FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Forrestal Lecture at the Naval Academy
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Annapolis, MD
April 10, 2012
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much. Thanks for that warm introduction, Zach. Thank you Jordan, who will be helping to moderate the questions at the end of my remarks. Vice Admiral Miller and Captain Clark, thank you for the very warm welcome that you have given me. I also want to recognize a long-time friend, the governor of the great state of Maryland, Martin O’Malley. And I understand that we have delegates from the Naval Academy Foreign Affairs Conference, from schools literally around the world, including some Fulbright scholars. So let me welcome all of you as well. I just hope they don’t make you climb Herndon before you leave the academy. (Laughter.)
And Midshipmen, thank you for taking this time away from your studies. (Laughter.) You’ll take just any excuse. (Laughter.) And Plebes, I’m sure you’d rather be sleeping. (Cheering and applause.) And Youngsters, well, you’re still just glad you’re not Plebes. (Cheering.) And Second Class, you’d rather, I’m sure, be catching up on some homework. (Cheering.) And Firsties, you’re already dreaming of throwing your cover in the air and putting all this in your rearview mirror. (Cheers and applause.)
But to one and all, it is such an honor for me to be here this evening. Now, I am fortunate to know and work with quite a few graduates of this academy and to call many of them my friends, including the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Retired Admiral Mike Mullen, and Admiral Harry Harris, class of 1978, who travels the world with me and is here with me tonight. And as I was signing the guestbook for the lectures, I know you recently heard from my former colleague, Senator John McCain, who, by his own admission, was nowhere near the top of his class, but that didn’t stop him from becoming a genuine American hero and a great colleague and travelling companion during my years in the Senate.
Now, I received a note, an email, from another graduate I know, just in the last day, who had heard that I would be coming here to the academy. And he wanted me to understand how this academy prepares you not just for military service, but for citizenship and life. Carlos came to Annapolis after fleeing Cuba as a child with his parents, who both worked two jobs to make a new life in America. The naval training he received helped him eventually become the first commanding officer of a guided missile destroyer, and his study of strategy and diplomacy landed him a job as a White House fellow.
But that’s not all. He used what he learned in, yes, electrical engineering classes – and I know how much you all love those – to start his own small business that now employs 50 people. The academy’s emphasis on integrity and character led this first-generation American to get involved in his own community and even to make a run for local office. In his email to me, he said, “My life would not be what it is today if it were not for the United States Naval Academy. Annapolis taught me to always strive in my own small way to make a positive difference in the lives of others because it is the right thing to do.”
Now, that is not only a wonderful sentiment for an individual’s life, but also for our country and our country’s future. You see, we need you to become leaders who can use every tool and every bit of training to make contributions across a wide range of disciplines. The challenges of the 21st century are blurring the lines between defense, diplomacy, and development, the three Ds of foreign policy. So we need officers who can fight wars, negotiate agreements, and provide emergency relief all at once. Call it the smart power Navy. That’s what Annapolis is preparing you for, and that’s what your country is counting on.
And as we consider this future, let us also remember our past. This is the Forrestal lecture, named for the first-ever Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal. He helped create the modern military and reorganize the government for the Cold War. And throughout his career, he championed the Navy as a pillar of America’s global leadership.
Now, that was not always a popular position. After World War II, many Americans would have been happy if we just retreated behind our borders. But Secretary Forrestal was part of an extraordinary generation of leaders who realized that Americans’ interests were inextricably linked to the fortunes of people everywhere. In 1946, he noted in his diary that the Soviets believed that the post-war world should be shaped by a handful of great powers acting alone. But “the American point of view,” he wrote, “is that all nations professing a desire for peace and democracy should participate.”
In the years that followed, the United States and its partners constructed a new international order – an architecture of institutions, norms, and alliances that delivered peace and prosperity across what was then called the Free World. We saw old rivals like France and Germany feeling secure enough to reconcile and break their cycle of conflict. We watched as increasing economic integration raised standards of living, as fundamental freedoms became enshrined in international law, and democracy took root and thrived.
Now, today, no totalitarian empire threatens the world. But new actors are wielding increasing influence in international affairs. And emerging regions, especially the Asia Pacific, are becoming key drivers of global politics and economics. As a result, the post-war architecture is in need of some renovation. Still, amidst all this change, two constants remain. First, a just, open, and sustainable international order is still required to promote global peace and prosperity. And second, while the geometry of global power may have changed, American leadership is as essential as ever.
Now, I have said that the 21st century will be America’s Pacific century, just like previous centuries have been. And today, I want to describe briefly the diplomatic, economic and military investments the United States is making in a strong network of institutions and partnerships across the Asia Pacific. This vast region, from the Indian Ocean to the western shores of the Americas, is home to half the world’s population, several of our most trusted allies, emerging economic powers like China, India, and Indonesia, and many of the world’s most dynamic trade and energy routes.
Surging U.S. exports to the region are helping drive our economic recovery here at home. And future growth depends on reaching further into Asia’s growing consumer base and expanding middle class. Indeed, the shape of the global economy, the advance of democracy and human rights, and our hopes for a 21st century less bloody than the 20thcentury all hinge to a large degree on what happens in the Asia Pacific.
Take a look at this month’s headlines, and it shows the challenges and opportunities that the region presents. As we meet here tonight, North Korea is readying a long-range missile launch that will violate UN Security Council resolutions and put its neighbors and region at risk. Now this new threat comes only weeks after North Korea agreed to a moratorium on nuclear and missile testing. The speed of the turnaround raises questions about Pyongyang’s seriousness in saying that it desires to improve relations with us and its neighbors. This launch will give credence to the view that North Korean leaders see improved relations with the outside world as a threat to the existence of their system. And recent history strongly suggests that additional provocations may follow.
So we are working around the clock with South Korea and Japan to strengthen our alliances and sharpen our deterrent. As President Obama said in Seoul last month after visiting the demilitarized zone, the commitment of the United States to the people of the Republic of South Korea is unshakable. We will also work with Russia and with China. They both share a strong interest in the stability of the Korean Peninsula and will join in sending a message to the North Koreans that true security will only come from living up to commitments and obligations first and foremost to their own people.
Yet at the same time, Burma offers a meaningful opportunity for economic and political progress. For decades, that Southeast Asian nation has been locked behind an authoritarian curtain while many other countries in the region made successful transitions to vibrant democracies and open markets. The United States, supporting these transitions, has been one of our defining efforts in the Asia Pacific from South Korea to the Philippines to Thailand to Indonesia. In fact, I’m often a little frustrated that people forget how hard it was for those four countries to make their transitions. They went through all kinds of military dictatorships and coups and instability. And so we have to continue to have the patience and persistence to nurture the flickers of progress that I saw when I visited Burma, the first visit by a Secretary of State in 50 years. Of course, it is still too early to say how this story will end. But just nine days ago, the long-imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize winner, Aung San Suu Kyi was voted into parliament.
Much of the history of the 21st century is being written before our eyes. And a quick glance at Burma and North Korea shows that we have a deep stake in how that history plays out. So from our first days in office, the Obama Administration began directing America’s foreign policy to account for the Asia Pacific’s growing importance. I broke with tradition and made my first overseas trip there as Secretary. President Obama has traveled to the Western Pacific four times. We stepped up our engagement with countries and institutions in what I call forward deployed diplomacy. And we’re not turning away from our old friends and interests in other parts of the world. Our relationships with European and NATO allies who are, after all, our partners of first resort, remain indispensable for our work around the globe. And we need to deepen our engagement in the Asia Pacific region in coordination with them.
So just as we are not losing old friends, we are not seeking new enemies. Today’s China is not the Soviet Union. We are not on the brink of a new Cold War in Asia. Just look at the ever expanding trade between our economies, the connections between our peoples, the ongoing consultations between our governments. In less than 35 years, we’ve gone from being two nations with hardly any ties to speak of to being thoroughly, inescapably interdependent. That requires adjustments in thinking and approaches on both sides. Geopolitics today cannot afford to be a zero-sum game. A thriving China is good for America and a thriving America is good for China, so long as we both thrive in a way that contributes to the regional and global good. Let me go one step further. We will only succeed in building a peaceful, prosperous Asia Pacific if we succeed in building an effective U.S.-China relationship.
So our aim is to build mature and effective institutions that can mobilize common action and settle disputes peacefully, to work toward rules and norms that help manage relations between peoples, markets, and nations, and establish security arrangements that provide stability and build trust. I am well aware that some in Asia fear that a robust American presence and our talk of architecture and institutions and norms is really code for protecting Western prerogatives and denying rising powers their fair share of influence. The argument goes that we’re trying to draw them into a rigged system that favors us. Well, that is just not the case. We agree that regional and international architecture cannot remain static. Rules and institutions designed for an earlier age may not be suited to today.
So we need to work together to adapt and update them and even to create new institutions where necessary. But there are principles that are universal and that must be defended: fundamental freedoms and human dignity; an open, free, transparent, and fair economic system; the peaceful resolution of disputes; and respect for the territorial integrity of states. These are norms that benefit everyone and that help all people and nations live and trade in peace. The international system based on these principles helped fuel, not foil, the rise of China and other emerging powers such as India and Indonesia. Those nations have benefited from the security it provides, the markets it opens, and the trust it fosters. And as a consequence, they have a real stake in the success of that system. And as their power grows and their ability to contribute increases, the world’s expectations of them will rise as well.
But some of today’s emerging powers in Asia and elsewhere act as selective stakeholders, picking and choosing when to participate constructively and when to stand apart from the international system. And while that may suit their interests in the short term, it will ultimately render the system that has helped them get to where they are today unworkable. And that would end up impoverishing everyone.
History shows us that a strong regional architecture can bring to bear incentives for cooperation and disincentives for provocation and problematic behaviors. But this kind of architecture does not just spring up on its own, just as NATO and other aspects of the post-World War II architecture didn’t just happen. It takes consistent effort, strong partnerships, and crucially, American leadership. And that is, at core, what our strategy in the Asia Pacific is all about. All of our actions – diplomatic, economic, and military – are designed to advance this goal. Let me offer three examples about how it works.
First, President Obama’s attended something called the East Asia Summit this past November. The East Asia Summit is a gathering of the heads of state of all kinds of the nations in the region to grapple with the biggest challenges and pursue comprehensive solutions, whether it’s on nonproliferation, disaster response, or maritime security. But no U.S. President had ever attended before. And President Obama’s decision to participate capped three years of intensive engagement with institutions like ASEAN, the Association of South East Asian Nations, and APEC, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, and reflected our support for the East Asia Summit as the region’s premier forum for discussing political and security issues.
Having an institution like this can make a difference. Take the South China Sea. It connects many of the region’s nations, some of whom have competing claims on its waters and islands. Half the world’s merchant tonnage flows through the South China Sea, so the stakes for maritime security and freedom of navigation are very high. The United States has no territorial claims there, and we do not take sides in territorial disputes. But we have always been a seafaring nation, and we have an abiding interest in protecting the seas and respecting international law and promoting the peaceful resolution of disputes that arise out of navigation.
Trying to settle complex disputes like this bilaterally, one-on-one, was a recipe for confusion and even potentially confrontation. There were too many overlapping claims and interests, and the concerns of some countries were being elevated while others were being diminished. But when President Obama joined his fellow leaders at the East Asia Summit, they were able to support a region-wide effort to protect unfettered access to the South China Sea, work toward developing a code of conduct, and respect the legitimate interests of all claimants to ensure that disputes were settled through a consensual process based on established principles of international law.
