civil Rights Act.
Now again, it is no coincidence that women’s colleges have been among the first to embrace this discussion. Women know what it feels like to have to fight to be part of institutions whose doors should never have been closed to them.
You often hear people say that past generations struggled so that you would not have to. But I say, past generations struggled so you would be free to fight on behalf of someone else.
The idea of seeing the struggles of others around you – whether the other is a gender or an ethnic or religious group, or even an entire nation that usually does not have a voice – is one of the principles that has defined President Obama’s foreign policy. We know that America is stronger, that our policies are more effective, and that the world is better off when America is listening. And that includes listening to countries and communities that often feel invisible to the world’s superpowers.
That is why, when I started as the United States Ambassador to the UN a year and a half ago, I decided to visit as many of the other 192 UN ambassadors as I could, regardless of the size or the geopolitical heft of the country that they represent. By visiting their missions, rather than having them travel to ours, as was common practice, I would be able to see the national art they wanted to showcase, the family photos on their desks, the books that they had carried with them long distances to America. And I could show them America’s respect and our curiosity. So far, I’ve visited 119 countries’ missions. And when I visit, I try [Applause], when I visit I try to put my long list of policy asks aside. Instead, I ask the ambassadors about their upbringings, about how they became diplomats, what they are most proud of about their countries.
True equality will mean not just seeing the unseen, but also finding a way to make invisible problems visible – and this is my third point. I think the contemporary conversation about the challenge that women face in balancing a demanding job with raising a family is important. Women are opening up about how overwhelmed they feel trying to “have it all.” Back in 2013, when I arrived in my job, I was still nursing my one-year-old daughter as I tried to move my family to New York, and find schools for my two kids – and no, I did not enroll my then-four-year-old in a Kaplan course so he could get into a New York pre-school. I had to do all this at the same time, roughly, that the Syrian regime decided to stage massive chemical weapons attacks against its people, horrific atrocities were being committed in the Central African Republic, and a new government was cracking down on the opposition in Egypt. When asked by friends whether I subscribed to “lean in,” I would instead describe my philosophy then as “hang on.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has put it even better – “lean on.”
While Ambassador, I have spoken in public a fair amount about the ways my six-year-old, my now six-year-old son Declan, interacts with my new life – making visible a version of what goes on behind the scenes in many homes. Like most young kids with their parents, he seems to delight in interrupting me when I’m on the phone. “Mommy,” he says, “Can I ask you something?” I shake my head and I whisper, “I’m on the phone.” He says, “Mommy it’s important.” “I’ll be off in a minute.” “But Mommy, what’s the score of the Nationals game?” he says. I beg him to let me finish the call. But he is insistent. “Mommy, I said it’s important.” And I hold my hand over the phone and say – “Mine too, this is important too” – I may well be talking to the UN Secretary-General, a UN envoy on a crackling phone line from a war zone, or a fellow diplomat that I’m trying to put the squeeze on. But nothing persuades Declan. And when this little showdown has abated, and he gives up – which after nine or ten exchanges he does, usually – he invariably storms off in a huff, usually grumbling some version of, “Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine!” He’s had it up to here with Ukraine.
Now, the juggling act that I am attempting pales compared to that faced by moms who are raising kids alone; or who struggle to provide for families on a minimum wage that is not a livable wage [Applause]; or who risk losing their jobs if they have to stay home to care for a sick child. But I share these stories because – even with all the support that I am lucky enough to have – the balancing is hard and making that visible might be useful to somebody somewhere.
Of course, it is not just our personal challenges that we must make visible. There are far bigger and more important problems that we have to shine a bright light on – like the dark chapters of our own nation’s history.
Let me give you one of the most chilling examples. Between 1877 and 1950, nearly 4,000 African Americans were lynched in 12 Southern states, according to a remarkable report released this year by the Equal Justice Initiative. In 1916, a man named Jeff Brown was lynched in Mississippi for accidentally bumping into a white girl while running to catch a train. In 1940, Jessie Thorton was lynched in Alabama for failing to address a white police officer as “Mister.” Many of the lynchings were public spectacles, advertised in advance in newspapers. Vendors hawked popcorn and lemonade. Families had photos taken by the bodies of the victims as souvenirs. In 1893, 10,000 people came to watch the lynching of Henry Smith in Paris, Texas.
One of the most alarming findings of the Equal Justice Initiative report is that there are virtually no public memorials to these killings. South Carolina, which witnessed 164 lynchings during this period, has only a few public markers of where they occurred. But the state has at least 170 memorials to Confederate soldiers of the Civil War.
Fifty years after Selma, and 150 after the end of the Civil War – at a time where there remains such enduring racial inequalities – these sites should not be invisible. We have to stop looking past them. Which is why finding ways to mark more of these sites – as the Equal Justice Initiative plans to do – is such an essential step [Applause].
To memorialize the Holocaust – the most unspeakable atrocity of the 20th century – a German artist named Gunther Denmig began installing what he called stolperstein, or stumbling stones. He placed the tiny, four-inch cubes – which simply note the name, date of birth and, when known, the death of an individual victim – in the ground outside the Holocaust victim’s former home. He started in Cologne, Germany, in 1992, with 250 little stones. Since then, Denmig has laid some 48,000 stolperstein in 18 countries. Any of you who have stumbled upon one knows the impact. The stone telescopes history. In humanizing a single victim – you feel it, if only for a minute, the incomprehensible loss of six million people.
Of course, we cannot limit ourselves to surfacing the dark parts of our past; we must do the same right here in the present. Consider the enduring problem of sexual violence on college campuses [Applause], only a tiny fraction of which is reported by victims. In spite of this problem, we have too often seen colleges and universities falling short of adequately investigating and disciplining perpetrators, and of protecting victims.
And yet – even as we are aware of the seriousness of this problem, it takes a woman picking up a mattress and carrying it around her campus to make people really see it [Applause]. A mattress that a good number of the women in this graduating class have helped carry. And men from Columbia, too.
This challenge of rendering the invisible visible is one I face every day at the United Nations, where the people most directly affected by the policies discussed are often far removed from sight and mind. We talk so often in terms of thousands or even millions of people that it’s easy to lose a sense of what one person is – and why even a single human being’s dignity is so important. So, wherever possible, the United States tries to bring those voices into the debate as a way of sharpening understanding of the human consequences of what can otherwise feel like abstract challenges.
Last September, as the Ebola outbreak was spreading exponentially in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, the most dire evidence-based projections suggested more than a million people would be infected if the international community failed to mount a swift and massive response. Yet most countries were doing far too little to stop the outbreak. Worse, several countries in the region were sealing their borders out of fear, preventing crucial aid from reaching those in need.
So the United States convened the first-ever emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on a public health crisis – and instead of simply having UN officials present statistics and charts, we arranged for a video link from the Security Council to the capital of Liberia, where a 38-year-old healthcare worker named Jackson Naimah was asked to describe what was happening in his country. Jackson, who was working at Médecins Sans Frontières Ebola clinic, described people dying outside the gates because the clinic was overflowing and had run out of beds to take more patients. He described having to turn away a boy with all the symptoms of the virus, whose father had died a week earlier, and he recalled thinking, “This boy is going to take a taxi, and he is going to go home to his family, and he will infect them.” He told the diplomats crammed into the UN chamber: “I feel that the future of my country is hanging in the balance. If the international community does not stand up, we will all be wiped out.”
As Jackson spoke, you could hear a pin drop in the Security Council. People who had not really seen Ebola up to that time were forced to grapple with its monstrous efficiency. And you could feel the momentum in the room shift as, one by one, countries spoke with a greater sense of urgency about the need to stand up rather than stand by.
Today, we haven’t just bent the curve of the epidemic, we are closing in on ending it [Applause]. And we try, we try, to seize every chance we have to bring voices like Jackson’s into discussions at the United Nations. And, when a conflict or a prison cell or some other barrier prevents these individuals from speaking for themselves, we try to describe their experiences in a way that others will hear.
Now, I have talked about what it will mean to secure lasting equality – slaying the bats in our bat caves; taking on the struggles of others seeking dignity; and using a range of means – from mattresses to human contact – to make the invisible visible.
This brings me to my last point, and arguably the simplest. True equality is going to require showing – not telling, but showing – people that change is possible.
Let me tell you what other countries see today when they look at the United States delegation to the UN. They see a woman Permanent Representative – one of only 37 women permanent representatives out of 193 ambassadors to the UN – they also see two other women Ambassadors for the United States, Michele Sison and Isobel Coleman, all three of us working mothers. And when the General Assembly is held each September, the world sees the U.S. delegation led by an African-American man – our President. What we look like to the world matters. Because we know, empirically, that people’s belief systems and biases can be shifted dramatically by what they see.
In West Bengal, India, for example, a political affirmative action program reserved spots for women in village governments. Within seven years, a study found, men’s individual biases against the capacity of women leaders almost fully disappeared; and women have become more likely to run for – and win – local seats. Parents have developed higher aspirations for their daughters, and girls’ expectations have increased for themselves.
I can tell you it’s true personally, as well. As a girl growing up in Ireland – where my family lived until I was nine – I watched my mother attend medical school while playing world-class squash and caring for me and my kid brother. I also learned from the stories my mother and father, Dr. Vera Delaney and Edmund Bourke – both kidney doctors – brought home about their patients. I loved the way they saw their patients not as a spreadsheet of symptoms and diseases, but as individuals. And I learned from the way they knew how to listen to them, and glean the details that others may have missed.
There is no question in my mind that growing up with my mother as my model gave me the confidence – or the hubris – to think that covering the women’s volleyball team for my college newspaper was experience enough to send me to the Balkans to become a war correspondent. Thanks, Mom [Laughter]. And there’s no question that I took from both my parents that – in work, in friendship, in love – we must understand where people around us are coming from, what motivates them, what saddens them, what inspires them, and how they got where they are.
And it’s worth remembering to the extent to which we – any of us here – see the world the way we do; make it to the heights we reach; and experience days of such great pride like this one – it’s worth remembering that all of that starts with the people we saw first. When you hug them after this, thank them for that. And you can give them a round of applause now, too [Applause].
As I’m wrapping up, I want to leave you with one last image. As you know, there are few places where women and girls have endured greater hardship – or been less visible – than in Afghanistan. Under Taliban rule, women couldn’t even walk outside without a male relative and a burqa. No girls were allowed to go to school, and no women served in positions of authority. Today, notwithstanding the persistence of the Taliban and its monstrous attacks against civilians, more than three million Afghan girls are in school. Women hold 28 percent of seats in Afghanistan’s Parliament – a higher proportion, I would note, than in the United States Congress [Applause].
And today, women can not only walk outside without a man or a burqa, but members of Afghanistan’s Women’s National Cycling Team are racing down the country’s roads on their bikes. Team members are pinched for resources, but big on courage. Some drivers yell at them and threaten them, but they ride on. One day, a man on a motorcycle reached out and tried to grab at the captain, causing her to crash and hurt her back. But today she is back on her bike, leading more than 40 other women training with the team.
One of the team members, Malika Yousufi, not only wants to become the first Afghan woman – but the first woman, period – to compete in the Tour de France. She told a reporter, “Nothing will stop us.”
Now, imagine just for a minute, what it must feel like to be a little girl from a rural town in Afghanistan – and to suddenly see those 40 women, in a single file, flying down the road. To see something for the first time that you couldn’t have believed possible. Think about where your mind would go – about the shockwave that image would send through your system. Think what it would allow you to believe possible. You would never be able to think the same way again.
That impact – that is what equality is all about. It is a memorial that forces us to see a dark part of our history. A woman who picks up a mattress to show us a problem we are overlooking. A woman or girl in a classroom, or on a bike, or in the water – clearing a path that otherwise would have seemed closed or unimaginable.
Now it’s your turn to climb on the bike. As Malika said, nothing can stop you. What will you make people see?
Thank you, and congratulations again, Barnard Class of 2015!
