Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT COUNCIL OF THE AMERICA'S CONFERENCE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Remarks at the Council of the Americas' 44th Conference on the Americas

Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Loy Henderson Hall
Washington, DC
May 7, 2014



I’m very, very happy to be here with all of you, and I thank you for coming here for this meeting. Delighted to be introduced by John. My sister Peggy works up at the UN and she had a chance to work for John, who has served the President and Hillary Clinton and myself so well on the Foreign Affairs Policy Board, and it’s a pleasure for me to be able to welcome him back to the State Department. He’s one of our eminence grises who shares great experience, a road well-traveled, and a lot of good input to some of the very complicated challenges that we’re facing today. He’s also witnessed firsthand the remarkable transformation of the Western Hemisphere, and I think the truth is, we both know, it’s really just the precursor to things to come. And I think the size of the gathering here today, the quality of people assembled here, is testimony to that.

I want to thank Roberta Jacobson for her leadership. As our Assistant Secretary, she is constantly on the road and engaged actively in a lot of the transformations that are taking place here. I also want to thank Senator Tim Kaine, who’s hiding behind the house photographer here. (Laughter.) Tim, I had the pleasure of serving with also on the committee – the Foreign Relations Committee – and he’s just a superb senator and good friend and represents a state which is as forward leaning on trade and technology and the future as any state in the country – a state, I might add, that’s been growing and changing markedly over these last years. So I’m delighted that Tim is here, and you’re going to hear from him, and he does understand the stakes here.

I’m also proud that my governor, Governor Deval Patrick, is here. He’s also going to share some thoughts with you. Deval is in his last year of a two-term stewardship of the state, could have chosen to run again, but I think wants to return to the private sector for a period of time, despite a number of entreaties to do otherwise. And we are deeply appreciative. It was the first state to pass a sensible healthcare plan in the United States, and I just read yesterday that the life expectancy in Massachusetts has risen markedly, definitively, since that has been put in place. So quality of life is up, and businesses in our state are not complaining, but rather, think it’s been a very effective means of providing coverage and lowering costs.

So this is a great opportunity to share thoughts. I mean, this – yeah, I’m just back from Africa yesterday – midnight last night, or the night before last – and I was in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Angola, South Sudan, Ethiopia. And I’ll tell you this is a world of extraordinary opportunity right now, but also of remarkable change. The transformations taking place are really hard to describe. It’s a very different world from the world I grew up in. I’m a Cold War child who learned how to duck under the desk and take cover for the event of a nuclear war, and some of you here may have shared that experience. Since then, we’ve seen the end of the Cold War, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the remarkable bursting out of an incredible number of pent-up demand in various places, not the least of which is manifested in this increased sectarianism, increased religious distortion, exploitation, which results in extremism, as well as ideological extremism.

And we see, with what is happening in Nigeria with Boko Haram, the extents to which this can disrupt the world. It’s a challenge to all of us. And what I saw in Africa convinced me, as I talked to leader after leader and asked them how they balance this tension of these challenges that they face – they all talked about poverty and the need to alleviate poverty, and that much of this challenge comes out of this poverty where young people are grabbed at an early stage, proffered a little bit of money. Their minds are bended, and then the money doesn’t matter anymore; they’ve got the minds, and they begin to direct them into these very extreme endeavors.

And for all of us, the truth is it’s not something far away. Every American needs to understand that this is related to security at home, related to the capacity for job growth in the future, related to stability that the absence of may demand, at some point in time, the deployment of some of their sons and daughters to some far-off place in the world. We are all connected today. And everybody increasingly in these countries is dealing with some kind of mobile device, and they’re all tuned in, 24/7, 365 – everybody is connected. And no politician in any part of the world can operate with complete impunity as a result of that.

So this is the world we live in. I might add, in this new era of new partnerships, we think that the partnership means you’ve got to share resources and assets, like in football or soccer. So we’re here to humbly request the services of Lionel Messi for the month of June. We think that would work just fine for our interests. (Laughter.) I had a chance to see the World Cup right here in the other auditorium over there. Vice President Biden and I held an event to celebrate the coming of the World Cup. And we had the actual World Cup there. And I relished it because in all honesty, I wasn’t sure that I would see it here again very soon. (Laughter.) We’re in the tier of death. I don’t know if you know that. We’re poised to take on some of the toughest teams. But I have confidence in our team. They’re coming on strong and we have high hopes.

The bottom line is this: When you travel the world, as I get to as Secretary of State representing our great nation and all of the opportunities that all of you represent in our businesses, I really get to see both the challenge and the opportunity. And the opportunity is staggering, absolutely extraordinary. There are so many schools that need to be built, so many roads that need to be built, so much transportation infrastructure that needs to be built, so many people in the world still living on less than $2 a day or less than a dollar a day in many places – all of whom are thirsting to be part of that growing middle class that you see in countless numbers of countries.
So if you’re in business, as you all are, you’re staring at untold opportunity. And I’ll speak in a moment about some of that. You see regions of the world, obviously, that are in crisis and full of promise at the same time, all of them struggling to break out of an old cycle of this violence and poverty, despair, and corruption. Everywhere I go, when I meet with the foreign ministers or prime ministers or presidents, leaders of these countries, in some case monarchs still, you will find those leaders are struggling to open doors and make tough decisions. And I share with them the stories of what we are doing in this hemisphere. It’s a great example. I tell them the story of the American journey, and I can say America North and South. We are proof positive, really the real evidence, if you will, of what can await a lot of countries in the world if they finally make tough decisions and make the right decisions.

And I share this for one simple reason: It’s true. I came to the senate in 1985. John referred to that a moment ago in his introduction, how we were there together working together during a very difficult time. I know he remembers it very, very well. It was a period when the region only seemed to land in the headlines for the wrong reasons – violence, upheaval, repression, whether it was Guatemala or Nicaragua or El Salvador or Colombia. I remember when we were struggling over the Plan Colombia. We were dealing with the questions of narcotics and corruption. It was a very difficult era – a government literally under siege. I think thirteen supreme court justices were assassinated in one moment, and presidential candidates were assassinated. There was a question as to the viability of the system. But today, this story of this hemisphere is exhibit A that incredible progress is possible when there’s the right kind of leadership.

Today it’s crystal clear that if we work together and play our cards right, the Western Hemisphere can become literally the most stable and prosperous region in the world. That’s the possibility that we think we’re looking at.

Just think about it. Over the last decade, the economies of Latin America and the Caribbean grew at a rate of 4 percent a year, and this growth has lifted the lives of citizens. In the past decade alone, as trade between the United States and the Americas nearly tripled, more than 73 million people in Latin America were lifted out of the poverty that I referred to a few minutes ago. Seventy-three million people – you could take all the people in New York, Mexico City, Rio de Janeiro, Toronto, and Bogota, and you still wouldn’t be halfway to that number of people who have been lifted out of poverty.

It’s a great story. It didn’t happen by accident. It happened by integrating markets, by incentivizing innovation, by creating new opportunities for citizens of all backgrounds. In short, it happened because leaders and institutions were willing to make the tough decisions to break away from the past, to try to make peace where there were insurgencies, and to open up new markets with trade agreements. They were prepared to commit to the future.

But even as we celebrate the growth that has spread through our hemisphere, it doesn’t mean we can sort of sit back and say, “Okay, job done, take a break.” It means that we have to develop a strategy to invest in the lasting, shared prosperity needed to lift up our section of the world for decades to come, and I believe that’s possible. That’s our goal. I believe there are four areas in particular where we will get the most return on our investments, and none of them, I think, will surprise you.

First and foremost is education. I’m preaching to the choir, I know, but we’ve got to make sure, still, despite your acceptance of this, it doesn’t automatically translate into the kind of political process necessary to guarantee we’re doing what we need to do. And the numbers of young people coming online in countries is staggering and way ahead of the numbers of desks and chairs and teachers and buildings for them to get that education. The fact is that the people in our hemisphere, youngAmericanos, are global learners, and we have to make sure that they can be those global learners so that they can thrive in the economies that we are developing.
And that is exactly the thinking behind President Obama’s 100,000 Strong in the Americas, an effort to increase student exchanges throughout our hemisphere in both directions. And we’re very successfully moving to grow to those numbers. All you have to do is ask a young woman from Paraguay by the name of Cecilia Martinez Gomez. She was a terrific student in high school, and when she was finished, she decided that she wanted to come to the United States for college and study English. The only problem was every program that she came across was far too expensive for her to be able to consider it. Through the connections that we have built with 100,000 Strong, Cecilia was able to participate in a program at Wichita State University in Kansas where she then eventually earned her bachelor’s degree. A couple of years later, she went on to get a master’s degree in public administration. And now she’s thriving and giving back.

So education’s only the first step, and I think everybody here understands that. Then you have to answer the question: So what comes next? You come out of school. Can you find a job? Is your economy growing? Will you have the skills necessary to be able to do what you want to do? And what happens to all these young people after graduation? And that’s why trade and economic integration are the next areas that we need to put our effort into and our investment.
Now, already, the United States has free trade agreements with 12 countries in the hemisphere. That is more than any other region in the world. And under the President’s leadership, we have also helped expand the hemisphere’s participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Chile and Peru, and beyond, and also to include Canada and Mexico. A number of nations in our hemisphere are already particularly important Pacific Rim players, and many of those without a Pacific coast are actually taking steps to now strengthen their ties with Asia as a result. So we’re looking to our partners in the Americas as a natural complement to our strategy in the 21st century Pacific. And you all saw the success of the President’s trip in moving Prime Minister Abe to a point of acceptance of and advancing the TPP, and also advancing it in Philippines and South Asia.

We’ve also redoubled our commitment to NAFTA, which actually turned 20 this year. I remember that debate, a very tough, very bitter debate which lingered in our politics for some period of time. But it remains the greatest single step toward shared prosperity in this hemisphere. And in recent years, we’ve seen greater collaboration between the United States, Canada, and Mexico than ever before in our history, growing all the time. I will be in Mexico in a few weeks to continue that dialogue, and the President was there just a few weeks ago. Tim Kaine, I think, is going to talk to you a little bit about the critical relationship we share with Mexico. But today, I’m pleased to be able to share with you this – my plan to be there in Mexico City later in the month, because Mexico has become a very valued partner on so many issues, especially on the economic challenges both within North America and beyond. So I’m very much looking forward to my visit.

But for all the success and growth that we’ve seen, I don’t think there’s anybody sitting here who doesn’t think we can do more. Of course we can, and we have to do more. And if we do, then the Western Hemisphere – think about this – the Western Hemisphere can wind up being literally the leader of the global market for decades to come. And I say that with some sense of assurance when I look at some of the developmental issues, challenges of infrastructure, challenges of politics, challenges of capital flow and other – market access, other kinds of things that exist in other parts of the world. But if we get the TPP and the TTIP, both of which equal 40 percent of the market each, globally, you are talking about changing trade relationships and business capacity all across the planet.

Real economic integration will require us to do two things: reduce the cost of doing business across borders by opening up trade throughout Central and South America, and increase access to international markets for big business and small business alike. As we’ve seen here in the United States, this will require some more creative thinking. Over the past decade, U.S. small businesses have generated the majority of net growth in new jobs, but still less than 1 percent of America’s 30 million small companies export their goods and services out of the country.

That’s one of the reasons why President Obama has launched the Small Business Network of the Americas. The Network connects more than 1,000 small businesses – small business development centers in the United States with thousands of centers in Latin America in order to help build the kind of relationships that make exporting more easy and effective at the same time, and accessible to people.