Now, it was a reminder that, for certain issues, there’s no substitute for putting the relevant players in the same room and letting giving them a chance to begin to exchange ideas and work towards sorting out problems. In cases like this one, smaller countries then can be sure their voices are heard. And larger countries, which have a significant stake in broader regional stability and security, can pursue solutions to these complex challenges. That’s what an effective architecture permits.
Here’s a second example, which demonstrates how strong rules and norms matter in people’s lives. As part of that same trip last November, the President built momentum for a new far-reaching trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership that we are negotiating with eight other countries in the Asia Pacific region. This agreement is not just about eliminating barriers to trade, although that is crucial for boosting U.S. exports and creating jobs here at home. It’s also about agreeing on the rules of the road for an integrated Pacific economy that is open, free, transparent, and fair. It will put in place strong protections for workers, the environment, intellectual property, and innovation – all key American values. And it will cover emerging issues such as the connectivity of regional supply chains, the competitive impact of state-owned enterprises, and create trade opportunities for more small-and-medium-sized businesses.
These kinds of rules help level the playing field for all countries and companies. And when the competition is fair and the rules are transparently known and there are systems to enforce them, American businesses can out-compete and out-innovate anyone in the world. Now of course, the rules only work if they’re known and enforced, which is why this Administration continues to bring suits against violators of trade norms and to speak up against abuses.
And on the subject of norms and rules, let me add that the United States is increasingly concerned about the growing threat to our economic and national security posed by cyber intrusions, particularly the theft of intellectual property and classified material via cyber means. Because the United States and China are two of the largest global cyber actors, establishing clear and acceptable practices in cyberspace is critical. And I was delighted to hear from Admiral Miller that the Naval Academy is introducing a cyber course that will be – begin to not only educate you about the opportunities and challenges in cyberspace, but help prepare you as part of what will certainly be an essentially function of our defense.
Now we will continue to be very candid about this and clear-eyed in addressing the harms and risks that have evolved over the past few years. At the State Department, we are attacked countless times every single day. Actually, our defenses aren’t breached, but sometimes people, for whatever reason, decide they want to dump national security material into the public domain. So we have to think figure out how to deal with the human factor while we build up our technical expertise.
My third example will be familiar to many of you, because it deals with how strong alliances and partnerships – especially our military cooperation with militaries around the world – saves lives, builds trust, and advances our interests. For decades, the United States military and our enduring alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand have underwritten security and stability in the Asia Pacific. Every day, the Navy has some 50 ships, hundreds of aircraft, tens of thousands of sailors and Marines in the Pacific at any given time. And the Navy’s role is growing, as evidenced by President Obama’s new Defense Strategic Guidance.
Each year, United States Navy ships and sailors and Marines participate in more than 170 bilateral and multilateral exercises and conduct more than 250 port visits in the region. One of my favorite port visits was of the USS McCain to Vietnam. This allows us to respond more quickly and efficiently when we need to work together with partners, such as responding to natural disasters in one of the most environmentally volatile and vulnerable areas in the world.
I hope you know and are proud of the Navy’s efforts after the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear crisis in Japan last year. The 7th Fleet had developed a close partnership with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force over many decades, so we were able to work hand in hand, delivering food and medical supplies, conducting search and rescue missions, evacuating the injured, and so much more. After the operation was over, I had the chance to visit with the crew of the destroyer USS Fitzgerald when we were both in Manila, and they told me how all that preparation and partnership had paid off.
To maximize our ability to participate in these kinds of efforts all over the Asia Pacific and to meet an increasingly diverse set of security challenges, the United States is moving to a more geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable force posture in the region. We are sending Marines to Australia for joint training – the first six-month rotational deployment arrived in Darwin last week. We are deploying state-of-the art ships to Singapore. We are modernizing our basing arrangements with allies in Northeast Asia.
We’re also working hard to reduce the risk of miscalculation or miscues between the American and Chinese militaries and to try to forge a durable military-to-military relationship. Our navies already work together to combat piracy off the Horn of Africa. But we can, we should, and we must do more together. We also hope to strengthen the newly established Strategic Security Dialogue, which brings American and Chinese military and civilian leaders to the table to discuss sensitive issues like maritime security and cyber security.
Here’s the bottom line, which I think is worth remembering as you work, study, and prepare for your futures in the Navy and the Marine Corps: The extraordinary service and sacrifice of America’s men and women in uniform makes a difference in the lives of people all over the world. In this region, it made a difference in the lives of those people in the Japanese community rescued from the floodwaters, or to the Singaporean sea captain protected from pirates, or the Korean family shielded from aggression. When it comes to ensuring stability and security in the Asia Pacific and beyond, there is simply no substitute for American power. Only the United States has the global reach, the resources and the resolve to deter aggression, rally coalitions, and project stability into diverse and dynamic areas of danger, threat, and opportunity.
Now this is not 1912, when friction between a declining Britain and a rising Germany set the stage for global conflict. It’s 2012, and a strong America is welcoming new powers into an international system designed to prevent global conflict.
We have come through a long decade of war, terrorism, and recession. And these continue to be difficult days for many of our fellow Americans. But America still has the world’s largest economy with the most productive workers, the best universities, the most innovative companies. Our military is the finest in the history of the world, far outclassing any rival. There is no other nation that boasts a global network of alliances and partnerships that can project force on every continent and in every ocean.
And just as importantly, no other nation can bring disparate countries and people together around common goals. I see it when I travel across Asia and the world: American leadership is respected and required. Now yes, this is because of our military and our material might, but it’s more about our values and our commitment to fairness, justice, freedom, and democracy. Our record may not be perfect, but the United States consistently over history seeks to advance not just our own good, but the greater good. And this is part of what makes American leadership so exceptional. There is no real precedent in history for the role we play or the responsibility we have shouldered. And there is no alternative.
But our global leadership is not a birthright. It has been earned by each successive generation, staying true to our values and living up to the best traditions of our nation. In the years ahead, it will be up to you and your classmates to carry this important work forward.
One of the enduring memories of my own childhood is listening to my father talk about his service in the Navy during World War II. He was a chief petty officer, responsible for training thousands of new recruits at Great Lakes Naval Station outside of Chicago before they shipped out to sea, mostly to the Pacific theater. He never forgot how it felt to watch those young men get loaded onto troop trains heading for the West coast, knowing that many would never return home. He never lost his sense of duty or his belief in our exceptional country. And after he died, I received letters and photographs from so many of the sailors who he had trained and who had served with him. Even all those years later, they shared a deep and abiding faith in our nation and the work we must do in the world.
One day soon, you, too, will leave this place and board ships, submarines, and aircraft bound for distant seas. Some of you will sail the Atlantic, renewing old bonds and defending old friends. Others will head to the Pacific to face the challenges of a new time. Wherever you go, you will represent the pride and power of this great nation we cherish. And you will embody our hopes for a freer, more peaceful, and prosperous world.
But before you head out into that world, I think you need to make some more memories here at home. So with the approval of the superintendent and the commandant, I am pleased to grant an uncharged overnight for plebes and an uncharged weekend for upper class midshipmen. (Cheers and applause.)
Thank you. Thank you for your service to our country. Good luck and Godspeed. (Applause.)
Thursday, April 12, 2012
U.S.-CHINA COOPERATION ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 11, 2012
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 11, 2012
The United States and the People’s Republic of China held the 8th Joint Working Group Meeting of the U.S.-China Ten Year Framework (TYF) for Energy and Environment Cooperation April 9-10 in Washington, D.C. Dr. Kerri-Ann Jones, Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, and David Sandalow, Assistant Secretary of Energy for Policy and International Affairs, co-chaired the meetings on behalf of the United States. Vice Chairman Zhang Xiaoqiang from the Chinese National Development and Reform Commission led the Chinese delegation. The two sides assessed ongoing collaboration and exchanged views on emerging issues, including low-carbon sustainable communities.
Established in June 2008, the TYF facilitates the exchange of information and best practices to foster innovation and develop solutions to the pressing environment and energy challenges both countries face. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, and Chinese State Counselor Dai Bingguo participated in the July 2009 signing of the Memorandum of Understanding to Enhance Cooperation on Climate Change, Energy, and the Environment, which expanded the role of the TYF and established a new strategic dialogue on climate change.
Agencies in each country implement the TYF, which includes seven action plans: on protection of air, water, wetlands, nature reserves and protected areas, and transportation, electricity, and energy efficiency. In addition, public-private “EcoPartnerships” contribute to TYF goals. There are currently 15 EcoPartnerships between U.S. and Chinese organizations, with several new partnerships in the planning stages. The expansion of EcoPartnerships will encourage U.S. and Chinese stakeholders to build capacity and commitment to sustainable economic development at the local level.
U.S. agencies involved in the TYF include the Departments of State, Energy, Commerce, Interior, Transportation, and Agriculture, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Trade and Development Agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Participating agencies for China include the National Development and Reform Commission, the State Forestry Administration, the National Energy Administration, and the Ministries of Finance, Environmental Protection, Science and Technology, and Foreign Affairs.
PAKISTAN PARLIMENT APPROVES GUIDELINES FOR REVISED TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT WITH US/NATO/ISAF
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Pakistan Parliamentary Review
Press Statement Victoria Nuland
Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 12, 2012
We have seen that the Pakistani parliament has approved its “Guidelines for Revised Terms of Engagement with USA/NATO/ISAF and General Foreign Policy.” We respect the seriousness with which parliament’s review of U.S.-Pakistan relations has been conducted.
We seek a relationship with Pakistan that is enduring, strategic, and more clearly defined. We look forward to discussing these policy recommendations with the Government of Pakistan and continuing to engage with it on our shared interests.
SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON REMARKS AT END OF G-8 MINISTERIAL
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the Conclusion of the G-8 Ministerial
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Victoria Nuland
Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson Benjamin Franklin Room
Washington, DC
April 12, 2012
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, good afternoon, and welcome to the State Department, some of you back again, some for the first time. It has been a great honor and pleasure for me to host the G-8 foreign ministers here in Washington. We’ve just concluded a second day of productive meetings at Blair House.
This group of nations has extensive shared interests and responsibilities around the globe, so we discussed a range of issues that are of pressing concern. And while there was certainly frank debate about the details, we all affirmed our common commitment to confronting these challenges together and working in close consultation with one another. Let me briefly touch on some of the highlights, from Syria to North Korea to Iran and beyond.
First, the foreign ministers discussed the evolving situation in Syria. We welcomed Joint Special Envoy Kofi Annan’s report that the violence in Syria, at least for the moment, has abated. I also spoke separately about this at some length with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. If it holds, a ceasefire is an important step, but it represents just one element of the special envoy’s plan. As Kofi Annan reported, the Assad regime has, so far, failed to comply with key obligations. The regime’s troops and tanks have not pulled back from population centers. And it remains to be seen if the regime will keep its pledge to permit peaceful demonstrations, open access for humanitarian aid and journalists, and begin a political transition.
