SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL'S BRIEFING ON THE AFRICAN UNION SUMMIT

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Background Briefing on the African Union Summit
Remarks
Senior State Department Official
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
May 24, 2013

MODERATOR: And this is just to – as always, but just so you know, on background as a Senior State Department Official.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. All right, so thank you. Drink a lot of water. You’re at 8,500 feet. If you go to the Embassy, it’s 9,000 feet up. The other thing, too, is if you want to protect yourself on health, I wouldn’t eat raw vegetables.

MODERATOR: We had a thorough briefing.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah.

MODERATOR: Very thorough. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Do you speak from experience?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes. I served here for three years (inaudible). And if you have a chance off (inaudible) to see the – and everyone is looking at Lucy (ph). I think (inaudible) is much better, (inaudible) and it’s on display at the museum.

MODERATOR: Oh. All right.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: So anyway, just a couple things that we’re working on. As far as – number one, of course, this is the 50th anniversary. It really kind of highlights what the African Union has done over the last 50 years. And I think if you take the African Union at snapshots from 50 years ago to 20 to 10 to five to now, the developments and the progress has been dramatic. We now have a lot of peacekeeping operations organized by the African Union, et cetera. We have a lot of efforts that we’re doing jointly with the UN as well as the United States.

The second issue, of course, is to highlight Ethiopia as a host for the African Union and everything that it’s doing to support the African Union. And in that context, Ethiopia has done a lot of work for us in the African Union in Abyei, which has been a crisis area, Darfur, the Congo, Libya, Burundi issues, et cetera. So they’ve been a very part and parcel part of the African Union experience.

The third theme, of course, is to highlight what the United States is doing throughout Africa. And that is, of course, good governance, emphasizing holding governments accountable to the people. The other issue is economic development, and also peace and security. And also it’s a prelude to the President’s trip, so that means highlighting women issues as well as youth.

And as kind of background information, 70 – over 70 percent of Africa, 850 million population, is under the age of 30. And in many countries, two-thirds are under the age of 15. So it’s a very young, dynamic continent.

So with that, tomorrow the schedule is very chockablock jam-packed. And so what we’re trying to do as far as getting bilats for Secretary Kerry – the main area, of course, is Sudan. That means trying to meet with the Foreign Minister Karti, who was supposed to have come to the United States, but because the Secretary was on travel, we couldn’t arrange those meetings. So we’re going to do it here at the African Union.

And then the other side is Salva Kiir from Southern Sudan. The reason why is because of the challenges between North and South Sudan on the recent oil problems. The stoppage of the oil is restarted. The second area, too, is just the border issue challenges. And another area, too, is to work with Southern Sudan on their economic development program.

Another area that we’re going to try to arrange a meeting is with Goodluck Jonathan from Nigeria. As you know, before we left Washington we did issue a statement on the offensive that Nigeria had launched into the north against Boko Haram. We, of course, in that statement said we do not deny or oppose a country’s right for security or its effort to secure its border and the sovereign rights to do so, but also our concerns on human rights issues in the north. And that’s something of great concern, and growing concern actually.

The other area, too, that we’re going to try to meet is with the African Union leadership, and that’s Madam Zuma, and also Hailemariam, the Prime Minister of Ethiopia. Ethiopia is the president for the African Union. So it’s really a dual role for Prime Minister Hailemariam, not only as the President of the AU but also as Prime Minister of Ethiopia, and a discussion of bilateral issues.

MODERATOR: And the other two, just to add, of course, he’s going to be meeting with Morsy tomorrow. The focus of that from our end will be urging action on, of course, putting reforms in place, economic reforms in place, so that they can shore the IMF loan agreement. Also they’ll discuss Middle East peace. As you know, Egypt has played a role both with the Arab League in reaffirming API, and they’ve also had a historic role in that, so the Secretary will update the President on his talks in Jerusalem and Ramallah. And he’ll also, of course, stress the importance of respecting human rights. And he’ll also meet with Ban Ki-moon tomorrow to discuss the good work the UN and AU have done working together on a number of issues in Africa, but also in preparation for the Geneva conference. He’ll update him on, of course, the events of the last couple of days and discuss plans moving forward.

With that --

QUESTION: Can I ask you a question about the – is it confirmed that the Secretary will meet with President Goodluck Jonathan from Nigeria, one? And then two, the statement that you issued was really extremely hard-hitting, as I recall. And one of the things that it talked about was deeply concerned by credible allegations that Nigerian security forces are committing gross human rights violations which internally exacerbate (inaudible) – have you seen any improvement since you issued the statement? Or is this partly just to try to drive home that this may be continuing and that you want it to stop?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We’re looking at our relationship in Nigeria as extremely important. I mean, kind of one background information is if you ask any leaders on West Africa, what is one area of the relationship that’s really critical, and the issue is Nigeria. Why? Because Nigeria has such a – plays such a pivotal role in West Africa, not only in peacekeeping operations but the economy, its population. And the issue comes in as whatever happens in Nigeria affects the regional states. So Nigeria becomes very critical.