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
May 17, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Good afternoon, President Spar, faculty, trustees, alumni, families and friends of the strong and beautiful Barnard graduates! Congratulations, class of 2015!
Columbia grad Madeleine Albright has said, “It used to be that the only way a woman could truly make her foreign policy views felt was by marrying a diplomat, and then pouring tea on an offending ambassador's lap.” I’m here to tell you that in 2015, we have other options! [Applause].
I’m truly honored to be here, and to be among the amazing women, and men, on this stage, and to be with the amazing class of 2015 – I’m so honored that I invited my parents to your graduation. [Applause] And while we’re at it, let’s give a huge round of applause to all the parents and loved ones in the audience.
Your great school came into existence largely due to the vision of a remarkable woman, Annie Nathan Meyer. Meyer didn’t get the kind of schooling you got, or I got. Her mother kept her home as a small child because she wanted company. Meyer read voraciously, finishing all of Dickens’ books by the age of seven. [Laughter]. Yeah, seriously. When she was eleven, her mother died, and while her father agreed to let her go to school, he was so overprotective that he kept her home whenever there was bad weather.
When Meyer learned about a special college course for women at Columbia University, she set about secretly studying for examinations, which she passed on her first try. When she finally told her father, she later wrote, “He drew me gently and lovingly to him and announced, ‘You will never be married…Men hate intelligent wives.’” Meyer decided to go to Columbia anyway.
It was not what she had hoped. Women were not allowed into lectures; instead, they were given a reading list, a short meeting or two with the professor, and then an exam. When Meyer sat for her first exam, she found the questions were based entirely on the lectures that she had been barred from attending. Feeling what she called a “devastating sense of desolation,” she answered as best she could. And though she passed, she eventually dropped out, and, soon after, started her full-court press to secure the education for women that she had been denied. Four years later, in 1889, as we know, Barnard College – your college – was founded.
As Barnard finishes its 125th school year, it is safe to say that the cause of equality has come a very, very, very long way. But what I want to talk to you about today is how some of the remaining barriers to true equality can, and must, be overcome.
First, true equality will mean not letting our doubts silence our voices.
We live in a time where women have made tremendous strides, particularly here in the United States. And you all know the statistics. Women earn 60 percent of all undergraduate and graduate degrees; hold more than half of all professional-level jobs; and study after study shows that companies employing greater numbers of women outperform their competitors. And you know that, at the end of your four years, you are as well-equipped as any Barnard graduating class to make your mark. So why do you still feel that persistent self-doubt? That fear of making mistakes? And why do those doubts sometimes get in the way of your voices being heard?
I wish I had the answer. Instead, all I can tell you is that we all experience that feeling – even if it’s not obvious on the outside. I have even adopted a name for it – the Bat Cave; it’s that dark place in your head where all the voices tell you every reason you can’t do something.
Let me give you an example. Rewind to August 2008. I am working as a senior advisor on the campaign for then-Senator Barack Obama – who has just earned the Democratic nomination for President. And I find out that I’m pregnant with my first child. Now, I have an amazing husband, and this news – it’s seismic. I am over the moon.
And I tell no one at work. Lots of nods, I bet, back here and up there [Laughter].
I have never gone through this before, and I am worried that if I advertise my blissful state, it will affect how seriously I will be taken by the campaign, and potentially even shut me out of the kind of job that could make an impact. Everything I know of then-Senator Obama and the people around him tells me at the time that this makes zero sense. After all, this is a man who was raised by a single, working mother. A man whose brilliant wife worked while raising two daughters. A man who would go on to demonstrate daily as President his commitment to supporting working moms and dads. But at the time, I am way too deep in the Bat Cave to see any of that.
Eventually, it is my body that tells people the news – not me. And I acquired quite a collection of scarves.
I ended up having two babies while spending four years at the White House, and thereafter still managed to get to serve in my dream job, representing the United States at the United Nations [Applause]. But if I felt the way I did with a boss like mine, I can only imagine how other women feel – the ecstasy of a pregnancy clouded by the fear it could cause severe professional damage.
Last year, when the Ukraine crisis began, I momentarily experienced another version of this anxiety. Russia, a permanent member on the UN Security Council, is trying to lop off part of its neighbor, Ukraine – a clear violation of the rules that the United Nations was created to defend. An urgent UN Security Council session is called on Russia’s attempted takeover of Crimea. I take my seat, and my mind recalls Prague 1968, Budapest 1956, and some epic occasions in the twentieth century when Ambassadors Adlai Stevenson, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Madeleine Albright, and other legends made memorable, forceful interventions at the United Nations on behalf of the United States.
Then it dawns on me: that’s me now! I’m the United States!
Deep in the Bat Cave, I think of the consequences if my response – the United States’ response – is too forceful, or not forceful enough. I think of the overwhelming responsibility that comes with speaking on behalf of America and the ideals we stand for. And I think of the people of Ukraine who are counting on me. And I speak.
The fact is that doubt – and his more lovable big sister, self-awareness – both are more pronounced among women. Turns out Batwoman’s cave often has more square footage than Batman’s.
True equality will not mean shedding our doubts or our self-awareness – but rather not letting them quiet us when we should be speaking up. There are more than enough forces out there doing that without needing our help. And it will mean that, while everyone will have moments of uncertainty – and humility is an especially prized quality – women should not have to worry that if we stumble, it will be more noticed than when men do the same [Applause].
But it is not enough to find our own voices. True equality also requires that we learn to hear, and lift up, the voices of those whom others choose not to hear. This is my second point: You have to teach yourself to see the people and communities who live in society’s blind spots. Of course, everyone should strive to do this. But as women who, even to this day, know what it feels like to be unheard or unseen, we have an additional responsibility. I think the burden of being treated differently is also our strength – because it gives us the capacity to notice when others are treated differently. To see the blind spots.
That includes the discussion of gender identity on campus, which the Barnard community – and particularly your class – has embraced [Applause]. We must see that seemingly simple actions that most of us don’t have to think twice about – the bathroom we walk into; the gender listed on our driver’s licenses; the name people use to address us; the boxes “male” and “female” on a college application – can be a source of profound anguish for others. We must recognize the cruel and hostile treatment that transgender people experience in so many communities, which, according to one study, has contributed to 40 percent of transgender people in the United States attempting suicide during the course of their lives.
We must all work toward the goal of ensuring equal rights for all people – lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. And while we have a very long way to go, I’m extremely proud to work for an administration that has lifted Medicare’s ban on covering gender reassignment surgery, and whose Justice Department has decided to take on cases of discrimination based on an individual’s gender identity, including transgender status, under the Civil Rights Act.
Now again, it is no coincidence that women’s colleges have been among the first to embrace this discussion. Women know what it feels like to have to fight to be part of institutions whose doors should never have been closed to them.
You often hear people say that past generations struggled so that you would not have to. But I say, past generations struggled so you would be free to fight on behalf of someone else.
The idea of seeing the struggles of others around you – whether the other is a gender or an ethnic or religious group, or even an entire nation that usually does not have a voice – is one of the principles that has defined President Obama’s foreign policy. We know that America is stronger, that our policies are more effective, and that the world is better off when America is listening. And that includes listening to countries and communities that often feel invisible to the world’s superpowers.
That is why, when I started as the United States Ambassador to the UN a year and a half ago, I decided to visit as many of the other 192 UN ambassadors as I could, regardless of the size or the geopolitical heft of the country that they represent. By visiting their missions, rather than having them travel to ours, as was common practice, I would be able to see the national art they wanted to showcase, the family photos on their desks, the books that they had carried with them long distances to America. And I could show them America’s respect and our curiosity. So far, I’ve visited 119 countries’ missions. And when I visit, I try [Applause], when I visit I try to put my long list of policy asks aside. Instead, I ask the ambassadors about their upbringings, about how they became diplomats, what they are most proud of about their countries.
True equality will mean not just seeing the unseen, but also finding a way to make invisible problems visible – and this is my third point. I think the contemporary conversation about the challenge that women face in balancing a demanding job with raising a family is important. Women are opening up about how overwhelmed they feel trying to “have it all.” Back in 2013, when I arrived in my job, I was still nursing my one-year-old daughter as I tried to move my family to New York, and find schools for my two kids – and no, I did not enroll my then-four-year-old in a Kaplan course so he could get into a New York pre-school. I had to do all this at the same time, roughly, that the Syrian regime decided to stage massive chemical weapons attacks against its people, horrific atrocities were being committed in the Central African Republic, and a new government was cracking down on the opposition in Egypt. When asked by friends whether I subscribed to “lean in,” I would instead describe my philosophy then as “hang on.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has put it even better – “lean on.”
While Ambassador, I have spoken in public a fair amount about the ways my six-year-old, my now six-year-old son Declan, interacts with my new life – making visible a version of what goes on behind the scenes in many homes. Like most young kids with their parents, he seems to delight in interrupting me when I’m on the phone. “Mommy,” he says, “Can I ask you something?” I shake my head and I whisper, “I’m on the phone.” He says, “Mommy it’s important.” “I’ll be off in a minute.” “But Mommy, what’s the score of the Nationals game?” he says. I beg him to let me finish the call. But he is insistent. “Mommy, I said it’s important.” And I hold my hand over the phone and say – “Mine too, this is important too” – I may well be talking to the UN Secretary-General, a UN envoy on a crackling phone line from a war zone, or a fellow diplomat that I’m trying to put the squeeze on. But nothing persuades Declan. And when this little showdown has abated, and he gives up – which after nine or ten exchanges he does, usually – he invariably storms off in a huff, usually grumbling some version of, “Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine!” He’s had it up to here with Ukraine.
Now, the juggling act that I am attempting pales compared to that faced by moms who are raising kids alone; or who struggle to provide for families on a minimum wage that is not a livable wage [Applause]; or who risk losing their jobs if they have to stay home to care for a sick child. But I share these stories because – even with all the support that I am lucky enough to have – the balancing is hard and making that visible might be useful to somebody somewhere.
Of course, it is not just our personal challenges that we must make visible. There are far bigger and more important problems that we have to shine a bright light on – like the dark chapters of our own nation’s history.
Let me give you one of the most chilling examples. Between 1877 and 1950, nearly 4,000 African Americans were lynched in 12 Southern states, according to a remarkable report released this year by the Equal Justice Initiative. In 1916, a man named Jeff Brown was lynched in Mississippi for accidentally bumping into a white girl while running to catch a train. In 1940, Jessie Thorton was lynched in Alabama for failing to address a white police officer as “Mister.” Many of the lynchings were public spectacles, advertised in advance in newspapers. Vendors hawked popcorn and lemonade. Families had photos taken by the bodies of the victims as souvenirs. In 1893, 10,000 people came to watch the lynching of Henry Smith in Paris, Texas.
One of the most alarming findings of the Equal Justice Initiative report is that there are virtually no public memorials to these killings. South Carolina, which witnessed 164 lynchings during this period, has only a few public markers of where they occurred. But the state has at least 170 memorials to Confederate soldiers of the Civil War.
Fifty years after Selma, and 150 after the end of the Civil War – at a time where there remains such enduring racial inequalities – these sites should not be invisible. We have to stop looking past them. Which is why finding ways to mark more of these sites – as the Equal Justice Initiative plans to do – is such an essential step [Applause].
To memorialize the Holocaust – the most unspeakable atrocity of the 20th century – a German artist named Gunther Denmig began installing what he called stolperstein, or stumbling stones. He placed the tiny, four-inch cubes – which simply note the name, date of birth and, when known, the death of an individual victim – in the ground outside the Holocaust victim’s former home. He started in Cologne, Germany, in 1992, with 250 little stones. Since then, Denmig has laid some 48,000 stolperstein in 18 countries. Any of you who have stumbled upon one knows the impact. The stone telescopes history. In humanizing a single victim – you feel it, if only for a minute, the incomprehensible loss of six million people.