The Annan plan is not a menu of options. It is a set of obligations. The burden of fully and visibly meeting all of these obligations continues to rest with the regime. They cannot pick and choose. For it to be meaningful, this apparent halt in violence must lead to a credible political process and a peaceful, inclusive, democratic transition. The United States will be watching closely to see how things develop. We are particularly interested in seeing what the developments on the ground are, and we are in contact with members of the opposition. We remain firmly resolved that the regime’s war against its own people must end for good and a political transition must begin. Assad will have to go, and the Syrian people must be given the chance to chart their own future.
Given the Assad regime’s record of broken promises, we are proceeding, understandably, with caution. The ministers agreed to remain in close contact in the hours and days ahead. As we speak, our representatives in New York are consulting on a potential UN monitoring mission that would go to Syria under the right authorities, circumstances, and conditions. The United States supports sending an advance team immediately to begin this work. And both will need complete freedom of movement, unimpeded communications, and access throughout the country and to all Syrians, as well as firm security guarantees from all parties.
Now let me turn to North Korea. The G-8 ministers discussed our concerns that North Korea continues to prepare to launch a ballistic missile in violation of UN Security Council resolutions and its own national commitments. We urge the North Korean leadership to honor its agreements and refrain from pursuing a cycle of provocation. We all share an interest in fostering security and stability on the Korean Peninsula, and the best way to achieve that is for North Korea to live up to its word.
We also looked ahead to the P-5+1 talks with Iran, scheduled to take place in Istanbul this weekend. We continue to underscore that we hope these talks result in an environment that is conducive to a sustained process that delivers results. This is a chance for Iran to credibly address the concerns of the international community. Iran, in coming to the table, needs to demonstrate that they are serious.
A few other points to mention: We reviewed the outcomes of yesterday’s Quartet meeting and agreed this is a moment to focus on positive efforts, to build trust, and improve the climate between the parties.
We also discussed Africa and the Sahel, in particular how we can deepen our cooperation to prevent conflicts, to deal with the food security challenges, and protect and advance democracy. And we agreed on the importance of continuing the Deauville Partnership and supporting countries in the Middle East and North Africa working to transition to democracy, to improve governance, to create jobs, to expand trade and investment.
Finally, I spoke with many of my G-8 colleagues about the World Bank and our nominee, Dr. Jim Yong Kim. I have known Jim for some time. I know him to be a devoted public servant with a history of thinking big and taking bold actions. I believe he is an excellent choice, and I was delighted not only when the President nominated him but with the response that his nomination is receiving. And selfishly, of course, I was very happy that he named a World Bank president.
So as I’ve said, we’ve covered a lot of ground over the past two days. All of these discussions underscore a simple truth: Today’s complex challenges require continued leadership of the G-8 countries working together. I know that we laid the groundwork for a successful meeting when the G-8 leaders meet next month at Camp David. And now, I’d be happy to take your questions.
MS. NULAND: We’ll take three today. We’ll start with Scott Stearns of VOA. Thank you.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MS. NULAND: We’re going to start with Jill Dougherty of CNN. All right. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Since it’s Syria and you named Syria first, maybe we’ll start with that, Madam Secretary. You just mentioned now that you – that the United States supports this UN monitoring mission and supporting it immediately. So is that the next step? What do you think about the idea of a buffer zone or this idea of having NATO protect the border with Turkey?
And then also in kind of a broader sense, do you think that now, with the ceasefire holding, that it’s kind of taken the wind out of that move to do something stronger at the United Nations, at the Security Council? Could you also give us a little brief on what you discussed specifically with Sergey Lavrov?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Jill, I had good discussions with all of my colleagues about Syria, and I was encouraged that Foreign Minister Lavrov agreed with Kofi Annan that this fragile first step is only that – a first step. Sporadic fighting continues in parts of Syria, Assad has not complied with the six points of the Kofi Annan plan, his forces have not pulled back, and he has not taken any action on any of the other points.
So our first imperative is to test the commitment. And with that in mind, our teams are working in New York on a UN Security Council resolution that calls for Assad to fully comply with all points in the Annan plan and that supports Kofi Annan’s request to send a UN advance team to Syria immediately to prepare the way for a full, robust international monitoring mission. And let me be as clear as I can: That monitoring mission will only be a force for peace and security if it enjoys the full freedom of action within Syria. That means freedom of movement, secure communications, a large enough ground presence to bear witness to the enforcement of the six-point plan in every part of Syria.
And that’s a standard that we would expect of any UN monitoring mission. Foreign Minister Lavrov joined with the other G-8 ministers in welcoming the report of Kofi Annan and welcoming the beginning of the process that would lead to a monitoring mission by sending an advance team. So we are working together to try to enforce, in practical terms, the commitments that the Assad regime claims to have made.
Now, we have to maintain our pressure on the Assad regime to fully comply, so our sanctions and the sanctions of others who have imposed them must continue. Our support for the opposition has to continue because they have to be prepared to participate in a political transition process, and we’re going to continue to work in the Security Council and with like-minded nations as we move forward.
So I think we’re at a point, Jill, where we want to test what has been agreed upon but with our eyes wide open going forward.
MS. NULAND: Next question from Marco Mierke, German Press Agency, please.
QUESTION: Thank you very much, Madam Secretary. You said you talked about North Korea – discussed North Korea and your concerns regarding the possible imminent rocket launch. Since it’s only probably a couple hours away, did you already discuss any consequences that might follow such a launch?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. We discussed our concerns about the announced actions that the North Koreans may take in the next hours or days. We’ve made it abundantly clear, as have our other G-8 colleagues, that any missile launch would violate North Korea’s obligations under UN Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874. I think our Six-Party members and all the members of the G-8 are in agreement that we will have to be prepared to take additional steps if the North Koreans go ahead.
The text of UN Security Council Resolution 1874 couldn’t be clearer, and let me quote it because I think it’s important that you hear this. The Security Council, and I quote, “demands that the DPRK not conduct any further nuclear tests or any launch using ballistic missile technology.” And there is no doubt that this satellite would be launched using ballistic missile technology.
So Pyongyang has a clear choice: It can pursue peace and reap the benefits of closer ties with the international community, including the United States; or it can continue to face pressure and isolation. If Pyongyang goes forward, we will all be back in the Security Council to take further action. And it’s regrettable, because as you know, we had worked through an agreement that would have benefitted the North Korean people with the provision of food aid. But in the current atmosphere, we would not be able to go forward with that, and other actions that other countries had been considering would also be on hold.
MS. NULAND: Last question, Scott Stearns, VOA. Thanks.
QUESTION: Madam Secretary, on the last bit of Jill’s question, could you tell us whether you support
NATO protecting the border between Turkey and Syria?
For my question on Iran, please, Iran says it’s bringing new initiatives to these talks in Turkey. Are the P-5+1 bringing new initiatives to these talks? And from your talks with Foreign Minister Lavrov, do you believe that Russia shares your view that time is running out for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear issue?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, with respect to your first question, there is nothing of that nature pending and I’m not going to comment on hypotheticals.
Secondly, with respect to Iran, as the G-8 statement makes clear, we are united in our resolve and expectation that Iran will come to the talks prepared. And we are receiving signals that they are bringing ideas to the table. They assert that their program is purely peaceful. They point to a fatwa that the supreme leader has issued against the pursuit of nuclear weapons. We want them to demonstrate clearly in the actions they propose that they have truly abandoned any nuclear weapons ambition.
So I’m not going to get into the details of what we expect. We’ve worked very closely inside our own government and then with our P-5+1 colleagues. I’ve been in close touch with Cathy Ashton, who will be leading our efforts in Istanbul. But we’re looking for concrete results. And of course, in a negotiation we understand that the Iranians will be asking for assurances or actions from us, and we will certainly take those under consideration. But I do think it is clear to everyone, certainly in the P-5+1 but far beyond, that the diplomatic window for negotiations is open but will not remain open forever. And therefore time is a matter to be taken into account, so we want to get started this weekend. And we will certainly proceed in a very expeditious and diligent manner in a sustained way to determine whether there is the potential for an agreement.
Thank you all.
MS. NULAND: Thank you all very much.
CIVIL WAR SPEAKER INITIATES PENTAGON SPEAKER SERIES
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Civil War Historian Kicks Off Pentagon Speaker Series
By John Valceanu
WASHINGTON, April 12, 2012 - Lessons of U.S. Civil War history were brought to life in the Pentagon yesterday during the first of a series of historical presentations to be delivered to interested audiences in the U.S. military's headquarters.
Ethan Rafuse, professor of military history at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College on Fort Leavenworth, Kan., delivered a lecture in the Pentagon auditorium in which he focused on the first months of the Civil War. Rafuse is a recognized expert on the Civil War who has authored several books on various aspects of the conflict. The lecture was open to anyone in the Pentagon who wished to attend, and it was webcast live on the Pentagon Channel.
During his talk, Rafuse explored the ideas that drove strategy and tactics on both sides of the war. He showed how the war was part of a larger "sectional conflict," and he explained that it was interpreted by leaders on both sides as a "people's contest." He also discussed the "tripolarity of the struggle," in which he showed how combatants and supporters on both sides strove to sway unaligned populace to their cause.
Rafuse showed that U.S. Army Capt. Nathaniel Lyon's conventional victory over the pro-Confederate forces of the Missouri State Militia in May 1861 resulted in Missouri's alignment with Union forces. The professor explained how this then helped drive President Abraham Lincoln's advisors to push the idea of achieving a political result by scoring a quick conventional military victory over the Confederates.
The thought was that if the Union could defeat Confederate forces in a big battle, the South would lose the will to fight on, and the war could be concluded quickly. Unfortunately, the Union was unable to achieve that victory during First Manassas in July 1861, and the result was that war then raged and ravaged the country for another four years.
During his presentation, Rafuse explained that the study of history is critical for military personnel and defense strategists, and he quoted a variety of leaders who hold or held this view. These included Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Paul K. Van Riper; the late Army Gen. George S. Patton Jr., one of the great leaders of World War II; the late President Harry S. Truman, commander in chief at the end of World War II and for the Korean War; and Napoleon Bonaparte, a professional soldier who became leader of a nation.
Rafuse used a complicated presentation slide from the Afghanistan conflict to illustrate the complexities of war, and he drew attention to the similarities between the multidimensional, layered aspect of the current conflict and that of the civil war. Nevertheless, he cautioned against drawing simplistic analogies from history and applying them to current situations.
History doesn't repeat itself, "but there are echoes that can inform thinking about situations," Rafuse said. He also noted that those looking to learn from history have the challenge of "seeing the parallels that inform our thinking while also being sensitive to differences that also shape our thoughts."
In an interview with the Pentagon Channel conducted after the lecture, Rafuse said the value of history is "to broaden people's thinking – thinking about context, the breadth of events, the depth of events, the larger context in which they take place to develop critical thinking skills and the framework for dealing with problems in the future."
The speaker series is sponsored by a collaborative effort between the history offices of the secretary of defense, the Joint Staff and the military services.
"We plan to offer a presentation each month and cover a wide range of subjects related to military history," said Jon Hoffman, deputy chief historian in Office of the Secretary of Defense, in a blog post introducing the series.
"The concept for the series is simple—identify interesting and relevant historical topics and find a well-qualified and well-spoken historian to address them in a venue available to all personnel in the Pentagon (and hopefully well beyond)," Hoffman said in the blog.