We’ve worked with Nigeria on a wide range of issues. And one of them, of course, is stability within its own country, and that is the – towards the north. When Johnnie Carson was the Assistant Secretary, he made the speech – I think it was at – is it CSIS or USIP, one of the two – and he articulated that in the north, if you have – the education rates was around 40 percent as opposed to 60 percent for the south, and you had a greater focus on southern development, and that more needed to be done in northern development. In other words, economic development, trade and investments, education and healthcare, the whole wide range of areas. And so with that in mind, what we want to say is that there has to be greater dialogue, greater interconnections between the two areas. And I think that would bring not only stability to Nigeria but also calmness in the hill region.

QUESTION: Right, but do you still believe that gross human rights violations are being perpetrated? Or do you still – there are continued allegations that gross human rights violations are being perpetrated by government forces in the north.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: When we issued the statement, it was based on information that we had been receiving that there was continued violation of human rights. And we continue to monitor the north. We’re going to continue to monitor the north. More important is we continue to work with the Nigerians, their military and their security to address the situation in the northern area. And as human rights violations continue, and I think the concern is that because of our concern, it does continue.

QUESTION: Because of what?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Because of our concerns in the north that human rights violations still continue, that we will continue to monitor and work with the Nigerian Government to address those concerns.

QUESTION: And so, since your statement came out, is it continuing?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Again, as I say, we’re monitoring the north. We’re monitoring the north.

QUESTION: And this will be raised by the Secretary in the meeting?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.

QUESTION: So you’re not --

QUESTION: Wait. Can I just – it’s either continuing or it’s not continuing. It’s a very simple question.

MODERATOR: It’s continuing. It’s continuing.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It’s continuing. And that becomes – it still remains a concern for us, is the peace, stability in the north and human rights issues. That remains --

QUESTION: I know, but what’s continuing? Sorry, this – I don’t want to belabor this, but human rights violations are continuing, correct?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Human rights violations, yes.

QUESTION: This is post-Baga?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Post-Baga.

QUESTION: And can you just – the first part of Arshad’s question: Is this meeting with Jonathan Goodluck confirmed, or are you still working on it?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We’re still working on the – I think – the problem comes in is all the scheduling is just --

MODERATOR: We’re going to get a schedule from upstairs, just to see where things are. This was something that’s planned, so we’ll get you guys that before the end of it.

QUESTION: Sorry. The Sudanese Foreign Minister, you said he was supposed to come to D.C. but he’s not, and so they’re meeting him here.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Right.

QUESTION: Does that mean that the Sudanese delegation, which, as you know, was a bit contentious, is not coming to Washington? Or is this separate?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No, no, this is separate. This was an earlier meeting that was being arranged. We had it scheduled, but the Secretary had another trip overseas, and so we had to delay it. And we just couldn’t get the schedule back on track, so we said we’ll meet at the African Union Summit.

QUESTION: So the delegation, then, that is expected to include Mr. Nafie Ali Nafie, to your knowledge, is still on? That was announced.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah, yeah. The meeting here is just with Foreign Minister Karti.

QUESTION: I understand.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. And the issue about Nafie Ali Nafie’s visit, I think that would be discussed with Karti. But I think we will have to give you a briefing later about when that trip is and the details.

QUESTION: Right. No, I understand. Nobody really knows when that trip is, but --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: That’s right.

QUESTION: But the United States, at present, still intends to welcome a delegation that includes Mr. Nafie Ali Nafie?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: At this time.

QUESTION: Is that issue and his alleged involvement in human rights, will that be part of the conversation with the Sudanese Foreign Minister tomorrow?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Right now, I think the main topics for the Khartoum meeting is going to be the relationship with the southerners and the issue of the oil which came up. That, I think, raised a lot of concerns on our part about the relationship between north and south.

QUESTION: So could I ask you – obviously I know there’s a lot of leaders here, but are there any plans for any meeting with the leaders of Rwanda or DR Congo to discuss the – and also Mali and the issues that are happening up there?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: The schedule is so tight. We’ve been doing everything from the lunches and dinners that are being arranged, who’s sitting next to the Secretary at the table. I think that’s still being finalized.

MODERATOR: There’s still a lunch and a dinner. There’s possibilities that there can be kind of pull-asides. So we’ll keep you updated as we know of those, but this is what’s on the schedule as of now.

QUESTION: Can you – is there any expectation that Secretary Kerry or are there any plans of Secretary Kerry to meet or have any interaction with President Ahmadinejad?

MODERATOR: No.

QUESTION: And can you rule out that they’ll see him or deal with him?

MODERATOR: Yes. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: They’ll be in the same room at some point?

MODERATOR: There is a – it is a conference, but there are no plans to see him or --

QUESTION: Do you know the proximity or is --

MODERATOR: I don’t. I don’t. I don’t know that level of technical detail of the setup.

QUESTION: They won’t be sitting at the same dinner table then?