Of course, we cannot limit ourselves to surfacing the dark parts of our past; we must do the same right here in the present. Consider the enduring problem of sexual violence on college campuses [Applause], only a tiny fraction of which is reported by victims. In spite of this problem, we have too often seen colleges and universities falling short of adequately investigating and disciplining perpetrators, and of protecting victims.
And yet – even as we are aware of the seriousness of this problem, it takes a woman picking up a mattress and carrying it around her campus to make people really see it [Applause]. A mattress that a good number of the women in this graduating class have helped carry. And men from Columbia, too.
This challenge of rendering the invisible visible is one I face every day at the United Nations, where the people most directly affected by the policies discussed are often far removed from sight and mind. We talk so often in terms of thousands or even millions of people that it’s easy to lose a sense of what one person is – and why even a single human being’s dignity is so important. So, wherever possible, the United States tries to bring those voices into the debate as a way of sharpening understanding of the human consequences of what can otherwise feel like abstract challenges.
Last September, as the Ebola outbreak was spreading exponentially in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, the most dire evidence-based projections suggested more than a million people would be infected if the international community failed to mount a swift and massive response. Yet most countries were doing far too little to stop the outbreak. Worse, several countries in the region were sealing their borders out of fear, preventing crucial aid from reaching those in need.
So the United States convened the first-ever emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on a public health crisis – and instead of simply having UN officials present statistics and charts, we arranged for a video link from the Security Council to the capital of Liberia, where a 38-year-old healthcare worker named Jackson Naimah was asked to describe what was happening in his country. Jackson, who was working at Médecins Sans Frontières Ebola clinic, described people dying outside the gates because the clinic was overflowing and had run out of beds to take more patients. He described having to turn away a boy with all the symptoms of the virus, whose father had died a week earlier, and he recalled thinking, “This boy is going to take a taxi, and he is going to go home to his family, and he will infect them.” He told the diplomats crammed into the UN chamber: “I feel that the future of my country is hanging in the balance. If the international community does not stand up, we will all be wiped out.”
As Jackson spoke, you could hear a pin drop in the Security Council. People who had not really seen Ebola up to that time were forced to grapple with its monstrous efficiency. And you could feel the momentum in the room shift as, one by one, countries spoke with a greater sense of urgency about the need to stand up rather than stand by.
Today, we haven’t just bent the curve of the epidemic, we are closing in on ending it [Applause]. And we try, we try, to seize every chance we have to bring voices like Jackson’s into discussions at the United Nations. And, when a conflict or a prison cell or some other barrier prevents these individuals from speaking for themselves, we try to describe their experiences in a way that others will hear.
Now, I have talked about what it will mean to secure lasting equality – slaying the bats in our bat caves; taking on the struggles of others seeking dignity; and using a range of means – from mattresses to human contact – to make the invisible visible.
This brings me to my last point, and arguably the simplest. True equality is going to require showing – not telling, but showing – people that change is possible.
Let me tell you what other countries see today when they look at the United States delegation to the UN. They see a woman Permanent Representative – one of only 37 women permanent representatives out of 193 ambassadors to the UN – they also see two other women Ambassadors for the United States, Michele Sison and Isobel Coleman, all three of us working mothers. And when the General Assembly is held each September, the world sees the U.S. delegation led by an African-American man – our President. What we look like to the world matters. Because we know, empirically, that people’s belief systems and biases can be shifted dramatically by what they see.
In West Bengal, India, for example, a political affirmative action program reserved spots for women in village governments. Within seven years, a study found, men’s individual biases against the capacity of women leaders almost fully disappeared; and women have become more likely to run for – and win – local seats. Parents have developed higher aspirations for their daughters, and girls’ expectations have increased for themselves.
I can tell you it’s true personally, as well. As a girl growing up in Ireland – where my family lived until I was nine – I watched my mother attend medical school while playing world-class squash and caring for me and my kid brother. I also learned from the stories my mother and father, Dr. Vera Delaney and Edmund Bourke – both kidney doctors – brought home about their patients. I loved the way they saw their patients not as a spreadsheet of symptoms and diseases, but as individuals. And I learned from the way they knew how to listen to them, and glean the details that others may have missed.
There is no question in my mind that growing up with my mother as my model gave me the confidence – or the hubris – to think that covering the women’s volleyball team for my college newspaper was experience enough to send me to the Balkans to become a war correspondent. Thanks, Mom [Laughter]. And there’s no question that I took from both my parents that – in work, in friendship, in love – we must understand where people around us are coming from, what motivates them, what saddens them, what inspires them, and how they got where they are.
And it’s worth remembering to the extent to which we – any of us here – see the world the way we do; make it to the heights we reach; and experience days of such great pride like this one – it’s worth remembering that all of that starts with the people we saw first. When you hug them after this, thank them for that. And you can give them a round of applause now, too [Applause].
As I’m wrapping up, I want to leave you with one last image. As you know, there are few places where women and girls have endured greater hardship – or been less visible – than in Afghanistan. Under Taliban rule, women couldn’t even walk outside without a male relative and a burqa. No girls were allowed to go to school, and no women served in positions of authority. Today, notwithstanding the persistence of the Taliban and its monstrous attacks against civilians, more than three million Afghan girls are in school. Women hold 28 percent of seats in Afghanistan’s Parliament – a higher proportion, I would note, than in the United States Congress [Applause].
And today, women can not only walk outside without a man or a burqa, but members of Afghanistan’s Women’s National Cycling Team are racing down the country’s roads on their bikes. Team members are pinched for resources, but big on courage. Some drivers yell at them and threaten them, but they ride on. One day, a man on a motorcycle reached out and tried to grab at the captain, causing her to crash and hurt her back. But today she is back on her bike, leading more than 40 other women training with the team.
One of the team members, Malika Yousufi, not only wants to become the first Afghan woman – but the first woman, period – to compete in the Tour de France. She told a reporter, “Nothing will stop us.”
Now, imagine just for a minute, what it must feel like to be a little girl from a rural town in Afghanistan – and to suddenly see those 40 women, in a single file, flying down the road. To see something for the first time that you couldn’t have believed possible. Think about where your mind would go – about the shockwave that image would send through your system. Think what it would allow you to believe possible. You would never be able to think the same way again.
That impact – that is what equality is all about. It is a memorial that forces us to see a dark part of our history. A woman who picks up a mattress to show us a problem we are overlooking. A woman or girl in a classroom, or on a bike, or in the water – clearing a path that otherwise would have seemed closed or unimaginable.
Now it’s your turn to climb on the bike. As Malika said, nothing can stop you. What will you make people see?
Thank you, and congratulations again, Barnard Class of 2015!
Sunday, March 22, 2015
U.S. STATEMENT ON SITUATION IN YEMEN
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
March 22, 2015
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The UN Security Council met today to discuss how we can support the resumption of a peaceful, inclusive, and consensus-driven political transition under the leadership of the legitimate President of Yemen, Abdo Rabbo Mansour Hadi. All parties must re-commit to a transition through peaceful participation in talks mediated by UN Special Advisor Jamal Benomar. On March 21, President Hadi called for dialogue on the basis of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative and National Dialogue outcomes, and we urge all Yemenis to heed this call to prevent further violence and destabilization.
Unfortunately, the Houthis’ actions – taken in close collaboration with former President Ali Abdullah Salih – have consistently undermined Yemen’s transition. In recent days, forces loyal to the Houthis and Salih carried out airstrikes against the Presidential Palace in Aden – attacking the government’s democratically elected leader. Earlier today, Houthi forces launched destabilizing attacks on the city of Taiz. These attacks are but the latest in a series of violent actions perpetrated by the Houthis since they chose to overrun Sana’a, take over government institutions, and attempt to govern by unilateral decree. To preserve Yemen’s security, stability, and unity, all parties must refrain from any further unilateral and offensive military actions.
The human costs of instability in Yemen grow every day. On Friday March 20, we were shocked and outraged by the horrific terrorist attacks on mosques in Sana’a and Saada that killed more than 130 and injured hundreds more. The United States reiterates again our condemnation of these attacks, which were cowardly attempts to divide the Yemeni people.
And it is the Yemeni people who will continue to feel the consequences if all parties do not immediately cease military actions and return to Yemen’s political transition. Nearly 16 million people – 61 percent of the population in Yemen – are in grave need of humanitarian assistance.
Today, the Security Council spoke with one voice, reaffirming its support for President Hadi as Yemen’s legitimate president, deploring the Houthis’ failure to withdraw their forces from government institutions, and reiterating the Security Council's condemnation of Houthi unilateral actions that undermine the political transition process.
Yemen’s crisis can still be solved peacefully through the full implementation of the GCC Initiative and National Dialogue outcomes, which provide for a Yemeni-led democratic transition. All Yemenis have a right to peacefully participate in the process of determining Yemen’s future. Having worked bravely and tirelessly to bring about a political transition, the Yemeni people should see this process resume with meaningful public timelines for finishing a new Yemeni constitution, holding a referendum on this constitution, and launching national elections.
The United States remains firmly committed to supporting all of Yemen’s diverse communities in this endeavor. Since the Yemeni people took to the streets to demand change in 2011, Yemen’s transition has succeeded when its communities have come together to support a transition by consensus, as opposed to by unilateral decree. We remain firmly convinced that the peaceful future Yemenis deserve will only come through a return to an inclusive transition led by President Hadi with the full support of all Yemenis.
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
March 22, 2015
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The UN Security Council met today to discuss how we can support the resumption of a peaceful, inclusive, and consensus-driven political transition under the leadership of the legitimate President of Yemen, Abdo Rabbo Mansour Hadi. All parties must re-commit to a transition through peaceful participation in talks mediated by UN Special Advisor Jamal Benomar. On March 21, President Hadi called for dialogue on the basis of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative and National Dialogue outcomes, and we urge all Yemenis to heed this call to prevent further violence and destabilization.
Unfortunately, the Houthis’ actions – taken in close collaboration with former President Ali Abdullah Salih – have consistently undermined Yemen’s transition. In recent days, forces loyal to the Houthis and Salih carried out airstrikes against the Presidential Palace in Aden – attacking the government’s democratically elected leader. Earlier today, Houthi forces launched destabilizing attacks on the city of Taiz. These attacks are but the latest in a series of violent actions perpetrated by the Houthis since they chose to overrun Sana’a, take over government institutions, and attempt to govern by unilateral decree. To preserve Yemen’s security, stability, and unity, all parties must refrain from any further unilateral and offensive military actions.
The human costs of instability in Yemen grow every day. On Friday March 20, we were shocked and outraged by the horrific terrorist attacks on mosques in Sana’a and Saada that killed more than 130 and injured hundreds more. The United States reiterates again our condemnation of these attacks, which were cowardly attempts to divide the Yemeni people.
And it is the Yemeni people who will continue to feel the consequences if all parties do not immediately cease military actions and return to Yemen’s political transition. Nearly 16 million people – 61 percent of the population in Yemen – are in grave need of humanitarian assistance.
Today, the Security Council spoke with one voice, reaffirming its support for President Hadi as Yemen’s legitimate president, deploring the Houthis’ failure to withdraw their forces from government institutions, and reiterating the Security Council's condemnation of Houthi unilateral actions that undermine the political transition process.
Yemen’s crisis can still be solved peacefully through the full implementation of the GCC Initiative and National Dialogue outcomes, which provide for a Yemeni-led democratic transition. All Yemenis have a right to peacefully participate in the process of determining Yemen’s future. Having worked bravely and tirelessly to bring about a political transition, the Yemeni people should see this process resume with meaningful public timelines for finishing a new Yemeni constitution, holding a referendum on this constitution, and launching national elections.
The United States remains firmly committed to supporting all of Yemen’s diverse communities in this endeavor. Since the Yemeni people took to the streets to demand change in 2011, Yemen’s transition has succeeded when its communities have come together to support a transition by consensus, as opposed to by unilateral decree. We remain firmly convinced that the peaceful future Yemenis deserve will only come through a return to an inclusive transition led by President Hadi with the full support of all Yemenis.