"The presentations will serve as professional military education (in official lingo), promote historical awareness among those charged with developing and influencing national defense policy and strategy, and also honor those who have served before us in defending the nation," he said.
PHILANTHOPISTS PLEDGE $1 MILLION FOR UNDER SERVED ASIAN AMERICANS AND PACIFIC ISLANDERS
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Philanthropic Leaders Pledge $1 Million as Initial Investment in Public Private Partnerships for AAPI Community
White House Asian American Pacific Islander Initiative convenes historic National Philanthropic Briefing to address needs of underserved communities
APRIL 10, 2012
WASHINGTON – With newly released figures from the U.S. Census Bureau indicating that the Asian American population experienced a 43 percent increase and that of Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders experienced a 30 percent increase from 2000 to 2010, on April 2, 2012, the nation’s top foundations pledged an initial $1 million and the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders convened its first National Philanthropic Briefing to draw attention to this fastest growing racial group in the country.
Co-chair of the White House Initiative on AAPIs and Assistant to the President Chris Lu addressed the over 200 participants, including philanthropic leaders from more than 50 foundations. “This effort is historic in that it is the first time the White House is bringing together foundation leaders, federal officials and community experts to discuss the needs of this often-overlooked group.” He remarked, “We must work together to make sure that no community is invisible to its government.”
Embracing the collaborative spirit, the Ford Foundation, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Kresge Foundation together committed $1 million “to support follow up program planning for some of the outstanding ideas that emerged from the White House event that will improve the quality of life of AAPI communities,” said Ford Foundation President, Luis Ubiñas.
U.S. Department of Education Secretary and Co-chair of the White House Initiative on AAPIs Arne Duncanspoke about models of partnerships between foundations and federal agencies. “You and your organizations can help make the smart, strategic investments that will drive the transformational change we are talking about today.”
Participants learned about the White House Initiative’s unprecedented engagement with over 25,000 AAPI community members across the country. They brainstormed with Administration officials and foundation leaders on ideas for partnerships – from building community capacity to improving language access, to tackling significant disparities among Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders and Southeast Asian Americans, to combating discrimination and bullying and harassment of LGBT, South Asian and Muslim communities.
Moving forward, as W.K. Kellogg Foundation Vice President - Program Strategy Dr. Gail Christopherunderscored “will require both philanthropic and governmental organizations to evaluate their strategic plans to ensure that the critical needs of these marginalized communities are addressed.”
Reflecting on this important effort, Kresge Foundation President Rip Rapson observed that this “momentous conversation between federal and philanthropic leaders addressing the critical needs of the AAPI community marks the beginning of what we hope is a long and productive partnership.”
President Obama signed an executive order in October 2009 reestablishing the White House Initiative to improve the lives of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders underserved by federal resources.
Philanthropic Leaders Pledge $1 Million as Initial Investment in Public Private Partnerships for AAPI Community
White House Asian American Pacific Islander Initiative convenes historic National Philanthropic Briefing to address needs of underserved communities
APRIL 10, 2012
WASHINGTON – With newly released figures from the U.S. Census Bureau indicating that the Asian American population experienced a 43 percent increase and that of Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders experienced a 30 percent increase from 2000 to 2010, on April 2, 2012, the nation’s top foundations pledged an initial $1 million and the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders convened its first National Philanthropic Briefing to draw attention to this fastest growing racial group in the country.
Co-chair of the White House Initiative on AAPIs and Assistant to the President Chris Lu addressed the over 200 participants, including philanthropic leaders from more than 50 foundations. “This effort is historic in that it is the first time the White House is bringing together foundation leaders, federal officials and community experts to discuss the needs of this often-overlooked group.” He remarked, “We must work together to make sure that no community is invisible to its government.”
Embracing the collaborative spirit, the Ford Foundation, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Kresge Foundation together committed $1 million “to support follow up program planning for some of the outstanding ideas that emerged from the White House event that will improve the quality of life of AAPI communities,” said Ford Foundation President, Luis Ubiñas.
U.S. Department of Education Secretary and Co-chair of the White House Initiative on AAPIs Arne Duncanspoke about models of partnerships between foundations and federal agencies. “You and your organizations can help make the smart, strategic investments that will drive the transformational change we are talking about today.”
Participants learned about the White House Initiative’s unprecedented engagement with over 25,000 AAPI community members across the country. They brainstormed with Administration officials and foundation leaders on ideas for partnerships – from building community capacity to improving language access, to tackling significant disparities among Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders and Southeast Asian Americans, to combating discrimination and bullying and harassment of LGBT, South Asian and Muslim communities.
Moving forward, as W.K. Kellogg Foundation Vice President - Program Strategy Dr. Gail Christopherunderscored “will require both philanthropic and governmental organizations to evaluate their strategic plans to ensure that the critical needs of these marginalized communities are addressed.”
Reflecting on this important effort, Kresge Foundation President Rip Rapson observed that this “momentous conversation between federal and philanthropic leaders addressing the critical needs of the AAPI community marks the beginning of what we hope is a long and productive partnership.”
President Obama signed an executive order in October 2009 reestablishing the White House Initiative to improve the lives of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders underserved by federal resources.
U.S. EXPORTS OVER $181 BILLION IN FEBRUARY
FROM: U.S. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK
U.S. Exports Hit More Than $181.2 Billion in February
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The United States exported $181.2 billion in goods and services in February 2012, according to data released today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Commerce Department. Exports of goods and services over the last twelve months totaled $2.134 trillion, which is 35.46 percent above the level of exports in 2009. Over the last twelve months, exports have been growing at an annualized rate of 15.04 percent when compared to 2009, a pace slightly greater than the 15 percent required to double exports by 2015.
“Exports are more important to America than ever, and I am pleased that we are on track to meet President Obama’s goal of doubling U.S. exports by 2015,” said Fred P. Hochberg, chairman and president of the Export-Import Bank of the United States.
Over the last twelve months, the major export markets with the largest annualized increase in U.S. goods purchases were Panama (39.1 percent), Turkey (37.0 percent), Honduras (32.1 percent), Argentina (31.0 percent), Chile (30.8 percent), Hong Kong (30.2 percent), Peru (28.1 percent), Russia (26.2 percent), Brazil (25.9 percent), and Guatemala (24.2 percent).
ABOUT EX-IM BANK
Ex-Im Bank is an independent federal agency that helps create and maintain U.S. jobs by filling gaps in private export financing at no cost to American taxpayers. In the past five years, Ex-Im Bank has earned for U.S. taxpayers $1.9 billion above the cost of operations. The Bank provides a variety of financing mechanisms, including working capital guarantees, export-credit insurance and financing to help foreign buyers purchase U.S. goods and services.
Ex-Im Bank approved $32.7 billion in total authorizations in FY 2011 -- an all-time Ex-Im record. This total includes more than $6 billion directly supporting small-business export sales -- also an Ex-Im record. Ex-Im Bank's total authorizations are supporting an estimated $41 billion in U.S. export sales and approximately 290,000 American jobs in communities across the country.
VIET NAM VETERANS: A BELATED "WELCOME HOME"
A Long Overdue Welcome for Vietnam Veterans
March 15, 2012 by Alex Horton
It has been more than three decades since my uncle came home from his tour in Vietnam, but he wore the battle on his face for many years. Even when I was little, I understood the man in my family who walked jungle trails as a Marine grunt was different from my other relatives. He didn’t talk about his experiences much, to the detriment of our family and our history.
My uncle’s story is hardly unique among Vietnam Veterans, and the less than welcoming reception from the public played a role in how comfortable many were in speaking about his experiences. As the Marine Corps blog noted, Vietnam Veterans never received a welcome fit for their honor and sacrifice.
Last year, the Senate recognized March 30 as “Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day” to right the wrongs of our past. State and local governments are holding their own events in a long overdue motion of support.
This year, the USO of North Carolina is organizing an event at the Charlotte Motor Speedway on March 31 to thank Vietnam Veterans. Live entertainment will be on hand, but more importantly, VA will have mobile sites set up to help Veterans sign up for health care and benefits. Veteran Service Organizations will also be on hand to explain the services and support they offer.
If you’re interested in attending the free event, check out this page for more information, contact phone numbers, and information on how to get tickets. And don’t forget to bring a DD-214!
Veterans are still coming home long after the last shot in Vietnam was fired. Men and women like my uncle didn’t have the homecoming they deserved, so it’s up to every community to welcome home our Vietnam Vets any way they can.
NEW DEADLINE SET FOR DEFENSE LAWYERS IN USS COLE CASE
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Judge Sets New Deadline for Nashiri Defense Team
By Jim Garamone
WASHINGTON, April 12, 2012 - A military judge has given defense lawyers an extension to May 1 to provide a theory of the case in the United States vs. Abd al-Rahim Hussein Mohammed Abdu al-Nashiri.
Army Col. James Pohl, the trial judge in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, originally set a deadline of April 17.
Nashiri is the alleged mastermind of the terror attack on the USS Cole in October 2000 in the Aden, Yemen, harbor that killed 17 sailors and wounded 39 others.
Defense attorneys asked for a 90-day extension, saying they didn't have time to properly read and evaluate more than 70,000 pages of data by April 17. The government provided the data – both classified and unclassified – to the defense under the rules of the Military Commissions Act.
Defense attorney Navy Cmdr. Stephen Reyes said the effort was delayed for two weeks when classified information was found in the unclassified data.
Pohl gave the defense two extra weeks to submit their theory of the case to him. Submitting the theory of the case is not a required step, but it would be in the interest of the defendant to do so, officials explained. If the defense fails to present the theory by the deadline, the case can still continue.
The judge granted a defense motion to get information from the Yemeni government and denied another that would have required the government to include irrelevant information in discovery documents.
Finally, the judge ordered the defense team to submit a written response on allowing defense counsel Michel Paradis to remain on the case. He set a deadline of May 14 for that response.
EPA ON BEST CITIES WITH STAR BUILDINGS
FROM: U.S. EPA
EPA Releases List of Cities with the Most Energy Star Buildings in the United States
Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco rank in top five, cutting energy costs while increasing efficiency, protecting health, reducing pollution
WASHINGTON – Today the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the annual list of U.S. metropolitan areas with the most Energy Star certified buildings for 2011. The list of 25 cities is headed by Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco, New York, Houston, Dallas, Riverside, Calif. and Boston. By the end of 2011, the nearly 16,500 Energy Star certified buildings across America have helped save nearly $2.3 billion in annual utility bills and prevent greenhouse gas emissions equal to emissions from the annual energy use of more than 1.5 million homes.
"More and more organizations are discovering the value of Energy Star as they work to cut costs and reduce their energy use," said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. "This year marked the twentieth anniversary of the Energy Star program, and today Energy Star certified buildings in cities across America are helping to strengthen local economies and protect the planet for decades to come."
First released in 2008, the list of cities with the most Energy Star certified buildings continues to show how cities across America, with help from Energy Star, are embracing energy efficiency as a simple and effective way to save money and prevent pollution. Los Angeles has remained the top city since 2008, while Washington, D.C. continues to hold onto second place for the third year in a row. Atlanta moved up from the number six spot in 2010 to third place this year and Boston and Riverside broke into the top ten. Tampa, Fla., Colorado Springs, Colo. and Salt Lake City all are new to the list in 2011. California has six cities on the 2011 list—more than any other state.