QUESTION: He’s short; Kerry’s tall. He won’t see Kerry. (Laughter.)

MODERATOR: I don’t know how the dinner tables are set up, to be honest. True answer. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: You mentioned that there’s a Dlamini Zuma meeting as well. Is that something you’re working on or you know?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh, no, that’s – because that’s the chairperson for the African Union.

QUESTION: Right. What are the highlights expected there?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Again, it’s to highlight the great progress made by the African Union. The other issue, too, is our continued support and assistance for the African Union. As you know, the United States is the first non-African country to assign an ambassador to the African Union. And I happened to be one of the acting ambassadors during that period, too, so --

QUESTION: But maybe we – maybe there’s some Mali in there? I mean, is that --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes. It’s going to be – when you talk to the African Union, it’s a wide range of issues. And that goes into what the African Union is doing on the Mali issue, on Sudan, on Somalia and the Great Lakes, the careful coordination with the United Nations. Just for your information, we had a meeting today with – or lunch with the deputy chair to kind of go over a lot of the issues that will be raised tomorrow. But our relationship with the African Union is very wide-ranging. So --

QUESTION: On Mali, I mean, apart from Secretary Kerry’s meetings, what’s the discussion here about the eventual African force? And where does all that stand? How big a part of the conversation is that here, and how do you assess where they are?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think if you talk about AFISMA, the African force, it really has to be in a context of our major goal and objective, and that’s elections on July 28th and --
QUESTION: It has to be in the context of what?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: -- of the – I’m sorry, of the elections, the presidential elections in July 28th. The reason why is because really the elections are critical. Without a credible, transparent election – and we’re doing everything we can, from supporting the registration of refugees in other countries to working on the registration of the Tuaregs in Gao and other areas, as well as the other minorities such as the Songhais and the Peuls is that without the elections, really that becomes a basis for a lot of the other crises that we’re trying to address. That is the dialogue between the north and the south.
The second thing is the humanitarian relief efforts, and of course the addressing of the issue of extremism in the north, and that’s posed by Ansar al-Dine and AQIM.
QUESTION: So --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: And so in that context, then you look at the African Forces. And the issue is that if you look at the African force, you have, I mean, over a dozen countries, three different languages that are being spoken, the different – the capacity and capability of the African forces that are different levels, not all the forces can operate in the north. And then I think it’s still a work in progress to see how you can integrate the interoperability of these African forces.
And so it’s going to take time. And in that issue is that we are very thankful and appreciative of the French forces playing such a significant role in northern Mali. The other issue, too, is trying to get the right force structure, massive transitions from AFISMA to MINUSMA – UN operations. And so those are a lot of things that have to be addressed. But the right questions are being asked by ECOWAS, the African Union, and the United Nations. And as you know, the – a new UN Special Envoy is being assigned from Cote d’Ivoire, the Dutch person, Albert – was it Gerard Koenders?
QUESTION: You mentioned AQIM in the context of Mali. Is that going – is al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb going to be perhaps one of the topics across the board for the Union, or is it going to be contained country by country?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It’s – One background note is you have, on the Mali crisis, it is one of the – an African issue which galvanized and attracted all these African countries in ECOWAS. In other words, from Cote d’Ivoire to non-ECOWAS countries like Chad, to Algiers, to all these countries that are affected by not only extremism, but also by the flow of different ethnic groups and tribes such as the Tuaregs, which are really in multiple countries. And then the other issue, too, is the flows of refugees. You’re talking 400,000 – over 400,000 people in North Mali who are displaced, either internally or are refugees. So that affects the entire region. And so because of that, it’s really attracted the attention of the entire African area in that region.
QUESTION: So would it be fair to say it’s a point on the agenda that --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: That’s right. AQIM, has to be looked at in a context that there’s four interconnected, simultaneous ongoing crises that are taking place. And AQIM or extremism is only one of those four crises. And so it’s not the – like the main one, but it’s in a context of the four.
QUESTION: And the –
QUESTION: There are just four?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: The four crises are, again, reestablishing democratic governance, because that’s going to be key to a lot of resolving the other crises. The other one is a dialogue between Bamako and the minority tribes in the north. That’s the Peul, the Songhais, the Arabs and the Tuaregs. The third is the humanitarian crisis. Not only do you have 400,000 displaced in northern Mali, but if you look at the trans-Sahel, because of the drought and weather and climactic problems, you have – at one point it was 13 million people food insecure. It’s been eased up because of our USAID efforts. And then the fourth issue, of course, is the issue of extremism.
QUESITON: Wait. How many refugees did you say? How many are without food?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Of the 400,000 displaced, what is it? It’s – I thought was about even, but a little less than 200,000 – 177,000 in refugee camps in the areas and the rest are internally displaced in Mali.
QUESTION: And then – great. And then – well, not great, but thank you for clarifying that. And then – (laughter) – you said that at one point there were 13 million --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: That’s across --
QUESTION: -- food insecure.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: -- across the Sahel.
QUESTION: And you said USAID efforts had helped bring that down. How many do you think now are food insecure?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I would defer to AID, but it’s – we’re addressing the needs. It’s not --