Now, that’s just one of many programs that we have in place to make it easier for entrepreneurs in the hemisphere to access markets, to access capital, training, and leadership opportunities. We’re also very proud of the Pathways to Prosperity Innovation Challenge and the Women’s Entrepreneurship in the Americas initiative, better known as WE Americas.

So far, WE Americas has benefited some 20,000 women. An example: an entrepreneur, Vanessa Mazorra, who comes from El Salvador, and she owns a clothing and accessories company. Not so long ago, she produced about 500 pieces a month. But thanks to WE Americas support from the State Department and USAID, she has been able to significantly expand her operations and begin exporting internationally, including to the United States. Today, she produces nearly 3,000 pieces a month and growing. And last year, the Salvadoran Corporation of Exporters named her the Small and Medium Enterprise Exporter of the year. That’s what can happen. And it’s a program that we are excited about and will grow and want to work with you to try to get out there and get other people to understand exists.

Day after day, we are seeing how relatively small investments – these are not big deals, complicated – but relatively small investments can have enormous business benefits. And this spreads way beyond just the individual – spreads into the community, and ultimately even an entire country as you begin to attack that fundamental issue of creating a middle class and lifting people out of poverty.

Continued economic growth will also require us to invest in the third area I want to discuss today very quickly: energy security. You all saw the report, I hope, today – the front page of The Washington Postand New York Times – are very clear about a very important report released by the Administration yesterday with respect to climate change. I, again, see this all over the world, and I think you probably do too, the consequences. Yet you will still read within the article the doubts some Americans still have about this being a frontline issue. But today it is clear that the world’s new energy map – and this is a huge transformational moment in this regard – the world’s new energy map is no longer centered on the Middle East but on the Western Hemisphere. The region will account for two-thirds of the growth in the world’s oil supply over the next two decades. But oil and gas are only part of the big picture. And we also know that while many of the hemisphere’s largest countries are increasingly global energy producers, many of the hemisphere’s smallest countries are bearing the brunt of the burden when it comes to high-energy prices and the disastrous impacts of climate change, as the scientific report from the White House yesterday just confirms.

Unfortunately, these impacts are only going to get worse. And without serious reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions, we are looking at some very expensive choices for people. So this hemisphere needs to commit and needs to lead the world in terms of moving rapidly to energy resources that are used more responsibly and more sustainably. And there are leaders here among you who are doing exactly that. For example, last year Mexico passed
comprehensive climate change legislation that included ambitious greenhouse gas targets. I can’t emphasize enough: If you really want to address the problem of climate change, you enhance energy security and you reduce energy costs. And we know exactly what we have to do. The solution to climate change is energy policy. And we have to do a better job, all of us, in investing in new clean energy technologies and connecting energy markets from Chile to Canada.

And here in the United States, this is an extraordinary opportunity. We don’t even have a grid. We have an east coast grid, a west coast grid, a Texas grid, and a little line that goes from Chicago out towards the Dakotas. That’s it. Huge centerpiece opening in the belly of America. You can’t sell energy from those wind farms of Minnesota or Iowa to somewhere in the South. You can’t sell solar thermal energy from the South to the North where they need it. It’s ridiculous. It’s almost insulting for a great country like ours with our capital and our capacity not to have yet developed a modern, smart energy grid for this nation.

So we believe in this future of energy policy for this hemisphere, of linking Canada, U.S., Mexico, to all the way down through Latin America. And that’s exactly the idea behind a program that we have created called Connecting the Americas 2022. This initiative is about encouraging private sector investment in renewable energy and ultimately providing cheaper, cleaner, more reliable power for citizens all across the region. And already we are seeing encouraging progress. The final 25 miles of SIEPAC power transmission, the line in Costa Rica, ought to be completed later this year. And once that happens, all six Central American countries will be linked into one power grid for the first time in history. Think what could happen if we could all be linked ultimately.

Finally – and by the way, this is the biggest market in the world. The market that made America wealthy in the 1990s, where every single quintile of American income earner saw their income go up, was a $1 trillion market with 1 billion users. The market I just described for energy is a $6 trillion market today, 4-5 billion users, and going up to 9 billion users over the course of the next 20, 30, 40 years. It’s the biggest market in the history of human kind, and we need to be on the frontline of tapping into it and leading the world to it. And by the way, what I saw in Africa was this extraordinary demand for energy. It’s a huge restraint on growth, and one of the key components of what they need to do. So this is global, and if we don’t do it in the right way – read today’s newspapers – it’s going to be disastrous.

So if we want to bring about the prosperous, stable future that we dream of, the fourth area that all governments in the Americas must invest in is good governance. If we manage revenue effectively and transparently and maintain a sufficient tax base, then our nations can invest in the services and infrastructure needed to support social mobility and competitive economies. But I got to tell you: Corruption and fragile institutions drive down investor confidence and deny citizens economic opportunities, exacerbating crime and insecurity, chasing away capital, and leaving doubts about the possibilities. And they produce an environment, as a result, where innovation and economic growth simply can’t thrive.

That’s one of the many reasons why the United States is deeply concerned by the deteriorating situation in Venezuela, for instance. We believe the future of Venezuela is for the people of Venezuela to decide. And the people in the streets have legitimate grievances that deserve to be addressed. And the serious and worsening economic and social challenges in Venezuela can only be resolved with the input of those people. So we support the UNASUR-sponsored dialogue in the hope that it will allow Venezuelans to come together and take on the challenges that they face. But make no mistake: We will never stop defending the basic human rights that are essential to any functioning democracy, including the freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly.
Now for these same reasons, of course, we remain concerned about the Cuban people. None of us want to see the Cuban people continue to be left behind as the rest of the hemisphere advances. Since 2009, President Obama’s Cuba policy has been geared towards loosening the dependence of Cubans on the state and strengthening independent civil society. There’s an important overlap between U.S. policy and the emerging micro-entrepreneurial sector in Cuba.
President Obama’s goal has always been to empower Cubans to freely determine their own futures. And the most effective tool we have to promote this goal is helping to build deeper connections between the Cuban and American peoples. The hundreds of thousands of Cuban Americans who now send remittances and who travel each year under the President’s policies, they are critical to ensuring that the Cuban people have more of the opportunities that they deserve.

Now I know the Council of Americas has proposed steps that could be taken to further support Cuban entrepreneurs, and we want to thank you for those recommendations, and we very much appreciate those suggestions as we continue to evaluate the policies that we have in place today, and I can promise you we will do so.

We are immensely proud of this hemisphere’s positive trajectory, and we look forward to helping it move forward in the days ahead, including next month when our Deputy Secretary of State Heather Higginbottom leads the U.S. delegation to the OAS General Assembly in Paraguay. But it’s clear to all of you, I think, for our trajectory to continue in the direction we want it to, for these investments in education and the other investments that I’ve described – in trade and economic integration, in energy security and in good governance – for all of these to bring home the unity and the integration and the future that we want, we all are going to have to stay together, we’re going to have to continue to engage; we’re going to have to continue to push leaders, in some cases, to lead to the full potential. And in the end, I’m convinced this hemisphere has the ability to define a hemispheric future that is very different from anything that we lived in the 20th century.

The 21st century can be a time of new definition of possibilities for people. And as you see the incredible input of people who have come to America as immigrants from throughout this hemisphere, who love the fact that that they are today American, but always will remember where they came from and take pride in their language and their culture and make America richer because of it – that’s the definition that we get to make. We are – the beauty of America is we’re not defined by ethnicity and we’re not defined by – or we shouldn’t be. Maybe in some places people still fall into bad habits. But basically that’s not what defines America. America is defined as an idea. An idea. Read the Declaration of Independence. Look at the Constitution. That defines the idea. And more and more people are excited by and buying into that idea. And I’m convinced that if we focus on the things I laid out today, we’re going to give that idea definition that will have resonance all across this planet.

The one thing I have said since the day I was nominated for this job is economic policy is foreign policy, and foreign policy is economic policy. And we see that more today in this globalized world than at any other time. So all of you are instruments of our ability to market our values and protect our interests at the same time. And I thank you for being part of the Council and your willingness to do that. Thank you. (Applause.)

Saturday, May 3, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS ON U.S. COMMITMENT TO AFRICA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Commitment to Africa

Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Gullele Botanic Park
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
May 3, 2014




Hallelujah, thank you very much for a spectacular introduction. Thank you for even getting out of the city and up into the mountains. And everything is so beautiful. This is an extraordinary building, and I just had the pleasure of walking out on the veranda here and enjoying the view. I understand this is the first green building, totally green building. So I congratulate the Gullele Botanical Gardens, and I particularly congratulate the University of Addis Ababa. Thank you, Mr. President, for being here. And thank you, all of you, for treading up the hill to join me this morning. I saw a couple of donkeys out there. Did some of you come up on the donkeys? (Laughter.) But a lot of buses and cars, and I am very, very appreciative.

It’s really good to be back in Addis, and I want to thank the Prime Minister and -- Foreign Minister Tedros and Prime Minister Hailemariam for a very generous welcome. And I want to thank them particularly for their terrific support in efforts not just with our development challenges and the challenges of Ethiopia itself, but also the challenges of South Sudan, the challenges of Somalia, the challenges of leadership on the continent and beyond.

I was here last spring to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the African Union and it was an appropriate time to take note of the meaning behind the AU’s significant emblem, the red rings that remind us all of the blood that was shed for an Africa that is free, and the palm leaves that remind us of the fact that the blood was not just shed for freedom, but it was shed for peace. And then the gold that symbolizes the promise of natural resources and economic potential. Today, as I come here to this hilltop, it’s important to understand how we will fulfill the promise of still another symbol of the African Union’s crest, the interlocking rings of green that embody all of Africa’s hopes and dreams.

These are the dreams I believe absolutely can be realized if we are, all of us, together, prepared to make the right choices. And it is a matter of choice. There is no pre-determined destiny out there that pushes us in a direction; this is up to the will of the people, and the will of leaders. We need to make certain that we grab the choice that seizes the future, and we need to refuse to be dragged back into the past.

I have absolutely no doubt that this could be an inflection point for the new Africa, a time and a place where Africans bend the arc of history towards reform, and not retribution; towards peace and prosperity, not revenge and resentment. And it’s important to acknowledge -- at least I feel it's important to acknowledge candidly -- that for too long the ties between the United States and Africa were largely rooted in meeting the challenges and the crises of a particular moment. But we’re discovering that, at the beginning of the 21st century, we both want a lasting and more grounded relationship, one that is not reflective, but visionary and strategic.
And for many Americans, Africa was too long a faraway place on a map, a destination for philanthropy, an occasional and harrowing image on the TV screen of starvation and war, a place of distance and some mystery. The fact is that today Africa is increasingly a destination for American investment and tourism, that African institutions are increasingly leading efforts to solve African problems. All of this underscores that dramatic transformations are possible, that prosperity can replace poverty, that cooperation can actually triumph over conflict.
But even as we celebrate this progress, we are also meeting at a time of continued crisis. Conflicts in South Sudan, which I visited yesterday, Central African Republic, Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the events that we've just seen in Nigeria, these are among some of the things that are preventing millions of Africans from realizing their full potential. And in some places they are plunging the continent back into the turmoil of the past.

Now, some things are absolutely certain as we look at this panorama: Africa has the resources; Africa has the capacity; Africa has the know-how. The questions that Africa faces are similar to those confronting countries all over the world: do we have the political will, the sense of common purpose, to address our challenges? Are we prepared to make the hard choices that those challenges require?

The continent’s course is ultimately up to you. It's up to Africans. But we firmly believe that the United States is Africa’s natural partner. One thing we know for sure, the United States could be a vital catalyst in this continent’s continued transformation, and President Obama is committed to that transformation.