Monday, February 16, 2015
U.S. EXPLANATION OF UN SECURITY COUNCIL VOTE ON YEMEN
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Explanation of Vote at a Security Council Session on Yemen
02/15/2015 05:09 PM EST
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
February 15, 2015
AS DELIVERED
The United States is pleased to support the adoption of a Security Council resolution that sends a clear message: all parties in Yemen, especially the Houthi, must commit to resolving the country’s political crisis by consensus through a peaceful and inclusive dialogue. Today, this Council deplores unilateral attempts by the Houthi to take over government institutions and to dissolve parliament by force. And this Council reaffirms the roadmap for implementing Yemen’s transition provided by the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative and its Implementation Mechanism and the outcomes of the comprehensive National Dialogue conference. The people of Yemen deserve a clear path back to the political transition process and a legitimate government based on these agreements and the resolutions of this Council, with a publicly-announced timeline and specific dates for the completion of a new constitution, a constitutional referendum, and national elections.
We continue to strongly support UN Special Adviser Jamal Benomar’s efforts to mediate a consensus solution to this political crisis—a process vital to defusing tensions on the ground. We also underscore the Security Council’s demand for the Houthi to release President Hadi, Prime Minister Bahah, and other members of the Cabinet from house arrest immediately. Their continued detention is unacceptable, and they must be granted full freedom of movement. We strongly condemn the use of force against peaceful protesters in Ibb on February 14th.
The United States will continue supporting all Yemenis who are working toward a peaceful, prosperous, and unified Yemen.
Thank you.
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Explanation of Vote at a Security Council Session on Yemen
02/15/2015 05:09 PM EST
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
February 15, 2015
AS DELIVERED
The United States is pleased to support the adoption of a Security Council resolution that sends a clear message: all parties in Yemen, especially the Houthi, must commit to resolving the country’s political crisis by consensus through a peaceful and inclusive dialogue. Today, this Council deplores unilateral attempts by the Houthi to take over government institutions and to dissolve parliament by force. And this Council reaffirms the roadmap for implementing Yemen’s transition provided by the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative and its Implementation Mechanism and the outcomes of the comprehensive National Dialogue conference. The people of Yemen deserve a clear path back to the political transition process and a legitimate government based on these agreements and the resolutions of this Council, with a publicly-announced timeline and specific dates for the completion of a new constitution, a constitutional referendum, and national elections.
We continue to strongly support UN Special Adviser Jamal Benomar’s efforts to mediate a consensus solution to this political crisis—a process vital to defusing tensions on the ground. We also underscore the Security Council’s demand for the Houthi to release President Hadi, Prime Minister Bahah, and other members of the Cabinet from house arrest immediately. Their continued detention is unacceptable, and they must be granted full freedom of movement. We strongly condemn the use of force against peaceful protesters in Ibb on February 14th.
The United States will continue supporting all Yemenis who are working toward a peaceful, prosperous, and unified Yemen.
Thank you.
Friday, January 16, 2015
AMBASSADOR PRESSMAN'S REMARKS ON PEACE-BUILDING AT UN SECURITY COUNCIL BRIEFING
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at a Security Council Briefing on Post-Conflict Peace-building
01/14/2015 01:30 PM EST
Ambassador David Pressman
Alternate Representative to the UN for Special Political Affairs
New York, NY
January 14, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Thank you, Mr. President. And let me begin by thanking the Deputy Secretary General and Ambassador Patriota for your leadership on this issue and for your briefings this morning, and to you, Foreign Minister Muñoz, for your presence here today, and to Chile for convening this important discussion.
Mr. President, preventing relapse into conflict was the primary objective for the creation of the Peacebuilding Architecture in 2005. And a decade later, it remains an urgent undertaking.
It has been said by others and we know that war is not like the weather – it doesn’t just happen; it is not inevitable. And it can be stopped. But we also know that countries that have experienced conflict once have heightened risk for relapsing into conflict again, and again. And we have seen the devastating consequences of that deadly cycle of conflict, from South Sudan to the Central African Republic.
But while war or conflict should never be deemed inevitable, too often, too many adopt a cynical passivity to emerging signs of tension or indicators of potential conflict – a passivity that assumes the futility of efforts to prevent potential conflict from metastasizing into actual conflict; and a cynicism that assumes, essentially, that certain places are just destined to fight it out.
The Peacebuilding Architecture is a living challenge to that dangerous cynicism and deadly passivity. It is a challenge for us to turn expressions of concern into coordinated actions -- actions to ensure that societies recovering from conflict do not relapse back into it. And it is a commitment to the idea that our past can indeed be put behind us and that our shared future can be built, together and in peace.
We know that when the international community mobilizes in concert with national authorities, together we can change behavior and assumptions and we can stop that which may have been written off by some as “inevitable.” Peace is built through hard work and, as the Secretary-General notes in his report, we have made “significant gains” in places and countries as diverse as Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Tunisia in efforts to consolidate peace.
In Sierra Leone, the integrated work of successive UN missions and the country team, as well as the engagement of the Peacebuilding Commission, has been critical to breaking the cycle of violence – providing space for a country and a people hungry for peace to turn their focus from war to prosperity; from conflict to electoral contests; from isolation to sustainable development. Sierra Leone has held three peaceful, credible elections since the end of the civil war in 2002, and new institutions, supported by the international community, are finding their place in society and contributing to the important work of building a government that is responsive to its citizens. Support from the United Nations has been critical to this transition.
For instance, United Nations support for institutions such as the All Political Parties Women’s Association, with a target of 30% female participation in all political parties, has increased women’s participation in Sierra Leone’s elections, building public trust in the elections process. And we know that the full and equal participation of women – whether in forging peace agreements, electing leaders, or leading post-conflict reconstruction – is absolutely critical to sustainable peace and stability. We cannot build peace for half of a society and expect it to be meaningful or lasting.
That is why the work of entities like the United Nations Peace Fund for Nepal, which has designated 30% of their funding for projects addressing the needs of women and girls -- including projects in the domain of land reform, conflict prevention, the rule of law, and the reintegration of child soldiers -- is so important. A project on land issues ensured extensive women’s participation in consultations on land use planning, a domain from which women had traditionally been excluded. Developments in Nepal demonstrate that appreciable progress can be made with targeted funding, leadership, and capacities for gender-responsive programming.
As the Deputy Secretary General noted, in Guinea, the creation of a “Women’s Situation Room” to support a network of local women’s organizations during the 2013 parliamentary elections not only increased women’s participation in the elections, it enabled them to actively participate as elections monitors and helped build confidence in the entire electoral system. The creation of community-led, early childhood development centers in Cote d’Ivoire enhanced social cohesion by bringing together women of diverse backgrounds focused on the well-being of children.
Kyrgyz women, with training from UN Women and United Nations Development Program, have formed women’s peace committees and have become important actors in monitoring tensions and government response within their community -- again, building social cohesion as well as trust between local populations and authorities in regions affected by conflict.
Full and equal inclusion of women and girls is not something that is just “just”; it is essential to build the peace of which we speak. Yet still, the participation of women in peacebuilding receives too little attention, is too often underfunded, and is too often thought of as an “effort to be inclusive” rather than a recognition that the full participation of women is a precondition of lasting peace. We must change this mindset and, in the process, change minds. And we must build our peacebuilding efforts to ensure they are inclusive, and in doing so we will make them more effective.
The recent outbreak of Ebola presented a new kind of threat to international peace and security that has indeed demanded an unprecedented response. We commend the United Nations’ critical efforts to mobilize human, financial, and technical resources to deliver an integrated response in the post-conflict countries of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. The Peacebuilding Commission can play an important role in bringing together key partners to coordinate assistance efforts and maximize the impact of the international community on the ground.
Unfortunately, international efforts have been less successful in producing results towards ending the enduring and daily threat to international peace and security presented in places like South Sudan. Despite a hard-won independence, South Sudan has erupted into deadly and devastating conflict, exacerbating ethnic tensions, eroding hope, and provoking a dire and man-made humanitarian crisis. Despite one of the most comprehensive UN peacekeeping mandates ever adopted by the Council and despite historic levels of international support, and despite almost infinite goodwill from international partners, political leaders in South Sudan have prioritized political power and conflict over peace and stability. Their actions have exacerbated tensions, have brought about tens of thousands of deaths, have displaced nearly 2 million innocent people, and are bringing this young nation – the United Nations’ newest member state – to the threshold of state failure. We cannot give up and we cannot allow the parties in South Sudan to abandon their people’s aspirations and right to live in peace and prosperity. And in standing with the people of South Sudan, we must be unified in our demand for the violence to end and that those responsible for this carnage be held to account.
Until recently, successive conflicts in the Central African Republic, received too little attention from the international community. A lack of vision for national reform, limited political will from the international community, and successive weak UN presences with little capacity to help develop state institutions further destabilized the country’s weak governance structure and undermined social cohesion. Our action last year in authorizing an integrated peacekeeping mission to protect civilians, facilitate humanitarian access, and support the state as it seeks to re-establish governance was a necessary action to stop the ensuing bloodshed. Bolstered by the contribution of troops from member-states from several regional organizations and humanitarian donations from around the globe, these collective actions represent the most comprehensive level of international engagement in the Central African Republic to date.
Mr. President, we must reflect on these lessons as we undertake the five-year review of the UN Peacebuilding Architecture. We have learned that peacebuilding requires the sustained, not sporadic, and coordinated commitment of national, regional, and international actors. It requires inclusivity – meaning women and girls are at the forefront and at the table, not an afterthought or excluded. It means the international community holds political actors accountable to the agreements they undertake and agreed frameworks to which they subscribe. And it means that addressing human rights abusers, hate, and discrimination head-on is the path to sustainable peace, not a diversion from it or an obstacle to it.
We hope that the Peacebuilding Architecture Review’s Advisory Group of Experts will heed these lessons and develop concrete recommendations to enhance the Peacebuilding Commission’s relevance and real-world impact by focusing on achieving results through its core competencies of coordination, resource mobilization, and advocacy.
2015, as others have noted, will also see the Secretary-General’s High Level Review of UN Peace Operations, as well as the Global Study of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security. We must challenge ourselves not to think about these issues only in silos. Peacekeepers are essential in setting the stable foundation for peace and development and peacekeepers are increasingly and appropriately being called upon to protect civilians in dire need of protection. Protecting civilians is not only an essential element of creating space for peace, it is vital for the credibility of the United Nations in the eyes of local populations and around the world. As such, it is essential for UN peacekeepers to carry out their protection of civilian mandates robustly and in a way that gives people confidence that we mean what we say.
And in this vein, let’s mean what we say when we sit at this table and recommit ourselves to the work of the Peacebuilding Architecture. Let’s translate our commitment to the inclusion of women into the actual inclusion of women. And let’s translate our hope for peace into the hard work required of building it.
Thank you, Mr. President.
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at a Security Council Briefing on Post-Conflict Peace-building
01/14/2015 01:30 PM EST
Ambassador David Pressman
Alternate Representative to the UN for Special Political Affairs
New York, NY
January 14, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Thank you, Mr. President. And let me begin by thanking the Deputy Secretary General and Ambassador Patriota for your leadership on this issue and for your briefings this morning, and to you, Foreign Minister Muñoz, for your presence here today, and to Chile for convening this important discussion.
Mr. President, preventing relapse into conflict was the primary objective for the creation of the Peacebuilding Architecture in 2005. And a decade later, it remains an urgent undertaking.
It has been said by others and we know that war is not like the weather – it doesn’t just happen; it is not inevitable. And it can be stopped. But we also know that countries that have experienced conflict once have heightened risk for relapsing into conflict again, and again. And we have seen the devastating consequences of that deadly cycle of conflict, from South Sudan to the Central African Republic.