Energy use in commercial buildings accounts for nearly 20 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions at a cost of more than $100 billion per year. Commercial buildings that earn EPA’s Energy Star must perform in the top 25 percent of similar buildings nationwide and must be independently verified by a licensed professional engineer or a registered architect. Energy Star certified buildings use an average of 35 percent less energy and are responsible for 35 percent less carbon dioxide emissions than typical buildings. Fifteen types of commercial buildings can earn the Energy Star, including office buildings, K-12 schools, and retail stores.
Launched in 1992 by EPA, Energy Star is a market-based partnership to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency. This year marks Energy Star's 20th anniversary. Over the past 20 years, with help from Energy Star, American families and businesses have saved about $230 billion on utility bills and prevented more than 1.7 billion metric tons of carbon pollution. Today, the Energy Star label can be found on more than 60 different kinds of products and more than 1.3 million new homes.
SEC CHARGES GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO. IN "RESEARCH HUDDLES" CASEE
FROM: SEC
SEC Charges Goldman, Sachs & Co. Lacked Adequate Policies and Procedures for Research “Huddles”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2012-61
Washington, D.C., April 12, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged that Goldman, Sachs & Co. lacked adequate policies and procedures to address the risk that during weekly “huddles,” the firm’s analysts could share material, nonpublic information about upcoming research changes. Huddles were a practice where Goldman’s stock research analysts met to provide their best trading ideas to firm traders and later passed them on to a select group of top clients.
Goldman agreed to settle the charges and will pay a $22 million penalty. Goldman also agreed to be censured, to be subject to a cease-and-desist order, and to review and revise its written policies and procedures to correct the deficiencies identified by the SEC. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) also announced today a settlement with Goldman for supervisory and other failures related to the huddles.
“Higher-risk trading and business strategies require higher-order controls,” said Robert S. Khuzami, Director of the Commission’s Division of Enforcement. “Despite being on notice from the SEC about the importance of such controls, Goldman failed to implement policies and procedures that adequately controlled the risk that research analysts could preview upcoming ratings changes with select traders and clients.”
The SEC in an administrative proceeding found that from 2006 to 2011, Goldman held weekly huddles sometimes attended by sales personnel in which analysts discussed their top short-term trading ideas and traders discussed their views on the markets. In 2007, Goldman began a program known as the Asymmetric Service Initiative (ASI) in which analysts shared information and trading ideas from the huddles with select clients.
According to the SEC’s order, the programs created a serious risk that Goldman’s analysts could share material, nonpublic information about upcoming changes to their published research with ASI clients and the firm’s traders. The SEC found these risks were increased by the fact that many of the clients and traders engaged in frequent, high-volume trading. Despite those risks, Goldman failed to establish adequate policies or adequately enforce and maintain its existing policies to prevent the misuse of material, nonpublic information about upcoming changes to its research. Goldman’s surveillance of trading ahead of research changes — both in connection with huddles and otherwise — was deficient.
“Firms must understand that they cannot develop new programs and services without evaluating their policies and procedures,” said Antonia Chion, Associate Director in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.
In 2003, Goldman paid a $5 million penalty and more than $4.3 million in disgorgement and interest to settle SEC charges that, among other violations, it violated Section 15(f) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by failing to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent the misuse of material, nonpublic information obtained from outside consultants about U.S. Treasury 30-year bonds. The 2003 order found that although Goldman had policies and procedures regarding the use of confidential information, its policies and procedures should have identified specifically the potential for receiving material, nonpublic information from outside consultants. Goldman settled the SEC’s 2003 proceeding without admitting or denying the findings.
The order issued today finds that Goldman willfully violated Section 15(g) of the Exchange Act (formerly Section 15(f)). The SEC censured the firm and ordered it to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 15(g) of the Exchange Act. Under the terms of the settlement, Goldman will pay a $22 million penalty, $11 million of which shall be deemed satisfied upon payment by Goldman of an $11 million penalty to FINRA in a related proceeding. The SEC considers a variety of factors, including prior enforcement actions, when determining sanctions.
In addition, Goldman agreed to complete a comprehensive review of the policies, procedures, and practices relating to the SEC’s findings in the order, and to adopt, implement, and maintain practices and written policies and procedures consistent with the findings of the order and the recommendations in the comprehensive review. In June 2011, Goldman entered into a consent order relating to the huddles and ASI with the Massachusetts Securities Division (Docket No. 2009-079). In the SEC’s action, Goldman admits to the factual findings to the extent those findings are also contained in Section V of the Massachusetts Consent Order, but otherwise neither admits nor denies the SEC’s findings.
Stacy Bogert, Drew Dorman, Dmitry Lukovsky, Alexander Koch, and Yuri Zelinsky in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement conducted the investigation.
The SEC thanks FINRA for its assistance in this matter.
SEC Charges Goldman, Sachs & Co. Lacked Adequate Policies and Procedures for Research “Huddles”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2012-61
Washington, D.C., April 12, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged that Goldman, Sachs & Co. lacked adequate policies and procedures to address the risk that during weekly “huddles,” the firm’s analysts could share material, nonpublic information about upcoming research changes. Huddles were a practice where Goldman’s stock research analysts met to provide their best trading ideas to firm traders and later passed them on to a select group of top clients.
Goldman agreed to settle the charges and will pay a $22 million penalty. Goldman also agreed to be censured, to be subject to a cease-and-desist order, and to review and revise its written policies and procedures to correct the deficiencies identified by the SEC. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) also announced today a settlement with Goldman for supervisory and other failures related to the huddles.
“Higher-risk trading and business strategies require higher-order controls,” said Robert S. Khuzami, Director of the Commission’s Division of Enforcement. “Despite being on notice from the SEC about the importance of such controls, Goldman failed to implement policies and procedures that adequately controlled the risk that research analysts could preview upcoming ratings changes with select traders and clients.”
The SEC in an administrative proceeding found that from 2006 to 2011, Goldman held weekly huddles sometimes attended by sales personnel in which analysts discussed their top short-term trading ideas and traders discussed their views on the markets. In 2007, Goldman began a program known as the Asymmetric Service Initiative (ASI) in which analysts shared information and trading ideas from the huddles with select clients.
According to the SEC’s order, the programs created a serious risk that Goldman’s analysts could share material, nonpublic information about upcoming changes to their published research with ASI clients and the firm’s traders. The SEC found these risks were increased by the fact that many of the clients and traders engaged in frequent, high-volume trading. Despite those risks, Goldman failed to establish adequate policies or adequately enforce and maintain its existing policies to prevent the misuse of material, nonpublic information about upcoming changes to its research. Goldman’s surveillance of trading ahead of research changes — both in connection with huddles and otherwise — was deficient.
“Firms must understand that they cannot develop new programs and services without evaluating their policies and procedures,” said Antonia Chion, Associate Director in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.
In 2003, Goldman paid a $5 million penalty and more than $4.3 million in disgorgement and interest to settle SEC charges that, among other violations, it violated Section 15(f) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by failing to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent the misuse of material, nonpublic information obtained from outside consultants about U.S. Treasury 30-year bonds. The 2003 order found that although Goldman had policies and procedures regarding the use of confidential information, its policies and procedures should have identified specifically the potential for receiving material, nonpublic information from outside consultants. Goldman settled the SEC’s 2003 proceeding without admitting or denying the findings.
The order issued today finds that Goldman willfully violated Section 15(g) of the Exchange Act (formerly Section 15(f)). The SEC censured the firm and ordered it to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 15(g) of the Exchange Act. Under the terms of the settlement, Goldman will pay a $22 million penalty, $11 million of which shall be deemed satisfied upon payment by Goldman of an $11 million penalty to FINRA in a related proceeding. The SEC considers a variety of factors, including prior enforcement actions, when determining sanctions.
In addition, Goldman agreed to complete a comprehensive review of the policies, procedures, and practices relating to the SEC’s findings in the order, and to adopt, implement, and maintain practices and written policies and procedures consistent with the findings of the order and the recommendations in the comprehensive review. In June 2011, Goldman entered into a consent order relating to the huddles and ASI with the Massachusetts Securities Division (Docket No. 2009-079). In the SEC’s action, Goldman admits to the factual findings to the extent those findings are also contained in Section V of the Massachusetts Consent Order, but otherwise neither admits nor denies the SEC’s findings.
Stacy Bogert, Drew Dorman, Dmitry Lukovsky, Alexander Koch, and Yuri Zelinsky in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement conducted the investigation.
The SEC thanks FINRA for its assistance in this matter.
SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON ADDRESSES G-8 MEETING REGARDING SYRIA
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the G-8 Plenary Session
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Blair House
Washington, DC
April 11, 2012
Well, once again, welcome to the historic Blair House here in Washington. I greatly appreciate this opportunity to discuss in person the many global issues that require joint leadership from the G-8 nations. The events of this past year, even of just this past week, affirm the continued need for comprehensive international cooperation, and the G-8 is an essential forum for that.
We are alarmed for the ongoing violence in Syria, and we are concerned about the problems facing Special Envoy Kofi Annan as he attempts to bring about a ceasefire and the end to violence. We are very watchful of this. This will be on our agenda later this afternoon. We will look for ways that we can, together, try to bring about a peaceful resolution of the current situation and a political transition for the sake of the Syrian people.
We also look forward to the beginning of the next round of P-5+1 talks in Turkey. These talks are an opportunity for Iran to address seriously the international community’s concerns about its nuclear program. And we believe there is still time for diplomacy, but it is urgent that the Iranians come to the table to establish an environment conducive to achieving concrete results through a sustained process.
And further to the east, North Korea is readying a long-range ballistic missile launch over the East China Sea. It comes just weeks after North Korea agreed to a moratorium on missile testing; it violates multiple UN Security Council resolutions. I think we all share a strong interest in stability on the Korean Peninsula, and we will be discussing how best to achieve that as well.
Earlier today, our Quartet colleagues – which includes the United Nations, represented by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon; the European Union, represented by High Representative Cathy Ashton; the Russian Federation, represented by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov; and the United States, represented by myself and our special envoys – met to review the situation in the Middle East. Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh briefed on Jordan’s recent engagement. The Quartet underscored its support for Jordan’s positive efforts. We remain committed to the goals that we outlined in New York last September. We agreed on the importance of continued financial international support for the Palestinian Authority, including the need for $1.1 billion in immediate assistance.
And finally, we have begun discussing some of the transnational issues – terrorism, piracy, food security – that affect so many millions of people throughout the world. We are also going to be discussing our shared framework to support the democratic transitions and promote sustainable and inclusive economic growth through the Deauville Partnership in the Middle East and North Africa.
So there’s a lot for us to discuss, and we have a full agenda ahead of us in preparation for the leaders meeting at Camp David next month. So again, I welcome my colleagues and look forward to our work together. Thank you all.
Remarks at the G-8 Plenary Session
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Blair House
Washington, DC
April 11, 2012
Well, once again, welcome to the historic Blair House here in Washington. I greatly appreciate this opportunity to discuss in person the many global issues that require joint leadership from the G-8 nations. The events of this past year, even of just this past week, affirm the continued need for comprehensive international cooperation, and the G-8 is an essential forum for that.