QUESTION: It’s still millions, though?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh yes, of course.
QUESTION: One question on that food insecurity talk. I mean, you mention these four, but how much do they interact? I mean, this food insecurity, the jobs, the problems like that, how much does that interact with other problems, including extremism?
SENIOR STATEDEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I mean, if you have already a problem with drought, and then on top of it you start adding the insecurity or the instability in northern Mali contributing or exacerbating those people who are at risk of food insecurity, that danger remains there.
The other issue, too, is if you have one country or one area that’s insecure that also compounds and exacerbates the problems that we’re trying to address and makes it more complex.
QUESTION: Can you go back to Mali? You were starting to say something about without credible elections there’s going to be problems basically. Can you say what that’s going to mean from the U.S. and what you want the African countries to bring in terms of consequences, in terms of pressure to make sure that you get something that resembles a democracy story?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: When you – I think if you look at December it was – I think the United States was really pushing for credible, open elections, and there’s a couple of reasons for that. Number one is in a coup situation, we have to impose 7008 sanctions. In order to raise those sanctions, you have to have elections – national elections and the election of a government. So that’s one.
The second issue, too, is that looking at how to resolve the problems in Mali is that if you don’t have a government that is – that people can talk to, discuss, or has the authority to negotiate or to do the dialogue with the North, then that becomes a hindrance to your efforts to dialogue and the address a lot of those things in the North. So things on those two issues – I think the change event from January to now that elections become really the priority.
QUESTION: But are you going to do? What are you – if – what are you and the other African – the African countries going to say to Mali to make sure this happens? It may be in their best interest, but how are you going to tell them, "Look, if you don’t do this, you’re not going to get as much military support. You’re not going to get as much political support. You’re not going to get help at all with dealing with the Tuaregs going across borders." What specifically are you going to tell them so that they actually do what’s good for them?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think – look at the Brussels meeting that took place on was it May 15th? There the Tuareg and President Hollande of France articulated that elections were important in the resolution of the crisis in Mali. And really that kind of underscores that this becomes one of the major focuses for resolving the Mali crisis.
Now what are we doing? We have all the countries that – African countries that are providing troops for AFISMA, which will become MINUSMA. Those countries have bought in that elections are important. The other issues, too, is that on the donor conference that part of the electoral process – I mean, part of the donation deals with governments and democracy, which is elections. For the United States, we’re putting in --
QUESTION: Part of the donation – I’m sorry, what?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Part of the donation is for --
QUESTION: Donation of what? I couldn’t hear.
QUESTION: Money.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Donations of money in Brussels.
QUESTION: Right. Brussels. Okay.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: So in other words, the United States is putting in a little less than 7 million for the elections, but then other countries, too, will be putting money into it, and part of that money collected is also going to go for elections and electoral processes.
QUESTION: Can I ask one about – back on Nigeria? In just simple terms that an ordinary person can understand, what is Secretary Kerry going to say to the President about the human rights abuses that you believe continue to (inaudible)?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: As you know, the Secretary met with Nigerian Foreign Minister Ashiru in Washington, and remember, Nigeria is a very complex – relationship issues that are very important to Nigeria as well as to us, and it’s not – it’s a whole wide range of issues that we’re discussing with Nigeria from economies to economic development to securities to what Nigeria’s contributing to Malian forces, AFISMA, and also to peacekeeping operations. Nigeria plays a critical role well beyond its own borders in all parts of Africa, just because of its not only peacekeeping operations but because it plays a role in peacekeeping and security around Africa, just as South Africa does. It’s an important continent-wide country. And so our discussions with Nigeria encompasses a wide range of issues, and human rights in the north is just one of those issues.
MODERATOR: Is it fair to say that he’ll reaffirm our concerns about human rights --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Right. That’s right.
MODERATOR: -- abuses in the north?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes. And as we did with –
MODERATOR: That we’ve expressed before and to the Foreign Minister last meeting?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: And as stated in our public statement.
QUESTION: Can I ask –
MODERATOR: One thing just – oh, sorry. I just wanted to make sure on the schedule that you guys know, so I didn’t forget, these are the confirmed meetings, and this is still being worked through. And just remember that the African leaders who are participating have sessions in the morning and afternoon, so some of this is pulling them out of things, so it’s possible there could be more added.
QUESTION: But this is for sure?
MODERATOR: This is for sure.
QUESTION: Good.
PARTICIPANT: And --
MODERATOR: Oh, go ahead.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I’m sorry. And then going to back to Nigeria, we have a Bi-National Commission, so we have strategic talks with South Africa, Angola, and Nigeria. And Nigeria Bi-National Commission discussions have really been very wide-ranging, progressive in the areas that we’re discussing. So when we talk about security in Nigeria, it’s just not military or intel; it entails the entire security (inaudible), finances, economy, et cetera. Because those are also security issues.
QUESTION: I guess what I was asking for it in simple terms. I was hoping you would say something just like he’s going to urge the Nigerian Government to ensure that its military ceases such abuses.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.
QUESTION: Thank you. (Laughter.)
MODERATOR: Correct.
QUESTION: We have a deal.