But while war or conflict should never be deemed inevitable, too often, too many adopt a cynical passivity to emerging signs of tension or indicators of potential conflict – a passivity that assumes the futility of efforts to prevent potential conflict from metastasizing into actual conflict; and a cynicism that assumes, essentially, that certain places are just destined to fight it out.
The Peacebuilding Architecture is a living challenge to that dangerous cynicism and deadly passivity. It is a challenge for us to turn expressions of concern into coordinated actions -- actions to ensure that societies recovering from conflict do not relapse back into it. And it is a commitment to the idea that our past can indeed be put behind us and that our shared future can be built, together and in peace.
We know that when the international community mobilizes in concert with national authorities, together we can change behavior and assumptions and we can stop that which may have been written off by some as “inevitable.” Peace is built through hard work and, as the Secretary-General notes in his report, we have made “significant gains” in places and countries as diverse as Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Tunisia in efforts to consolidate peace.
In Sierra Leone, the integrated work of successive UN missions and the country team, as well as the engagement of the Peacebuilding Commission, has been critical to breaking the cycle of violence – providing space for a country and a people hungry for peace to turn their focus from war to prosperity; from conflict to electoral contests; from isolation to sustainable development. Sierra Leone has held three peaceful, credible elections since the end of the civil war in 2002, and new institutions, supported by the international community, are finding their place in society and contributing to the important work of building a government that is responsive to its citizens. Support from the United Nations has been critical to this transition.
For instance, United Nations support for institutions such as the All Political Parties Women’s Association, with a target of 30% female participation in all political parties, has increased women’s participation in Sierra Leone’s elections, building public trust in the elections process. And we know that the full and equal participation of women – whether in forging peace agreements, electing leaders, or leading post-conflict reconstruction – is absolutely critical to sustainable peace and stability. We cannot build peace for half of a society and expect it to be meaningful or lasting.
That is why the work of entities like the United Nations Peace Fund for Nepal, which has designated 30% of their funding for projects addressing the needs of women and girls -- including projects in the domain of land reform, conflict prevention, the rule of law, and the reintegration of child soldiers -- is so important. A project on land issues ensured extensive women’s participation in consultations on land use planning, a domain from which women had traditionally been excluded. Developments in Nepal demonstrate that appreciable progress can be made with targeted funding, leadership, and capacities for gender-responsive programming.
As the Deputy Secretary General noted, in Guinea, the creation of a “Women’s Situation Room” to support a network of local women’s organizations during the 2013 parliamentary elections not only increased women’s participation in the elections, it enabled them to actively participate as elections monitors and helped build confidence in the entire electoral system. The creation of community-led, early childhood development centers in Cote d’Ivoire enhanced social cohesion by bringing together women of diverse backgrounds focused on the well-being of children.
Kyrgyz women, with training from UN Women and United Nations Development Program, have formed women’s peace committees and have become important actors in monitoring tensions and government response within their community -- again, building social cohesion as well as trust between local populations and authorities in regions affected by conflict.
Full and equal inclusion of women and girls is not something that is just “just”; it is essential to build the peace of which we speak. Yet still, the participation of women in peacebuilding receives too little attention, is too often underfunded, and is too often thought of as an “effort to be inclusive” rather than a recognition that the full participation of women is a precondition of lasting peace. We must change this mindset and, in the process, change minds. And we must build our peacebuilding efforts to ensure they are inclusive, and in doing so we will make them more effective.
The recent outbreak of Ebola presented a new kind of threat to international peace and security that has indeed demanded an unprecedented response. We commend the United Nations’ critical efforts to mobilize human, financial, and technical resources to deliver an integrated response in the post-conflict countries of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. The Peacebuilding Commission can play an important role in bringing together key partners to coordinate assistance efforts and maximize the impact of the international community on the ground.
Unfortunately, international efforts have been less successful in producing results towards ending the enduring and daily threat to international peace and security presented in places like South Sudan. Despite a hard-won independence, South Sudan has erupted into deadly and devastating conflict, exacerbating ethnic tensions, eroding hope, and provoking a dire and man-made humanitarian crisis. Despite one of the most comprehensive UN peacekeeping mandates ever adopted by the Council and despite historic levels of international support, and despite almost infinite goodwill from international partners, political leaders in South Sudan have prioritized political power and conflict over peace and stability. Their actions have exacerbated tensions, have brought about tens of thousands of deaths, have displaced nearly 2 million innocent people, and are bringing this young nation – the United Nations’ newest member state – to the threshold of state failure. We cannot give up and we cannot allow the parties in South Sudan to abandon their people’s aspirations and right to live in peace and prosperity. And in standing with the people of South Sudan, we must be unified in our demand for the violence to end and that those responsible for this carnage be held to account.
Until recently, successive conflicts in the Central African Republic, received too little attention from the international community. A lack of vision for national reform, limited political will from the international community, and successive weak UN presences with little capacity to help develop state institutions further destabilized the country’s weak governance structure and undermined social cohesion. Our action last year in authorizing an integrated peacekeeping mission to protect civilians, facilitate humanitarian access, and support the state as it seeks to re-establish governance was a necessary action to stop the ensuing bloodshed. Bolstered by the contribution of troops from member-states from several regional organizations and humanitarian donations from around the globe, these collective actions represent the most comprehensive level of international engagement in the Central African Republic to date.
Mr. President, we must reflect on these lessons as we undertake the five-year review of the UN Peacebuilding Architecture. We have learned that peacebuilding requires the sustained, not sporadic, and coordinated commitment of national, regional, and international actors. It requires inclusivity – meaning women and girls are at the forefront and at the table, not an afterthought or excluded. It means the international community holds political actors accountable to the agreements they undertake and agreed frameworks to which they subscribe. And it means that addressing human rights abusers, hate, and discrimination head-on is the path to sustainable peace, not a diversion from it or an obstacle to it.
We hope that the Peacebuilding Architecture Review’s Advisory Group of Experts will heed these lessons and develop concrete recommendations to enhance the Peacebuilding Commission’s relevance and real-world impact by focusing on achieving results through its core competencies of coordination, resource mobilization, and advocacy.
2015, as others have noted, will also see the Secretary-General’s High Level Review of UN Peace Operations, as well as the Global Study of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security. We must challenge ourselves not to think about these issues only in silos. Peacekeepers are essential in setting the stable foundation for peace and development and peacekeepers are increasingly and appropriately being called upon to protect civilians in dire need of protection. Protecting civilians is not only an essential element of creating space for peace, it is vital for the credibility of the United Nations in the eyes of local populations and around the world. As such, it is essential for UN peacekeepers to carry out their protection of civilian mandates robustly and in a way that gives people confidence that we mean what we say.
And in this vein, let’s mean what we say when we sit at this table and recommit ourselves to the work of the Peacebuilding Architecture. Let’s translate our commitment to the inclusion of women into the actual inclusion of women. And let’s translate our hope for peace into the hard work required of building it.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Monday, December 15, 2014
U.S. REP. TO UN MAKES REMARKS ON VIOLENCE IN SOUTH SUDAN
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
December 15, 2014
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
On September 23, 2011, only months after South Sudan gained its independence and joined the United Nations, President Salva Kiir climbed the dais at the UN to address the General Assembly for the first time. He spoke of South Sudan’s commitment to political pluralism and “to fostering world peace and prosperity for the benefit of all humankind.” A year later, in his first speech before the UN General Assembly, then-Vice President Riek Machar reiterated that promise, and asked that South Sudan’s friends around the world continue supporting the country’s political and economic goals. The world stood with South Sudan from the outset. In 2011, the UN Security Council established the UN Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS) to help the young nation consolidate peace and security and to assist laying the groundwork for future development in the years following its independence.
Despite the international community’s support for South Sudan’s independence, the nation’s political and military leaders have unleashed a conflict that has devastated the country. One year ago today, internal political fighting turned bloody on the streets of Juba in clashes between Dinka and Nuer soldiers. That event quickly metastasized into a broader ethnic and armed conflict, unleashing a wave of targeted attacks on civilians that has produced a political, economic and humanitarian crisis of colossal proportions and that threatens regional stability. In one year of violence, it’s estimated that tens of thousands of people have been killed. There are 1.9 million internally displaced people and nearly 500,000 refugees in neighboring countries. Civilians have been murdered as they sought shelter in churches and mosques, and have been forcibly recruited to fight in militias. The risk of a man-made famine once again hangs over the country.
The United States again condemns in the strongest possible terms the ongoing violence in South Sudan, and we remain deeply concerned by the government and opposition’s persistent failure to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the crisis. When the UN Security Council visited Juba in August of this year, I made very clear during our conversations with both leaders that the United States and the United Nations expected both sides to uphold their previous agreements to end hostilities and negotiate earnestly both peace and a transitional government framework.
The United States urges South Sudan’s leaders to engage more urgently and more seriously in the Inter-governmental Authority on Development-led peace talks in Addis Ababa. We stand ready to work with South Sudan’s leaders if they take concrete steps toward peace. We are equally prepared to work with the international community, including the UN Security Council, to hold political spoilers and human rights abusers accountable.
The United States reaffirms its support for UNMISS and urges those countries that have committed troops and equipment to the mission to deploy them quickly. UNMISS must operate at full strength, and it must protect civilians. With over 102,000 people seeking refuge at UNMISS facilities, we remind all parties that UN sites, facilities, personnel and all sheltering civilians must be protected, and that attacks on those facilities, the forces guarding them, and the civilians sheltering inside could constitute war crimes. We further stress that UN and other humanitarian agencies must have safe, unfettered access to those in need of assistance throughout the country.
The commitment of the United Sates to the people of South Sudan is unwavering. But all the good will and humanitarian assistance in the world are no substitute for the difficult compromises necessary to end man-made violence and begin the process of accountability and reconciliation needed to build a sustainable future. Today, the country is at a crossroads. Its political and military leaders must demonstrate courage and lead the nation out of this horrific, self-inflicted, and pointless cycle of violence. If they do not take the necessary steps for peace, they will own the responsibility for war and mass atrocity – just what they fought to erase when they secured independence for South Sudan.
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
December 15, 2014
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
On September 23, 2011, only months after South Sudan gained its independence and joined the United Nations, President Salva Kiir climbed the dais at the UN to address the General Assembly for the first time. He spoke of South Sudan’s commitment to political pluralism and “to fostering world peace and prosperity for the benefit of all humankind.” A year later, in his first speech before the UN General Assembly, then-Vice President Riek Machar reiterated that promise, and asked that South Sudan’s friends around the world continue supporting the country’s political and economic goals. The world stood with South Sudan from the outset. In 2011, the UN Security Council established the UN Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS) to help the young nation consolidate peace and security and to assist laying the groundwork for future development in the years following its independence.
Despite the international community’s support for South Sudan’s independence, the nation’s political and military leaders have unleashed a conflict that has devastated the country. One year ago today, internal political fighting turned bloody on the streets of Juba in clashes between Dinka and Nuer soldiers. That event quickly metastasized into a broader ethnic and armed conflict, unleashing a wave of targeted attacks on civilians that has produced a political, economic and humanitarian crisis of colossal proportions and that threatens regional stability. In one year of violence, it’s estimated that tens of thousands of people have been killed. There are 1.9 million internally displaced people and nearly 500,000 refugees in neighboring countries. Civilians have been murdered as they sought shelter in churches and mosques, and have been forcibly recruited to fight in militias. The risk of a man-made famine once again hangs over the country.
The United States again condemns in the strongest possible terms the ongoing violence in South Sudan, and we remain deeply concerned by the government and opposition’s persistent failure to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the crisis. When the UN Security Council visited Juba in August of this year, I made very clear during our conversations with both leaders that the United States and the United Nations expected both sides to uphold their previous agreements to end hostilities and negotiate earnestly both peace and a transitional government framework.
The United States urges South Sudan’s leaders to engage more urgently and more seriously in the Inter-governmental Authority on Development-led peace talks in Addis Ababa. We stand ready to work with South Sudan’s leaders if they take concrete steps toward peace. We are equally prepared to work with the international community, including the UN Security Council, to hold political spoilers and human rights abusers accountable.
