STATE DEPARTMENT DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

FROM:  DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
April 23, 2012
TRANSCRIPT:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING                                                                                                         
MONDAY, APRIL 23, 2012
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
1:15 p.m. EDT

MS. NULAND:  Happy Monday, everybody.  You were just treated to an hour of Professor Clinton up at Syracuse University, so we’ve covered a number of issues.  Let me do a couple of quick things at the top, and then we’ll go to what’s on your minds.

Today, the Chinese Government announced the fourth round of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, which will be held in Beijing May 3rd and 4th.  Secretary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Geithner will be joined for the dialogue by their Chinese co-chairs, Vice Premier Wang Qishan and State Councilor Dai Bingguo.   The Chinese also announced the third round of the U.S.-China Consultations on People-to-People Exchanges, which will be held in the same time period in Beijing.

And then further to our daily highlighting of a human rights case, and particularly a journalistic freedom/press freedom case in the walkup to World Press Freedom Day on May 3rd, today’s case, if you’ve seen our website HumanRights.gov, is the case of Yoani Sanchez in Cuba.  Yoani Sanchez is a Cuban blogger who has attracted international following for her blog Generation Y, which gives readers unprecedented insight into life in Cuba.  The Cuban Government has repeatedly denied Ms. Sanchez’s request for travel some 19 times, most recently she was – when she was granted a visa to go to Brazil to attend the premieres of a documentary about media freedom.  So she is our person of the day, and we call your attention to our website, HumanRights.gov.

Let’s go to what’s on your minds.

QUESTION:  Can I just start briefly with Syria?

MS. NULAND:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  Maybe not so briefly on others, but mine is only brief.  Are you okay with the limits, the restrictions that the Syrians want to put on the monitoring mission in terms of where monitors can come from, what countries they can come from, how they are able to travel?

MS. NULAND:  We are most emphatically not okay with restrictions on monitors.  We make clear in Resolution 2043 that we expect monitors to have full freedom of movement, to have full access to Syrians and parts of Syria that they think are important to monitor, and that we expect them to have complete freedom to communicate, to choose their personnel, et cetera.  So this is a matter of concern as these monitors begin to deploy.  And as the Syrian National Council put it in their own statement after Resolution 2043 was passed, this first deployment of monitors is really a litmus test for the Assad regime’s seriousness with regard to the six-point plan.

QUESTION:  And what about the other – about the – where the monitors come from?

MS. NULAND:  And of course, with the – it’s up to the United Nations to decide who should be chosen for the monitoring trip.

QUESTION:  So you would not be comfortable with a monitoring team made up of people from – made up of monitors from Iran, Belarus, Eritrea --

MS. NULAND:  It is not for the Government of Syria to decide who should be a UN monitor for this mission.  It’s up for the – to the United Nations to make those decisions.

QUESTION:  So have you – you’ve told that – you’re aware of what – where they want the people to come from, correct?

MS. NULAND:  We are.  We are.

QUESTION:  And you’ve raised your objections to them?

MS. NULAND:  We have.

QUESTION:  Okay.  That’s all.

QUESTION:  And you are comfortable that 300 monitors can actually do the job that is assigned to them?

MS. NULAND:  Well, again, we’ve only just started to have monitors deploy over the last week and a half.  We are only at double-digit strength, as you know, with more coming in.  The monitors, as you have probably seen through the press reporting, have been greeted warmly by crowds of Syrians wanting to express themselves peacefully wherever they have been able to go.  But I think the concern is, as in places like Hama and Homs, that the monitors come in, they are able to provide some space and some openness for opposition leaders to come out and make their views known.  They’re beginning to start to see people, and then no sooner do they leave town when the artillery resumes.  So this is a matter of concern and something that we will be watching day on day.

QUESTION:  Yeah.  I understand that they are greeted very well and people have probably waited for them to arrive.  But are they – will they be able to discharge their duties as they should?  I mean, keep track of what’s going on, have actual data so it can be vetted and determined and defined and so on?

MS. NULAND:  Well, these are the standards that we insist this monitoring team be able to have, so we just have to see, Said.  It’s really very early days, but as I said, it’s a litmus test for the seriousness of the regime.

QUESTION:  And just a quick follow-up to the discussion that took place here last Friday on the Plan B – your Plan B, so to speak – a great deal of discussion was talked about yesterday.   The Washington Post had an editorial saying that you don’t really have a Plan B, that basically your approach to this whole Syria crisis has been ad hoc.  Do you have a comment on that?

MS. NULAND:  Well, of course, we disagree with that.  As the Secretary made clear in Paris, even as these monitors deploy, the international pressure has to stay on the Syrian regime.  You saw the EU impose new sanctions today.  The United States imposed new sanctions today.  We are continuing to work with all of our international partners.  And as the Secretary made clear in Paris, if this Kofi Annan plan fails, if this monitoring mission fails, we’re going to be back in the UN Security Council, we’re going to be looking at Chapter VII and looking at other ways to increase the pressure.

QUESTION:  That’s once the 90-day period is over, correct?

MS. NULAND:  I’m not going to speak to the timetable.  I think we have to see how it goes, as I said, day on day.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

MS. NULAND:  Please.

QUESTION:  And that within the 90 day, or after the 90 days, you’re going to go to the Security Council?

MS. NULAND:  Well, I think Said just asked that question.  Obviously, Resolution 2043 gives this initial monitoring effort 90 days, but I think the question is, even within the 90 days, are we able to get folks in?  Are they able to do the job?  Is the zone of peace enlarging or is it shrinking as a result?  And we’re just going to have to watch and see.
Please, Jay.

QUESTION:  A question concerning China.  Just --

MS. NULAND:  Yeah.  Are we done – first of all, are we done with Syria?

QUESTION:  Oh, yeah.

MS. NULAND:  Yeah?  Okay.  Go ahead.  Go on to China.

QUESTION:  I know you guys aren’t getting into the give-and-take on the Bo Xilai case, but I’m trying to get sort of on a broader sense if the – if you could describe what the State Department’s, like, policy is towards walk-ins.  Are there sort of clear parameters that the State Department has always used or is using now in dealing with them, just on a general basis?  Because there have been cases in the past where, I guess during Tiananmen, we gave sanctuary to a dissident for, like, more than a year.  So I was just trying to see if there was any parameters you could outline.  And traditionally, is the White House involved in these decisions?

And the other question I just had is:  Is there any – do you know what the status is of Bo Xilai’s son is up in Boston as far as his legal status here?  I assume he came in as a student, on a student visa, but I don’t know if he’s – if there’s any sense on if he has to renew it or if the Chinese want him back.  I was trying to get an update on that.

MS. NULAND:  Well, first, on the latter question, there’s been broad press reporting that he is a student in good standing at Harvard.  We don’t speak to individual visa matters, as you know, but you can draw your own conclusions from that.  And obviously, student visas are, as a general matter, subject to the term of the educational opportunity that the person is here for.

With regard to walk-ins, every case is different.  People walk into U.S. embassies and consulates around the world for a broad variety of reasons and with a broad variety of requests.  There are some guiding regulations with regard to individual requests that might be made in the Foreign Affairs Manual.  We can get you those if you need, Jay, but in general cases have to be decided based on the circumstances, and they’re very much case by case, depending upon what the individual is seeking and what the circumstances are.

Please.  Still on this issue?  No.  Something else?

QUESTION:  Can I try Afghanistan?

MS. NULAND:  Why don’t we stay on China, first?  Yeah.  Go ahead.

QUESTION:  A question that’s much easier.  First, could you please talk to us about the focus of this, the fourth one of S&ED?

MS. NULAND:  I don’t have too much more detail than what was put out by the Chinese side.  As you know, this is a broad Strategic Dialogue that allows us to talk about the full range of bilateral issues, regional issues, and global issues.  On the Treasury side, they’ll speak to their issues, but you know that – all those things that we talk about on the economic and financial and currency side with the Chinese Government.  On the State Department side, it’s everything from our student exchange program, as you can imagine, to the regional issues that we talk about, like North Korea, to the global issues, like our work together on Iran, et cetera.  So I think it’ll be a rich and broad menu of issues.

QUESTION:  Will the South China Sea issue be addressed?  Because I’m wondering if you are following the dispute with (inaudible).  The Philippines now is seeking international support in the standoff with China.  So under what circumstance will the U.S. wade into this dispute?

MS. NULAND:  Well, I think you know our position on these disputes in the South China Sea.  We want to see them resolved through dialogue; we want to see them resolved through consensual means.  In general, in all of the most recent meetings that Secretary Clinton has had with Chinese counterparts, whether they were here, whether they were in China, whether they were in multilateral fora, she has reiterated our interest in deepening and broadening mechanisms within ASEAN, within regional fora, and bilaterally for solving these things consensually, not by force, calling for restraint by all sides.  That’s where we are on this particular one and where I’m sure we’ll be in Beijing next week.

QUESTION:  So do you believe China and the ASEAN countries can solve this problem in a – through friendly diplomatic consultations?

MS. NULAND:  We do.  We have always thought that this needed to be resolved through dialogue, and we’ll continue to press that on everybody.

Andy.

QUESTION:  When was the last time you haven’t?

MS. NULAND:  Haven’t what?

QUESTION:  Thought that something should be resolved through dialogue?  (Laughter.)  When was the last time you said, “No, I think we really need war.”

MS. NULAND:  In the Libya context, dialogue failed and we had to call in NATO and call in other countries, as you’ll recall.  That’s probably the --

QUESTION:  On that same issue, I think you saw that Liberation Daily had a very strong piece over the weekend which essentially accused the United States of, in support of the Philippines, increasing the potential for military conflict in the South China Sea.  Do you have any response to that charge from a newspaper which is widely seen as the mouthpiece of the PLA?

MS. NULAND:  Well, again, our position has been consistent.  The Secretary’s position has been consistent on all of these skirmishes in the South China Sea and certainly with regard to this one, that this can only be solved diplomatically, that we want to see restraint on all sides, we want to see ASEAN play a helpful role in coming to a resolution.  And that’ll be the Secretary’s message again when she’s in Beijing next week.