We are alarmed for the ongoing violence in Syria, and we are concerned about the problems facing Special Envoy Kofi Annan as he attempts to bring about a ceasefire and the end to violence. We are very watchful of this. This will be on our agenda later this afternoon. We will look for ways that we can, together, try to bring about a peaceful resolution of the current situation and a political transition for the sake of the Syrian people.
We also look forward to the beginning of the next round of P-5+1 talks in Turkey. These talks are an opportunity for Iran to address seriously the international community’s concerns about its nuclear program. And we believe there is still time for diplomacy, but it is urgent that the Iranians come to the table to establish an environment conducive to achieving concrete results through a sustained process.
And further to the east, North Korea is readying a long-range ballistic missile launch over the East China Sea. It comes just weeks after North Korea agreed to a moratorium on missile testing; it violates multiple UN Security Council resolutions. I think we all share a strong interest in stability on the Korean Peninsula, and we will be discussing how best to achieve that as well.
Earlier today, our Quartet colleagues – which includes the United Nations, represented by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon; the European Union, represented by High Representative Cathy Ashton; the Russian Federation, represented by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov; and the United States, represented by myself and our special envoys – met to review the situation in the Middle East. Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh briefed on Jordan’s recent engagement. The Quartet underscored its support for Jordan’s positive efforts. We remain committed to the goals that we outlined in New York last September. We agreed on the importance of continued financial international support for the Palestinian Authority, including the need for $1.1 billion in immediate assistance.
And finally, we have begun discussing some of the transnational issues – terrorism, piracy, food security – that affect so many millions of people throughout the world. We are also going to be discussing our shared framework to support the democratic transitions and promote sustainable and inclusive economic growth through the Deauville Partnership in the Middle East and North Africa.
So there’s a lot for us to discuss, and we have a full agenda ahead of us in preparation for the leaders meeting at Camp David next month. So again, I welcome my colleagues and look forward to our work together. Thank you all.
DR. JILL BIDEN ON MILITARY FAMILY SUPPORT
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Dr. Jill Biden, wife of Vice President Joe Biden, speaks about the value of military family support during a roundtable discussion at the Pentagon, April 10, 2012. The roundtable included Deanie Dempsey, wife of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, and honored the winners of the Joining Forces Community Challenge, which is an effort to recognize and celebrate the extraordinary military family support efforts of citizens and organizations across the country. DOD photo by Elaine Sanchez
Dr. Biden, Mrs. Dempsey Salute 'Challenge' Winners
By Elaine Sanchez
WASHINGTON, April 11, 2012 - Leading up to a White House celebration today, two of the nation's top wives personally thanked a group of individuals and organization leaders for their efforts to improve military families' lives at the Pentagon yesterday.
Dr. Jill Biden, wife of Vice President Joe Biden, and Deanie Dempsey, wife of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, honored the winners of the Joining Forces Community Challenge during a roundtable discussion.
The Community Challenge, part of the Joining Forces campaign, is intended to recognize and celebrate the extraordinary military family support efforts of citizens and organizations across the country. First Lady Michelle Obama and Biden launched Joining Forces one year ago today to rally Americans around troops, veterans and their families, and announced the Challenge in July to capture the innovative ways people have chosen to support and honor them.
"What you're doing is so amazing," Biden told the group, which had just wrapped up a Pentagon tour. "This is a dream come true that you're out there helping military families."
USO President Sloan D. Gibson, who served as roundtable moderator, invited representatives from each of the six groups to explain their organizations' accomplishments and what spurred them to action. The winners range from a community that ensures families of deployed Guard members have a vast array of support, to a group that offers outdoor retreats to military spouses, to an organization of mental health professionals that volunteers their time, free of charge, to military families.
Whatever the service or support they provide, all embody the spirit of the Joining Forces campaign, Biden said, as they step up to serve and honor troops and their families. "Joining Forces is all about calling on people all across the country to lend a hand," she said.
Biden and Dempsey both passed on their personal gratitude for the groups' efforts. The Bidens' son, Beau Biden, is a captain in the Army National Guard who served a one-year deployment in Iraq, and Dempsey is a military wife and a military mom. Her husband commissioned all three of their children, she said, and their daughter is married to a captain in the Special Forces.
"What you do for all military families, you also do for the Dempsey family," the chairman's wife said. "From a personal standpoint, thank you from the bottom of my heart."
The Joining Forces Community Challenge winners are:
-- Armed Forces Service Center, St. Paul, Minn. The service center is a 24/7 "all free" lounge staffed by volunteers at the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport for active-duty military personnel, their families, activated reservists and National Guardsmen and other members of the uniformed services.
-- Defending the Blue Line, Hastings, Minn. This organization works to ensure that children of military members have access to participate in hockey through free equipment, hockey camps, special events and financial assistance toward association and other hockey-related costs.
-- Give an Hour, Bethesda, Md. Founded by Washington, D.C.-based psychologist Barbara Van Dahlen, this organization is dedicated to meeting the mental health needs of military personnel, their families, and the communities affected by the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to counseling, providers also consult to schools, first responders, employers, and community organizations. Give an Hour has provided nearly 50,000 hours of free service, valued at roughly $5 million.
-- Project Sanctuary, Parker, Colo. This organization brings military families together in the Rocky Mountains after deployments to help them reconnect through recreational activities and therapy. Follow-up support beyond the retreat is also provided, and includes support to families with housing, job placement and veterans' assistance.
-- City of Richfield, Utah. The city has supported its local Army National Guard unit through four deployments since Sept. 11, 2001. Additionally, Richfield provides several programs and services for military families, including a city utility abatement program and distribution of the city's newspaper to deployed soldiers so they can stay in touch with the community.
-- Our Family for Families First Foundation, East Greenwich, R.I. This foundation, chosen by the public as the Challenge's "People's Choice Winner," supports military families pursuing higher education by supporting military children through scholarships and military spouses through grants and assistance identifying educational opportunities.
Other than the People's Choice award, the Challenge winners were selected with input from a panel of judges that included news correspondent and author Tom Brokaw; J.R. Martinez, an Iraq war veteran, motivational speaker and "Dancing With the Stars" winner; San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro; Deanie Dempsey; and Gibson.
At the roundtable, Gibson ticked off the reasons he believes these groups deserve this national honor. They're having a positive impact on military families' lives, are building stronger bonds between military families and their communities, and are inspiring others to bring the same "passion and obvious care and concern" to military family support, he said.
All 20 Challenge finalists will be honored at today's White House event, which also marks the one-year anniversary of Joining Forces.
INCREASE MILITARY ATTACKS BETWEEN SUDAN AND SOUTH SUDAN
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
On the Increased Military Attacks Between Sudan and South Sudan
Press Statement Victoria Nuland
Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 11, 2012
The United States is deeply disturbed by the escalating hostilities between Sudan and South Sudan and condemns offensive military action by either side. We condemn South Sudan’s military involvement in the attack on and seizure of Heglig, an act which goes beyond self-defense and has increased tensions between Sudan and South Sudan to dangerous levels. We also condemn the continued aerial bombardment in South Sudan by the Sudanese Armed Forces. Both governments must agree to an immediate unconditional cessation of hostilities, withdraw all forces that are deployed across the January 1, 1956 border as recognized by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005, and cease all support to armed movements from the other state.
It is critical that both sides avoid unilateral offensive actions and that Sudanese and South Sudanese leadership exercise maximum restraint. We urge both parties to activate without delay the Joint Border Verification and Monitoring Mechanism through UN Security Council Resolution 2024, authorizing the United Nations Interim Security for Abyei to assist Sudan and South Sudan with investigations and monitoring along the Sudan-South Sudan border.
The continued violence in Southern Kordofan, Blue Nile, and along the border, as well as the continued deployment of Sudan Armed Forces and South Sudan Police Services in Abyei, undermines the progress made through the African Union High-Level Implementation Panel (AUHIP)-facilitated talks toward the creation of two viable states and weakens the prospects of reaching agreements on security, border, nationality, and oil issues. We urge both countries to return without delay to the negotiating table under the auspices of the AUHIP and use peaceful means, not military action, to resolve outstanding issues. We further urge the heads of state of both countries to meet in a summit as previously planned in order to advance negotiations on the issues that stand in the way of achieving true peace.
WHITE HOUSE ON HIGHER TAXES FOR THE RICH
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
The Buffett Rule Asks the Wealthiest to Pay Their Fair Share
Megan Slack April 10, 2012
Nearly one-quarter of all millionaires (about 55,000 individuals) pay a lower tax rate than millions of middle-class families. Warren Buffett has famously said that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary, and he agrees that isn’t fair. To reform our tax system, which is currently tilted in favor of very high-income households, President Obama has proposed a basic principle of tax fairness called the Buffett Rule.
And, using the average tax rate to tell the story actually, like in the chart above, masks the fact that some high-income Americans pay extraordinarily low tax rates. A full 22,000 households that made more than $1 million in 2009 paid less than 15 percent of their income in income taxes. And the top 400 richest Americans—all making over $110 million a year—paid an average of 18 percent of their income in income taxes in 2008, but one in three of them paid less than 15 percent.
It is these high-income taxpayers that the Buffett Rule is meant to address by limiting the degree to which they can take advantage of loopholes and tax expenditures. For middle class families making less than $250,000 a year—families for whom tax rates have barely budged in the last 50 years—taxes should not go up.
WISCONSIN NATIONAL GUARD REMEMBER PRISONERS OF WAR
NEWS: Wisconsin National Guard members march in memory of POWs
Date: April 9, 2012
Wisconsin National Guard Public Affairs Office
Twenty members of the Wisconsin Army National Guard's 157th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade headquarters and 32nd Military Police Company - joined by dozens of service members from the U.S, Poland and Ukraine - recently honored the victims of the Bataan Death March by walking in their footsteps, as it were, in a memorial endurance event in Kosovo.
Chief Warrant Officer 2 Christopher Hudson, a Wisconsin National Guard member assigned to Task Force Falcon, played a key role organizing the 13.1-mile march at Camp Bondsteel on March 26, complete with gravel, paved roads and large hills. He also took part in the heavy category which required participants to carry at least 35 pounds on their backs.
"Participating in the Bataan Memorial March was a fitting way to pay tribute to all the heroic service members who made the ultimate sacrifice defending the Philippine Islands during World War II," Hudson said. "All those who entered and took part did so out of sheer preservation and determination - not unlike the Soldiers who marched in the actual Bataan Death March."
Ninety-nine members of the Janesville-based Company A, 192nd Tank Battalion, Wisconsin National Guard, fiercely defended the Bataan peninsula in the Philippines for more than three months alongside fellow American and Filipino forces, until disease, lack of supplies and hunger compelled their surrender to the Imperial Japanese Army seven decades ago today (April 9).
The Janesville Soldiers who served in one of two National Guard tank battalions - comprised of companies from Illinois, Kentucky, Ohio, Minnesota, Missouri - deployed to the Philippines shortly after the United States entered World War II. Approximately 76,000 prisoners endured the harrowing "Bataan Death March," an 80-mile forced trek to Balanga, the capital of Bataan. Prisoners of war who did not die of exhaustion, wounds or illness were stabbed, beaten or killed along the way - between 5,000 and 10,000 Filipinos and as many as 650 Americans before reaching Camp O'Donnell, where the death toll continued to mount. Only one third of the Janesville unit survived until their liberation three years later.