The United States reaffirms its support for UNMISS and urges those countries that have committed troops and equipment to the mission to deploy them quickly. UNMISS must operate at full strength, and it must protect civilians. With over 102,000 people seeking refuge at UNMISS facilities, we remind all parties that UN sites, facilities, personnel and all sheltering civilians must be protected, and that attacks on those facilities, the forces guarding them, and the civilians sheltering inside could constitute war crimes. We further stress that UN and other humanitarian agencies must have safe, unfettered access to those in need of assistance throughout the country.
The commitment of the United Sates to the people of South Sudan is unwavering. But all the good will and humanitarian assistance in the world are no substitute for the difficult compromises necessary to end man-made violence and begin the process of accountability and reconciliation needed to build a sustainable future. Today, the country is at a crossroads. Its political and military leaders must demonstrate courage and lead the nation out of this horrific, self-inflicted, and pointless cycle of violence. If they do not take the necessary steps for peace, they will own the responsibility for war and mass atrocity – just what they fought to erase when they secured independence for South Sudan.
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
REMARKS BY SECRETARY KERRY, IRAQI PRESIDENT MASUM AND IRAQI FOREIGN MINISTER AL-JAFARI
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at a Stakeout with Iraqi President Fuad Masum and Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Eshaiker al-Jafari
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
UN Headquarters
New York City
September 23, 2014
SECRETARY KERRY: Mr. President, you go right ahead.
PRESIDENT MASUM: (Via interpreter) Our meeting with the U.S. Secretary of State was very positive and very fruitful. We have discussed several issues, especially the situation in Iraq and the region. And also, we specifically focused on this terrorist organization known as ISIL. We have common views concerning this issue, and also we believe that the latest session of the UN Security Council was remarkable, and it gives peace and – gives assurances to people in the region that this threat will be dealt with.
Therefore, we would like to thank the countries that have come together in order to support Iraq and to stand by Iraq and support it in its war against terrorism, which is a new threat in this area.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. Delighted to be here with President Masum and with Foreign Minister Jafari, who have already proven to be important partners in this effort, and I appreciate the very constructive meeting that we’ve just had to talk about where we are.
Before I get started, I want to just say a few words about our decision to conduct strikes against ISIL targets in Syria, and also against seasoned al-Qaida operatives in Syria, who are known as the Khorasan Group. We have been very clear from the beginning we will not allow geography or borders to prevent us from being able to take action against ISIL, and we will not allow them to have a safe haven where they think they can have sanctuary against accountability. We will hold them responsible for their grotesque atrocities, and we will not allow these terrorists to find a safe haven anywhere. That is President Obama’s resolve.
If left unchecked, ISIL is not only a threat to the stability of Iraq and to the region, but it is a threat to countries elsewhere, including here. From the beginning President Obama has been very clear that this is not America’s fight alone. ISIL poses a threat to not just Iraq and Syria but to the region as a whole, and the region has to be a leader in this effort in order to fight back.
I want to commend President Masum and Prime Minister Abadi for the critically important steps that Iraq has taken to help form a government, and it is obviously important that they continue to take those steps, and we talked about some of that today. They are committed to doing so.
But they’ve also been, importantly, reaching out to their neighbors and helping to build this coalition. More than 50 countries have now agreed to join this effort to combat ISIL, including the Arab countries that joined us last night in taking military action in Syria. The overall effort is going to take time, there are challenges ahead, but we are going to do what is necessary to take the fight to ISIL, to begin to make it clear that terrorism, extremism does not have a place in the building of civilized society. And we will work with our friends from Iraq in order to make certain that their choice to move forward in a democratic and viable way will bear fruit and be supported by the international community.
Thank you.
Monday, September 22, 2014
U.S. UNITED NATIONS REPRESENTATIVE'S REMARKS TO SECURITY COUNCIL ON UKRAINE
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at a Security Council Briefing on Ukraine
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
September 19, 2014
AS DELIVERED
Thank you, Under-Secretary-General Feltman, for your informative briefing. Thank you, Ministers Timmermans, Bishop, and Asselborn for being here and signaling the importance of this issue with your presence.
First, on behalf of the United States, let me once again convey our condolences to the loved ones of the victims of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. We do not presume to grasp the depth of your grief. But we mourn the lives of those you lost.
We convene today for an update on the investigation into a crime that abruptly ended too many lives. The purpose of the investigation is to determine the truth about what brought down that plane.
Now, for any investigation to be credible, we all agree that it must be thorough, impartial, and professional. Ukraine and the whole international community turned to the Dutch Safety Board because we believed it was more than capable of meeting these standards.
The Board’s preliminary findings reflect its independence and its expertise. Those findings, submitted to the Security Council on September 9th, include the following:
- First, the aircraft was brought down by, “a large number of high-energy objects that penetrated the aircraft from the outside.”
- Second, there were no engine warnings, aircraft system warnings, or distress messages detected.
- Third, the damage to the aircraft is, “not consistent with any known failure mode of the aircraft, its engines, or systems.”
- And fourth, the only planes identified in the report that were in the vicinity of Flight MH 17 were commercial aircraft.
Based on those preliminary findings, one can rule out that Flight MH 17 was brought down by a bomb on board. It was not. Russian claims that the flight was brought down by a Ukrainian fighter jet are also not supported by evidence in the report. Moreover, ground photography is consistent with the expected damage from a surface-to-air missile, but does not correspond with the damage that short-range, air-to-air missile from a smaller warhead would produce. These facts are important because they contradict the fiction that has been propagated by Russia.
The Dutch Safety Board’s findings are consistent, however, with evidence gathered by a group of countries, including the United States, pointing to the fact that Flight MH 17 was shot down by a surface-to-air missile fired from territory controlled by Russian-backed separatists.
Russia called for today’s meetings under the pretense of being briefed on the status of the investigation. The representative of the Russian Federation today has appealed for what he calls a “objective and transparent investigation.”
But in its intervention today, Russia made clear its real intention is not to learn about the investigation, but to discredit it. Russia is seeking to play the role of forensic aviation investigator but cannot do so in an impartial and objective manner.
Russian-backed separatists denied access to the crash site for days after Flight 17 was downed. Russian-backed separatists then restricted access after initially letting outside officials in.
This is not consistent with an objective and transparent investigation.
The representative of the Russian Federation today complained about the timeliness of the voice recordings being processed. Yet telephone conversations intercepted by the Ukrainian government indicate that the commander of a pro-Russian separatist unit told local state emergency service employees that Moscow wanted to find the black boxes; and he enlisted the support of these local officials to help recover the boxes.
This is not consistent with the desire to ensure the sanctity of the recordings that, today, the Russian representative professes a desire to protect.
The Russian representative says that the report does not contain “convincing information.” In order to be convinced of facts, one must acknowledge them. In order to be convinced of truth, one must allow it to be surfaced. One can be convinced if one confronts the facts as they are established and proven, not as one may wish they were.
It’s time to allow facts, however inconvenient, to be uncovered. And it is time to stop all attempts to undermine the credibility of a thorough, impartial, and independent investigation that the international community has no reason to doubt.
Russia does not have the track record to play the credible investigator here. Russia has repeatedly misled this Council, its own people, and the world about its support for illegal armed groups and its own military incursions into Ukraine. Just read the transcripts of the previous 24 Security Council sessions on Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Read Russia’s denials that it was arming and training separatists in Crimea, and later its denials that it had deployed troops to Crimea. Read Russia’s denials that it was arming and training separatists in eastern Ukraine, and later its denials that it had deployed troops to eastern Ukraine.
The Dutch Safety Board that has been delegated the authority by Ukraine, in line with ICAO standards, to investigate this crash. If Russia has evidence that it believes can help identify who shot down Flight MH 17, it has a responsibility to share that information with the independent investigators.
Too many lives have been lost and this conflict has gone on for too long. It is time for Russia to bring its intervention to an end. That is why we fully support the ceasefire and agreement signed in Minsk, which aims to de-escalate the conflict that has taken approximately 3,000 lives. We fully support a negotiated political solution to this crisis, as we have asserted since Russia’s incitements created the conflict. We welcome reports that Russia is decreasing its troop levels in eastern Ukraine – even if Russia continues to deny that its troops were there in the first place. And we welcome Russia’s recent statements expressing support for the ceasefire.
However, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the crisis in eastern Ukraine, just like the occupation and annexation of Crimea before it, was manufactured by Moscow. And no country should support carving off pieces of sovereign Ukraine and handing them to the aggressors. The territorial integrity of Ukraine is non-negotiable.
Ukraine has demonstrated remarkably good faith in meeting its commitments. This week – notwithstanding the aggression against the state by the separatists and by Russian forces – Ukraine’s parliament passed legislation granting certain districts in eastern Ukraine special status that includes greater self-governance, economic control, and Russian language rights.
Now it is Russia’s turn. Russia must immediately withdraw all of its forces and equipment from Ukraine, including Crimea, and cease all forms of support and training for separatist groups. Russia and the separatists it backs must release all of their hostages and prisoners. Russia must finally close its borders to the flow of soldiers, separatists, tanks, artillery, and other machinery of war, and it must grant Ukraine control over its own border. Russia and the groups it backs must create an environment that allows the OSCE to fulfill its monitoring and verification mandate.
There is one very important imperative we must remember, which brings us back to why we convened today: truth. Two hundred and ninety-eight innocent people were killed on July 17th. The international community has identified an independent investigative body to uncover the truth about what happened to Flight MH 17. Today, we join the chorus of member states in reiterating our full support for the Dutch Safety Board’s investigation and we reject Russia’s efforts to disparage it or hinder its progress. The next step is the pursuit of justice. And when those responsible for this horrific crime are eventually identified, they will be punished.
Thank you.
Saturday, September 13, 2014
U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL'S REMARKS AT UN SECURITY COUNCIL ON MINUSTAH
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at the Security Council Debate on MINUSTAH
AS DELIVERED
Thank you, Special Representative Honoré, for your briefing and for your leadership. And thank you to all the dedicated women and men who are serving in MINUSTAH, who are working with you to build a more secure and stable Haiti.
The troop and police contributors to Haiti, many of whom we have heard from – several of whom we will soon hear from – have made a world of difference in the lives of the Haitian people. The whole international community is grateful.
When the Council met to discuss Haiti in March, there was cautious optimism that the signature of the El Rancho Accord and the dialogue mediated by the Episcopal Conference would help break the country’s political stalemate, and lead to long-overdue elections. So it is deeply disappointing, as other Council members have pointed out, that five months later, so little progress has been made toward that goal. Haiti still doesn’t even have an electoral law, leading the country’s provisional electoral council to declare recently that Haiti will not be able to hold elections on October 26, 2014, the date the government had set.
Many of Haiti’s elected leaders have worked tirelessly to seek a political compromise and have offered meaningful concessions toward that end, including with regard to the composition of the electoral council and the cabinet. But a group of six senators seems intent on holding elections hostage to partisan concerns, even going so far as to prevent a debate on the electoral law. Legislators in a democracy have a responsibility to defend their constituents’ rights. But when elected officials take advantage of democracy’s checks and balances to cynically block debate and elections altogether, they stand in the way of addressing citizens’ real needs.
And the needs of Haiti’s citizens, as we all know, are real – very, very real. Massive progress has been made to find homes for the one and a half million people displaced by the 2010 earthquake, but 70,000 people are still displaced. And much work remains to be done to provide for citizens’ basic needs – like electricity, quality schools, and access to doctors. Haitians expect their government to provide for these needs, and are understandably frustrated when they are not met.
So our message to all of Haiti’s politicians is clear: come together to pass an electoral law, and hold free, fair, and inclusive elections in respect of constitutional deadlines. Every UN member state should join that call and we are heartened that so many have done so.