The United States is blessed to be the world’s epicenter for innovation. Africa is home to many of the fastest-growing economies in the world. There is no limit to what we can accomplish together by working together, and cooperating, and setting out a strategy, and agreeing to have a vision, and join it in common purpose. And though we never forget -- we never forget -- how our first ties were forged in some of the darkest chapters of human history, we still start from a strong foundation.

Now, I’m sure that some of you have seen that in your travels, hopefully across the United States. Whether it is Little Senegal in Los Angeles, or the Somali community in Minneapolis, or the Ethiopian community in Washington, DC, Africans are making American culture richer, and our economy stronger, and contributing to the future chapters of American history. It’s time to make sure that we build on this deep connection; it’s time that we take these connections to the next level by investing in the future of this continent.

And when we know, as we do, that Africa will have a larger workforce than India or China by 2040, then it is time for us to get ahead of the curve, to invest in education for the vast numbers of young people, and the increasing numbers of people demanding their part of that future. It is time to build a more open exchange of ideas and information that leads to partnership and innovation. President Obama’s Young African Leaders Initiative -- I had a chance to meet a number of them, they will be coming to Washington in August -- YALI, is designed to harness this energy, and it’s one example of how some of these efforts are already well underway. YALI is bringing leadership and networking to thousands of young people across the continent. And I am very, very pleased that many of you who are here today are participating in YALI, and that four of you will come and join us this summer as part of the first class of the Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders.

I was particularly impressed, frankly, by one of the stories of these young women, Haleta Giday. Perhaps it’s because Haleta is a prosecutor, and I used to be a prosecutor in my early career. But she graduated from Jimma University, which you all know is one of the best schools in Ethiopia. And the fact is that she had her pick of any lucrative job that she wanted to do, right here in the capital. Instead, she chose to represent women and children who were victims of violence. And when Haleta saw how many widows went bankrupt after they lost their husbands, she began a campaign to educate women about their legal and financial rights.

Just consider what Haleta has witnessed over the course of her young life: she spent her first years in a nation traumatized by famine. Today, Ethiopia is one of the world’s fastest growing economies. Since Haleta arrived on her first day of school, the number of democratic governments in Africa has tripled. Since she left high school, banking assets have more than doubled. And since Haleta graduated from university, Africa’s telecommunications market has doubled in size. She has already lived a remarkable life, and she’s doing amazing work here in Ethiopia. What’s more remarkable is she is one of many young leaders across this continent who are proving their mettle by taking on some of the toughest challenges.

So this is clearly a moment of opportunity for all Africans. It is also a moment of decision, because it’s the decisions that are made or the decisions that are deferred that will ultimately determine whether Africa mines the continent’s greatest natural resource of all, which is not platinum, it's not gold, it's not oil, it is the talent of its people. Africa’s potential comes from the ability of its citizens to make a full contribution, no matter their ethnicity, no matter who they love, or what faith they practice. This continent is strong because of the diversity and the dynamism of the people. The nations in Africa, like nations all over the world, are strongest when citizens have a say, when citizens' voices can be a part of the political process, when they have a stake in their nation's success.

Over the next three years, 37 of the 54 African nations will hold national elections, including 15 presidential elections. Millions of Africans will be going the polls, selecting their leaders in free and fair elections, and that will have a dramatic impact and show the world the power of this moment for Africa. These elections, I promise you, are vitally important. But elections cannot be the only moment, the only opportunity, for citizens to be able to help shape the future. Whether a citizen can engage with their government, not just on Election Day, but every day, whether or not they can engage with their fellow citizens in political discussion and debate and dialogue every week, every month, these are the questions that matter profoundly to Africa’s future.
The African Union is working to answer “yes” to all of these questions. “Good governance, democracy, and the right to development,” these are enshrined in universal rights, and the African Union’s charter represents that and reflects that. The AU has also gone to great lengths in order to highlight the corrosive effect of corruption, both in the public square, as well as corruption in the marketplace. To the AU’s great credit, they have reported that corruption costs Africans tens of billions of dollars, if not more. And that money -- every one of you knows that money could build new schools, new hospitals, new bridges, new roads, pipes, power lines. That’s why it is a responsibility for citizens in Africa and in all nations to demand that public money is providing services for all, not lining the pockets of a few.

And that is why it is so important for all of us everywhere, in our country, your country, and elsewhere, to fight against public corruption and corruption in the marketplace. Our cooperation is essential in order to protect economic growth that is shared by everybody in order to provide opportunity for all individuals in Africa. And, as you well know, fighting corruption is difficult. It takes courage. It sometimes has its risks. But fighting corruption lifts more than a country's balance sheet. Transparency and accountability attract greater investment. Transparency and accountability create a more competitive marketplace, one where ideas and products are judged by the market and by their merits, and not by backroom deals or bribes. That is an environment where innovators and entrepreneurs flourish, I promise you.

The United States has learned through its own experience that entrepreneurship is an essential driver of prosperity and of freedom. That’s why President Obama launched the Global Entrepreneurship Summit, which this fall will bring some of the world’s brightest minds to Morocco. Last year I had the pleasure of being in Kuala Lumpur for that meeting, for the same meeting. And I was stunned by the 15,000 young people screaming like they were in a rock concert or something, all challenged by the prospect of themselves becoming or being the next Steve Jobs or the next Bill Gates. It was unbelievable to feel their energy and enthusiasm.
And they are all connected, all these kids are connected. Everybody shares everything with everybody else in the world, all of the time. And that changes politics, and it changes business, and it changes perceptions. It changes hopes and dreams and aspirations. And every political leader needs to be tuned in to that reality, because that's what we saw in Tunisia, that's what we saw in Egypt. That's what we're still seeing in Syria, where young people came out, asking for a future.

We want to make certain that every country can provide young people the ability to be able to take an idea and turn it into a business. And we know beyond any doubt that the places where people are free not just to develop an idea, but to debate different ideas, to transform the best ideas into a reality, those are the societies that are most successful. Now, this success is not a mystery, and it's not something that is hard to achieve, if you make the right choices. This success is possible for all of Africa. This new Africa is within everybody's reach. But a new Africa will not emerge without becoming a more secure Africa.

In too many parts of the continent, a lack of security, the threat of violence, or all-out war prevent the shoots of prosperity from emerging. The burdens of past divisions might not disappear entirely, my friends. But they must never be allowed to bury the future. The African Union’s commitment to silence the guns of Africa by 2020 is an ambitious goal. It is the right goal. It is a vision worth fighting for, and one that we will do everything in our power to help you achieve, and that’s why we will continue to provide financial and logistical support to African Union-led efforts in Somalia, where al-Shahaab is under significant pressure. That’s why we will continue to support the African Union Regional Task Force against the Lord’s Resistance Army, where LRA-related deaths have dropped by 75 percent, and hundreds of thousands have returned to their homes. And that’s why we are working to strengthen Nigeria’s institutions and its military to combat Boko Haram, and their campaign of terror and violence.

Let me be clear. The kidnapping of hundreds of children by Boko Haram is an unconscionable crime, and we will do everything possible to support the Nigerian government to return these young women to their homes and to hold the perpetrators to justice. I will tell you, my friends, I have seen this scourge of terror across the planet, and so have you. They don't offer anything except violence. They don't offer a health care plan, they don't offer schools. They don't tell you how to build a nation, they don't talk about how they will provide jobs. They just tell people, "You have to behave the way we tell you to," and they will punish you if you don't.
Our responsibility and the world’s responsibility is to stand up against that kind if nihilism. That is the reason that we have committed up to $100 million to support AU and French forces in Central African Republic to push back, as well as $67 million in humanitarian assistance. It’s why we support wholeheartedly the Framework Peace Process and the leadership of Angola and the 10 other African nations to resolve the root causes of conflict in the Great Lakes. Through our Special Envoy to the Great Lakes, a former Senator, a friend of mine that I appointed, Russ Feingold, the United States has been supporting the burgeoning dialogue that is now taking place, and we have already helped to broker the demobilization of M23. We stand ready to support all efforts that help the parties stay on a peaceful path.
Yesterday I was in South Sudan. I was there at the birth of the nation, at the referendum. I know President Kiir, I know the hopes and aspirations of the people there. And I saw yesterday how a nation that once had a hopeful vision for the future can be challenged by old grudges degenerating into violence by personal ambition, by greed that gets in the way of the hopes of all of the people.

I expressed my grave concerns to President Kiir about the deliberate killings of civilians on both sides of the conflict and he agreed to embark on negotiations to form a transitional government that can lead the nation back from the abyss. I congratulate him for his willingness to do that, and I look forward, as the world will, to watching him lead the nation back from this abyss. I also called the former Vice President, Riek Machar, and I urged him to do the same, to come to Addis Ababa in the near term, and to engage in these direct talks in order to move South Sudan to its rightful future.

If both sides do not take bold steps to end the violence, they risk plunging South Sudan into greater desperation and even famine. And that famine could be right around the corner if we don't turn the corner ourselves in the next days. They will completely destroy what they claim they are fighting for if we do not make a difference now. Both sides must do more to facilitate the work of those providing humanitarian assistance. The UN, UNMIS, and all organizations that are urgently providing aid must be supported and protected and not demonized, the way they have been.

Once again, African nations are all working hard to try to forge a regional solution through the AU's Commission of Inquiry and IGAD Monitoring and Verification Mechanisms. And in the days to come I will continue my personal engagement with both sides, and it is imperative that both sides abide by the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement, and implement it as fully as possible. The international community must stay committed to the people of South Sudan and see them through this time of incredible difficulty.

Preventing new conflicts also requires coordination to confront the causes of conflict, including food insecurity and famine and, obviously, poverty. Africa has 60 percent of the world’s arable land. Just think about that. That is a tremendous opportunity for the future, not just to feed Africa’s people, but to feed the world. The United States wants to help Africa seize this opportunity by making investments in agribusiness and in crops with greater yields and greater resistance to extreme weather.

With Feed the Future, which was built on the foundation that was laid by the African Union with your own Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program, the United States is investing several billion dollars to improve seed quality, to enhance farming methods, to protect against soil erosion, and link small farmers to the marketplace. To underscore the importance of these commitments, the AU has made 2014 the year of agriculture and food security.
But it is no exaggeration to say that the greatest risk to African agriculture, and even to our way of life, not just in Africa but on this planet, comes from the potential ravages of climate change.
According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, portions of Mombasa, Dakar, Monrovia, and dozens of other coastal cities could be under water by the middle of this century. Yields from rain-fed agriculture in parts of Africa could decline by 50 percent. An additional 100 million people or more will be living without water or under greater water duress as a result of the changes from climate.

When 97 percent of scientists agree that the climate is changing, and that humans are responsible for much of the change, and that it is happening faster than predicted, let me tell you something: We need to listen to that 97 percent, and we need to act. And when this continent produces less carbon than almost any other nation, when the continent produces less carbon than almost any other nation, but has the most to lose climate change, it is true there is an inherent unfairness to that equation. And there can be no doubt about it: greater prosperity in Africa is going to demand greater energy supply. So, citizens in Africa will have to make certain that the mistakes that we make, the mistakes that other developed nations have made, that those are not repeated, that the mistakes that created this moment of urgency for the world are not repeated on this continent.

The United States wants to support Africa’s efforts to develop more sustainably, even as we move to do so ourselves, and move to curb our emissions. And that’s why, as part of the President’s bold Power Africa Initiative, a partnership that will pump billions of dollars into the continent’s energy sector, we are working with programs such as the U.S.-Africa Clean Energy Finance Initiative. We’re leveraging public resources and private resources to support $1 billion in clean energy investment from the private sector. Climate change is a global challenge, and it's going to threaten this continent and all continents in profound ways if it is not matched by global cooperative action.