Wisconsin honors the service and hardship of these and other prisoners of war every April 9, designated since 2001 asPrisoner of War Remembrance Day.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LEON PANETTA MEETS WITH AFGHAN OFFICIALS
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, right, escorts Afghan Defense Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak, center, and Afghan Interior Minister Gen. Bismullah Muhammadi Khan to a meeting at the Pentagon, April 10, 2012. DOD photo by Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo
Panetta Meets Afghan Defense, Interior Ministers at Pentagon
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, April 10, 2012 - The goal of a sovereign, secure Afghanistan is in sight, Afghan Defense Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak said here today at the beginning of the Afghanistan Security Consultation Forum.
Wardak and Afghan Interior Minister Bishmullah Muhammadi Khan held a two-hour meeting in Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta's Pentagon office. They discussed the status of Afghan forces, plans for training those forces and issues that will be discussed at the NATO summit in Chicago next month.
Panetta congratulated both Afghan leaders for the progress the military and police are making. "I have often stated that I believe 2011 was a turning point, that we suddenly were able to see that the Afghan army and police developed the capabilities to provide security and have developed capabilities to implement the kind of operations that are necessary to providing security," he said.
Strong Afghan military and police forces are needed to make the transition to local security lead, he said.
The secretary also spoke about the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Afghanistan on special operations signed April 8. "The fact that we were able to achieve an agreement, I think, was a very important step forward to ensure that we will make the transition to Afghan operations, but we will do it in a responsible and effective way," Panetta said. "I thank both of you for the leadership that you've provided in being able to achieve those very important agreements."
The forum looked at the future of the Afghan national security forces, the levels that they will surge to and the levels the nation will need for the long run, Panetta said.
"I look forward to discussing our strategic partnership and our ability to arrive at a strategic partnership agreement, which will again be another important step forward in our relationship, and also the regional security challenges that we will have to continue to confront in order to ultimately have a sovereign Afghanistan that can in fact be secure and govern itself," he said.
Wardak thanked the United States for its "sterling contribution" to Afghanistan. "And we are not an ungrateful nation," he said. "We fully recognize your generosity. We acknowledge and honor your sacrifices. We pay tribute to all those brave souls that have paid the ultimate price for the mission in Afghanistan, and we pray for the families of the fallen and wounded."
Afghanistan is at a critical juncture, Wardak said. "But after the years of struggle, tomorrow's goal is in sight," he said. "The costs have been high and the stakes even higher, but the good news is that the hope has been replaced by the real progress, though it has been dearly bought."
Continued U.S. support and cooperation will remain vital for the Afghan forces to transition to the security lead in the years ahead, he said.
"No one should have any doubt on our firm determination to succeed," the defense minister said. "It's a question of our national survival. And we do not wish to be a burden on the U.S. or the rest of the international community more than it is required."
"We assure you that we will spare no effort and sacrifices to ensure the inevitability of our victory in this joint endeavor," Wardak said.
The interior minister also expressed his gratitude for "all of the sacrifices, lost lives and treasures of this country that have been sacrificed for our mutual goals for the survival of our nation in Afghanistan."
In the past decade, coalition and Afghan forces have had many successes and many accomplishments, Muhammadi said through a translator. "We have seen many victories in southern Afghanistan, in eastern Afghanistan, in all of Afghanistan," he said, adding that the visit comes during "a time of destiny" as Afghanistan goes through a transitional process.
By this time next year, the transition process shifting responsibility from the coalition to Afghan security forces will be well under way, Muhammadi said. "I am certain that these face-to-face meetings that we have in this framework of the security consultation forum will pave the way for a successful conference in Chicago," he said.
ONE YEAR AFTER NIGERIAN ELECTIONS
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Nigeria, One Year After Elections
Remarks Johnnie Carson
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of African Affairs As Prepared
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Washington, DC
April 9, 2012
A year ago today, Nigerians began casting ballots in the first of what would be four days of voting for legislators, governors, and a president. Tensions were high. Voting that had been scheduled one week earlier was abruptly canceled just hours before polls were to open. We did not know for certain whether months of careful election preparations would result in a process Nigerians considered fair and credible or a rerun of the deeply flawed 2007 presidential elections. Skeptics were everywhere; and many said good elections could not be held.
Nigerians had a different idea. They waited in line for hours. They stuck around after the polls closed to ensure that every ballot was counted. They monitored polling places and compilation centers by the thousands, and they sent text messages reporting any irregularities they observed.
The result was clear. Nigeria had conducted its most successful and credible elections since its return to multiparty democracy in 1999. Despite obvious imperfections, these elections have given the country a solid foundation for strengthening its democratic institutions in the years ahead.
As a witness to that historic occasion, I can vouch for the enthusiasm that Nigerians demonstrated towards these elections and their democratic rights. Civil society groups across the country were actively engaged in the process, and on election day, diverse groups, including the Federation of Muslim Women, the Nigerian Bar Association, and the Transition Monitoring Group, joined together in a massive election monitoring effort called Project Swift Count.
There was also a strong commitment on the part of the government to improve the electoral process. Months before the election, a new and highly regarded Independent National Electoral Commission chairman was named, and the Nigerian Government provided adequate funding to pay for the election process. The new INEC Chair – Professor Attahiru Jega – made a good faith effort to register as many voters as possible and to organize the elections in the shortest time frame.
The April 2011 elections were clearly another step forward in Nigeria’s continuing democratization process, but more remains to be done to improve Nigeria’s electoral procedures and more importantly to strengthen the country’s democratic institutions and governance.
We all need to see a strong, vibrant, and growing Nigeria -- because what happens in Nigeria affects us all – the United States, Africa, and the global community. We cannot run away from the facts. Nigeria is probably the most strategically important country in sub-Saharan Africa. At about 160 million people, Nigeria is home to over twenty percent of sub-Saharan Africa’s population. It is the largest oil producing state in Africa, it is the fifth largest supplier of crude oil to the United States, and the tenth largest global producer. It is home to the sixth largest Muslim population in the world, and it’s by far the largest country in the world with approximately equal numbers of Christians and Muslims. In the United Nations, Nigeria is the fifth largest peacekeeping contributing country in the world. And as the most influential and militarily powerful member of the Economic Community of West African States, Nigeria has played a key role in helping to resolve every major political and security dispute in West Africa from the Liberian and Sierra Leonian crises in the 1990s to the recent political problems in Guinea, Niger, and the Cote d’Ivoire, and I might add to that, Mali. Nigeria is a dominant economic and financial force across West Africa, and if Lagos State were an independent country its population would make it the eighteenth largest country in Africa and its economy would be well within the top twenty on the continent.
Nigeria is important and a lot depends on the Nigeria’s success. That’s why Secretary Clinton inaugurated the U.S.-Nigeria Binational Commission in 2010, providing the two countries with a high-level vehicle to work together on the most criticial issues we face. We have supported Nigeria’s political and economic reforms and we have tried to be a useful partner as it addresses its social, economic, and security challenges. We have provided technical assistance to support reform in the power sector. We have taken a large energy trade mission to the country, and encouraged the swift passage of a strong petroleum industry bill that brings more transparency to the sector. We have recognized the importance of Nigeria’s agriculture sector and supported Nigeria’s comprehensive agriculture development plans. And in the health sector, we have committed over $500 million a year to the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, demonstrating how critical we consider Nigeria in the worldwide fight against HIV and AIDS. President Obama and Secretary Clinton both recognize the importance of this relationship and both have met with and engaged with President Jonathan on a number of occasions over the past three years. Later this week, Nigeria’s vice president will be in Washington and he is expected to meet Vice President Biden in the White House and with senior officials in the State Department.
Nigeria’s success is important to us; but we recognize that that success cannot be achieved unless Nigeria overcomes the challenges that have frustrated its progress. Decades of poor governance have seriously degraded the country’s health, education, and transportation infrastructure. Despite hundreds of billions of dollars in oil revenue, Nigeria has virtually no functioning rail system and only half of its population has access to electricity. The 80 million Nigerians who have electricity share intermittent access to the amount of power equivalent to what we have in the Washington, DC metro area. Living standards for most Nigerians are the same today as they were in 1970, and nearly 100 million Nigerians live on less than one dollar a day.
Nigerians are hungry for progress and an improvement in their lives, but northern Nigerians feel this need most acutely. Life in Nigeria for many is tough, but across the North, life is grim. A UN study shows that poverty in the 12 most northern states is nearly twice that of the rest of the country. The health indicators reflect this. Children in the far north are almost four times as likely to be malnourished. Child mortality is over 200 deaths per 1000 live births, leading to lower life expectancy. Educational standards are just as bad. Literacy in the far north is 35 percent as opposed to 77 percent in the rest of the country. Seventy-seven percent of women in the far north have no formal education, compared to only 17 percent in the rest of the country. In northern Nigeria, primary school attendance is only 41 percent, while youth unemployment is extremely high. All of this contributes to joblessness and a deepening cycle of poverty.
The statistics are disturbing, but they are not the whole story. Poverty in northern Nigeria is increasing. Despite a decade in which the Nigerian economy expanded at a spectacular seven percent per year, the Nigerian National Bureau of Statistics estimates that extreme poverty is 10 percent higher than in 2004. It’s even worse in the North. Income inequality is growing rapidly. These trends are worrying for economic, political, and security reasons.
While ninety-one percent of Nigerians across the country considered the April 2011 elections to be fair and transparent, most people in the far north backed opposition candidates that did not win. The post-election violence that occurred in several northern cities reflected strong dissatisfaction with elites who protestors thought controlled the election process. Public opinion polls and news reports suggest that there is a strong sentiment throughout the country, but especially in the North, that government is not on the side of the people; and that their poverty is a result of government neglect, corruption, and abuse. This is the type of popular narrative that is ripe for an insurgent group to hijack for its own purposes.
Which brings me to Boko Haram.
As you all know, over the last year Boko Haram has created widespread insecurity across northern Nigeria, increased tensions between various ethnic communities, interrupted development activities, frightened off investors, and generated concerns among Nigeria’s northern neighbors. They have been responsible for near daily attacks in Borno and Yobe states. And they were behind the January 20 attack in Kano that killed nearly 200 people and three major attacks in Abuja, including the bombing of the UN headquarters last August. Boko Haram’s attacks on churches and mosques are particularly disturbing because they are intended to inflame religious tensions and upset the nation’s social cohesion.
Although Boko Haram is reviled throughout Nigeria, and offers no practical solutions to northern problems, a growing minority of certain northern ethnic groups regard them favorably. Boko Haram capitalizes on popular frustrations with leaders, poor government service delivery, and the dismal living conditions of many northerners. Boko Haram seeks to humiliate and undermine the government and to exploit religious differences in order to create chaos and to make Nigeria ungovernable.
Boko Haram has grown stronger and increasingly more sophisticated over the past three years, and eliminating the Boko Haram problem will require a broad-based strategy that employs the establishment of a comprehensive plan rather than the imposition of more martial law. While more sophisticated and targeted security efforts are necessary to contain Boko Haram’s acts of violence and to capture and prosecute its leaders, the government must also win over the population by addressing the social and economic problems that have created the environment in which Boko Haram can thrive. The government must improve its tactics, avoid excessive violence and human rights abuses, make better use of its police and intelligence services, de-emphasize the role of the military, and use its courts to prosecute those who are found to be responsible for Boko Haram’s kidnappings, killings, and terrorist attacks.