Despite the political deadlock in Haiti, there has been encouraging progress on other fronts. We welcome the ongoing expansion and professionalization of the Haitian National Police. Police have shown an increased capacity to maintain public order while respecting people’s rights. We also recognize MINUSTAH’s efforts to strengthen Haiti’s justice sector, such as seeking to improve the capacity of judges and prosecutors, and increasing access to legal aid. Haiti’s prison system needs urgent fixing. Haiti’s prisons, which have a capacity of around 6,000 people, currently house over 10,000. And nearly 80 percent are awaiting trial.
Let us be clear: our work in Haiti is not finished. But just because significant development and political challenges persist does not make MINUSTAH the solution to all of them, nor does it mean that the mission should be kept just as it is. We have to right-size MINUSTAH to fit Haiti’s evolving needs. We agree with our colleagues that decisions about the size and configuration of the force should be conditions-based. And like our friends in the region who have given so much to Haiti’s recovery, we are a neighbor of Haiti’s and we have a deep and demonstrated interest in Haiti’s security and the growth and success of its democracy. The United States agrees with the Secretary General’s determination – based on a thorough review – that conditions support further consolidating MINUSTAH’s military component in the upcoming mandate. We agree with the Special Representative that support from MINUSTAH’s robust police component to Haiti’s National Police is still critically necessary. And a smaller military component must stand ready to assist – on short notice – anywhere that unrest overwhelms the combined capacity of Haitian and UN police. With continued, robust MINUSTAH support, we look to Haiti’s government to assume greater responsibility for security, including for elections.
We are committed to discussing with partners how MINUSTAH should be adjusted. We believe that the Secretariat, the SRSG, and the Force Commander have taken the facts on the ground into account, and they have concluded that conditions support the adjusted force levels recommended by the Secretary-General.
In conclusion, Haiti has real needs. It has been through so much and it faces tremendous challenges. We as an international community continue to experiment and to learn and to adjust around the most effective ways to help the Haitian people address those very real needs. We will continue to do so as Haiti continues to move along the path to self-sufficiency. Thank you.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
U.S. REMARKS AT SECURITY COUNCIL STAKEOUT ON UNMIL
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at the Security Council Stakeout on UNMIL
09/09/2014 04:35 PM EDT
AS DELIVERED
Hi, good afternoon. Before I go into today’s consultation, I have one quick Presidency-related scheduling update. The President’s—President Obama’s-- Foreign Terrorist Fighter Summit is now scheduled for Wednesday, September 24 at 3:00 p.m.
Now, let me briefly summarize what transpired in the Security Council this morning. You’ve all seen this morning’s briefing in the open chamber, so I’ll start with a readout of consultations.
The Special Representative Karin Landgren updated the Council on the efforts of UNMIL to support the Liberian and international response to the Ebola outbreak. Council members expressed support for the Secretary-General’s recommended three-month technical roll-over of UNMIL’s mandate.
Regarding the Ebola outbreak itself, The Special Representative discussed how the outbreak has put some of UNMIL’s tasks on hold, but she stressed that UNMIL’s presence and its operations remain critical, especially as the international community surges health care personnel into Liberia. She also discussed UNMIL's engagement with the region, including with NGOs, to coordinate support for the response.
Special Representative Landgren reviewed UN efforts to step up protection of UNMIL staff, noting the very low risk of transmission to UN personnel, and their efforts to provide education about the disease, which is preventable and controllable.
Council members then discussed the ways in which the Security Council might do more to support the international mobilization effort.
Speaking in my national capacity, I want to reiterate the United States’ strong support for the work of the men and women of UNMIL and to express our deep appreciation for the troops, police, and civilians who are serving in the Mission.
The United States takes very seriously the concerns that some countries have expressed about the safety of their peacekeepers in UNMIL. At the same time, we have to avoid panic and fear. I would like to reiterate that this disease is preventable, and this outbreak is controllable.
The United States has reviewed the safety protocols UNMIL is taking and we believe that they are appropriate and that they are being followed. We feel confident in the safety of our own troops and police working in the mission. And our Embassy in Liberia remains open.
We are working closely with the UN, including with the World Health Organization, the Senior UN System Ebola Coordinator, David Nabarro, and others on further steps that we, and the broader international community, can take to address this crisis.
Today, the United States has more than 100 specialists in disease-control, planning, logistics, and operations drawn from across our governments working on the ground in the affected countries. More are on their way. In fact, by the end of next week, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, alone, will have more than 100 disease experts in West Africa to battle Ebola.
To date, the U.S. Government has spent more than $100 million to address the Ebola outbreak and USAID has announced plans to make available up to $75 million in additional funding. We’ve announced financial support to the African Union for the urgent deployment of trained and equipped medical workers to West Africa, which will represent the single largest injection of critical personnel to the region to help combat the Ebola outbreak. And yesterday our Department of Defense announced that it would deploy a field hospital to Liberia.
There is much work to be done and a full global response will require our collective resources and conviction that we can stop this outbreak as we have done with previous ones. But no one national government, no single UN office or no NGO can manage this alone.
It is imperative that we, as an international community, get serious about addressing the public health, humanitarian and security effects of this outbreak, and I believe we need to have a conversation about what role the Security Council should play in that.
There is a way forward, but it’s one that we have to take together.
Thank you. And with that, I’m happy to take a few questions.
Reporter: Ambassador, in your capacity – in your international capacity, sorry - and as host country for UNGA , what measures is the United States going to be taking to make sure that there’s no transmission of the virus here at headquarters during ministerial week when people come from 193 countries around the world? Port Authority, Health Homeland Security, who’s involved?
Ambassador Power: Well, first let me say that we have, in August, gone through something analogous in the sense that the United States hosted the African Leaders Summit in Washington and we had large delegations coming from many of the countries where infections have been noted. We have state, local, and federal cooperation on this, coordination with the United Nations. The Center for Disease Control has been in touch, again, with the Homeland Security and the other parts of the U.S. government that are responsible for monitoring the flow in and out of the United States as well as in touch, of course, with us here at the Mission and the staff working at the UN itself around procedures and protocols. And I think we feel very confident that we have the necessary safeguards in place.
Reporter: Ambassador, you just mentioned that a conversation in the security council maybe needs to happen. What role do you think the security council can play in tackling this outbreak?
Ambassador Power: Well, I think, without getting ahead of the Council itself, because we really are I think now in very intensive and urgent conversations, the Security Council is responsible with dealing with threats to peace and security. The fact that we just had a, you know, nearly 3-hour discussion of the – not only the Ebola crisis itself, but the knock-on effects of the Ebola crisis on the Liberian economy, on the fragile political situation in the country, and on security and the outbreak of violence, I think already indicates that the Security Council is embracing that responsibility. But this is a regional crisis, and so I think we need to look at the ways in which we can bring all of the relevant stakeholders together to discuss the necessary coordination, to raise the profile of the issue. I don’t think anybody can say right now that the response – the international response – to the Ebola outbreak is sufficient. None of us would say that that is the case. And given the threat, again, posed by the Ebola outbreak, if the response is not yet sufficient, then we in the Security Council, just as the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the African Union, every organization and every single member state in the international community needs to be looking at how we up our game.
Reporter: On terrorism, we witnessed in Lebanon the beheading of two soldiers – Lebanese soldiers – by terrorists. To what extent you think can Lebanon and other countries in the region can play a role in this fight against terrorism?
Ambassador Power: Well, first, let me state the obvious, which is how monstrous and horrific the beheadings have been. As you know the United States has seen two of our own also killed by these vile terrorists who call themselves, again, a part of this terrorist organization. Their crimes have spread from Syria, in the first instance, into Iraq; and now we are seeing what they are capable of, of course, in Lebanon. I think what we have seen in the wake of the United States’ involvement in this effort, as the President has put it, to destroy – to degrade and destroy ISIL is overwhelming support from the international community for that effort. And without getting into the specifics of what every country has offered, whether it’s in the realm of humanitarian assistance, or air strikes, or military support for the Iraqis and the Kurds, in the first instance, or for the Lebanese armed forces, we are seeing, again, an overwhelming show of support for this idea of the international community coming together in a coalition to degrade and destroy a movement that carries out beheadings and that terrorizes everybody who they come in contact with.
I would just take this occasion to commend the government in Lebanon because Lebanon is also sheltering more than a million Syrians who have fled from that crisis. And the fact that Lebanon, notwithstanding its own history, notwithstanding the delicate balance – political and security balance that exists within the country – the fact that the Lebanese people and the Lebanese government have embraced their role as a safe haven for truly vulnerable people who are fleeing either the Assad regime or a terrorist like those from ISIL, I think is a real tribute to the solidarity the Lebanese have shown. And it’s our responsibility as an international community to join in solidarity with Lebanon as it now deals with, you know, one of now what are becoming innumerable manifestations of the terror inflicted by ISIL.
Reporter: Thank you, Madame Ambassador. Stephane Dujarric, the UN Spokesman, just said that the Secretary General spoke to President Obama yesterday and the Secretary General told him that he plans to hold a high-level meeting on Ebola on the sidelines of the General Assembly. Is this something that President Obama will attend and is this something that in light of what you just said about what the Security Council is discussing could actually help put a global spotlight on what’s needed to combat this disease?
Ambassador Power: Thank you, Edi. Let me say a couple things. First, President Obama from the beginning of this outbreak has made clear that this is – that we view this as a national security priority in addition to a grave threat to human life. And President Obama, I think, over the weekend, made very clear our intention to do everything we can to help mobilize the international community. The Secretary General has himself come out and said we need a surge. The resources that UN member states are providing and that private donors are providing are not sufficient. So, I think that what you are seeing is the Secretary General and the President of the United States seeing this crisis in very, very similar terms. President Obama has said he will lend whatever support he can to the Secretary General’s efforts to mobilize resources around a UN appeal.
We also, as a government – the United States government has reached out to many of the troop contributing countries and police contributing countries to UNMIL, to offer our assurances that the protocols we have – we have looked at the protocols and the procedures UNMIL has put in places as I mentioned and to offer our view that these are sufficient and that UNMIL is being very careful in terms of the welfare of its personnel. And again, we have kept our people within UNMIL, notwithstanding the outbreak of this crisis. So, I’m not going to speak to, you know – I think we don’t yet have the details about what the Secretary General’s event is going to entail. But I can tell you on the basis of the conversation we just had in the Council, that everyone in that Council acting in their national capacities – and I’m quite confident us as a collective will be interested in thinking how we can do everything in our power between today and whenever that event occurs to optimize the outcome, and to ensure that the contributions made whether in terms of logistic support, whether in terms of transportation of medical workers into the country, whether in terms of money to pay for medication, to pay for health salaries – we just heard about how many Liberian health workers are risking their lives to deal with the Ebola outbreak have not been paid in 3-5 months – so, we need a division of labor. No one country is going to be able to manage the Ebola crisis response. The Secretary General’s leadership is invaluable, and the United States stands ready to support him in any way we can.
Thank you.
Friday, September 5, 2014
U.S. REPRESENTATIVE'S REMARKS TO UN SECURITY COUNCIL REGARDING SYRIA
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the Security Council Stakeout Following Consultations on Syria
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
September 4, 2014
AS DELIVERED
Good afternoon everyone. Special Coordinator Sigrid Kaag just updated the Council on the OPCW-UN Joint Mission’s progress on eliminating Syria’s declared chemical weapons program. She outlined the U.S. ship Cape Ray’s completed destruction of Syria’s most dangerous declared chemicals and discussed plans to destroy the remaining chemical weapons production facilities.
She also noted the Technical Secretariat’s continuing work to address discrepancies and omissions related to the original Syrian declaration. On this point, a number of Council members stressed how important it was to resolve questions with regards to the Syrian Government’s omissions and discrepancies in its original declaration.
Some Council members raised their concerns about the Syrian government’s use of chlorine gas, as reported by the UN Human Rights Council’s Commission of Inquiry last month.