We will -- we face this challenge remembering that we’ve come together before to confront a borderless, generational crisis, one in which I am proud to say we are now winning. So when someone suggests that we are impotent to combat climate change here on Africa’s soil, remind them that we already turned back armies of indifference and denial in the fight against AIDS.

I’ve worked with some of you in this battle since the 1990s. It was 15 years ago when I co-authored the first Africa AIDS legislation which later became the foundation for PEPFAR. Back then, what I saw this week at Gandhi Memorial Hospital that I visited a couple days ago, that would have been unthinkable back then. Because of the commitment of local doctors and healthcare professionals, and with PEPFAR’s sustained support, we have dramatically reduced the number of young children infected with HIV. And the fact is that we have -- we are -- I think we were about, what, 15,000 children were receiving antiretroviral drugs back in 2004. Today, there are more than 330,000 receiving them. The number of people living with HIV has been reduced by one-third. And, remarkably, we are on the cusp of witnessing the first generation of children who will be born AIDS-free because of what we have learned to do.
There was a sign I saw yesterday at the hospital -- or the day before yesterday. It was -- it read, “Ethiopia and the United States of America investing in a healthy future together.” My friends, that sign tells it all. It tells us what's possible, it tells us what we're doing together. It tells us what’s possible in all of our endeavors together.

Achieving President Obama’s goal for an AIDS-free generation would have been the most distant dream. I tell you it was back when we first started talking about doing something about AIDS. Back then it was a death sentence, and back then it was almost a death sentence for politicians talking about it. They didn't want to hear about it. But despite the difficulties that lie ahead -- and there are still difficulties -- this goal is now within our reach. So don't let anybody tell you we can't do something about climate change or these other things.

In fact, in so many ways, Africa is on the move. And that is why investment is moving here from all over the world. IBM has invested $100 million in Big Data on the continent. IBM’s initiatives are helping Africans to find ways to streamline the work of their businesses and governments, to provide more effective and efficient services. Microsoft is investing in what it calls “Mawingu,” the Swahili word for cloud, to develop cloud computing and storage in Kenya that could be expanded to additional African nations. Google is exploring ways to develop underused spectrum in order to deliver broadband Internet access to remote communities.

And it was here in Addis Ababa that we launched a formal review of the African Growth and Opportunity Act, in order to determine where to take AGOA for the future. President Obama is committed to a seamless renewal of AGOA, as it continues to serve as a vital link in order to facilitate trade between our countries.

I say this unabashedly, too: we want more American companies to be here, to invest, both to unleash the power of the private sector in Africa, and, yes, to create jobs in America at the same time. Now, we’ve seen time and again: when we help nations stand on their own two feet, we share in their success. Out of our 15 largest trading partners today, 11 are former recipients of American aid. They are now donor countries. That is the transformation that can be made.
The transformation from aid to trade has been a powerful driver of American prosperity, as well as global growth. And that’s what we saw take root from our partnerships in Europe after World War II, when America came in and we helped to rebuild Germany (inaudible) before the war, helped to rebuild Japan (inaudible) before the war, helped to rebuild Europe that was crushed by the war. We have seen this same kind of resurgence in Asia, where American investment and partnership helped underwrite their incredible rise. And today, that’s what we’re beginning to see here Africa.

When people say that the kind of development that happened in Europe and Asia can’t happen here, we just plain disagree: it’s already happening. Africans are shaping their future for themselves. You are shaping it for yourselves. And we want to share in your effort and help to provide and drive for a shared prosperity that reaches these millions of young people who need education and jobs. That’s one of the reasons I’ve come to Addis today, and why I’m traveling across the continent from the Horn of Africa to the Atlantic coast in the next couple of days.
So this is a very important time for us both. This summer we will further advance the vital work that we are undertaking together with the Africa Leaders’ Summit. This summit will be the first of its kind. Never before will so many leaders from such a diverse cross-section of the African Continent come together with the President of the United States and leaders from all across American society in the United States. It’s an historic gathering that matches the remarkable importance of this particular moment.

The theme of this Summit will be “Investing in the Next Generation.” And I am pleased to see that generation is so well represented here today, with the younger participants from YALI that I mentioned earlier. These young African leaders are the future. And I have to tell you, when we introduced YALI, we were stunned by the response. We put out this notion of young African leaders and invited people to come to Washington. And guess what, 50,000 young people responded and applied to be a part of this program. We could only take 500. So, what we need to do is make sure those other 49,500, and for millions beyond them, are able to be reached.
That is the kind of commitment that actually inspired a young Bobby Kennedy. Some of you may remember when he came to South Africa during some of that country’s darkest days. And he challenged the young audience at Cape Town University to muster the courage and the determination to confront their generation’s most daunting challenges. He said: “The world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life, but a state of mind, a temper of the will, a quality of the imagination, a predominance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over the love of ease.”

It’s that spirit, it’s those qualities, it’s that appetite that I guarantee you will propel the next generation of Africans to tackle today’s greatest challenges. And as they do so, the United States of America will stand beside them, bound together by a shared future, a common purpose, and a shared destiny.

So, I say to you, thank you. (Speaks in foreign language.) Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thursday, April 3, 2014

PRESS AVAILABILITY: SECRETARY KERRY AND ALGERIAN FOREIGN MINISTER LAMAMRA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Joint Press Availability With Algerian Foreign Minister Ramtane Lamamra

Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Algiers, Algeria
April 3, 2014


QUESTION: (Via interpreter, in progress) – makes a lot (inaudible) in the field of counterterrorism. However, we have two unshakable principles. The first one is noninterference in the states first, and the second one is the nonintervention of our army outside our territories. So how could we serve stability in this context and as part of these two principles?

SECRETARY KERRY: Merci. We have great respect for Algeria’s principle of noninterference. At the same time, terrorism doesn’t know any borders. Terrorism moves indiscriminately across borders without regard to international lines or rules of law. And there is only one way to respond between states who are joined together in the principle of fighting against terrorism, and that one way is cooperation.

We have to cooperate. I think Algeria completely understands that and is dedicated and committed to it. Algeria has been a very strong partner bilaterally and multilaterally in countering terrorist threats and in building a regional and international capacity to be able to do that. And Algeria’s one of the original key founders of the Global Counterterrorism Forum. It’s co-chair of the Sahel Region Capacity Working Group. And we really applaud the leadership of Algeria.
What we’re here to talk about today and what we have talked about is: How do we cooperate even further? How do we take this cooperation to be able to be more effective in providing the kind of stability that your question just asked about? So the United States, the UN, the G7 endorse the practices that are now known as the Algiers Memorandum. And we have, I think, very strong exchanges today with Algerian security services, law enforcement, their justice sectors, covering a wide range of questions.

Algeria is also a member of the Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Partnership, which is our primary vehicle – the United States State Department’s primary vehicle to support long-term capabilities of the countries in the West and North Africa to face the AQIM threat. So we’re building that capacity and I believe that Algeria’s noninterference principle that you asked about does not stand in the way at all of our capacity to build additional cooperative initiatives, and particularly to build a full-fledged security cooperative relationship, which is what we came here to talk about today. We’ve made progress on that and we’re very pleased with it.

FOREIGN MINISTER LAMAMRA: (Via interpreter) Thank you, John. As far as these complex issues are concerned, I can simply add to what the Secretary of State has just said. The issues of international terrorism at the level of doctrine and policies, the objective and principles of international cooperation are clear-cut on behalf of the protection of human life and dignity. At the operational level, it is necessary for efficiency purposes not to go into the details as far as international cooperation is concerned.

However, I would like to mention that the – for the countries of the region, can – we are available to support all the neighboring countries in terms of information, the exchange of experiences, equipment, and (inaudible), a stakeholder as totally involved in the field of counterterrorism. We have made huge sacrifices in fighting against terrorism, as you know.

MODERATOR: Another question? Scott from – our guest, the American side, from our – according --

MS. PSAKI: Scott Stearns from VOA.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, on the Middle East, you spoke today – here today and in Brussels about the limits of being a facilitator and about bringing the horse to water, saying today that the leaders need to know that now is the time to drink. Have you had any indication from Prime Minister Netanyahu or President Abbas that they are ready to drink?

And Mr. Minister, could you tell us specifically: What is it that you would like to see from the United States to help with security assistance, especially along the border with Mali? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Scott, let me say that I have been in direct touch this morning with our team on the ground in Israel, and they worked literally until 4:00 in the morning in direct discussions between Israelis and Palestinians, with the United States present, in an effort to try to move the process forward. I think it is a critical moment, obviously. The dialogue remains open. There was progress made in narrowing some of the questions that have arisen as a result of the events of the last few days, but there’s still a gap, and that gap will have to be closed and closed fairly soon.

So I will be in touch this afternoon with both leaders, but again, it’s really their decision that has to be made. They understand what the choices are. They understand what the stakes are. And they understand each of them, their own limits and dynamics. So we are urging them to find the compromise that is critical to being able to move forward.

One of the important things I want to say about this moment: The fight right now, the disagreement between them, is not over the fundamental substance of a final status agreement. It’s over the process that would get you there and what you need to do in order to be able to continue to negotiate. It would be a tragedy for both of them, we would say, for them to lose the opportunity to get to those real issues that are the differences of a final status agreement.

A fight over process, how to get into a negotiation, should not stop you from getting into that negotiation. And so I hope that they will consider that very, very carefully. President Obama believes very strongly that the role of the United States to help the parties come together is a critical role. He is committed to his efforts and my efforts on behalf of him and the United States to play this role without any fear, because we believe that it’s the right thing to do. President Obama believes that it is important for the United States to try to help the parties make peace.
But as he himself would agree, in the end, the leaders have to make the decisions to do so. We will continue to do everything in our power to try to bring them together, to find a place of reasonableness, to encourage them to compromise, show ways in which they might do so. But in the end, they are the ones who have to say yes, and that’s where we are.

FOREIGN MINISTER LAMAMRA: If I may, John, just to make a short comment on the Middle East, I think a week or so ago, we were having our Arab summit in Kuwait. And the ministers of foreign affairs of the group had a chance to be briefed by President Mahmoud Abbas about the status quo of the diplomatic effort at that time. What I want to say is that at that time, the president referred to the fact that he had some 38 interactions with you, John, and he described that as really a clear demonstration of the commitment by the Secretary of State and President Obama to achieve lasting peace for the region and justice for the Palestinian people.

So the whole group were very appreciative of this effort, and we were hoping that it would reach fruition and it will indeed have the desired outcome that we are all hoping for and praying for. President Mahmoud Abbas requested a meeting of the ministers of foreign affairs of the Arab world to be held on the 9th of April in Cairo. We intend to go and we’ll definitely listen to President Mahmoud Abbas about the nitty-gritty of these discussions, and I’m sure that because it is our longstanding position to favor peace, stability, security, global peace, I believe that the Arab world will again express appreciation and support to your efforts, Mr. Secretary.

SECRETARY KERRY: And I --

FOREIGN MINISTER LAMAMRA: It’s not --

SECRETARY KERRY: I’m sorry, I thought you were finished. I didn’t mean to --

FOREIGN MINISTER LAMAMRA: No, I thought I would go to the Arab question, but please --

SECRETARY KERRY: No, no, please.

FOREIGN MINISTER LAMAMRA: Please, go, go.

No, regarding what is expected on the part of USA as far as the fight against terrorism in the Sahel region is concerned, I believe that today, the time has come for us to consolidate the achievements of the war against terrorism in northern Mali. I believe that we need to help in the rebuilding state institutions, law enforcement agencies, the national armed forces of Mali, and also in encouraging the regional efforts aiming at putting together regional security arrangements under the African Union initiative.