MODERATOR: Get up here, Arshad.
QUESTION: What are the meetings?
MODERATOR: Ethiopian Foreign Minister, Sudanese Foreign Minister --
QUESTION: Foreign Minister or Prime Minister?
MODERATOR: Sorry. Prime Minister. Sorry, long day.
QUESTION: Which one, Ethiopian or --
MODERATOR: Ethiopian Prime Minister.
QUESTION: Right.
MODERATOR: That’s one we’re doing an avail, after that one, joint avail. Sudanese Foreign Minister, AU Chairperson, Ban Ki-moon, South Sudan President, and Egyptian President. Those are the confirmed. There are others we’re still working on.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) Goodluck Jonathan confirmed or no?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No. Not yet.
MODERATOR: Not yet.
QUESTION: Can I just ask – I’m not an expert on Sudan and South Sudan issues. You mentioned the oil. What is going to be the content of this discussion tomorrow on South Sudan - Sudan oil? What are you going to try to accomplish?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think the oil issue I think has strained trust between the North and the South and really it’s restoration of trust. That’s really the basic – one basic thing is to restore trust between North and South to work together to resolve common, shared problems, which is the border issue, it’s the wealth issue, it’s the oil issue.
MODERATOR: Do you want him to explain what the oil issue is?
QUESTION: Yes.
QUESTION: Yeah.
QUESTION: Well, where it stands. I mean, you guys –
MODERATOR: -- talk about it.
QUESTION: -- talk about it, and you issued a statement some weeks or months ago cheering the agreement. And what’s happened since?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Well, right now, as you know, the oil pipes are operating now. They’re flowing again. So you don’t have the prospect of the pipes, where it’s coagulating and the oil breaking the pipes or leaking into the (inaudible). So no it’s flowing again. But again, it’s – I think what the North and South have to do is discuss what gave rise to the North putting restrictions on the oil, what is it that – further discussions need to take place between the North and the South. And as you know, ongoing discussions take place between the North and the South here in Addis Ababa. You have the African Union High-Level discussions. And I think when we get back to Washington is – and I defer you to our Special Envoy’s Office on Sudan to give you really a good in-depth discussion and briefing on Sudan.
QUESTION: Who’s the special envoy now?
QUESTION: It was Princeton Lyman.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Special Envoy’s Office.
QUESTION: Oh, okay.
QUESTION: For Michael’s sake and certainly also for mine, because I haven’t written about this in a long, long, long time, can you explain in real simple terms? The issue, as I understand, is the South has the oil, the North has not been – has at times not been willing to allow it to be transported, and it’s all because of the issues over how the revenue gets shared?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Right. Yes. That’s the bottom line is revenue sharing.
QUESTION: Did they solve the revenue issue or did they just get --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think it’s – the issue is – I mean, in simple terms, it is revenue. But in larger terms, its – it goes into the relationship between the North and the South, how they’re going to address the whole wide range of issues. And unfortunately, how they express those issues is expressed, let’s say, in this instance, is the blockage of the oil by the North. So now what we’re trying to do is they build trust and find good (inaudible) for them to resolve their problems on the whole wide range of issues from the borders to wealth-sharing to citizenship to nationality, et cetera.
QUESTION: And how – really stupid question, but two questions. One, how long were the shipments, or more precisely I guess the flow, through the pipelines cut off? And secondly, how did the North do that? Did they have like a giant spigot, or did they just refuse to allow it to be transported along?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. We have to get back to you on how long. (inaudible)
QUESTION: Days or weeks?
QUESTION: It was January of ’12 to --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Off and on. But I mean, this most recent one, because we had an agreement for the oil, oils to flow – I’d have to get back to you on the exact dates.
QUESTION: Right. But it included this year though?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.
QUESTION: Okay. And then how do they stop it? Just by refusing it to be shipped?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: That’s right. Because the oil – as you know, the pipes go through up to the Port of Sudan and other, which is Khartoum controlled.
QUESTION: Yeah. Okay. And so in other words, by refusing to let it ship on things get filled up and then you can’t --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Right.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: [Moderator], can I just ask, I know you’re going to send out a schedule at some point, but just what time you think you’ll have that joint press avail?
QUESTION: 8:40 a.m., right?
MODERATOR: Yeah. It’s 8:40 a.m.
QUESTION: 8:40 a.m.
QUESTION: They sent it already.
MODERATOR: Yeah, we sent you where --
QUESTION: Well, maybe I’m not getting emails.
MODERATOR: Well, you’re not getting emails here.
QUESTION: Okay.
MODERATOR: We sent you a tentative, which may have had all of the meetings I went through. It may have had others that are still being worked through.
QUESTION: Okay. 8:40 a.m. Okay. That’s great. Thank you. I just wanted to --
QUESTION: I feel a little silly about the Nigeria thing, but it’s not even for sure that you’ll meet – that he will meet with President Jonathan Goodluck --
MODERATOR: In a bilat.
QUESTION: In a bilat. Right. But he should raise those issues in a bilat. So you’re basically seeking a meeting at which you would raise these issues.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.
QUESTION: Great.
QUESTION: Does he want to meet the Secretary?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh, yes. I mean, we – this is a – yeah, we do.
QUESTION: So you expect this to happen, it’s just --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We hope it happens.
QUESTION: Yeah.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Again, you know our relationship is so robust and as complex that we’re going to meet whatever happens. We will meet.
QUESTION: Yeah. Here?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. And it’s not just Goodluck Jonathan. It’s the previous presidents as well also play a tremendous role – Obasanjo and others – in the process.
MODERATOR: Anything else?
QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you very much.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MODERATOR: Thank you very much.