Nigerian officials should focus on the political environment that makes Boko Haram so dangerous. By demonstrating the benefits a pluralistic society has to offer, the government will deny Boko Haram and other extremists the ability to exploit ethnic and religious differences. The government should redouble their efforts to resolve ongoing disputes in Jos and other high violence flashpoints. By becoming more responsive to the people, the government can put distance between itself and the accusations that it is blind to the needs of everyday Nigerians.
Numerous northern civil society organizations have come out against Boko Haram – at great personal risk – that could multiply serious government efforts to address longstanding northern grievances. I want to stress that religion is not driving extremist violence in either Jos or Northern Nigeria. While some seek to inflame Muslim-Christian tensions, Nigeria’s ethnic and religious diversity is a source of strength, not weakness, and there are many examples of communities working across religious lines to protect one another.
Containing and eliminating Boko Haram today will be much more difficult than it was four years ago, when it was under the leadership of it now deceased leader, Muhammed Yusof, who was killed in police custody. Today, Boko Haram is not a monolithic, homogenous organization controlled by a single charismatic figure. Boko Haram is several organizations, a larger organization focused primarily on discrediting the Nigerian Government, and a smaller more dangerous group, increasingly sophisticated and increasing lethal. This group has developed links with AQIM and has a broader, anti-Western jihadist agenda. This group is probably responsible for the kidnapping of westerners and for the attacks on the UN building in Abuja. Complicating the picture further is the tendency of some officials to blame Boko Haram for bank robberies and local vendettas that are carried out by common criminals and political thugs.
There are some who say that Boko Haram is comprised mostly of non-Nigerian foreigners, and that the group is being funded by a handful of resentful politicians nursing their wounds from the last election. This would be unfortunate if true, but I have not seen any evidence to support either of these theories.
To fix the Boko Haram problem, the government will have to develop a new social compact with its northern citizens. It will have to develop an economic recovery strategy that complements its security strategy. It will have to draw on the support of northern governors traditional Hausa and Fulani leaders and local officials and organizations. The Nigerian Government should consider creating a Ministry of Northern Affairs or a Northern development commission similar to what it did in response to the crises in the Niger Delta.
Northern populations are currently trapped between violent extremists on one hand and heavy-handed government responses on the other. They need to know that their president is going to extraordinary lengths to fix their problems.
Achieving this will not be easy. Although the problems are not the same, it has taken the central government in Abuja nearly ten years to bring the problems in the Niger Delta under some semblance of control. Resolving the problems in northern Nigeria will require the government to act more swiftly and to make a strategic course correction. It will need to adopt a comprehensive strategy and remain disciplined and committed in its implementation, especially at the state and local level where accountability is low and corruption high.
Despite the challenges that Nigeria faces with Boko Haram and other issues, Nigeria is simply too important to be defined by its problems. Nigeria must be defined by its promise and its enormous potential, as well as the resourcefulness of its people. Although some political observers have accused the government of getting off to a shaky start after the elections, that is not a judgment shared by all – especially when you look at key players in the President Goodluck Jonathan’s cabinet. By all accounts, President Jonathan has put together one of the strongest and most competent economic teams ever assembled in Nigeria. Finance Minister, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, former vice president of the World Bank, has pushed a strong reformist agenda, pushing for an end to costly government subsidies, deregulation of the electrical supply and distribution, the sale of the country’s oil refineries and the rapid improvement of the country’s infrastructure. She has been supported in her efforts by Central Bank President Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, Agricultural Minster Alhaji Bukar Tijani, Trade and Investment Minister Olusegun Agang, and the Minister of Power Professor Bart Nnaji -- all of whom have put a high premium on promoting sustained economic development, job creation, greater agricultural productivity, and more foreign investment. Given time and political support from the top, this team has the ability to shape and lead Nigeria’s long term economic transformation.
The Nigerian Government has also taken a positive step in trying to address its long standing problem of corruption. Through two strategic appointments, the government has signaled that is once again going to try to get a handle on high-level corruption. For four years, we scaled back our technical assistance programs to Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) because we did not believe the previous leadership was committed to reform. In November, President Jonathan appointed a new chairman to run the country’s EFCC – the country’s main anti-corruption agency. The appointment of Ibrahim Lamode to lead the EFCC gives us confidence that the high-level corruption that has hobbled the delivery of government services will be seriously addressed. President Jonathan’s appointment of Nuhu Ribadu to oversee a commission to monitor and audit the government’s vast oil and gas revenues is also a very promising sign. Before he was fired several years ago, Ribado earned a well-deserved reputation as Nigeria’s most zealous prosecutor of high level corrupt officials. His return, like that of Ngozi and other economic reformers, should be taken as an indication of the promise and potential of getting it right. We hope these high performers will encourage others, like the Petroleum Minister Diezani Alison-Madueke, to accelerate key reforms, including the long awaited Petroleum Industry Bill.
There is also a bright side to be found in a number of statehouses across Nigeria, where governors are responsible for delivering most public services. A handful of governors embraced the challenges of their jobs and have made a real difference. The governors in Lagos, Edo, and Kano have demonstrated what strong, honest, and responsible leadership at the state level can accomplish.
We continue to use the U.S.-Nigeria Binational Commission as our primary vehicle for exchanging ideas and promoting engagement with Nigeria.
We want to elevate and expand our dialogue and are ready to work with Nigerian authorities at the national and state level and to expand our programs in states with high performing executives, particularly in northern Nigeria where the need is greatest. We are committed to helping Nigeria develop a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy and to improving collaboration among Nigeria’s intelligence services. We want to support the Nigerian Government’s efforts, especially in the areas of agriculture, electrical power generation and transmission, and anti-corruption. We sent a high-level energy trade mission to Abuja and Lagos in February to attract U.S. private investment in the energy field, and we would like to do something similar to highlight the opportunities that exist in agriculture and infrastructure – where we think we have something real to offer. The agricultural investment forum sponsored by the Corporate Council on Africa and the Nigerian Embassy starting tomorrow similarly aims to direct U.S. resources towards Nigerian development.
I am bullish on Nigeria. I have been ever since I served there as a young Foreign Service officer. There is no doubt that Nigeria’s challenges are serious, but we should not underestimate the skill and ability of the Nigerian people and leaders to address them. I believe the forces that are holding Nigeria together are stronger today than the forces that are pulling Nigeria apart. Nigeria remains the giant in Africa, and I remain optimist about its long term future. By working with Nigeria, we can contribute to the country’s economic growth and political unity – two objectives that are important to the United States, Africa, and the global community. A strong, vibrant, politically stable, and economically prosperous Nigeria is in everyone’s interest. I hope you agree. Thank you.
ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER SPEAKS AT SHERMAN ACT AWARD CEREMONY
FROM: DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the Sherman Act Award Ceremony Washington, D.C. ~ Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Thank you, Sharis [Pozen]. I appreciate your kind words – and your outstanding leadership as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division. Every day, your work strengthens the protections, and the great progress, that we’ve gathered to celebrate – and, especially during this period of transition, I am deeply grateful for your stewardship, your commitment to fair and aggressive antitrust enforcement, and the many contributions that you and your team continue to make.
It’s an honor to be with you all, and a pleasure to join Sharis in welcoming so many Division leaders – past and present – distinguished guests, and great champions of sound economic policy and strong consumer protection. I would particularly like to thank the U.S. Marine Band, the Joint Armed Forces Color Guard, and Shawnee Ball for opening today’s ceremony. And I’d like to recognize Judge [Michael] Boudin– along with Doug Melamed and Tim Muris – for their participation this afternoon. Thank you for taking the time to be join our celebration.
Finally, I’d like to extend a special welcome to today’s guest of honor – one of our nation’s leading experts in the field of antitrust law and one of the most effective advocates ever to stand on the side of American consumers – Jim Rill. Jim, it’s a pleasure to have you – and so many of your family members – back at the Department.
Those of you who’ve had the privilege – and great benefit – of working with Jim know that he is a fearless and tireless advocate for fairness and justice. For decades, he has worked to protect the American people from anticompetitive conduct – and has stood out as an effective and innovative leader in this field. During his tenure here at the Department, where he served as Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division, he updated and enhanced the handling of antitrust matters, helped to shape sweeping policy guidelines, and negotiated critical international agreements. He served as a mentor – and an excellent role model – for a generation of public interest lawyers, including some of the people in this room. And he helped build the Antitrust Division into the dynamic component it is today.
In 1997, when my predecessor, Attorney General Janet Reno, asked him to Co-Chair the Justice Department’s International Competition Policy Advisory Committee, Jim did not hesitate to answer the call of duty. The recommendations that he helped to develop continue to serve as guideposts. And it’s no exaggeration to say that he, his colleagues, and the partners they brought to the table from around the world helped to usher in a new era of global antitrust enforcement.
But government service is only one of the ways in which Jim has given back – to his country as well as his profession – over the course of his remarkable career. As a past Chairman of the ABA’s Section of Antitrust Law, he lent his considerable experience and expertise to a host of policy questions affecting the entire bar – work he continues today as a member of the Section’s International Task Force. And as an attorney in private practice, he regularly provides counsel to major corporations in both domestic and international matters.
In many ways, Jim’s career has been built on the same commitment that inspired John Sherman’s landmark effort, more than a century ago, to provide legal mechanisms for protecting America’s economic freedom, growth, and opportunity.
A decade before the dawn of the 20th century, Senator Sherman stood before his colleagues in Congress and declared that “Monopolies [are] inconsistent with our form of government. . . . If we will not endure a king as a political power, we should not endure a king over the production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life. If we would not submit to an emperor, we should not submit to an autocrat of trade."
Today, the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division continues to live up to Senator Sherman's words – and regularly employs the tools and authorities provided under one of our nation’s most important and enduring laws, the Sherman Antitrust Act, to keep the American economy free from the grip of anticompetitive practices and entities.
Now, as much as ever before, we are committed to smart, fair, and aggressive antitrust enforcement across all sectors of our economy. And there are few who understand or appreciate the importance of this work better than today’s awardee.
As an antitrust lawyer, Jim has remained steadfast in his commitment, not to any ideology, but to a basic overriding principle – enshrined in law 122 years ago – of a free but fair American marketplace.
As we carry on this essential work, I know everyone in this room is – and, for more than two decades, has been – proud to call Jim Rill a partner, a friend, and a valued member of the Justice Department family. The American people have been privileged to have him as a strong ally and a fierce advocate. And the legal profession has benefitted immensely from the leadership of a man upon whom the United States will today bestow an honor reserved for those defined by their “substantial contributions to the protection of American consumers and the preservation of economic liberty.”
Jim, on behalf of the Department of Justice, it’s my pleasure to present you with this year’s Sherman Act Award, which – as the inscriptions reads – is: Presented to James F. Rill, in recognition of his significant lifetime contributions to the development and enforcement of antitrust law and the advancement of antitrust policy internationally. With thanks from a grateful nation.
Jim, your example is an inspiration to us all. Your indelible contributions – to this Department, and to our nation – are beyond measure. And your service to the American people has set a standard to which we all should aspire.
Thank you, and congratulations on this well-deserved honor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)