Eleven countries in the region have launched what we call the Nouakchott Process in order to help to assist each other in monitoring borders, in sharing intelligence, and this is a good occasion for the region to show by itself that indeed, we can do our best to fight and defeat terrorism in the Sahel region with clearly the required assistance on the part of the international community. If we were to ask specifically about what the U.S. can do, because nobody else could do it, it’s, for instance, sharing electronic intelligence with the armed forces and security agencies in the region. One example, but this is a qualitative edge that only the U.S. can provide. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you for that comment, Ramtane. Let me – just a quick addendum to that. I just want to – maybe I don’t have to say this, but I’ll just say it. If this was an easy thing to do, it would have happened a long time ago. It’s difficult because it is a very difficult conflict with deep-rooted historical levels of mistrust and huge narrative issues on both sides that are deeply emotional and go to the core of both people’s identity and aspirations.
It’s as tough as it gets. And the one thing that stands out to me is this: If it’s tough today, I have not met anybody anywhere who believes it’s going to get easier next week or next year or in the future. And that’s why I think this is so important. Both sides – neither side can achieve what it wants staying away from the negotiating table. There’s only one way to resolve that, and that’s through negotiation. And so my hope, along with the foreign ministers and everybody, I think, in the world, is that the parties will not lose an opportunity to negotiate.

FOREIGN MINISTER LAMAMRA: Thank you, sir.

MS. PSAKI: Thank you, everyone.

Monday, March 24, 2014

ADVANCING GLOBAL NUCLEAR SECURITY FACT SHEET

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 
FACT SHEET: Advancing Global Nuclear Security

In 2009, President Obama launched an ambitious global agenda to prevent nuclear materials from falling into the wrong hands.  During his visit to Prague, the President called on the international community to prevent terrorists from getting access to the building blocks needed for a nuclear bomb by putting an end to dedicated production of weapons-grade materials and securing all of the world’s vulnerable nuclear material within four years.  He urged countries to lock down sensitive materials, break up black markets, detect and intercept materials in transit, and use financial tools to disrupt their trade.

Translating ambition into action, the President convened an unprecedented Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, DC in 2010.  Forty seven countries from every region in the world committed to work together to ensure that nuclear materials could not be sold or stolen and fashioned into nuclear weapons.

The stakes are high and the threat is real.  The danger of nuclear terrorism is one of the greatest threats to our collective security.  The hardest part of making a nuclear weapon is getting the material.  Even a small amount of nuclear material could kill and injure hundreds of thousands of innocent people.  Terrorist networks could acquire the materials to assemble their own nuclear weapon, wreaking havoc on global peace and stability, and resulting in extraordinary loss of life and global economic damage.

Since 2009, the world has made substantial progress.  The United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1887, endorsing a comprehensive agenda to secure all nuclear materials.  Individual countries have taken specific and concrete actions to secure nuclear materials in their countries and to prevent illicit trafficking and smuggling.  The world has worked to strengthen the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and to ensure it has the resources and authorities it needs to meet its responsibilities.  And we have worked to build the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism into a durable international institution.

Earlier this year, the United States and Russia completed implementation of the 1993 U.S.-Russia Highly Enriched Uranium Purchase Agreement, one of the most successful non-proliferation programs in our history.  Low-enriched uranium derived from 500 metric tons of highly enriched uranium blended down from 20,000 Russian nuclear warheads, became fuel for U.S. nuclear power reactors.  The program supplied nearly ten percent of all U.S. electricity over the last fifteen years.  Since 2010, the U.S. has also blended down 24 MT of excess Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) from our own weapons program, and assisted in removing or confirming the disposition of over 2400 kilograms of HEU and plutonium from other countries.

Through the Summit process, we have established a global network of experts who work on nuclear security at senior levels in 53 governments and multiple international organizations.  We have expanded bilateral cooperation on nuclear security with dozens of countries worldwide.  And the trends we’re seeing are very positive:

The number of countries and facilities with HEU and plutonium is decreasing:

Twelve countries have completely eliminated HEU or separated plutonium from within their borders.
Twenty seven countries removed or disposed of nearly 3000 kilograms of HEU and separated plutonium.
Twenty four HEU nuclear reactors in 14 countries were successfully converted to Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) fuel use or verified as shut down.
Security at storage sites is increasing:

The United States has helped secure 218 buildings in 5 countries storing weapons-usable nuclear materials through physical security upgrades.
We responded effectively to security issues at the Y-12 HEU site in Tennessee and are applying those lessons throughout our nuclear complex.
More countries are prepared to counter nuclear smuggling:

The United States is working with 20 countries to enhance their ability to detect, interdict, attribute and prosecute nuclear smugglers.
260 sites and ports have been equipped with radiation detection systems, and 41 mobile radiation detection cans have been deployed to internal checkpoints in 15 partner countries.
We are providing training to U.S. and partner nation officials in law enforcement, customs, and border security.
More countries are seeking international advice:

The United States hosted its first-ever international advisory security review in October 2013.
Twelve other countries have requested international advisory reviews since the first Summit.
The nuclear security architecture is stronger:

Over two dozen countries have ratified the key nuclear security treaties since the 2010 Summit.  The United States continues to pursue ratification of these critical instruments.
The IAEA’s nuclear security team has been elevated and better funded, and has a more rigorous standards development process.
INTERPOL’s radnuke support team has been enhanced.
The United States is committed to continuing its leadership on this vitally important issue.  With our allies and partners, we will continue to work to put in place a strong and sustainable global nuclear security architecture designed to reduce the dangers of nuclear weapons and nuclear terrorism while allowing countries to more safely and effectively pursue peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

We have fulfilled our commitments, improved security at our facilities, and forged new partnerships.  We have removed nuclear materials, and in some cases gotten rid of them entirely.  As a result, more of the world’s nuclear materials can never fall into the hands of terrorists who would use them against us.  While there is much more to be done, we should be proud of all that we have achieved since the first Summit in 2010, and seize this opportunity to move that progress forward.

Saturday, March 15, 2014

U.S. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS AT UN COMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Remarks at the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) High-Level Segment

Remarks
William R. Brownfield
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Vienna, Austria
March 13, 2014


Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission
It is a pleasure to join you all today.

Protecting our citizens from the harmful consequences of illegal drugs and transnational criminal organizations is a shared responsibility.

There is consensus around the goals: public health; citizen security; rule of law. How we achieve them will engage our governments leading up to the 2016 UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs.

The three drug conventions are the starting point. Their goals – facilitating access to medicine, protecting citizens from the consequences of harmful drugs – are universally acknowledged. As is the important role of civil society in achieving them.

The international drug control system is not perfect. Some argue the conventions cannot handle problems this big and complex. I respectfully disagree: over the decades, these conventions have been flexible and resilient, evolving to help member states grapple with these challenges. We believe it is more prudent to advance evidence-based reform within the framework of the conventions than to embrace unproven ideas that undercut the system and risk greater drug abuse. We welcome the chance to discuss reform at this CND and during preparations for the 2016 UNGASS.

The United States enters this dialogue with three lessons in mind:
First, historic neuroscience advances prove addiction is a disease of the brain that can be prevented and treated. We must look at what drives individuals to use drugs, identify ways to prevent drug use before it begins, and expand access to treatment. We will share examples of effective practices with partners facing similar challenges, while supporting capacity-building and training for drug prevention, intervention, treatment, and recovery.

Second, we need a holistic approach to combat the criminal orgs who wreak havoc on communities. It is not our task to incarcerate everyone who consumes drugs, but to take down the multinational criminal enterprises that profit from them. Criminal networks thrive in underserved spaces. But when the criminal justice system and the treatment community work in tandem, when we provide alternatives to incarceration, we can stop the revolving door of criminal justice and save lives. Alternative development is another tool for helping good governance and prosperity take root.

Third, international cooperation among UN member states is essential. New psychoactive substances are an excellent example. As many as 200 new uncontrolled substances hit the market just this year, posing public health and law enforcement challenges to all. Member states have developed mechanisms to share information and responses to protect our citizens from these substances, demonstrating the value of the drug conventions, the UNODC, the WHO, and the INCB.

A focus on public health and the science of addiction; an innovative approach to criminal justice; and a commitment to international cooperation. These ladies and gentlemen are the future of drug policy. The three drug conventions provide the framework for this holistic, balanced approach to reducing the global drug problem.

We look to the future, our efforts must be guided by reason, evidence, and – above all – a common desire to safeguard the health and well-being of our citizens.

That is a formula for success, ladies and gentlemen. And succeed we shall, because succeed we must.

Monday, March 3, 2014

G-7 STATEMENT ON UKRAINE

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 
G-7 Leaders Statement

We, the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States and the President of the European Council and President of the European Commission, join together today to condemn the Russian Federation’s clear violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, in contravention of Russia’s obligations under the UN Charter and its 1997 basing agreement with Ukraine.  We call on Russia to address any ongoing security or human rights concerns that it has with Ukraine through direct negotiations, and/or via international observation or mediation under the auspices of the UN or the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.  We stand ready to assist with these efforts.

We also call on all parties concerned to behave with the greatest extent of self-restraint and responsibility, and to decrease the tensions.

We note that Russia’s actions in Ukraine also contravene the principles and values on which the G-7 and the G-8 operate.  As such, we have decided for the time being to suspend our participation in activities associated with the preparation of the scheduled G-8 Summit in Sochi in June, until the environment comes back where the G-8 is able to have meaningful discussion.

We are united in supporting Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and its right to choose its own future.  We commit ourselves to support Ukraine in its efforts to restore unity, stability, and political and economic health to the country.  To that end, we will support Ukraine’s work with the International Monetary Fund to negotiate a new program and to implement needed reforms.  IMF support will be critical in unlocking additional assistance from the World Bank, other international financial institutions, the EU, and bilateral sources.

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

CAPE RAY READIES TO DESTROY SYRIAN CHEMICAL WEAPONS



FROM:  U.S.NAVY 
The Military Sealift Command container ship Cape Ray departs Portsmouth, Va., Jan. 10, 2014, to test the systems that will be used to destroy chemical agents from Syria. The vessel was modified to contribute to the joint mission organized by the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons to eliminate Syria's chemical materials. U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 1st Class Isaiah Seller.




The Military Sealift Command container ship Cape Ray departs Portsmouth, Va., Jan. 10, 2014, for sea trials. U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Lacordrick Wilson.



The Military Sealift Command container ship Cape Ray departs Portsmouth, Va., Jan. 10, 2014, for sea trials. U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Jared Walker -

Thursday, January 23, 2014

WHITE HOUSE BRIEFING FOR JANUARY 22, 2014

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE
Daily Briefing by the Press Secretary, 1/22/14

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

12:55 P.M. EST

MR. CARNEY:  Kind of feels like Monday, weirdly.  My kids still haven't gone to school this week.

Good afternoon.  I hope you're holding up in the wintry weather, today’s cold.  Before I take your questions I'd like to tell you that this morning the President and Vice President held a meeting in the Oval Office with Attorney General Holder, Secretaries Hagel, Sebelius and Duncan, and senior administration officials to discuss their commitment to combating rape and sexual assault in all settings.  During the meeting the President and Vice President reiterated their deep, personal interest in doing everything possible to root out these types of abuse and build on the steps their administration has taken to protect Americans from it.