THE OLD GUARD REMEMBERS THE FALLEN

Army Sgt. Titus Fields of the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment -- The Old Guard -- places an American flag in front of a gravestone in Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington, Va., May 23, 2013. U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Jose A. Torres Jr.

FROM: U.S. ARMY, MEMORIAL DAY
Old Guard Marks Graves With Flags to Honor Fallen Warriors
Army News Service

WASHINGTON, May 25, 2013 - A sea of tiny American flags flutters gently in the breeze now at Arlington National Cemetery. The flags were placed at gravesites May 23 in tribute to the service and sacrifice of the nation's fallen service members who rest there.

In advance of Memorial Day, soldiers from the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment -- The Old Guard -- carefully placed the flags by hand, one by one, in front of each gravestone at the cemetery.

"I think every soldier you will talk to, especially the Old Guard alumni, [say] that for them, 'Flags In' is one of the most meaningful things that Old Guard soldiers get to take a part in," said Army Maj. John Miller, spokesman for the Old Guard. "It's just overwhelming that you can go out and be amongst all these warriors that have gone before you and you can honor their legacy by just a single token of putting a flag at their gravesite and giving them a hand salute."

The Flags In event is an old tradition at the cemetery, Miller said.

"Flags In is a tradition that the Old Guard has carried on now for over 40 years -- though nobody has an exact date," he said.

The tradition actually goes back even further, though there was a break in the tradition for a while. But The Old Guard revived it after World War II. It dates back to the Grand Army of the Republic in 1868 to honor Union Soldiers that had fallen during the Civil War, Miller said.

About 1,200 Old Guard soldiers participated in the event this year, and about 220,000 graves received a flag, as did memorial markers and rows of urns at the cemetery's columbarium. Miller said the soldiers were able to accomplish the task in about four hours -- beginning after the last full-honors funeral ended at the cemetery. That means, for the graves alone, a soldier placed a flag every 80 seconds.

The major said soldiers put a toe against the center of the stone, and then place the flag at the heel, providinging a uniform appearance. Uniformity and perfection is something that the Old Guard prides itself on, Miller said.

"The Old Guard soldiers are the last thing that a family sees as they bury their loved one from the Army," he said. "And that's what we try to give every service member's family. Their final vision of the Army is one of perfection and professionalism, and that is how we try to honor the fallen service members in the cemetery every year as well."

In addition to each grave marker at the cemetery receiving a flag, sentinels at the Tomb of the Unknowns placed flags at the graves of each of the four unknown service members interred there. Additionally, about 13,500 flags were placed at the Soldier's and Airmen's Cemetery in Washington, D.C.

ROSE GOTTEMOELLER ON GEOPOLITICS AND NUCLEAR ENERGY

Rose Gottemoeller

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Geopolitics and Nuclear Energy: The View from the State Department
Remarks
Rose Gottemoeller
Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security
Nuclear Energy Institute
Washington, DC
May 15, 2013

Thank you for that introduction and thank you for having me here today. It is a pleasure to talk to the principal nuclear industry organization in the United States. Your involvement in all parts of the nuclear energy sector, as well as your work with universities, research laboratories, and labor unions is so important to our energy future. Congratulations on the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Atomic Industrial Forum, your predecessor organization. It is sometimes hard to believe that nuclear energy is over a half century old.

I am sure that most of you are familiar with the Obama Administration’s "all of the above" energy strategy – and that it unequivocally includes nuclear energy – but it bears repeating. President Obama has stated clearly that "we must harness the power of nuclear energy on behalf of our efforts to combat climate change and advance peace and opportunity for all people."

Since taking office in 2009, the President has worked continuously to improve our nation’s energy security, efficiency, and sustainability. With his recently proposed FY2014 budget, the President has made it clear that he will not back down from energy issues and has proposed significant targets – and budgetary resources – to dramatically improve our economy’s energy productivity, lessen our oil imports, and deploy clean power generation technologies.