QUESTION:  Okay.  Also --

MS. NULAND:  In the back.  Afghanistan?

QUESTION:  Can we try Afghanistan?  Thanks very much.  May I try two actually?  As you know, the Strategic Partnership Agreement is being inked now to take the United States relationship on beyond 2014.  And we’re hearing that $2.7 billion is going to go to Afghan security forces.  It’s a huge amount of money.  What more can you tell us about the inking of the Strategic Partnership Agreement, please?

MS. NULAND:  Well, let me start by saying that on April 22nd Ambassador Crocker and Afghan National Security Advisor Spanta initialed the text of the Strategic Partnership Agreement.  Let me stress this is an initialing.  This is not yet a signing.  After much work together, we’re pleased that our negotiating teams have come to a common text to recommend to their respective governments.  As is the case with all such agreements, both governments now have to review it, the text in interagency terms.  We have to, on our side, have consultations with our Congress and the President has to make a final review.  So that is still to be done.

With regard to dollar figures, I don’t have anything to announce yet.  I think you know that we have been talking to the Afghan Government, we’ve been talking to our allies and partners around the world about the need to ensure that as the Afghan national security forces take on lead responsibility for security around Afghanistan that they are fully funded, that they are fully equipped, and that we have the ability to continue to train them.  The Afghans themselves will contribute to those costs, but it’s going to take international support as well.  As the Secretary made clear when she was with Secretary Panetta at NATO last week, we’re talking to lots of countries about how they can help the Afghans foot the bill, and the United States also will pay its fair share, but I’m not going to get into numbers here today.

QUESTION:  Okay.  I’m going to just add one more, and that is:  What effect do you think the initialing of this document will have on peace talks with the Taliban?

MS. NULAND:  Well, frankly, at this stage, that is very much up to the Taliban.  Let me say that the Strategic Partnership document is primarily about the United States’ medium and long-term relationship with the Government of Afghanistan, with the Afghan people, and it sets out a blueprint for how we can move forward together on the political side, on the economic side, and continuing to provide appropriate security support, even as the Afghans manage their security increasingly self-reliantly.

As you know, in the context of the larger peace effort that the Afghan Government’s engaged in, we have very much supported the idea of Afghan-Afghan talks about political reconciliation.  We have tried to be helpful in that regard, but really the Taliban have a choice to make now.  They need to decide if they are ready to come to the table under the terms that we’ve all supported, led by the Afghan Government, starting with renouncing violence and expressing interest in these talks.  So ball’s very much in their court.

QUESTION:  Do you have anything to add to your statement from this morning on Sudan?

MS. NULAND:  Other than to say that our Special Envoy Princeton Lyman remains very much engaged with the parties, with the African Union, and that we very much welcome the fact that the South Sudanese did withdraw from Heglig and that it’s now time for the Government of Sudan to stop its aerial bombardment and for everybody to get back to the table.  That’s essentially where we are.  And just to remind again that neither one of these governments is going to be able to fully benefit from the resources of both countries, from peace, from integration with the international community, until the violence stops.  So they both – both sides have an interest in getting this violence stopped.

Said.

QUESTION:  Change of issue?

MS. NULAND:  Say again?

QUESTION:  Change topics?

MS. NULAND:  Yes.

QUESTION:  The Palestinian issue?

MS. NULAND:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  Yes.  There is an apparent estrangement between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.  And my question to you, in this kind of atmosphere, how do you conduct whatever talks or lack of talks, if you would, with both entities?  How do you conduct your business with them?

MS. NULAND:  Well, I’m not going to get into internal issues within the Palestinian Authority.  Obviously, we work with all the leading Palestinian figures.  We obviously work with President Abbas, who David Hale had the chance to sit with on Saturday.  We see Mr. Fayyad obviously, and David also works with Palestinian negotiator Erekat, who he anticipates seeing, I think it’s tomorrow.

So our goal is to continue to try to work with all parties on the Palestinian Authority side and with the Israelis to increase the opportunity for them to be in direct contact and to really get this conversation back to where it needs to be.

QUESTION:  And Mr. Hale discussed the content of the letter that Mahmoud Abbas submitted last week with him?

MS. NULAND:  Well, I would anticipate that he did, but I’m not going to get into the details of their discussion.

QUESTION:  Yeah.  This letter is really the point of contention between the two – between Fayyad and Abbas.

MS. NULAND:  From our perspective, the fact that the sides are in contact, whether it’s by letter – obviously we prefer face to face, but the fact that this conversation is continuing is important.  So we are trying to talk to all of the involved parties about how they can make the most of the time in front of them and the channels available to them.

QUESTION:  Are you aware of the misunderstanding between Abbas and Fayyad?

MS. NULAND:  I’m really not going to get into internal issues between members of the Palestinian Authority.

Please.

QUESTION:  There are some press reports that (inaudible) Turkey is blocking Israel’s participation to next NATO summit.  And the U.S. side is not happy with that.  It’s disappointed and trying to convince Turks not to block Israel to NATO.  Do you have any comment on that – on those reports?

MS. NULAND:  Well, I think you know for quite some time now, we have been continuing to talk to both our ally Turkey and our ally Israel about the relationship that they have with each other, to encourage them to continue to get back to a place where can have conversation with each other, where they can work well together.  We think it’s important to both of them, and it’s certainly important to the region.

With regard to arrangements for the NATO summit and partnership events, as you know, Israel is one of NATO’s partners in the Mediterranean Dialogue.   I don’t have anything particular to announce on partnership planning at the moment.  Those discussions are continuing as we head towards the May summit in Chicago.

QUESTION:  So Israel may participate in some?

MS. NULAND:  Again, we’re still working on what the partnership arrangements are going to look like for the summit, so I’m not going to comment on them from here as those conversations continue.  There are many aspects of how the partners may or may not participate in the NATO summit that are still being worked on.

QUESTION:  Well, are you comfortable with the Turkish position?

MS. NULAND:  Again, I’m not going to comment on internal deliberations going on at NATO about arrangements for the summit from this --

QUESTION:  NATO operates by consensus, correct?

MS. NULAND:  Correct.

QUESTION:  As you well know.  So if one NATO member objected to Israel or any other country’s participation in a partnership dialogue, you wouldn’t be allowed to – that country wouldn’t be allowed to participate, correct?

MS. NULAND:  We need consensus at NATO.  And again, Israel is one of NATO’s partners, has participated over the years in many, many, many NATO activities, consultations, exercises, et cetera.  So we’re going to keep working on the arrangements for partnership at Chicago, but I don’t have anything particular to announce today.

QUESTION:  Well, would you be – would the Administration be comfortable if Israel did not participate?

MS. NULAND:  Again, there are many, many ways that these partnership activities may go forward.  They’ve been done in different ways at different summits.  So I’m not going to get into what we’re talking about, how it might work, who’s going to come.  We’re still working on all of that.

QUESTION:  The Administration won’t come out and say that it wants Israel to be at the – to participate at the summit in Chicago?

MS. NULAND:  We haven’t made any announcements about who --

QUESTION:  I know.

MS. NULAND:  -- among NATO’s 25-30 partners around the world we expect to invite to Chicago.  So I’m not going to comment on individual partners and whether they’re coming to Chicago.

QUESTION:  Well, you’re being asked about one specifically.

MS. NULAND:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  Is it important to the United States for Israel to participate?

MS. NULAND:  It’s important that we come to a consensus agreement at NATO about a strong partnership aspect of this summit.  So we’re still working on that.

QUESTION:  So you’re saying that that could happen without Israel’s participation?

MS. NULAND:  I’m saying that there are 25-30 global partners of NATO.  Is it still under discussion at NATO what events there will be in the context of the summit that will highlight the partnership and which partners will be invited.  No decisions have been made.

QUESTION:  So you’re saying that some partners may not be invited?

MS. NULAND:  I’m saying that there have been NATO summits where no partners were invited --

QUESTION:  Toria, I’m trying to help you out here, because you’re going to get absolutely slammed.

MS. NULAND:  I understand.  Matt, there is no --

QUESTION:  You are.  If you can’t come out and say that the United States wants Israel to participate, its main ally in the Middle East and you won’t come out and say that the Administration wants them to participate in whatever event is going in Chicago, that’s – that is going to be seized on.

MS. NULAND:  Matt, at the last summit in Lisbon, there was zero partnership participation with the exception, I think, of ISAF partners.  At Lisbon there were some partnership events, and I don’t know whether all partners were included.  I think they were not.

QUESTION:  Well, as --

MS. NULAND:  So every summit is done on a case-by-case basis, and we haven’t made a decision about who’s going to be invited yet.

QUESTION:  Well, yeah, but isn’t the planning for at least most of these partnership – these partnerships to have some kind of meeting revolving around Chicago?

MS. NULAND:  NATO has, I think, five --

QUESTION:  Wasn’t there a meeting at heads of state level between NATO and the Russians in Lisbon?

MS. NULAND:  I think there was a NATO-Russia Council at Lisbon.  There will not be a NATO-Russia council meeting at Chicago.  So again, the point is that for each summit, NATO makes decisions by a consensus what the partnership geometry will be.  And that has not been decided.

QUESTION:  Fair enough.  But the Turks wouldn’t be objecting to Israel’s participation if someone hadn’t proposed that Israel participate.  And if you have proposed that they participate --

MS. NULAND:  Again --

QUESTION:  -- and you’re not willing to stick up for it, I don’t understand why.

MS. NULAND:  I’m not going to get into, here, what we have proposed and where we are in the internal dialogue at NATO until the issues are settled by consensus.  That’s not the way NATO works.  Okay?

Let’s move on.

QUESTION:  Can we go back to the Palestinian issue?

MS. NULAND:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  Is Ambassador Hale mediating between the Palestinians, or between the Palestinians and the Israelis?

MS. NULAND:  So David – let me just go through his schedule, if I can.  Special Envoy Hale met with President Abbas on Saturday, with Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sabah and other officials in Kuwait on April 22nd.  He arrived in Jerusalem today.  He will meet with Israeli negotiator Molho.