They discussed the findings of a report issued by the White House Council on Women and Girls that was issued earlier today and identifies key areas to focus on as part of these continued efforts, including working to change social norms, improving criminal justice response, and protecting students from sexual assault.  Each of the Cabinet members briefed the President and Vice President on various actions their respective agencies are taking to lead a coordinated, comprehensive effort to combat sexual assault from the military to college campuses and beyond.
And later today, the President and Vice President and these Cabinet officials will join additional representatives of the Council on Women and Girls for a meeting in the East Room -- which I think you know -- where the President will sign a new presidential memorandum to establish the White House Task Force on Protecting Students from Sexual Assault.  In his meeting this morning, the President said that he looks forward to seeing recommendations from the task force within 90 days.

Working to combat rape and sexual assault in all settings has been a priority for the President and Vice President throughout their time in office, and these new efforts build on steps that this administration has taken to combat these crimes, including last year’s reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which the Vice President himself authored, and the series of executive actions that Secretary Hagel recently announced to address sexual assault in the military.

With that, I take your questions.  Julie.

Q    Thanks, Jay.  I have a couple questions about Iran and Syria.  I know the State Department has talked about this over the weekend, but what is the White House’s understanding of what happened with the Ban Ki-moon invitation to Iran to the Syria talks and then having to pull that invitation back?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I would refer you to the U.N. Secretary General for more detail about this.  I think he’s spoken to it and explained.  Our position never changed and remains today what it has always been, which in order to participate in the Geneva conference you need to endorse the Geneva Communiqué.  And the purpose of the Geneva II conference is the full implementation of that communique, including the establishment by mutual consent of a transitional governing body with full executive authorities.

So I would refer you to what Secretary General Ban has said on this issue.  Our position is clear.  And we're certainly following events in Montreux now as that conference has gotten underway.

Q    Is there any concern that any tension that was created through this invitation and pulling back the invitation might bleed over into the nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran?

MR. CARNEY:  No.  I think that we have made clear and the P5-plus-1 in general have made clear that the focus of the implementation of the Joint Plan of Action and of the next step, the six-month process of trying to reach a comprehensive resolution of this matter, is on how we can persuade Iran to abide by its international commitments, how we can ensure that Iran will not obtain and cannot obtain a nuclear weapon.  There are other issues, very serious ones, in the Iran account that we have and that includes our profound differences over Syria and the fact that Iran has clearly played a negative role there and a violent role there.

Q    And on those talks, they’re off to a bit of a rocky start.  Does the administration see this round, Geneva II, as sort of the last, best chance to get Assad out?  And if this round of talks ends without a positive conclusion, where does the discussion on Syria go from here?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, first of all, I’d note that this is the beginning of what will be a tough and complicated negotiation to end the war in Syria.  The meetings in Montreux are ongoing and the start of the Syria-Syria negotiations will begin on Friday in Geneva.  That is where the two parties themselves are negotiating.

The international community is focused on the full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué, including the establishment, based on mutual consent, of a transitional governing body exercising full executive powers, as I just said, including over military and security entities.  It’s important to be clear:  Mutual consent for a transitional governing body means that that government cannot be formed with someone who is objected to by one side or the other.  In other words, that means that Bashar al-Assad will not and cannot be part of that transition government.

Now, the most important work will be done in the coming days, weeks, and months ahead with the regime and the opposition sitting down together to negotiate the implementation of the Geneva Communiqué and the formation of that transitional governing body, and that will be hard work.  But today is the beginning of an important process that will hopefully lead to an end to that terrible war.

Q    Given how hard it’s been to get these parties to even come to the table, do you see this as really the last, best chance to have a political solution?

MR. CARNEY:  There is no alternative to a political solution, a negotiated political settlement.  And I wouldn't, as these talks are just starting, move ahead to an assumption that they’ll fail -- although I will recognize, as we all will and the President will, that this is going to be tough and complicated work.  But there is no alternative.  There is no other way forward for Syria absent a negotiated political settlement; absent a settlement based on the principles of the Geneva Communiqué, which calls very clearly for a transitional governing body that is reached to by mutual consent.  That’s going to be hard work, but it’s important that it’s gotten started.

Jeff.

Q    Thanks, Jay.  The President spoke yesterday with President Putin of Russia and your readout said that they discussed the Olympics and security.  What more would the White House like to see Russia doing on security there?  And what more would the United States like to do or to be involved in to address the mounting concerns about security in Sochi?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, let me say that starting with the call yesterday that the United States has offered its full support and any assistance to the Russian government in its security preparations for the Sochi Games.  Russian authorities will be responsible for overall security at the Olympics, and the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security has the security lead for United States.  We will send diplomatic security and FBI agents to liaise with host nation security and law enforcement officials.  And that’s standard operating procedure for large events like this, where thousands of U.S. citizens -- athletes from Team USA, American corporate sponsors and members of the U.S. media are present for an extended period of time.

Now, the United States and Russia have had discussions on counterterrorism cooperation in a number of venues, as we’ve noted in the past, including in working groups of the Bilateral Presidential Commission.  The United States has also been working with the Russian government through the International Security Events Group on Sochi preparation, specifically as we do with any host country.  Now, U.S. citizens planning to attend the games in Sochi should be contact with the State Department.  Potential threats to safety and security can be found on the embassy’s website and the Department of State’s travel website.

I’ll also note that we have seen an uptick in threat reporting prior to the Olympics, which is, of course, of concern, although it is also not unusual for a major international event. And we have offered, as I said, assistance to the Russians -- any assistance that they might need to counter that threat.

Q    Is Russia accepting any of that assistance that’s been offered?

MR. CARNEY:  I would, first of all, refer you to the Department of Defense for details on assistance that’s been offered.  I would also say that we’re having ongoing conversations with the Russians about this and have offered any assistance that we can provide.  They obviously have lead for security at the Olympics -- they are the host nation.

Q    But did that offer come out of a concern that they’re not doing enough?

MR. CARNEY:  No, I think that this is an international event; there will be a large U.S. citizen presence there for an extended period of time, and we take the necessary precautions as you would expect.  I think the Pentagon said on Monday of this week that the United States has offered its full support to the Russian government, and that includes the two U.S. ships that have been sent to the Black Sea as part of the prudent planning and preparations that are required for an event like this.

Q    All right.  And then one other issue -- The Washington Post today had a story quoting U.S. officials expressing concern that they would not be able to make good on the President’s promise regarding the telephone records and the NSA proposals.  How confident is the White House that a deadline can be met?  Was it realistic?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I would say the relevant agencies are already at work on implementing the directions in the President’s speech that he gave.  As the President said, these are complicated issues, but they are not new to us.  We’ve already been working on them over the past six months and doing everything in our power, already we are, to meet those timelines. So it’s complicated, but the word has already gone out, some of the work has already been done, and the President looks forward to progress being made and completed.

Jon.

Q    On Russia, the call with Putin, who called who?  Did the President call or did Putin?  Who initiated the call?

MR. CARNEY:  I don't know the answer to that, Jon.  They speak with some frequency, but I can find out if there is an initiator.

Q    And get back to us?

MR. CARNEY:  Sure.

Q    And on this question of security at the Olympics, what is your assessment, what is the White House assessment?  How are the Russians doing on security?  Are they doing enough?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, again, what I can tell you is there has been an uptick in some of the reporting, but that is not unusual. It’s of concern, but not unusual for an event like this.  The State Department has handled and is handling the issue of travel advisories for U.S. citizens, and we are offering the Russians any assistance that they might require or request in a situation like this.

But I wouldn’t be qualified -- I wouldn’t want to venture to assess overall except that these kinds of major events around the world obviously present security challenges; this one is not unique.  And we take matters like this seriously because of the presence of U.S. citizens.  That's why we’re working with the Russian government.  That's why we’re offering the assistance that we’re offering, as well as encouraging U.S. citizens planning to travel to Sochi to be in contact with the State Department to make sure they're aware of the advisories that are out there.

Q    Can you characterize our level of confidence in the steps they have taken?  You’ve heard -- obviously Putin has talked a “ring of steel” around the Sochi Olympics.  Do we have a great deal of confidence that they have done enough on this?

MR. CARNEY:  All I can tell you, Jon, is that we have had conversations with the Russian government about security in Sochi.  The President spoke with President Putin about this.  We have offered any assistance that they might want to avail themselves of, and we’re taking, I think, prudent precautions on this matter, as evidenced by some of the steps the Department of Defense and the State Department have taken.

I wouldn’t want to assess from here because this is a complicated piece of business, obviously -- an international event like this, Olympics in general -- because they, unlike already complicated events like a single day of a sporting event, the Olympics last over a significant period of time.

Q    And can I ask a question on the Iran -- on the negotiations with Iran on the nuclear issue?  Is it the White House’s belief that if you can reach an agreement with the Iranians that those sanctions can be lifted without congressional approval?  Can further sanctions be lifted?  Obviously there are some steps which you’re able to do without congressional approval, but can you strike a deal with Iran and lift sanctions without Congress okaying it?

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t seen that assessment made because it presupposes what is the only acceptable outcome to these negotiations, which is a verifiable, transparent agreement by Iran to forsake its nuclear weapons ambitions.  And the promise of that for Iran is that by coming into compliance with its international obligation, by offering in a way that is 100 percent reassuring to the P5-plus-1 and our international partners and allies that they will not pursue and cannot pursue a nuclear weapon, there will be an opportunity for Iran to end its isolated state that its violation of its international obligations has brought upon it.

But how that process would work, I think it’s a little early to discuss that because the six-month period that we’ve been talking about for the negotiations over a comprehensive solution is only just beginning.

Q    Okay.  And then just one last thing.  The First Lady had her 50th birthday party and I believe you said that the President picks up the cost for that party.

MR. CARNEY:  I think we put out information.  I don’t have it here.  I would refer you to the East Wing.

Q    And I was just wondering if you had an estimate on what the cost was.

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t, but I would refer you to the East Wing.

Q    On that uptick in threat reporting, you said that it’s something you should expect with events like this.  But really going beyond that, part of that uptick is because of recent events in the area because of the region we’re talking about.  Is that correct?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I mean, you’re asking me to assess the region.  I think that international events like this always represent -- or present, rather, security challenges, and that’s broadly speaking.  Obviously each event presents unique challenges.  But I’m not going to get into a detailed analysis of how this one might be different from another one.  The approach that the U.S. government takes and the administration takes is one of prudent preparation because of any risks that might be out there.

So as I said, as you might expect in the run-up to an event like this, there has been an uptick in some of the threat reporting, and we’re taking precautions accordingly.  But that is not unusual.

Q    And does President Putin seem welcoming of U.S. offers for assistance?

MR. CARNEY:  I think that we have communicated at a variety of levels including between the two Presidents that we are absolutely willing to assist the Russian government where we can, and those conversations are being engaged.  And I wouldn’t characterize them -- I can point you to the Defense Department in terms of some of the conversations they’ve had and some of the steps they’ve taken.  But we’re going to continue to work with the Russian government and have those conversations moving forward.

Q    And on The New Yorker piece, the President said a couple of things about marijuana.  He said that legalization experiments in Washington State and Colorado should “go forward.” He also mentioned that he didn’t think marijuana was any more dangerous than alcohol.  In 2010, this White House put out a policy paper on national drug policy stating that marijuana should not be legalized.  Was the President setting new drug policy?

MR. CARNEY:  No, the President’s position on these matters hasn’t changed.  I think he was making a couple of points -- one, that we ought to use discretion appropriately in our prosecution prioritization -- A.  B, when it comes to marijuana use, he made clear that he sees it as a bad habit and a vice and not something that he would encourage -- and this is a quote:  “It’s not something I encourage, and I told my daughters I think it’s a bad idea, a waste of time, not very healthy.”