Energy and Geopolitics

There are three fundamental reasons that energy issues matter to American foreign policy.

First, energy rests at the core of geopolitics – an issue of both wealth and power, which means it can be both a source of conflict and a basis for international cooperation. It is in the interest of the United States to resolve disputes over energy peacefully. We must keep energy supplies and markets stable during global crises and ensure that countries don’t use their energy resources to force others to bend to their will or forgive their bad behavior.

Second, energy is essential to how we will power our economy and manage our environment in the 21st century. We will work to promote new technologies and sources of energy to reduce pollution, to diversify the global energy supply, to create jobs, and to address the threat of climate change. Nuclear energy can play a role in each of these efforts.

Third, energy is the key to development and political stability. There are 1.3 billion people worldwide who don’t have access to energy. That is unacceptable in economic terms and security terms.

Our nuclear exports are a key strategic asset- a mature energy technology that does not emit greenhouse gases, while also providing a source of base-load electric power. Nuclear energy has an important role to play in pursuing our foreign policy objectives. Our top priority, though, is to make sure that U.S. access to energy is secure, reliable, affordable, and sustainable.

The Administration is working hard to make sure that countries are using nuclear energy safely. In comparison to other energy sources, nuclear power presents a unique set of challenges, most notably those related to safety, security, and nonproliferation.

Of course, when another country buys a U.S. reactor, both of us be confident that the design is safe because it has been certified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). U.S. nuclear exports also increase the transparency of the importing country’s nuclear programs, thus indirectly supporting our nonproliferation policies. When we export U.S. technology, we are also exporting our safety and security cultures.

Looking Ahead

The future of nuclear exports cannot be discussed without considering the future of nuclear energy, in general. It is well known that, following the incident at Fukushima, Japan in 2011, some major economies decided to decrease, and eventually eliminate, their reliance on nuclear power. Despite these shifts, there is still a considerable market for nuclear energy.

The International Atomic Energy Agency Nuclear Technology Review (NTR) for 2012 concluded that, "globally the [Fukushima] accident is expected to slow or delay the growth of nuclear power, but not to reverse it." In fact, the NTR projects significant growth in the use of nuclear energy worldwide, between 35% and 100% by 2030.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has reached similar conclusions. In its World Energy Outlook for 2012, the IEA concluded that while nuclear power would expand more slowly due to Fukushima and lower prices for fossil fuels, by 2035 nuclear generating capacity could increase to 580 gigawatts of electricity, compared to 371 gigawatts in 2010.

The U.S. Department of Commerce estimates the international marketplace for civil nuclear technology at $500 to $740 billion over the next ten years, with the potential to generate more than $100 billion in U.S. exports and thousands of new jobs.

This growth is welcome, as electricity demand is growing rapidly, particularly in emerging economies. By 2035, as much as 80 percent of this growth will take place in China, India and other non-OECD countries. These are the markets of the future. We see nuclear energy playing a critical role in meeting this increasing demand in a way that helps to provide efficient, low-cost power that also mitigates CO2 emissions.

Support for Industry

As we approach these new markets, we know that American nuclear exporters continue to face obstacles in the international market. That said, the U.S. nuclear industry has a number of assets that allow it to remain competitive, and I never bet against American ingenuity.

Our edge in technology is our greatest asset. American reactor designs on the market today are among the most advanced in the world, and some of them include passive safety features that would have been helpful at Fukushima.

The United States has unmatched experience with civil nuclear energy, operating the largest number of nuclear reactors in the world and generating the most nuclear power with the largest installed capacity worldwide.

The United States has top-performing companies all along the nuclear value chain. According to the World Nuclear Association, 12 of the world’s 25 highest-performing reactors are in the United States.

Further, while the NRC is careful not to engage in the promotion of nuclear power or exports, its very existence gives U.S. exporters an advantage. The NRC is widely regarded as the most effective and independent nuclear regulator in the world. By setting the bar for such safety standards we are also working to raise standards for nuclear safety around the world.

Some of the challenges of financing a nuclear power plant can be eased by the Export-Import Bank, the official U.S. export credit agency. While the Bank cannot engage in equity investing, it does offer direct loans and loan guarantees to support U.S. exports, including nuclear exports. This past fall, for the first time in decades, the Ex-Im Bank approved a two billion dollar loan to support a nuclear-related export.

It may not be the first impulse of export firm executives to think of the U.S. Government as a business asset, but there is much that we can do to help. We are developing what we call a "Team USA" approach to civil nuclear engagement abroad. In January 2012, the White House created a new position - Director of Nuclear Energy Policy – to lead this effort. Going forward, this will help us present a unified U.S. message on these issues and increase our presence in the civil nuclear commercial spaces.

Another service that the government can provide is advocacy. Once a potential nuclear project is approved for advocacy by the Department of Commerce’s Advocacy Center, the State Department and other U.S. government agencies can, through active diplomacy with the host country, put U.S. Government support behind the American bidder. Even when more than one American firm is bidding on a nuclear power plant, we may be able to engage in generic advocacy, expressing to the host government our support for a U.S. firm winning the contract.