QUESTION:  I’m sorry.  Can you say that again?

MS. NULAND:  He’s in Jerusalem today.  He’ll meet with Israeli negotiator Molho, and then he’ll meet with Palestinian negotiator Erekat separately tonight and tomorrow.  I’m not sure in what order.  And then he will also, tomorrow, see Foreign Minister Judeh, I assume in Amman.  And then, as we said, he plans to go on to Saudi, to Qatar, to Egypt.  And then he’s probably going to go back to the region, but that hasn’t been decided yet.

QUESTION:  That means he’s not mediating between Abbas and Fayyad?

MS. NULAND:  Correct.  He is not getting involved in internal Palestinian Authority issues.

QUESTION:  And when did he see Fayyad?

MS. NULAND:  Say again?

QUESTION:  When did he see Fayyad, the prime minister?

MS. NULAND:  We had Fayyad here in Washington not too long ago.

QUESTION:  No, no.  Isn’t he supposed to meet with Fayyad in --

MS. NULAND:  I don’t have that on this list, but let me check with him whether he intends to see Mr. Fayyad on this trip.

QUESTION:  New topic.  On Myanmar, here seems to be a hiccup in this warming – warmth between Aung San Suu Kyi and the ruling party, the military-backed party, and that they disagree over the oath of office and Aung San Suu Kyi’s – and her NLD counterparts have declined to take their seats in parliament until this oath is changed.  Does that concern you at all?  Do you think that’s a setback?  And what’s your view on this – the oath itself?

MS. NULAND:  Well, as you’ve said, Andy, our understanding is the same as yours, that Aung San Suu Kyi and the members of her party from the National League of Democracy did not sit when parliament opened today because they were concerned about taking an oath requiring them to safeguard the constitution that was passed under military rule.  Our understanding is that the NLD is in discussion with the government and with other parties with regard to this issue and we are calling on everybody to try to work this through in a manner that will allow the NLD to take its seats.
QUESTION:  Would the action for action that the U.S. has promised to continue to implement be on hold pending them actually sitting in their seats in parliament?

MS. NULAND:  Well, I think the measures that we’ve already announced are obviously going forward.  We want to see the government and the opposition continue to work on their issues in a consensual manner through dialogue, and that is our understanding of what the NLD itself wants.  So I think we need to watch this and hope that in coming days, this can be settled.

QUESTION:  And do you have any position on the oath itself?  Do you think that the NLD is correct in its objections to the wording of the oath?

MS. NULAND:  I think we’re not going to get into the internal conversation that they’re having.  As you know, the NLD has concerns about a number of things, including the name of the country, that were adopted at a time when they were not able to participate in the political process.  So they’re going to have to work through these things together as part of the general opening in the reform process.

Please.

QUESTION:  On Iraq, KRG President Maliki criticized an arms sales which will be made by U.S. to Baghdad Government – about the F-16 sales.  And he said to freeze the sales until there will be a solution between KRG and Baghdad Government because he’s suspicious that the Maliki government can use this F-16 against KRG.  Do you have any comment on that?

MS. NULAND:  I’m sorry.  Who made these initial comments?

QUESTION:  President Barzani.

MS. NULAND:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  KRG president.

MS. NULAND:  I’m not going to get into the middle of intramural efforts between the various Iraqis.  I think you know where we are on this, that we want to see the disagreements that they have with each other also settled through dialogue and through a big roundtable process that they’ve all pledged to join but that still needs to get off the ground.

QUESTION:  Is that F-16 sales will go on?

MS. NULAND:  I don’t think there’s any change in our policy.

QUESTION:  About the – just a follow-up about an oil agreement made by Exxon-Mobil and KRG.  Since it’s an American company, the Exxon-Mobil, this agreement is excluding Baghdad Government’s role in the use of oil in KRG region.  Do you have any comment?  How do you see this agreement?  Is it threatening to unity of Iraq, or how do you see Exxon-Mobil and KRG oil agreement?

MS. NULAND:  We’ve talked about this issue many times.  Our position on it has not changed, that we think the lack of a comprehensive oil agreement is holding Iraq back, that we’ve called on all sides to continue to work through what is necessary to come up with a national oil policy.  And we also regularly counsel our companies, including Exxon, about the fact that there isn’t such an agreement.  So I think we’ll have a little bit more to say on the issues of Iraq and energy later today.  We’re going to have – we have the U.S.-Iraqi energy dialogue going on, and we’ll have some folks briefing later this afternoon on those things.

QUESTION:  Toria, just a quick follow-up to this, but Maliki had really harsh words for Turkey.  And now both of them are your allies, you have invested a great deal in Iraq.  I mean, they’re – he’s pushing the envelopes.  You don’t have any comment on that?

MS. NULAND:  We have, for almost a decade now, encouraged increased dialogue, increased direct contacts between Iraq and Turkey.  There are mechanisms for them to work through their issues together which we have endeavored to facilitate, and we encourage them to continue to use them to work through the issues that they have.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

MS. NULAND:  Please.

QUESTION:  On North Korea?

MS. NULAND:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  Different topic.  There are multiple reports that the North Koreans have threatened Seoul and South Korean President Lee’s government.  Do you have a reaction on those reports with military action?

MS. NULAND:  I don’t think our position on this is any different than it’s been before and after the satellite launch.  I think if you got a chance to see what the Secretary had to say when she was on Wolf Blitzer last Thursday, that’s the – obviously the most eloquent statement of where we are, that the DPRK needs to understand that it’s not going to achieve anything but further isolation and pressure by threats, by launches, by any of this.

And we call on the new North Korean leadership to change course; instead put their effort into moving their country into the modern world, into the 21st century, opening up the system and giving their people the right to live in dignity and with openness, well fed, et cetera.  And they’re just putting their energy in the wrong place.

Please.

QUESTION:  Any reaction to Iraqi prime minister’s visit to Iran?  And do you think – is it related to the P-5+1 meeting in Baghdad next month?

MS. NULAND:  I’m going to send you to both of those governments for comments on their bilateral visit.

Okay.  Thanks very much.

ACTIONS TAKEN IN AFGHANISTAN BY AFGHAN AND COALITION FORCES

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Combined Force Captures Several Insurgents

Compiled from International Security Assistance Force Joint Command News Releases

WASHINGTON, April 23, 2012 - An Afghan and coalition security force captured several insurgents during an operation to capture a senior Haqqani facilitator in the Baraki Barak district of Afghanistan's Logar province today, military officials reported.

The Haqqani facilitator is suspected of providing weapons and ammunition to insurgents for a planned attack against Afghan government officials, Afghan security forces and coalition security forces in Kabul City, officials said. Additionally, the facilitator has ties to the Pakistan-based leaders of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.

No shots were fired and no civilian property was damaged during this operation.

In yesterday's Afghanistan operations:

-- An Afghan-led force captured a Haqqani leader and detained two other suspects in the Terayzai district of Khost province. The leader directed roadside bombings and other attacks against Afghan and coalition forces throughout the Bak district.

-- A combined force found two weapons caches comprising 17 mortars, two rocket-propelled grenades, and five recoilless rifle rounds in the Aliabad district of Kunduz province. The items were destroyed.

In April 21 Afghanistan operations:

-- A combined force captured a Taliban facilitator and detained one other suspect in the Kandahar district of Kandahar province. The facilitator provided weapons, ammunition and equipment to insurgents in Kandahar City and the Kandahar district for attacks against Afghan and coalition forces.

In April 19 Afghanistan operations:

-- In the Lash-e Joveyn district of Farah province, a combined force discovered a weapons cache containing 36 120 mm mortar rounds, 96 81 mm mortar rounds, four rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and 200 12.7 mm rounds. The cache was destroyed.

In April 18 Afghanistan operations:

-- A combined force detained one suspect and destroyed a RPG launcher and multiple rockets while searching for a senior Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan facilitator and explosives expert in the Baghlan-e Jadid district of Baghlan province. The facilitator is responsible for multiple attacks against Afghan and coalition forces in northern Afghanistan. He is also suspected in plotting bombings and suicide attacks in Kabul.

APRIL 2011 U.S. TORNADO OUTBREAK SPAWNED 750 TORNADOES, KILLED 361 PEOPLE

FROM:  FEMA
ATLANTA, Ga. -- The relentless and destructive tornado outbreak in April 2011 that caused massive damage, injuries and loss of life across the South resulted in unprecedented response and recovery efforts coordinated by FEMA to every affected state across the region. The storms spawned a record 750 tornadoes. A reported 361 people lost their lives. Six states received major disaster declarations. In the year since, thousands of people have rebuilt their lives and homes, and communities continue recovering and rebuilding.

Tornado over the plains. This tornado was one of many spawned during a massive outbreak stretching from eastern Colorado to Oklahoma on May 23-May  Image ID: nssl0231, NOAA's National Severe Storms Laboratory (NSSL) Collection Location: Kansas Photo Date: 2008 May 23 Photographer: Sean Waugh NOAA/NSSL

That rebuilding involves everyone from the affected individuals, community volunteers, local and tribal governments and state and federal officials. Federal assistance alone has totaled nearly a billion dollars for housing and other disaster-related needs of individuals, emergency and permanent repair work for local governments and educational and nonprofit organizations, low-interest disaster loans, and dollars paid to other federal agencies to support the disaster response.

That assistance in the six (Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee) of eight states in Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Region IV includes:
24,773 disaster survivors were eligible for federal disaster assistance;
$118 million to disaster survivors as part of the Individual and Households Program, including:
$90.6 million to individuals for housing assistance;
Inclusive of that funding, FEMA provided the maximum grant ($30,200) to 1,341 registrants, representing more than $40 million in disaster assistance.

$27.7 million to individuals for other disaster-related needs such as medical costs and funeral expenses.
More than $321 million of the estimated $338 million total estimated reimbursements has been provided to help local governments and educational and non-profit organizations pay for emergency work and permanent repairs.

$160 million in low-interest disaster loans from the U.S. Small Business Administration.
FEMA has set aside nearly $109 million to help state and local governments implement long-term measures to minimize the impact of future disasters.