But there’s no question that we’ve applied our drug laws in a way that has been counterproductive and that there are issues there that need to be addressed.  I think that it’s important to -- because he’s quoted quite extensively in that article -- to look at the full context of some of these quotes that have been taken out in phrases when, at least in this instance, there’s an opportunity to see him speak at length.

Q    But he does want to see those experiments to go forward in Washington State and Colorado.  What does he hope to find out --

MR. CARNEY:  I think the point he was -- well, see, I think again that you’re probably not aware of the entire sentence.  “It’s important for the experiment” -- which is bracketed -- “to go forward because it’s important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law, and only a select few get punished.”  In other words, he’s talking about the issue of the disparities in our prosecution of our drug laws that an experiment like this may be addressing.  He’s not endorsing any specific move by a state; he’s simply making an observation.  His position on these matters has not changed.

Q    And, Jay, on Syria, getting back to Syria, there has been a huge cache of photos that have been released showing what appears to be widespread killings, mass killings, mass torture in Syria.  Has the White House examined these photos?  Does it have an opinion on what should happen with respect to those photos?

MR. CARNEY:  We stand with the rest of the world in horror at these images that have come to light, and we condemn in the strongest possible terms the actions of the Assad regime and call on it to adhere to international obligations with respect to the treatment of prisoners.  While we cannot independently confirm or affirm the information that was presented recently, these photos cannot be ignored or dismissed.  They suggest widespread and apparently systematic violations of international human law and demonstrate just how far the regime is willing to go in harming its own people.  They’re very disturbing images.

Let me move around a little bit.  Christie.

Q    Thanks, Jay.  Back on the metadata program.  Can you say when the DOJ and the ODNI began working on the storage -- the new storage place for this database?  Was it 10 minutes after the President speech or --

MR. CARNEY:  I would refer you to them.  I don’t know when they --

Q    Well, your answer to Jeff made it sound like --

MR. CARNEY:  I’m saying that on -- the examination of these issues was part of the review process.  So moving forward, participants in that effort are not starting from scratch.  And that was the point I’m making -- not that the President had issued specifically this directive prior to his speech, but that there’s a knowledge base there that was built in part by the review the President asked for and got, and that will certainly be of assistance as the work moves forward to make some determinations about storage.

Q    And do you know if the Attorney General has assured the President that he can make the deadline that he has set?

MR. CARNEY:  Again, I think I would point you to what I said earlier.  There’s work that’s been done on this issue broadly speaking so people aren’t starting from scratch.  It’s a complicated piece of business, but the President expects that action can be taken in the timeline he set.

Q    Well, you also have the component of needing congressional help on this.  What would happen if Congress did not act to set something up by the deadline the President is talking about?  Is the President willing to stop -- he said in his speech that the government will no longer maintain this database.  Would he stop doing that --

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we’re going to work with Congress because we think that this is the kind of thing that can enjoy bipartisan support.  There’s a shared interest in moving forward on this so I think that we hope and expect congressional cooperation moving forward.

Q    On income inequality, the President has repeatedly made it clear recently that this is going to be a big part of the next three years.  But with so little appetite in Congress to do anything about it, how much effort is he going to put behind measures that can actually reduce the trend?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, there’s no question, as you heard the President say in Anacostia late last year, and as you’ve heard him say over the years, including in Osawatomie and earlier this year, that the challenge we face when it comes to economic mobility in this country and the ability of Americans from all stations in life to achieve the American Dream is something he considers his number-one priority.  And addressing that challenge, addressing that problem, making sure that there’s opportunity for everyone, is something that we can do together with Congress and it’s also something that he can tackle using all of the tools in his toolbox as President of the United States.

And you have seen him do that -- or rather you have seen examples of how he can do that just recently with the Promise Zones that he talked about, and the manufacturing hub in North Carolina, where we can continue to work on the renaissance of manufacturing in this country and focus on advanced manufacturing and the kind of industries that create well-paying jobs for middle-class families to live on here in the United States.  You've seen it in the initiative last week with a hundred representatives from colleges and universities and elsewhere interested in improving education for Americans, and that, in turn, helps address the issue, because it’s not something that a single piece of legislation will resolve.

You've seen it in efforts across the states to raise the minimum wage, state by state.  The President strongly supports action by Congress, strongly supports action here in Washington to raise the minimum wage, because as a basic principle in this country you ought to be able to earn a living, i.e. not live in poverty, if you put in a hard day's work.  That's certainly the President's view.  And that's something that has enjoyed across the country and through the years bipartisan support.  So there's an opportunity for action with Congress on that specific issue -- and others.

So the President is fiercely committed to this agenda that goes right at the heart of what he believes America has always been about, which is the foundational belief that no matter what the circumstances of your birth that you have endless opportunity in this country to advance yourself and your family if you're willing to work hard, if you're willing to take responsibility, and if you're willing to educate yourself and help your family move forward.  So this is obviously something the President has spoken about before.  I think you can expect that it will be something he'll speak about in the coming days and weeks, and throughout his presidency.

Q    How would he measure success?

MR. CARNEY:  I think he would measure success by evidence that we have improved economic opportunity in this country for everyone; that the mobility that we've seen declining in this country is on the rise again, where you don't have I think surprising statistics that suggest that countries in Europe have greater economic mobility than the United States, which sort of goes at the heart of who we believe we are in this country and what our history has been about when it comes to opportunity for people who have been willing to work hard and take responsibility.  So that's an agenda that could not have more presidential force behind it.

Major.

Q    There was a report last night that the Pentagon sent to the President a report or a recommendation that there would be 10,000 U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan after 2014 provided the BSA is signed, but that those forces would be removed by 2016.  A, can you confirm if that's true?  And if so, does it reflect a presidential desire to wind down the war completely by the end of his term, even if the bilateral security agreement is signed by the Afghan government?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can tell you, Major, is that the President has not made any decisions about final troop numbers  and I'm not going to discuss ongoing deliberations.  We will be weighing inputs from our military commanders, as well as the intelligence community, our diplomats and development experts as we make decisions about our post-2014 presence in Afghanistan.

As you mentioned, in addition, our position continues to be that if we cannot conclude a bilateral security agreement promptly then we will initiate planning for a post-2014 future in which there would be no U.S. or NATO troop presence in Afghanistan.  That's not the future we're seeking; it’s not the policy we think is best, and we don't believe it’s in Afghanistan’s best interest.  But the further this slips into 2014, the more likely such an outcome is.

Meanwhile, as the interagency convenes to continue considering options to present to the President for a post-2014 presence, we will have to increasingly take into account the lack of a signed BSA in that planning.  We'll have to frame decisions based on our clear position that we can't pursue a post-2014 mission without a BSA.  And that mission, if I could just reiterate, would be one tailored to focus on counterterrorism operations and on the training and support of Afghan security forces.

So no decisions have been made.  We're not going to get into ongoing deliberations.  And it’s important to note in the context of all of these discussions that we are still waiting for the Afghan government to sign the bilateral security agreement.

Q    Does the difficulty in obtaining that signature on the BSA inject into these deliberations a new question about the utility of keeping forces for a long period after 2014 because it appears the Afghan -- we may not be welcome there and therefore the utility of us staying might be in question now?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think, in fact, the loya jirga strongly endorsed the bilateral security agreement, and as a body that represents the will and opinion of the Afghan people, we think that is significant and it reflects the fact that the BSA was negotiated in good faith with the Afghan government.  And we consider that another strong reason why it ought to be signed.

Q    But you know as well as I do that part of this is the succession of Karzai and this being a live issue, so that if it’s not overshadowed, certainly presents itself within the succession of the Karzai government and it certainly is a factor being weighed by not just the loya jirga but whoever may succeed Karzai.

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think that's probably the case, but we're not basing the need for the BSA to be signed on that timeline in Afghan politics.  We're basing it on the fact that we have to make decisions -- we and our NATO allies have to make decisions and make plans for 2014 that need to take into account whether or not there is a BSA that's been signed, because there cannot be a further troop presence beyond 2014 absent a signed BSA.  So the further we slip into this year, the more we have to take that into account as we make plans.

Q    It was suggested on a couple of Sunday talk shows that there is evidence in possession of the U.S. government that Edward Snowden may well have received assistance from the Russian government in transit on his way to Russia and that he may be cooperating in ways that is harmful to the U.S. government on an ongoing basis.  Does the administration agree with those assessments?

MR. CARNEY:  I would say that this is an ongoing criminal investigation; there have been charges brought.  And I don't have anything to add from here on that matter.

Q    Would the administration cast any doubts on those suspicions?

MR. CARNEY:  Again, I just don't have anything to add.  There is a case that has been presented against Mr. Snowden, charges have been brought.  It is our firm position that he ought to return to the United States and face the charges against him here where he will be afforded all of the protections of due process that our judicial system provides.

Q    In The New Yorker piece, the President said he was haunted by Syria.  You read a statement about the images that the administration had a chance to look at.  You also said there’s no alternative to Assad staying in power.  Why isn't there any alternative to Assad staying in power?  He’s been there for almost two and a half years, a wide-running bloody civil war.  The military does not appear to be any less aggressive in its defense of the Assad regime than it has been from the start.  The opposition is splintered.  The Geneva II peace process or conversations are off to, at best, a rocky start.  Why isn't it possible that Assad stays and the President remains haunted by this for the remainder of his administration?

MR. CARNEY:  Because there’s no future that the Syrian people will endorse for their country that includes Assad in the government or as President.  He has forsaken in bloody fashion any claim he might have to lead that country into the future by massacring his own people --

Q    But with respect, that may undermine his moral authority, but the practical reality is he’s there, his military is there and fights aggressively to keep him there.

MR. CARNEY:  And there’s an ongoing civil war there, and there is no solution, there is no end to that war absent a negotiated political settlement.  And that settlement has to be based on the Geneva Communiqué, which calls for a transitional governing authority based on mutual consent.  And there’s no achieving mutual consent in Syria of the members of that governing authority that could include Bashar al-Assad in the government.  It won’t happen.  It can't happen.

So our view that Assad can't be part of Syria’s future is not one that we make on our own; it’s one we observe in the fulfillment of the Geneva Communiqué, because there’s no way the opposition would agree to -- nor should -- a governing transitional authority that would include Assad among those participants.

Q    Jay, on that point, is a U.S. military strike against Syria -- a potential U.S. military strike still on the table?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, Ed, I don't think that we would ever rule out options when dealing with matters like this.  But what I can tell you is that we foresee no U.S. troops in Syria and that there is -- the only resolution here -- I think that suggesting the use of force somehow answers the mail when we said there’s no resolution here that doesn't include a negotiated political settlement --

Q    The President very publicly considered U.S. force, was right up to the line of it, and then went to Congress.  All that only played out a few months ago.  My question is two summers ago, the President from that podium had a news conference and drew the red line and that was on chemical weapons specifically.

MR. CARNEY:  As was the threat of the use of force.

Q    The threat of force.  And the President, though, then when he drew that red line in August of 2012, said that if they crossed the line there would be enormous consequences.  Now, in addition to the mass killings that were just talked about a moment ago, chemical weapons were used in mass fashion, and as result, in a positive step, Syria started turning over some of those chemical weapons.  But my question is, Assad is still in power, as Major suggested.  He’s still killing his own people. What is -- what can the U.S. do about it?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, Ed, if I could briefly clarify the history that you recounted, the President made clear that it was a red line for Syria to use chemical weapons.  And he then very clearly and forcefully threatened force when the evidence demonstrated that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons.  It was because of that credible use of force -- threat of force, rather, that something happened that I don't think anybody would have predicted, which is that a government that had long denied that it even possessed chemical weapons agreed to give them all up.  And that process is underway.