While the Joint Mission’s formal role winds down on September 30, Council members noted that the elimination effort is not complete. The Council expressed thanks to Secretary-General Ban for his willingness to exercise good offices in furtherance of the implementation of Security Council resolution 2118. Some Council members, including the United States, expressed a desire for monthly updates on continuing efforts to completely eliminate the Syrian CW program.
One final note on today’s consultations: Earlier this morning, the Council met with the troop and police contributing countries to the UN Mission in Liberia. As you are all aware, Liberia is the epicenter of the tragic Ebola outbreak in West Africa. Special Representative Landgren, joined by the UNMIL force leadership, briefed on the many efforts that UNMIL is undertaking to protect and safeguard all UN personnel, notably the UNMIL peacekeepers, who continue to serve commendably to help Liberia consolidate its hard-won peace and security gains more than a decade since the end of that country's civil war. Under-Secretary-General Ladsous and Assistant-Secretary-General Banbury also highlighted the continued commitment of the UN system, including in support of the efforts of Dr. Nabarro and the World Health Organization, to respond fully and promptly to the Ebola outbreak across the region. We also heard from several of UNMIL's largest troop and police contributors who attended the briefing, many of whom expressed their continued and strong commitment to Liberia.
Let me just conclude, if I may, with a comment in my national capacity on the session from which I’ve just come. I want to stress that much more work still needs to be done on Syria’s chemical weapons program. The international community must continue to press for the resolution of all discrepancies and omissions in Syria’s original declaration. We must ensure that the Syrian government destroys its remaining facilities for producing chemical weapons within the mandated time frames and without the repeated delays by the Assad regime that plagued earlier removal efforts. We must also address the Syrian military’s reported systematic use of chlorine gas in opposition areas, as described by the Commission of Inquiry’s August report.
And as we work toward these goals, we need to keep front and center the fact that Syria is still wracked with violence of the worst sort. The Syrian government has increased its reliance on barrel bombs to wage a brutal aerial campaign, targeting schools, residential buildings, and crowded streets. In the first six months of this year, the Assad regime has dropped an average of 260 barrel bombs a month – this is three times more than during the same period last year. And it continues to launch rockets into neighborhoods, including hundreds of rockets that struck the neighborhood of Jobar over the past week, utterly destroying entire city blocks.
The progress we’ve made over the past year on chemical weapons, and the progress in Syria, will never be complete or real until the violence ends and steps toward a political solution begin. Thank you. And I’d be happy to take a few questions.
Reporter: Thanks. So, Ms. Kaag spoke to us in the briefing room just now and one of the things that she brought up were volume discrepancies related to Syrian declarations, which were repeatedly revised. Were there any details discussed in the Council about the volumes? And is the US concerned about this particular type of discrepancy, particularly in light of the recent expansion of territory under control of ISIL?
Ambassador Power: The United States is concerned about all discrepancies, also the potential that there are real omissions in the declaration. And we are working principally through the OPCW, which has a technical secretariat that is engaging with the Syrians on these issues. We are concerned, though, for two reasons: one, the reason you mention, of course, which is that extremist terrorist groups who have committed some of the most vile acts just in the last few days before our very eyes and who have terrorized everyone they come into contact with in Syria and Iraq, that these weapons, or weapon stocks, if they are left, could fall into their hands.
But let’s be clear. There is one actor that has actually used chemical weapons, in mass, killing, you know, thousands, or at least several thousands of people in the August 21 attack and many allegations of other use prior to the effort to get rid of Syria’s chemical weapons program. So, there are two reasons or concerns about omissions, gaps, and discrepancies, and that’s why the Security Council intends to stay very much on top of this and to press them, to press both the international actors who continue to engage on the ground and to press those who have leverage over the regime, to be pushing the regime to be fully forthcoming.
Reporter: Thank you, Madame President. How worried are you about the possibility that the ISIS/ISIL has acquired some kind of chemical weapons? Also, your administration has been resisting international calls to interfere in Syria, militarily. Last week, Syria foreign minister offered cooperation with the US against the terrorists in his country. What does it take for the US to interfere in this conflict? Thank you.
Ambassador Power: Thank you. I’d say first that President Obama I think was pretty clear over the last couple days about his intention to galvanize an international coalition to degrade and destroy ISIL. Inherent in that is a recognition of the threat that ISIL poses everywhere. Certainly if there are chemical weapons left in Syria, there will be a risk that those weapons fall into ISIL’s hands. And we can only imagine what a group like that would do if in possession of such a weapon.
With regard to the Assad regime, I would say first of all that the actors on the ground who have fought over the last 7 months the most strenuously against ISIL have been the moderate opposition, have been the Sunni opposition groups. And so as the president has said, a critical complement to any effort, comprehensive effort, to deal with ISIL will involve strengthening those groups. And it is still our belief that the Assad regime – its brutality, the barrel bomb attacks, the possible chlorine use now, the previous chemical weapons attacks – these are recruiting tools that extremists have used to attract foreign terrorist fighters to Syria.
Tactics of the kind that they’re employing against civilians, against residential neighborhoods, against schools, are tactics that can never be consistent with a lasting peace. They’re terrorizing tactics. So you have on the one hand a monstrous terrorist group and you have on the other hand a monstrous group – a monstrous regime, rather, carrying out attacks that terrorize their own people, that kill civilians, that fire indiscriminately on areas that you know are going to affect the lives of civilians and kill and injure women and children and so forth. So as President Obama has said, the Syrian people should not have to choose between two forms of terror: terror inflicted by the regime and terror inflicted by ISIL.
Reporter: On chemical weapons again, given the discrepancies and the concern you have expressed, what happens exactly after September 30th? Is there any appetite on the Council for further action?
Ambassador Power: Again, there’s a process playing itself out, in – through the OPCW executive secretariat, where the concerns that we and other member states have are being raised. Some of them have been addressed at the margins by the regime up to this point, but there’s a process that’s ongoing. What is, was very clear in the Council session today among members states is while there was great appreciation of the work of Sigrid Kaag and the Joint Mission, who operated under impossible circumstances, you know, building the airplane as they were flying it, and who have succeeded in getting rid of nearly all of the declared chemical weapons -- there’s just some destruction, again, as you know, that’s underway – there was a very strong desire on the part of Council members to stay on top of the gaps and declaration.
So you won’t see the Council oversight or the Council relationship to this issue abate after September 30th in any way. You will continue to see briefings, we will continue to interact with you on what we know and on what has been achieved, and what hasn’t been achieved. I mean, 2118 has not been fulfilled. And it won’t be fulfilled until this Council has confidence that the terms of the chemical weapons convention has been met.
Thanks.
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
SECRETARY KERRY, LUXEMBOURG FOREIGN MINISTER ASSELBORN MAKE REMARKS BEFORE MEETING
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
July 16, 2014
SECRETARY KERRY: Good morning, everybody. I’m very pleased to be here with Jean Asselborn, the foreign minister of Luxembourg, a good friend. We have worked together now for a year and a half on a lot of different issues. We’re very grateful to Luxembourg for its leadership, its work on the Children in Armed Conflict Working Group, also its important role played as a member of the UN Security Council. And over the course of time, we have really been locked together in efforts to be supportive of human rights, of individual rights. Also Luxembourg has been very, very focused on and helpful in terms of the situation in Ukraine, where we are continuing to struggle to try to calm things down and reduce the level of violence.
Luxembourg is also a strong supporter of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and we believe together that this is one of the most important economic lifts that we could provide to Europe and to ourselves. It’s important for all of us. It represents 40 percent of the global GDP. It’s a way to put our people to work. It’s a way to guarantee economic growth. And we will talk about that and other issues, including the Middle East peace process, and we look forward to your presidency. I think of the last five months --
FOREIGN MINISTER ASSELBORN: Six.
SECRETARY KERRY: Six months, six months presidency of the EU. So that will be a very important moment also of leadership.
So we have a lot to talk about, and I look forward to it. And we actually are both very
enthusiastic cyclists. (Laughter.) I’m looking for that moment when we can go out and enjoy --
FOREIGN MINISTER ASSELBORN: In Luxembourg. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY KERRY: In Luxembourg, riding together, yeah.
FOREIGN MINISTER ASSELBORN: Thank you very much, Secretary of State John Kerry. I effectively want to place this visit in the context of the partnership, the transatlantic partnership, and mention maybe three points very briefly.
The first point – you started also with this – is Security Council. We have been member since 1st of January 2013 till the end of this year, and I really want to stress this very fruitful and effective cooperation, small Luxembourg, humble Luxembourg and the United States. On two points I can give an example. From Syria, maybe that you know that the 17th – the 14th of July now a resolution was accepted to allow and to guarantee better humanitarian assistance through or across the borders of Jordan, of Turkey, of Iraq for 1.5 million people who need humanitarian assistance, and it is no more the Syrian Government who gives the authorization, but it is the UN Security Council. And Luxembourg, Australia, and Jordan with U.S., we pushed it and it’s very (inaudible).
Also on the armed conflicts, children in armed conflicts, I want to thank you, John, because during your presidency in September the Security Council will be having discussion and you allowed us a slot on the children in armed conflict, and this is very important.
The second point, Iran and Arab world. We know in Europe and we know it in Luxembourg how important it is the Iran issue for the American – for America and also for Europe. We really want to prevent Iran from nuclear weapons and bring back Iran to a more constructive and positive way for cooperation in international community. I was in Tehran months ago. I will a little bit explain the situation there as I saw it, but you can see in the streets everywhere – in Isfahan or – in Isfahan or in Tehran – that Iran wants to play another role. And it’s a crucial moment now. I hope that the international community can do it.
The second point is if we find a solution and bring back Iran to more cooperative and more constructive dialogue, I think they could play also an important role in Iraq, and that could be very important.
On the Middle East peace process, I want to underline that your effort, John, was not useless. It was really a big effort that you have done since I think July 2013 till April 2014. But we can see that if there is a lift of talks, immediately violence is coming up, and I think that if we get this ceasefire – and if I say “we,” that’s international community and also Egypt. I think we have to support Egypt. We have to try to restart immediately these talks again and a serious effort has to be done. Also I can say it here for the Israeli Government really to bring this two-state solution to a – this two-state solution to bring it to conclusions.
The last point that you mentioned, John, this TTIP, this partnership, free trade agreement between you and Europe, it’s not easy. We have to know that it’s difficult, difficult negotiations. I think that there are redlines on both sides. We have to overcome these redlines, and we have to play with more transparency to the public opinion, be it here or be it in Europe. The NGOs in Europe are asking very important questions and we have to give responses. And we have really I think to try to explain – to better explain the interests and the challenges.
SECRETARY KERRY: True.
FOREIGN MINISTER ASSELBORN: If it is possible to come to conclusions, it would be, I think, in the end of 2015. And at this moment, as you mentioned it, Luxembourg will have the presidency in the European Union, so it will be interesting for us.
A last point. Seventy years ago in December of 2014 started the Battle of the Bulge. It was the most important battle in Europe; 20,000 people died. In Luxembourg, in the cemetery of Hamm, 5,000 of its soldiers are buried with General Patton also. And in December there will be – we will organize festivities, and it would be for us, really, a big – a great honor, a great honor if you, John, could be present there. I think it would be for all – for our history and for our friendship between Luxembourg and United States a very significant presence there and maybe (inaudible).
SECRETARY KERRY: What’s the date?
FOREIGN MINISTER ASSELBORN: It’s up to you to find it. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, what is the concern about Gaza that you can speak about?
SECRETARY KERRY: I beg your pardon?
QUESTION: You specifically talked about the Middle East. What is your concern today especially about Gaza and that area?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, our concern is to have a legitimate ceasefire and see if we can find a way to stop the conflict and killing so we can get to the real issues that are underlying it. And we’re doing everything in our power; I’ve been in touch with Prime Minister Netanyahu, with the Egyptians, the foreign minister, with others in the region, and we’ll continue to dialogue on it. I’ll be seeing the President today, and we’ll talk about it later.
Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)