Debris was so massive in Alabama that the amount—10 million cubic yards was enough to fill 67,000 18-wheelers. If those trucks were lined up, they would stretch from Mobile to Nashville and halfway back again.

“If we learned anything from last April, it is that we lost too many lives.” said FEMA Region IV Administrator Phil May. “A prepared public is our nation’s most valuable resource in a disaster, and through disaster preparedness we can save lives.”
FEMA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have designated April 22-28 as Severe Weather Preparedness Week to highlight the importance of making severe weather preparedness a national priority.

U.S. AND IRAQ REAFFIRM COMMITMENT ENERGY PRODUCTION AND EXPORT

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Joint Statement of the U.S. - Iraq Joint Coordinating Committee on Energy
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 23, 2012
The Governments of the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq reaffirmed their commitment to joint cooperation in the areas of oil production and export, natural gas, electricity, and critical energy infrastructure protection during the inaugural meeting of the Joint Coordinating Committee (JCC) on Energy on April 23, 2012.

This meeting, held at the U.S. Department of Energy, was co-chaired by Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister for Energy Dr. Hussain Al Shahristani and U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman and Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs at the U.S. Department of State Ambassador Carlos Pascual. The JCC on Energy was established by the 2008 Strategic Framework Agreement between Iraq and the United States to strengthen the countries’ strategic partnership on a variety of initiatives.
During the meeting, both sides expressed interest in making efforts to assure oil markets meet producers’ and consumers’ needs for worldwide economic growth, and recognized the bold steps Iraq has taken to increase its oil production and export. The U.S. Government supports these major steps forward.

The United States expressed its continued commitment to support Iraq’s electricity sector through training in operations and maintenance, the provision of spare parts, and the development of the Iraq Electricity Master Plans and the assistance to implement it. The United States described its significant contributions to Iraq’s energy sector since 2003, including $4.6 billion to the power sector and $2.1 billion to the oil sector.

The delegations also discussed the progress of the ongoing energy capacity building programs conducted by the U.S. Department of Commerce Commercial Law Development Program and the U.S. Agency for International Development. The United States outlined the potentially greater role for the U.S. Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to expand financing for energy trade and investments.

Deputy Prime Minister Shahristani and Deputy Secretary Poneman will travel together to Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories on April 24, 2012 where they will see demonstrations of advanced technology in the areas of critical infrastructure protection for oil facilities, advanced civilian nuclear technology and renewable energy technology.
The United States and the Republic of Iraq committed to convene the Energy JCC quarterly over the coming year.

Abby-Care: Coverage for Young Adults

Abby-Care: Coverage for Young Adults

U.S. AND AFGHANISTAN LOOK AT POST-2014 STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Panetta: U.S.-Afghan Agreement Shows U.S. Commitment

By Jim Garamone

WASHINGTON, April 23, 2012 - U.S. and Afghan officials are studying a tentative agreement on a strategic partnership post-2014, White House and Defense Department officials announced today.

"For the United States, that will mean review by the interagency, consultation with Congress, as appropriate, and final review by the president," according to a White House announcement. "Once these internal processes are complete, we expect to be in a position to sign the agreement."

President Barack Obama wants the agreement to be signed by the NATO Summit in Chicago next month.

"It is fair to say that it represents a significant step in the relationship and makes clear that the United States is committed to an enduring presence in Afghanistan that will be there to help Afghanistan to become a country that can securely govern itself," Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said. "We've committed to an enduring presence and this agreement makes clear that we will have that presence there beyond 2014."

Officials will not discuss the specifics of the draft agreement, although Panetta said the size of the U.S. presence in Afghanistan remains to be worked out with Afghan government officials.

Both sides took drafting the document seriously, Navy Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said. "It represents the cornerstone in the long-term relationship between the United States and Afghanistan," he said.

The document lays out the strategic parameters for a long-term relationship in many areas, not just a security, Kirby said. "It is certainly ... a clear indication that the United States is not going to abandon Afghanistan," he said. "It is a clear statement of our desire to form and maintain a strategic relationship."

The size of any U.S. force that remains in the region after 2014 will be negotiated with the Afghan government, much like the recent agreement the United States signed with the Afghan government transferring the prisons to them and putting them in the lead of night operations.

Officials hope the agreement will assuage Afghans' concerns that the United States may lose interest in the region after 2014 and leave as it did after the Soviets were expelled from Afghanistan in 1989. That loss of interest and support enabled a decade of civil war and the rise of the Taliban.

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND AGRICULTURE SECRETARIES TOWN HALL MEETING ON CAREER PATHS AND POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

FROM:  DEPARTMENT HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Secretary Duncan joined Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack at the University of Wisconsin-Platteville to host a White House Rural Council town hall with agriculture teachers and students from across Wisconsin.

USDA and Education Host White House Rural Council Meeting, Sign Interagency Agreement to Promote Career Pathways and Postsecondary Education
APRIL 18, 2012
The U.S. Departments of Education and Agriculture have teamed up to enhance agricultural education and related programs that promote postsecondary and career pathways, including teaching, according to an interagency agreement to advance agricultural education. U.S. Education and Agriculture Secretaries Arne Duncan and Tom Vilsack announced the agreement today during a White House Rural Council meeting with local educators at the University of Wisconsin-Platteville.

“Agricultural education is central to the future of American prosperity,” Secretary Duncan said. “Many Americans may not realize that agriculture supports 1 in 12 jobs across the nation. For the U.S. economy to continue to rebound and grow, agriculture has to help lead the way.”

Duncan added: “Agricultural educators face unique challenges—but they also can tap into unique strengths within their tight-knit communities. Agricultural education is very much about the jobs of the future—and not a backwards-looking curriculum to preserve the past.”

“American agriculture makes incredible contributions to the health of our economy and the strength of our nation as a whole. That’s why it’s so important to recruit the best and brightest of the next generation to pursue careers in agriculture,” said Vilsack. “USDA works each day to help educate, train and support the scientists, farmers and ranchers we’ll need to provide America’s families with the food and energy they need. This partnership with the Department of Education will help us offer even greater opportunities for young people who want to dedicate their lives to agriculture, food and natural resources.”

The agreement calls for the Departments to exchange a variety of information and participate in joint activities, including webinars, conferences, outreach materials, and helping each other identify industry-validated standards, assessments, best practices, accreditations, and certifications. The Departments also will work jointly to find and use pathways and career programs of study that can prepare students for rewarding careers related to agriculture, food and natural resources.

Since taking office, President Obama’s administration has taken historic steps to improve the lives of rural Americans, put people back to work and build thriving economies in rural communities. From proposing the American Jobs Act to establishing the first-ever White House Rural Council – chaired by Agriculture Secretary Vilsack – the President is committed to a smarter use of existing Federal resources to foster sustainable economic prosperity and ensure the government is a strong partner for businesses, entrepreneurs and working families in rural communities. The Council is working to break down silos and find areas for better collaboration and improved flexibility in government programs and works closely with local governments, non-profits and private companies to leverage federal support.

Since August 2011, the White House Rural Council has supported a broad spectrum of rural initiatives, including a $350 million commitment in SBA funding to rural small businesses over the next five years, launching a series of conferences to connect investors with rural start-ups, creating capital marketing teams to pitch federal funding opportunities to private investors interested in making rural investments, making job search information available at 2,800 local USDA offices nationwide, making HHS loans available to help more than 1,300 Critical Access Hospitals recruit additional staff, and helping rural hospitals purchase software and hardware to implement health IT. USDA and the Navy have also announced a partnership to advance the use of next-generation biofuels in Navy operations.

FEMA SAYS NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM COULD EXPIRE MAY 31, 2012

FROM:  FEMA
National Flood Insurance Program Could Expire May 31, 2012, if Not Reauthorized
Here Are a Few Things You Need to Know
April 23, 2012
Many businesses, commercial owners, homeowners and renters purchase flood insurance to reduce the escalating costs of repairing damage to buildings and their contents caused by floods.

As we approach a potentially active hurricane season, FEMA’s Administrator, W. Craig Fugate, is engaging Congress to strongly recommend reauthorization of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) which will expire on May 31, 2012.

The NFIP plays a key role in our Nation’s efforts to prevent and recover from flood disasters. Reauthorization of the NFIP before it expires on May 31, 2012, is essential to our Nation’s efforts to prevent and recover from flood disasters. Floods are the number one natural disaster in the United States in terms of lives lost and property damaged. The NFIP identifies areas of flood risk; it encourages communities to implement measures to mitigate against the risk of flood loss; it provides financial assistance to help individuals recover more rapidly from flooding disasters; and it lessens the financial impact of flood disasters on individuals, businesses, and all levels of government.

In recent years, a series of short-term reauthorizations and temporary suspensions of the NFIP have eroded confidence in the program among stakeholders, including state governments, tribal governments, local communities, individual policyholders, mortgage lenders, and the private insurance industry. In addition to disrupting the program's day-to-day operations, short-term reauthorizations and temporary suspensions create significant uncertainty regarding the federal government's long-term commitment to underwriting and indemnifying flood losses. In the absence of such a commitment, our stakeholders are less likely to make the investments needed to successfully sustain, strengthen, and grow the program — thereby undermining the NFIP’s effectiveness and efficiency over time.

A two year re-authorization will send a clear signal to citizens, communities, and private sector partners that the federal government will continue to support our nation's efforts to manage flood risk. If Congress does not re-authorize the NFIP before it expires on May 31, 2012:

  Property owners will be unable to complete new mortgage transactions. Property owners who would normally be required to purchase flood insurance to fulfill lending requirements will be unable to obtain affordable coverage. The National Association of REALTORS estimates that a lapse in authorization jeopardizes an estimated 1,300 sales each day or about 40,000 mortgage closings per month.

The Disaster Relief Fund will bear additional costs when flood strike. Property owners who are unable to obtain flood insurance coverage may seek and be eligible for assistance from the Disaster Relief Fund. Consequently, failure to reauthorize the NFIP will result in transferring a portion of the costs of flood losses that otherwise would have been paid by the NFIP to the taxpayer through the Disaster Relief Fund.