What remains the case is that there’s an ongoing civil war. What the President has said is that we will do everything we can through provision of humanitarian assistance, through pushing the Geneva process forward, including the meetings underway now, including help and assistance to the opposition, to help bring about an end to the war and a negotiated political --

Q    But all of that has been going on for a couple of years now is my question, I guess.  And if the President is haunted by it, does he feel paralyzed?  Does he feel --

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I guess, Ed, I would point you to the words of the President when he’s made clear that we cannot intervene in every -- militarily into every civil war, but we can do what we have done in this case, which is work with international partners to help try to bring about a negotiated political settlement.

And we can, as we did, working with our international partners, help bring about the commitment by Syria to give up one of the largest collections of chemical weapons in the world.  And that is obviously something that’s very positive and that work is ongoing.

Q    Last thing on health care.  The Hill newspaper reported a couple of days ago that a procurement document from late December says that federal officials decided to bring on Accenture for the healthcare.gov contract.  And they did it quickly; they did it without open bid because they justified it, administration officials, by saying they had to move quickly because they said the health insurance industry was at risk if the site was not fixed.  They also went on to say, ”The entire health care reform program is jeopardized if these fixes are not made by mid-March.”

MR. CARNEY:  Who said that?

Q    Federal officials who were quoted in --

MR. CARNEY:  Which officials?

Q    From CMS, I would expect.  Not from the White House.

MR. CARNEY:  I didn’t see the article.  I’m not aware of those statements --

Q    But you’ve been saying the website is turning the corner.  Does this document suggest that there are still concerns here in the administration?

MR. CARNEY:  Again, I’m not aware of the document.  What I can you tell you is there has been an enormous effort expended and an enormous effort that continues to be expended in making sure that the website functions effectively for the millions of Americans who have so clearly demonstrated that they desire the product on offer here.  And I certainly hope that as those improvements have resulted in significantly increased numbers of Americans enrolling in and purchasing insurance through the exchanges, that that story is getting the full coverage that it merits.

Margaret.

Q    Thanks.  I wanted to go back to Sochi for a second.  Just to clarify, there were some reports beginning yesterday that the U.S. was using counterterrorism operatives to help the Russians look for potential suicide bombers inside the security zone.  Can you confirm that?  And even if you can’t, is the U.S. concerned that there may be suicide bombers inside the security zone?

MR. CARNEY:  Margaret, I just don’t have more.  I don’t have -- I have not seen that report.  What I can tell you is that we are having conversations with the Russians.  We have made clear that we are prepared to provide any assistance that we can if Russia asks for it.  And we’re going to continue to work with them and take steps as we’ve been taking out of prudence, given that this is the kind of event where security is an issue.

Q    On the President’s call with Mr. Putin, the one thing in the readout that I didn’t notice was any mention of Edward Snowden.  Can you tell us explicitly, did they -- is this like in the agree-to-disagree category and they just don’t talk about it? Or they talked about it and it’s just not going in the readout because there’s nothing you could possibly tell us about what they said?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don’t have more detail on the phone call.  What I can tell you is that our position on Mr. Snowden I think is abundantly clear to everyone, including the Russians, and our view that he ought to be returned to the United States where he will be afforded all the rights and protections in our system.  That hasn't changed.  So I don't think there's any doubt in Moscow or elsewhere of our position on that matter.

Q    Can I do one more?

MR. CARNEY:  Sure.

Q    There's an ally of Angela Merkel's who is like the foreign policy spokesman for her party in the Parliament, and what he had said is that it's their view that what the President has promised or offered in terms of the foreign leader aspect of the NSA role last week isn't quite enough and that -- he said, "Transatlantic relations are in the deepest crisis now since the Iraq war."  I'm just wondering if the President is concerned about the sort of ongoing steps to repair the relationship with Germany specifically and what he is doing in the wake of the NSA remarks?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we have had direct country-to-country and, in some cases, leader-to-leader consultations on these matters as they have arisen.  And we've certainly been clear about that when it comes to the United States and Germany and President Obama and Chancellor Merkel.  And I would say that at Chancellor Merkel and President Obama's direction, we have undertaken extensive, close consultations on our intelligence cooperation in recent months, which has resulted -- those consultations, rather, have resulted in a better understanding of the requirements and concerns that exist on both sides.  And those consultations will continue among our intelligence services.  And I think they reflect the very close relationship we have across the board, including on issues of and matters of intelligence.

Peter.

Q    Jay, clearly, there was a greater degree of sharing in past Olympics -- in London, in Vancouver, and even Beijing before that.  What specifically would you like to see with Russia that would give this administration more confidence in the safety of Americans not just in Sochi, but throughout Russia?

MR. CARNEY:  Again, Peter, I just don't have more on this beyond what I've said, which is that we are in conversations with the Russians, we've made clear that we are prepared to offer any assistance that they might require.  Russian authorities are, of course, responsible for overall security at the Olympics -- they are the host nation -- and the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security has the security lead for the United States. As part of that responsibility, we will send diplomatic security and FBI agents to liaise with host nation security and law enforcement officials.

I think that reflects the actions that we take in situations like this; they're fairly standard.  But these are obviously events that present security challenges, so we work with host nations and we take actions that we think are necessary to make sure that the precautions we can take are taken.

Q    So at this time, is the White House satisfied that Russia is prepared to host a safe games?
MR. CARNEY:  I think that Russia has responsibility for overall security in terms of the steps that they've taken, and assurances that they can make are ones that they have to make.  Our view is that we partner with host nations and liaise with them.  We also, in this case, are offering security assistance and we'll continue to work with the Russians as the event approaches and begins.

Q    Senator Angus King said a couple of days ago, "I would not go and I don't think I'd send my family."  Americans are making those decisions right now.  Should Americans go?  Should they feel safe sending their family?

MR. CARNEY:  Sure.  I think there will be, as I understand it, a lot of Americans in Sochi, which is why, of course, we pay close attention to an event like this.  There will be Team USA members there, as well as corporate sponsors.  And our advice to Americans who might travel to the games is to avail themselves of the information provided by the State Department in the form of travel advisories related to this and to take the standard precautions that those advisories recommend.  And beyond that, we're just going to continue to work with -- to take the necessary precautions and to work with the Russian government.

Q    As for Chairman Rogers, who this weekend discussed his suspicion or belief that Edward Snowden received some help -- this is going to a question that was asked earlier -- but he made these -- you could call them allegations or accusations -- at least it was his belief system that there was help provided to Edward Snowden.  A senior FBI official told us on Sunday that it’s still the Bureau’s conclusion that Mr. Snowden acted alone. So I guess I’m curious right now if Chairman Rogers and others using language like that somehow hinders the relationship the U.S. is trying to develop right now with Russia by making those suggestions when it appears the administration has no evidence of that.

MR. CARNEY:  I think the disagreement we have with Russia over Edward Snowden I think has been publicly expressed with some frequency.  I don’t think that --

Q    Is he helping or hurting by saying that if there’s no evidence?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don’t think that that’s really an issue because we have -- the President spoke with President Putin directly and does so with some frequency, as Presidents of Russia and the President --

Q    Wait, about -- I’m sorry, about Edward Snowden?

MR. CARNEY:  No, I’m just saying in general that we don’t -- that the President can talk to President Putin, and does.  And in our relations with Russia, we have areas of significant cooperation where our interests are aligned and we have areas of significant disagreement, including but not limited to the matter of Edward Snowden.  But I don’t think we’re anything but transparent about that.  And we have expressed that very clearly both on that matter and other matters.  That’s been the approach the President has taken in our relations with Russia because he thinks that best serves the interests of the United States, which is a very clear-eyed approach to U.S.-Russian relations that allows for cooperation on matters that are vital to U.S. national security and U.S. interests, and can also allow for the clear expression of disagreements -- and that happens.

We are still able to move forward and cooperate with the Russians on a host of areas.  That includes the P5-plus-1.  It includes counterterrorism cooperation in general.  And it includes obviously the ability to discuss security around the Sochi games.

Q    Finally, very quickly, we’re under the impression you’ll get back to us on who delivered -- who placed the phone call, whether it was President Putin or President Obama yesterday.  But we’re under the -- we’ve been told that the conversation was apparently several days or even weeks in the making.  Did the two of them agree to have other conversations and have other conversations been set before the games where further decisions will be made in terms of cooperation?

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have any previews of additional phone calls that may or may not happen.  As I said, the President speaks with President Putin with some frequency, as you might expect, but I don’t know when the next call might be.

Yes, Jess.

Q    On the U.S.-Africa summit that you announced earlier this week, can you talk about what prompted that, and also why Egypt is not among those that are invited, especially given what’s going on there right now?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I can tell you that what prompted it is the hope that the summit will build on the progress made since the President’s trip to Africa last summer that it will advance the administration’s focus on trade and investment in Africa and highlight America’s commitment to Africa’s security, its democratic development and its people.
I think that on matters of the invitation list, on Egypt -- I know I have this here somewhere.  Hold on.  I can give you -- Egypt has not been invited because it is suspended from the African Union, and that’s the reason why Egypt was not invited.  I can read you the entire list of the invitees, but I think you’ve probably seen it.  But that’s why Egypt was not invited.

Q    Is there any concern that that is a missed opportunity to have discussions that you’d like to be having with Egypt?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think we have regular discussions with Egyptian leaders and authorities focused on the bilateral relationship, on security matters, but also on developments in Egypt and our belief that Egypt needs to transition to a civilian-led government in a process that is inclusive where Egyptians from all walks of life get to express their views and be heard.

Reid.

Q    Jay, yesterday after he was indicted, former Virginia Governor McDonnell and his attorneys both described his actions while he was governor as similar to things that President Obama has done in the White House.  They said in the legal brief the President routinely participates in corporate events which lend credibility to his major benefactors, invites benefactors to events in the White House, allows his photo to be taken with benefactors, and includes benefactors in policy discussions with senior administration officials, in describing or explaining Governor McDonnell’s actions with Jonnnie Williams.  I’m sure you're going to refer questions about the prosecution to the Justice Department.  But does the President sort of concede the point that a lot of the people who are involved in some of these policy discussions are people who have contributed to his campaign?

MR. CARNEY:  Reid, I have no comment on what is obviously an ongoing matter of prosecution, and I’ll leave it at that.

Q    Thanks, Jay.

MR. CARNEY:  Mark.

Q    Jay, how will foreign leaders know if they are among the friends and allies whose phone calls the United States will not conduct surveillance on?

MR. CARNEY:  Mark, what I would say is that we have direct conversations through diplomatic channels on these issues and will continue to do so.  I think you can address those questions, that question elsewhere, but I think that we -- as has been the case since these revelations began, where they have affected our relations with a specific country, there have been direct and substantive conversations between the two countries using diplomatic channels, which is the tradition.

Q    So you’re saying you’ll tell them, you’re okay, your phone calls won’t be surveilled?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I’m not sure what other method you might suggest, Mark.  (Laughter.)  I can simply tell you that we have close relationships with our friends and allies -- our close friends and allies, and these kinds of discussions take place through normal diplomatic channels.

Q    And have you responded to the ad yesterday in the paper from Europe 1 Radio requesting an interview with the President?  And would you suggest that's a way for many of us to request interviews from now on?  (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY:  No, I think CBS has requested interviews through more traditional means successfully, as have many of the news organizations here.  But I wouldn’t rule out that as a means to request.  I think it’s an expensive way to do it.  But keep those invitations coming.

Thanks very much.

END
1:48 P.M. EST

Search This Blog

Translate

White House.gov Press Office Feed