The NFIP may have to halt payment of claims for recent events, including Hurricanes Irene and Lee, if a lapse in authorization substantially reduces cash flow into the program from premiums or a significant flood event follows the lapse and drains the remaining, non-renewable funds.

CHINA BASED OIL FIELD SERVICES CO. CHARGED WITH MISLEADING INVESTORS

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMISSION  
Washington, D.C., April 23, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a China-based oil field services company and two senior officers involved in a scheme to intentionally mislead investors about the value of its assets and its use of $120 million in IPO proceeds. The SEC additionally charged the company’s chairman of the board involved in a separate $40 million theft from the company.

The SEC alleges that SinoTech Energy Limited grossly overstated the value of its primary operating assets in financial statements, specifically the lateral hydraulic drilling (LHD) units that are central to its business. The company’s IPO registration statement in November 2010 promised investors it would spend $120 million raised in the IPO to acquire LHD units, but the company’s purchase contracts and other documents otherwise show it acquired far fewer LHD units, lied about the number it acquired, and grossly overstated the value of the units. SinoTech CEO Guoqiang Xin and former CFO Boxun Zhang were responsible for the fraud.

Meanwhile, the company’s chairman Qinzeng Liu is accused of secretly siphoning at least $40 million from a SinoTech bank account in the summer of 2011. He then stood silently by as SinoTech – attempting to counter negative Internet reports that the company was potentially fraudulent – falsely assured investors that the company had that money and more in the bank. Liu later admitted his theft to SinoTech’s auditor and board of directors, but he retained his position and investors were not informed of the incident.
“SinoTech’s brief life as a public company in the U.S. markets has been rife with falsehoods,” said David Woodcock, Director of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office. “Investors deserve the utmost honesty and transparency from companies and their officers when they tap public markets in the United States.”

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (Lake Charles Division), SinoTech’s public filings certified by both Xin and Zhang represented that the company had purchased 16 LHD units worth $94 million. In fact, the company only acquired 11 such units worth less than $17 million. SinoTech continually misled investors about the value of its equipment in press releases and SEC filings between December 2010 and November 2011. Xin went so far as to try (unsuccessfully) to convince SinoTech’s LHD unit supplier to issue public statements verifying the company’s false valuations to investors. The supplier refused.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Liu’s admitted theft of $40 million in company funds occurred sometime between June 30 and August 17. Liu withdrew the money from SinoTech’s primary bank account at the Agricultural Bank of China. SinoTech did not record Liu’s withdrawal in the company’s books and records, and it retained Liu as its chairman despite his confession.

The SEC alleges that the theft remained hidden when SinoTech attempted to rebut an Internet report alleging fraud in August 2011. In an effort to persuade investors that SinoTech was legitimate, the company issued a press release stating that SinoTech’s bank balances totaled more than $93 million and included $54 million on deposit at the Agricultural Bank of China. Liu knew this claim was false due to his earlier theft from that account.

The SEC’s complaint seeks permanent injunctive relief and financial penalties against all defendants as well as disgorgement of ill-gotten gains by SinoTech and Liu. The SEC also requests bars against each of the individual defendants from serving as officers or directors of U.S. public companies.

JUSTICE & EDUCATION DEPARTMENTS REACH SETTLEMENT WITH BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS OVER ELL STUDENTS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, April 23, 2012
Departments of Justice and Education Reach Settlement with Boston Public Schools to Ensure Equal Opportunites for ELL Students
The Department of Justice and the Department of Education reached agreement with the Boston Public Schools (the district) and its superintendent today to ensure that English Language Learner (ELL) students in Boston receive the services and supports they need to overcome language barriers, as required by the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  This agreement replaces an interim settlement agreement entered on Oct. 1, 2010, which required the district to implement short-term remedies to ensure that thousands of students improperly excluded from the district’s ELL programs were promptly assessed and provided services.

The agreement reached today governs the district’s transition from these short-term remedies to longer-term policies and programs that expand the coverage of Boston’s ELL program and are designed to ensure that the services provided to ELL students are of high quality, delivered by qualified teachers and tailored to the specific needs of each individual student.   The agreement requires the district to continue its efforts to accurately identify and place ELL students, and further ensures that ELL students, who face unique challenges, including students with interrupted former education and students with disabilities, receive assessments and services that are specially designed to address and ameliorate those challenges.   The agreement also affords ELL students greater access to the higher-level learning opportunities in the district. To ensure these programmatic changes are effective, the agreement further requires the district to evaluate the effect of these changes on student achievement over time through robust, disaggregated data analyses.

“We applaud the Boston Public Schools for working collaboratively with the United States to develop a comprehensive plan to effectively serve all students who are not proficient in English,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.  “We believe this plan can guide other school districts seeking to ensure that its English Language Learner programs not only meet the requirements of federal law, but also empower English Language Learner students to strive for success in their education and lives.”  

“A key to success is access to a high quality education and today, the Boston Public Schools is promising to provide limited English proficient students an equal opportunity for success by giving them access to programs and services tailored to meet their needs, including access to accelerated programs,” said Russlynn Ali, Assistant Secretary for the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Education.   “The Department of Education is committed to working with the Boston School Committee as it implements this comprehensive plan.”  

“ Our education system must provide our children with opportunities to develop into productive citizens regardless of their proficiency in English.  When English language learners lack properly trained teachers, those opportunities are curtailed,” said U.S.  Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz of the District of Massachusetts.  “We share the goal of continued improvement to Massachusetts schools and look forward to the progress of this collaborative effort.”

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PANETTA WORKS TO EXPAND SOUTH AMERICAN DEFENSE TIES

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Panetta Visit to Expand South American Defense Ties

By Cheryl Pellerin

WASHINGTON, April 22, 2012 - During his first visit to South America as defense secretary, which starts today, Leon E. Panetta will meet over the next week with military officials in Brazil, Colombia and Chile, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said.

The secretary "is looking to expand defense and security cooperation with three important countries in the region and, increasingly, in the world," Little added.

Panetta will travel to Brasilia and Rio de Janiero in Brazil, Bogota in Colombia, and Santiago in Chile.

This trip follows a late-March visit by Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to the U.S. Southern Command in Miami, Fla., and then to Brazil and Colombia.

In Brazil Dempsey met with Defense Minister Antonio Celoso Amorim and top-ranking military official Gen. Jose Carlos de Nardi in Brasilia, and in Bogota with Colombian Defense Minister Juan Carlos Pinzon Bueno and Gen. Alejandro Navas, commander of the Colombian Armed Forces.

For Panetta, one set of discussions in South America will focus on partnering with Brazil, Chile and Colombia to help build capacity for the military to assist civil authorities in such Central American nations as Guatemala, El Salvador and Belize, a senior defense official told reporters in a background briefing on Friday.

"The challenges these countries face are towering compared to their own capacity to deal with them," he said, adding that Brazil, Chile and Colombia already are significant contributors to building partner capacity.

Colombia, for example, offers capacity-building assistance in 16 countries inside and outside the region, including Africa.

Colombian service members have trained more than two dozen Mexican helicopter pilots and now train police in Honduras and Guatemala. The nation also provides assistance in nondefense areas like justice reform, the official said.

Also in the region, in the aftermath of the January 2010 earthquake and tsunami in Haiti, thousands of U.S. and Brazilian military personnel worked together to provide life-saving relief to the Haitian people. It was the largest combined operation of U.S. and Brazilian military forces since they fought together as allies in World War II.

"We could have done better in Haiti if we had glued together the system in advance to provide for more effective defense support to civil authorities," the official said.

"By collaborating with [all three countries]," he added, "the United States can get down to specifics about which country will be conducting specific initiatives and what kinds of initiatives, so together we can ensure the investment we're making ... is as efficient and effective as possible."

During an April 9 meeting in Washington, President Barack Obama and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff established the U.S.-Brazil Defense Cooperation Dialogue and announced that Panetta and Amorim would hold the first meeting this week in Brazil.

The DCD will help bolster cooperation between DOD and Brazil's Ministry of National Defense, and between the nations' militaries, the White House said in a statement.

Beyond the Western Hemisphere, the Defense Department is looking to Colombia and Brazil, both of which already have deep ties to Africa and now provide assistance there, to help U.S. Africa Command with peacekeeping and other efforts there.

"Africa typifies the situation we're in, where the United States has limited capacity to help build partner capabilities," the defense official said.

"Brazil and Colombia ... are stepping up to the plate. Let's collaborate with them, establish a dialogue between their militaries and Africom so we're working in mutual support in an informed, cooperative way," he added.

Panetta will also seek to expand the range of defense collaborations, including traditional military efforts such as training, exchanges and joint exercises.

"Clearly we still have plenty to talk about in continuing to support the Colombians in their efforts against [the narcoterrorist group FARC, for Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarios de Colombia or Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia]to talk about counternarcotics," the official said.

Panetta also will discuss new challenges like cyber security and defense support to civil authorities that offer opportunities for collaboration.

In 2014 Brazil will host the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, or FIFA, World Cup tournament in Rio de Janeiro, and two years later that city will host the 2016 Olympic Games.

"We know in the United States how to provide defense support to civil authorities, to law enforcement or to help prepare for the kinds of challenges these world-class sporting events can attract," he said, "so we're going to share expertise [and] talk about the kind of dialogue that will help nations get prepared."

He added, "In the context of limited resources of the United States for defense ... we have an opportunity to partner together with other nations so they become security exporters."

Panetta, Little said, sees Brazil, Chile and Colombia "as increasingly important players on the regional stage and also in terms of their leadership roles internationally."

All have made progress in terms of their economies, their militaries and their political situations over the last several years, he added.

U.S. Department of Defense Armed with Science Update, THE FOG OF WAR

U.S. Department of Defense Armed with Science Update

MISSILE TALK

FROM:  U.S. NAVY
NORCO, Calif. (March 29, 2012) Telemetry systems personnel from the performance assessment department at Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC), Corona Division, conduct pre-operation testing and software upgrades on portable auto-tracking telemetry antennae. The department develops, operates and maintains communications, computing and instrumentation systems required for missile flight data collection, analysis and dissemination. (U.S. Navy photo by Greg Vojtko/Released)

MILITARY MEMBERS AND FAMILIES HELP ON EARTH DAY TO CLEANUP TRASH

FROM:  U.S. NAVY
 Japan (April 21, 2012) Chief Yeoman Ken Vinoya, center, helps gather trash at the Misawa Fish Port. Misawa Air Base service members and family took part in an Earth Day cleanup in the local community, and helped remove several tons of refuse. (U.S. Navy Photo by Senior Chief Mass Communication Specialist Daniel Sanford/Released)

Misawa CPO 365 Helps Conduct Beach Cleanup
By Senior Chief Mass Communication Specialist Daniel Sanford, Naval Air Facility Misawa Public Affairs
MISAWA, Japan (NNS) -- Members of the Navy Misawa CPO 365 Program spent the morning cleaning up the local Misawa Fish Port, April 21.

The event was in coordination with the 42nd annual observance of Earth Day, a global event filled with activities highlighting environmental concerns and issues.

More than 30 Misawa Air Base chief petty officers (CPOs) and board-eligible first class petty officers worked together to help the community pick up trash and help beautify the areas in the local community.

"Were here this morning to help out our host country and Mother Nature," said Chief Navy Counselor Todd Wean, who hails from Sarasota, Fla. "The members of CPO 365 do monthly community relations projects together anyway, so it seemed like a good fit for us to combine our effort in the community, while also helping out the environment in the process."

The cleanup is always one of the largest environmental awareness projects in Misawa with several tons of refuse being collected and removed from the fish port.

"We have a great relationship with the local community, and they are very open, receptive and helpful to service members living here in Misawa," said Chief Cryptologic Technician Collection Erika Haws, who originally hails from New Orleans, and serves as the Navy Misawa CPO 365 community relations coordinator. "It's nice to return the favor, and help make this area even more beautiful than it already is."

Besides, the CPO 365 members, many more Misawa service and family members were also on hand to help with the cleanup. Misawa cub scouts, girl scouts and numerous other base groups and organizations joined CPO 365 in their effort.

"It's nice to see folks of all ages come on out from the base and take ownership in the local community," said Wean. "We love Misawa, and this is just one small way that we can make it an even better place to be stationed and live."

Prstence, Titan a Enceladus

Prstence, Titan a Enceladus

WALGREEN PAYS $7.9 MILLION TO RESOLVE FALSE PRESCRIPTION BILLING ACCUSATIONS

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WEBSITE
Friday, April 20, 2012
Walgreens Pharmacy Chain Pays $7.9 Million to Resolve False Prescription Billing CaseAllegedly Offered Illegal Inducements to Government Health Care Programs Beneficiaries to Transfer Prescriptions to Walgreens
Walgreens, an Illinois-based corporation operating a national retail pharmacy chain, has paid the United States and participating states $7.9 million to resolve allegations that Walgreens violated the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced today.

The settlement resolves allegations that Walgreens offered illegal inducements to beneficiaries of government health care programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), in the form of gift cards, gift checks and other similar promotions that are prohibited by law, to transfer their prescriptions to Walgreens pharmacies.  The government investigation alleged that Walgreens had offered government health beneficiaries $25 gift cards when they transferred a prescription from another pharmacy to Walgreens.  The company’s advertisements that promoted gift cards and gift checks for transferred prescriptions typically acknowledged that the offer was not valid with Medicaid, Medicare or any other government program.  Nevertheless, the government alleged that Walgreens employees frequently ignored the stated exemptions on the face of the coupons and handed gift cards to customers who were beneficiaries of government health programs, in violation of federal law.

“This case represents the government's strong commitment to pursuing improper practices in the retail pharmacy industry that have the effect of manipulating patient decisions,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.

The allegations were brought to the government by two whistleblowers, known as relators, in two separate whistleblower lawsuits filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act and state False Claims Act statutes.  The relators, Cassie Bass, a pharmacy technician formerly employed by Walgreens, and Jack Chin, an independent pharmacist, will receive $1,277,172 from the United States for their role in filing the qui tam actions.  The federal share of the settlement is $7,298,124.

“This case vindicates and protects the interests of consumers throughout the nation by ensuring that they remain free from undue influence by large retail chains when making decisions about which pharmacies to entrust their own individual health care,” said André Birotte Jr, U.S. Attorney for Central District of California.
   
“The law prohibits pharmacies from using their retail clout to lure patients whose prescriptions are subsidized by the government,” said Barbara L. McQuade, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.  “Continuity with a pharmacist is important to detect problems with dosages and drug interactions.  Patients should make decisions based on legitimate health care needs, not on inducements like gift cards.”

“This settlement makes clear that corporations seeking increased profits over their patients' needs will pay a substantial price,” said Daniel R. Levinson, Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services.  “Violating Federal health care laws, as Walgreens allegedly did by offering incentives for new business, cannot be tolerated.”

This resolution is part of the government's emphasis on combating health care fraud and another step for the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which was announced by Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius in May 2009.  The partnership between the two departments has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation.  One of the most powerful tools in that effort is the False Claims Act, which the Justice Department has used to recover more than $6.7 billion since January 2009 in cases involving fraud against federal health care programs. The Justice Department's total recoveries in False Claims Act cases since January 2009 are over $9 billion.

This case was investigated jointly by the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Central District of California and the Eastern District of Michigan, the National Association of Medicaid Fraud Control Units and the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General.
           
The claims settled by today’s agreement are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability.

FORMER GATEWAY CFO SETTLES SEC FRAUD ACTION

FROM:  SEC
April 18, 2012
On April 10, 2012, a final judgment was entered against John J. Todd, a former CFO of Gateway, Inc. Todd consented to entry of the final judgment without admitting or denying the allegations made by the Securities and Exchange Commission that he engaged in fraud and other violations of the federal securities laws in connection with Gateway’s recognition of revenue in the third quarter of 2000. This concludes the litigation of this action, brought in 2003 against three former officers of Gateway.

The SEC alleged that Todd falsely represented Gateway’s financial condition in the third quarter of 2000 in order to meet financial analysts’ earnings and revenue expectations. Among other transactions, the SEC alleged that Todd caused Gateway to record $47.2 million in revenue from a one-time sale of fixed assets to Gateway’s third-party information technology services provider in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and that Todd, then Gateway’s CFO, caused Gateway to recognize an additional $21 million in revenue from an incomplete sale of computers to a second entity, also in violation of GAAP. The SEC alleged that absent either of these transactions, Gateway would not have met analysts’ expectations with regard to its third quarter revenue.

Todd consented to a final judgment permanently enjoining him from violations of the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and from violations of SEC Rule 13b2-2, which prohibits making misrepresentations and omissions of material fact to company auditors, as well as from aiding and abetting the issuer reporting provisions of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder. Todd further consented to be barred for ten years from acting as an officer or director of a public company, and to pay disgorgement of $165,000, constituting his salary and bonus for the relevant quarter, together with prejudgment interest thereon of $138,162.24 totaling $303,162.24, and a $110,000 penalty.

Previously, on March 7, 2007, a jury had rendered a unanimous verdict finding Todd and defendant Robert D. Manza, Gateway’s former controller, liable for fraud, making false representations to auditors, aiding and abetting issuer reporting violations and other violations following a three week trial. On May 30, 2007, the Honorable Roger T. Benitez overturned the jury verdict as to the fraud and certain other claims. The SEC appealed that ruling, as well as the District Court’s prior August 1, 2006, grant of summary judgment to Gateway’s former CEO, Jeffrey Weitzen, dismissing the SEC’s case as to Weitzen. On June 23, 2011, the Ninth Circuit reversed those rulings and remanded the matter to the District Court. On January 25, 2012, the Court entered final judgments against Weitzen and Manza pursuant to their consents. [LR 22244 (January 31, 2012.]

DOJ AUDIT FINDS $64 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS FROM DEEPWATER HORIZON DISASTER

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Audit of Gulf Coast Claims Facility Results in $64 Million in Additional Payments Department of Justice-Ordered Audit Found the Gccf Marked a Significant Advance in Disaster Response
                                                                                                       Photo:  Wikimedia
WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice today released the executive summary of the report by an independent auditor of the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF), the facility set up to process claims in the wake of the April 20, 2010, Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  The audit found that the GCCF claims process constituted a significant advance in disaster response.  But the audit also identified significant errors that are now being corrected by sending more than $64 million in additional payments to approximately 7,300 individuals and businesses throughout the Gulf region.

“When the Attorney General visited the Gulf last summer, he heard concerns about the GCCF and ordered an independent auditor to evaluate it,” said Acting Associate Attorney General Tony West.  “Approximately 7,300 individuals and businesses throughout the Gulf region will now see the benefits of that action, to the tune of over $64 million in additional payments.  While there’s no question that the independent GCCF labored under extremely challenging circumstances to get a huge number of payments processed successfully, the fact that this audit has resulted in tens of millions of dollars being made available to claimants who were wrongfully denied or shortchanged underscores the importance of the audit.”

Last summer, the Attorney General visited the Gulf and met with individuals and small business owners whose lives were affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  He acted on those concerns and ordered an independent auditor to evaluate the Gulf Coast Claims Facility.  The evaluation is now complete, and the Department of Justice has released the Executive Summary of the auditor’s report.

As a result of the Attorney General’s acting on those concerns, checks totaling approximately $64 million are now being sent to approximately 7,300 claimants who received less than they were entitled to under the GCCF’s procedures.

The auditor also found claimants who were overpaid as a result of errors applying the GCCF’s procedures, but did not attempt to identify all the claimants who were overpaid or quantify those overpayments.  The GCCF is not making any effort to recover those overpayments.

The report also noted the unprecedented nature of the spill and the context that surrounded the GCCF’s operations:  intense pressure to pay claims quickly, a claimant community that was experiencing significant economic pressures after a very difficult post-spill tourist season, and over a million claims that included many with very complex economic losses.  The GCCF paid out $6.2 billion to more than 220,000 claimants before it closed its doors as a result of the settlement between BP and the private plaintiffs.

The evaluation was conducted by BDO Consulting.  BDO’s team was selected after interviews with the Department of Justice and the attorneys general from the five Gulf states, and drew on previous experience in the Gulf Coast area assisting clients with claims related to Hurricane Katrina, including in the hospitality, retail, commercial and residential properties, seafood processing, consumer products and transportation industries.  As part of this evaluation, BDO evaluated tens of thousands of claims files and searched the GCCF’s entire database of over one million claims to identify other claims that may have suffered from the same errors.  BDO is preparing a full report of its findings that will be published later this spring.

U.S. Navy Photos of the Day Update

U.S. Navy Photos of the Day Update

SPEECH BY KATHLEEN SEIBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Atlantic Health Care Forum
April 19, 2012
Washington, DC
It’s good to be with you this morning to talk about the future of health care at a time when that future looks brighter than ever.
For years, we’ve known that health care costs were rising at an unsustainable rate.  Families saw their health insurance premiums rise three times faster than their wages.  Doctors saw patients go without medications they couldn’t afford.  Businesses saw health coverage grow into one of their biggest expenses.  State and city governments saw rising health care bills crowd out investments in education and public services.
We knew it was possible to do better.  Around the country, leading health systems and forward-looking communities were showing that you could bring costs down by improving care and promoting better health.  There were hospitals cutting readmissions by doing better follow-up care; employers lowering costs with innovative wellness programs; states saving money by giving people more tools to help them quit smoking.  The critical question for our health care system was whether we could help these pockets of excellence spread.

Three years ago, the answer to that question wasn’t clear.  After all, we had been talking about many of these issues for years.   I like to quote a piece from the New York Times.  “Although four fifths of the population is covered by some kind of health insurance, the protection afforded is often skimpy and unreliable….  Close to half the people who file pleas for bankruptcy each year do so because of medical debts….  Americans might bear these medical burdens more cheerfully were they getting their money’s worth; but if the price of health care isn’t right, neither is the product.”

The article goes on to talk about the shortage of primary care physicians, unnecessary procedures, the high number of preventable deaths, and exorbitant out-of-pocket costs.  It sounds very familiar, right?  And it was published in 1977.

So it’s understandable that there was some skepticism about the possibility improving care on a broad scale.  We had been hearing the mantra of better care and lower costs for decades, but we had limited results to show for it.

That’s why the last few years have been so exciting.  From a health policy perspective, they have been the most transformative years in decades.  Everyone knows the Affordable Care Act, the most important health legislation since Medicare and Medicaid.  But we have also had historic tobacco control legislation, major children’s health coverage legislation, the beginning of a national transition to electronic health records, an unprecedented campaign to end childhood obesity led by the First Lady, a first-of-its-kind effort to make health data available to innovators, and the list goes on.

But what’s been even more thrilling is the wave of innovation we’re seeing in state houses, town halls, hospitals, health centers, insurers, schools, and boardrooms across the country.  More than ever before in my lifetime, we are seeing a surge of efforts to shape a better health care system for the future – not just in pockets of excellence, but in cities and towns across the country.

In many cases, these efforts have been encouraged and supported by the policies I just mentioned.  But the driving force behind them has been leaders on the state and local level who want to make health care work better for the people in their communities.  Together, they are starting to answer the question of whether widespread improvement is possible, and the answer is: yes.

This morning, I want to talk briefly about three areas where we’re seeing some of the biggest changes.

I can still remember one of the most heartbreaking letters I got since I took this job.  It was from a woman in Maine whose elderly father had gone to the hospital with a minor infection.  While he was receiving care, he acquired a much more serious infection.  A day and a half after he came home, he collapsed.  Within a couple months, he was dead.
In the US today, these stories are far too common.  At any given time, about one in every 20 patients staying in a hospital has an infection related to their care – even though these infections are largely preventable.

But we are seeing signs that the tide is turning.  Our department recently released new data showing significant nationwide reductions in three common healthcare-associated infections since 2008.  In particular, we’ve seen a nearly one third drop in central line blood stream infections – one of the most common kinds.   This means these infections are now falling at roughly four times the rate we saw a decade ago.  And today, we are announcing new estimates that show that this reduction alone has saved up to 1,250 lives and an estimated $82 million.

Part of this drop can be explained by a national Action Plan for reducing these infections that our department launched in 2009.  But efforts by state health departments and individual health systems and hospitals have been just as important.

The best example is probably the Partnership for Patients.  The Partnership is an alliance created under the Affordable Care Act that seeks to reduce preventable injuries in hospitals by 40 percent and preventable hospital readmissions by 20 percent by the end of next year.  Achieving these goals would save 60,000 lives and reduce Medicare costs alone by $10 billion over a three year period.

When we launched this Partnership a year ago, we weren’t sure what reaction we would get.  It was totally voluntary.  There was no direct financial incentive for joining.  But today, more than two thirds of America’s hospitals – over 4,000 in total – have signed on to do their part to reduce these errors.  And it’s not just hospitals.  We have more than 4,000 additional partners from employers to health insurers.

There is much more work to be done.  But when you visit health systems around the country as I do, it’s hard not to feel the change in the air.   Every day, more and more care organizations are setting the same goal as a doctor I spoke to at Nationwide Children’s Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.  He told me that they did not strive to reduce harmful errors for the children they treat by 20 percent, or 40 percent.  Their goal was to eliminate these preventable errors altogether.   And we have never been moving faster towards that goal as a country than we are today.

Another area where we’ve seen dramatic gains is health information technology.  The promise of electronic health records goes back to the 1960s.  For decades now, Americans have been hearing that the days of musty cabinets and misplaced paper files were coming to an end.  And yet when this Administration came into office, less than a fifth of doctors used even a basic digital record.
What we’ve seen since then is incredible.  In just three years, the share of primary care doctors switching to electronic health records has almost doubled from 20 percent to 39 percent.  The share of hospitals using electronic health records has more than doubled from 16 percent to 35 percent.

The potential health benefits from this shift are huge.  One recent study looked at more than 27,000 adults with diabetes.  Those with paper health records got the best standard of care seven percent of the time.  Those with electronic health records got the best standard of care 51 percent of the time.  That’s a more than 600 percent improvement!

And in the long run, it’s not hard to see how electronic health records might help bring down costs too, by reducing paperwork and helping eliminate duplicate tests and procedures.

This transformation would not be happening without the investments we made in the Recovery Act.   From creating new centers to help small practices make the most of their health records, to working with industry to establish common standards, to providing incentive payments to help offset the upfront cost, we are eliminating many of the obstacles that kept this technology from spreading.

And today, I’m happy to announce that as of this March, nearly 225,000 health care providers and nearly 3,500 hospitals have signed up for these incentive payments, committing themselves not just to adopting electronic health records, but to using them to improve care.

But government action alone cannot explain the change we’re seeing around the country.  As I’ve traveled the country, I’ve seen a new level of interest among providers, driven in part by a new generation of doctors for whom a tablet computer in the pocket of their white coat is just as essential as a stethoscope around their neck.  And there is a new level of excitement among technology developers too.  Since 2009, hundreds of new health IT products have been developed, mostly by small companies with 50 or fewer employees. And venture capital investment in health IT is up more than 60 percent.

We’re witnessing something that’s never been done before: a national transformation in how we store and share health information, all happening in a matter of years.

Finally, a third area where we’re seeing significant movement is the emergence of new care models.  Everyone here understands the limitations of our current system, which rewards increases in the quantity of care, not improvements in the quality.   It’s a system nobody would design today if we started from scratch.  But in the past, many have resisted change.  The attitude was: better the devil we know, than the devil we don’t.

That’s why it’s been so encouraging over the last couple  years to see the response to some of the reforms in the health care law.  This winter, 32 leading health systems and physician groups signed up to be Pioneer ACOs, pledging to lead the way in transforming their practices to emphasize prevention, improve care coordination, and cut waste.  We estimate their efforts will improve care for about 800,000 people with Medicare, while saving up to $1.1 billion over five years.

Then, earlier this month, another 27 organizations signed on for a different version of the ACO model.  They represent almost every kind of health organization you could imagine.  And we’ve already received another 150 applications for a July start date.  ACOs used to be a kind of code for the cutting edge care that could only be practiced at certain elite health systems.  Now, it’s a model that health organizations around the country are embracing as the best path forward.

And this isn’t the only area where providers are stepping up.  One recent survey of 69 hospital executives found that just one in six have bundled payments to pay for episodes of care in place now.  But five in six expect to have them in place within two years.  And health insurers are also taking the initiative, providing more support for models like medical homes that emphasize primary care and helping patients manage chronic conditions.

Change is sweeping our health care system.  Across the country, health organizations are showing that high quality, low cost care isn’t like being an NBA star, restricted only to those with special genes.  Instead, it’s more like being a great free throw shooter.  Anyone can do it if they put in enough work.

Of course, we have a long way to go.  The process of improving care is always incremental and changes in the health care system are never easy.  It can be hard to focus on long-term reforms when there is always another patient to see.

But in many cases, the cost involved in these improvements is small: one of the most effective interventions for reducing healthcare-associated infections is a simple checklist.  And in cases where change is more expensive, like adopting an electronic health records system, people are increasingly realizing that the cost of not changing is even higher.

After all, the alternative to lowering costs through improvement is lowering costs through blunt cuts.  That would simply put more strain on a system that already is coming up short for doctors and patients.

The better path forward is improving care.  And communities across America are showing it can be done.  What we need to do now is make sure we continue to spur them on, whether it’s by creating new incentives, providing technical assistance, or just helping them learn from each other.  That’s what this Administration has been working to do over the last three years.  And it’s what we’ll continue to do with your help in the months to come.

Thank you.

Presseeinladung: ISS-Symposium in Berlin

Presseeinladung: ISS-Symposium in Berlin

GENERAL DEMPSEY VISITS AFGHANISTAN

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Chairman's Afghanistan Visit Focuses on Afghan Forces' Progress

By John D. Banusiewicz
American Forces Press Service

KABUL, Afghanistan, April 22, 2012 - The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff  will focus on progress in Afghanistan's national security forces during a visit here.

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey arrived this evening, and after a private dinner with a small group of field grade officers, met for about an hour with Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen, commander of the International Security Assistance Force.

Discussions here also will center on Allen's plan to draw down the U.S. presence in Afghanistan to 68,000 troops by the end of September, the chairman told American Forces Press Service during the flight here from Amman, Jordan.

Dempsey's visit to Afghanistan comes between last week's meetings in Belgium among NATO foreign and defense ministers and the alliance's summit in Chicago next month.

"The ministers get together and provide [the defense chiefs] with political guidance, and we discuss how we turn that into military advice and planning," the chairman explained. But the summit will focus on the way ahead after 2014, when Afghan forces will have security responsibility for all of Afghanistan, he added.

In the meantime, Dempsey said, the key for military leaders is to work along with their Afghan partners to ensure Afghanistan's national security forces continue their progress toward full security responsibility and to work together in addressing the challenges that lie ahead in that effort.

Earlier today, Dempsey met in Amman with Lt. Gen. Mashal al-Zaben, Jordan's defense chief. They discussed the long-standing U.S. Jordanian partnership and regional security issues, including Jordan's perspective on the situation in neighboring Syria.

U.S. CONCLUDES REVIEWING BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
United States Concludes Review of Model Bilateral Investment Treaty
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 20, 2012
The following is the text of a joint statement issued by the U.S. Department of State and the Office of the United States Trade Representative.
Begin Text:

Today, the U.S. Department of State and the Office of the United States Trade Representative announced the conclusion of the Administration’s review of the United States’ model bilateral investment treaty (BIT) and the release of the revised 2012 model BIT.

International investment is a significant driver of America’s economic growth, job creation, and exports. The 2012 U.S. model BIT text will help achieve several important goals of the Obama Administration ensuring that U.S. companies benefit from a level playing field in foreign markets, providing effective mechanisms for enforcing the international obligations of our economic partners, and creating stronger labor and environmental protections.

The 2012 model BIT also supports our strategic international commitment to a robust economic agenda. It will play a critical role in ensuring that American firms can rely on strong legal protections when competing for the 95 percent of the world’s consumers who live outside the United States, as well as in promoting good governance, the rule of law, and transparency around the world.

Like the predecessor 2004 model BIT, the 2012 model BIT continues to provide strong investor protections and preserve the government’s ability to regulate in the public interest. The Administration made several important changes to the BIT text so as to enhance transparency and public participation; sharpen the disciplines that address preferential treatment to state-owned enterprises, including the distortions created by certain indigenous innovation policies; and strengthen protections relating to labor and the environment.

BACKGROUND
Since February 2009, when the Administration initiated a review of the United States’ (2004) model BIT to ensure that it was consistent with the public interest and the Administration’s overall economic agenda, the Administration has sought and received extensive input from Congress, companies, business associations, labor groups, environmental and other non-governmental organizations, and academics. While revisions to the model BIT do not require Congressional action, negotiated BITs require advice and consent of two thirds of the Senate.

A BIT is an international agreement that provides binding legal rules regarding one country’s treatment of investors from another country. The United States negotiates BITs on the basis of a high-standard “model” text that provides investors with improved market access; protection from discriminatory, expropriatory, or otherwise harmful government treatment; and a mechanism to pursue binding international arbitration for breaches of the treaty. High-standard BITs, such as those based on the U.S. model, improve investment climates, promote market-based economic reform, and strengthen the rule of law. The United States has more than 40 BITs in force with countries around the world, and the investment chapters of U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) contain substantially similar rules and protections. USTR and the Department of State co-lead the U.S. BIT program.

THE CIVIL WAR AND HONORING THE WAR DEAD

FROM:  VETERANS AFFAIRS
PHOTO: AFTERMATH AT GETTYSBURG
The Civil War’s Legacy of Honoring War Dead
April 18, 2012 by Alex Horton
We’ve all been taught the consequences of the U.S. Civil War since childhood. How it led to the emancipation of slaves, solidified state and federal rights, and further made the case for women’s suffrage. But the unprecedented carnage of the war also transformed the attitude of how the nation honors its military dead; a tradition now indelible to the American spirit.

That was the premise behind a talk given by Harvard University President Dr. Drew Faust at VA central office in Washington today. Through her research, Dr. Faust found that the Civil War fundamentally changed the way our country handled death on the battlefield. Both the Union and Confederacy were ill equipped to bury fallen troops in a dignified manner, and death notifications sent to families were informal and happenstance, if they happened at all. Unmarked and hasty graves littered fields and farms near battlefields where hundreds of thousands of men struggled and died.

Humanitarian ideas and the dignity of the human spirit were transformed in the crucible of war, and an emerging sense of responsibility for our war dead led to drastic shift in government obligations.

Edmund Whitman, an Army officer and a quartermaster during the war, led the effort. Whitman inspected cemeteries and battlefields across the south from 1865-1869, examined informal records, and conducted interviews to find out locations of fallen troops. He oversaw the reinterment of over 100,000 Union soldiers. About 300,000 were reburied in 74 national cemeteries, which now fall under the purview of the National Park Service.
As Dr. Faust noted, it was Whitman’s mission to put human faces and human cost to the war, and to recognize the sacrifices of so many of our own. His work helped to establish the notion that those who fell in battle are to be honored, and it’s our duty as citizens to remember and cherish that.

It’s difficult to fathom the damage of the war. An estimated 600,000 soldiers from both sides were killed; if the war were fought today with the same casualty rate, six million would lay dead. But it’s also hard to imagine a time when the care of our slain troops was an afterthought—an annoyance to both troops in the field and folks in the halls of government. It’s now one of VA’s most sacred obligations, but it took a war of staggering magnitude for our nation to realize it had a duty to honor the dead as much as they honored us.

AIR FORCE WEEK IN PHOTOS

Air Force Week in Photos

EXERCISE FOAL EAGLE IN S. KOREA SHOWS U.S. AND KOREAN FORCES READINESS

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Korea Exercise Lets Battalion Stretch Its Wings
By Jim Garamone
WASHINGTON, April 19, 2012 - Exercise Foal Eagle – an annual training exercise in South Korea – has given a Hawaii-based battalion an opportunity to spread its wings.
The exercise, which ends April 30, allows U.S. and South Korean service members to work together in defense of the Korean peninsula.

The exercise has added impetus this year, as North Korea launched a missile in defiance of United Nations agreements, said Army Lt. Col. Tim Hayden, commander of the 1st Battalion, 25th Infantry. His unit traveled to South Korea from its base in Hawaii to be part of the exercise.

"[The launch] did serve a strong point to remind us of our responsibility to maintain our readiness and our partnership with our Korean allies," he added.
The battalion focused on both the training mission and the combined mission with South Korean partners. The unit worked closely with South Korean army units as the exercise unfolded. It is a type of mission the unit, which has deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, has not practiced for years, Hayden said.

The battalion started preparing for movement last year and deployed in March. The unit has been able to train on everything from individual skills up through platoon and company level, the colonel said, and conducted combined training with the South Koreans.

"One of the events I'd like to highlight was a combined defensive live-fire shot here on Rodriguez Range," Hayden said from South Korea. "It was a great event, because we partnered with a Korean tank platoon."

The South Korean tankers partnered with the battalion's mobile gun systems – a 105 mm main gun on a Stryker vehicle variant. This allowed the troops of both nations to fight a defensive live-fire battle together.

"What we found was through our troops leading procedures and our rehearsals was both the Korean army and our Army have a lot in common – we have high-caliber leaders, we have well-trained soldiers, we have very good equipment," he said. "We can communicate and fight on the battlefield today as allies and partners."

Many of the American soldiers are veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, Hayden noted.
"What this has been able to do for us is focus on a higher-intensity fight, more of a decisive action, and fight in the terrain that we would have to fight here on the peninsula should a contingency arise," he said. "The change of terrain has forced my leaders to think beyond the standard mission set they are used to in Iraq or Afghanistan."

The colonel said his unit is ready for the type of combat that could happen in Korea. "We are ready," he said. "We've mastered the basics, and we're focused on our core competencies and our fundamental warfighting skills, and we remain disciplined in what we do."

DAVE CAMP, CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE CALLS FOR LESS SPENDING, GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY

FROM:  CONGRESSMAN DAVE CAMP’S NEWSLETTER
April 17, 2012
Highlights from the House: Highlights from the House: Camp Calls for Less Spending, Greater Accountability & Comprehensive Tax Reform
Congressman Dave Camp met with constituents across Michigan’s Fourth District last week to listen first hand to their concerns. Camp answered questions about how economic uncertainty continues to dampen the nation’s economic recovery. Residents agreed with  Congressman Camp’s plan to advance comprehensive tax reform to restore economic growth and job opportunities for hardworking Americans. Coupled with tax reform, Washington must be held accountable for the use of taxpayer dollars  rein in out-of-control federal spending, which remains a significant threat to America’s economic future. AsCBS recently reported, the national debt has now increased more during President Obama's three years and two months in office than it did during George W. Bush’s presidency.

With spending and debt at record levels, it is no wonder that more than three-quarters of Americans believe the country is still in a recession. Historically, Small businesses have led the country out of recessions.  Congressman Camp knows their recovery plays a key role to unlocking job growth and getting Americans back to work.

A recent survey shows that with taxes due tonight, cash-strapped small businesses are putting their scarce resources towards tax compliance, rather than growth and hiring. The good news is: the Senate rejected a tax hike yesterday. The better news is: Camp is leading House Republicans in tax reform efforts to boost small business job creation. On Thursday, the House will vote on Camp’s Small Business Tax Cut Act (H.R. 9) to give small businesses a 20% tax deduction. A Fiscal Associates study shows the Small Business Tax Cut with help create more than 100,000 new jobs a year once fully in place, directly benefitting 22 million small businesses. The president has called small businesses the "anchors of our Main Streets" hopefully he and will join the House to provide lower taxes and higher growth to America’s job creators.