We also try to ensure that a foreign government’s decisions are being made in a transparent manner on a "level playing field." Our diplomatic posts are sensitive to any evidence that undue influence is affecting a host government’s decision, and those posts are prepared to protest unwarranted discrimination against U.S sellers.

There are a number of other steps that the Administration has taken to ensure that our nuclear exports receive the attention they deserve. The Department of Commerce has established a Civil Nuclear Trade Initiative, the goal of which is to identify the U.S. nuclear industry’s trade policy challenges and commercial opportunities and coordinate public-private sector responses to support the growth of the U.S. civil nuclear industry.

There are important initiatives we are undertaking to significantly reduce the proliferation side-effects of the spread of nuclear energy. For example, in the field of radiopharmaceuticals, the United States plays an active role on several fronts. The Department of Energy is engaged in four cooperative agreements to support the development of domestic production of medical isotopes (in particular molybdenum-99) without the use of highly enriched uranium (HEU).

Last June, the White House established a policy that includes steps to further minimize the export of HEU where possible and preferentially procure non-HEU-based isotopes. The "American Medical Isotopes Production Act," passed in January, further supports these efforts by providing for a complete phase-out of HEU exports for such isotopes by 2020.

Let me close by reaffirming the Administration’s support for American nuclear exports. You all face stiff competition on the international market, but you also have strong resources to draw upon. I want to avoid the cliché, but we are here to help, and I hope we continue to work closely together in the future.

Thank you. I am happy to take a few questions and also eager to hear some thoughts and suggestions from you.

GSA CLAIMS A $300 MILLION SAVINGS WITH NEW WIRELESS PROGRAM

FROM: GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
New Wireless 'Family Plan' for U.S. Government Saves $300 Million
In partnership with federal agencies, GSA secures AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon for first-of-its-kind wireless service and device consolidation plan

May 22, 2013

WASHINGTON -- Today, the General Services Administration (GSA) Acting Administrator joined by executives from AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon announced the award of a new government-wide blanket purchase agreement (BPA) that allows the government to better manage wireless spending by consolidating service plans and centralizing management. The agreements, which will save $300 million over the next five years, is a significant accomplishment for the federal government because it capitalizes on more than a billion dollars that the government spends each year on wireless.

"By buying in bulk, we’re buying once and we’re buying well," said GSA Acting Administrator Dan Tangherlini. "This common sense approach allows us to do what families and businesses across America do every day. We’re driving down costs, increasing efficiency and improving service and operations. These agreements give agencies the ability to pool minutes, order plans and devices more efficiently and have greater visibility into their purchases."

A single government-wide option with the ability to pool minutes is a first for the federal government. Now instead of paying additional overage fees, agencies will have access to a pool of unused minutes within their wireless plan, enabling them to consolidate minutes and save money.

Federal agencies spend an estimated $1.3 billion on wireless services and mobile devices annually. Until now, wireless purchasing has been fragmented among multiple buying channels resulting in individual bureaus, departments and operating divisions across the government managing more than 4,000 wireless agreements and 800 wireless plans from various carriers. This initiative will greatly reduce this duplication and inefficiency in wireless purchases, which will also shrink costs. State and local governments are also eligible to use the contract to purchase service plans and devices to save money and better consolidate and manage wireless spending.

Today’s announcement is a key deliverable of the President’s Digital Government Strategy aiming to increase adoption of mobile technology across government, and is being released as part of the one-year celebration of the Strategy launch. This work is also part of a larger effort led by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to drive strategic sourcing across government. In December 2012, OMB established the Strategic Sourcing Leadership Council to encourage agencies to leverage their buying power on procurements whenever possible, and is looking to GSA to deliver more new government-wide solutions in FY ‘13 and FY ‘14.

Joe Jordan, OMB Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy noted, "This is an important day for our government wide strategic sourcing efforts. We applaud GSA’s work on this initiative, and look forward to working with agencies as they take advantage of these new and innovative agreements that will help save taxpayer dollars."

"Sprint is pleased to participate in this contract and believes that the GSA did an exceptional job leaning on industry and government expertise to pull it together, said Sharon Montgomery, Sprint vice president – federal & public sector. "For years, Sprint Federal has focused on maximizing the Agency’s spend and management capabilities. This Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative (FSSI) will ensure that those sorts of capabilities are available to all agencies and that every dollar spent on wireless technology is maximized."

"As budgets tighten, our customers want more flexibility to find much needed cost savings with wireless services and devices," said Kay Kapoor, president, AT&T Government Solutions. "This new agreement will allow AT&T to offer more value and options to our government customers under one contract, combining the strength of our wireless network with superior service plans and secure devices that meet their specific needs."

"From the delivery of vital citizen services to protecting the homeland, mobility is the catalyst driving transformation of day-to-day federal operations, said Susan Zeleniak, senior vice president, public sector markets, Verizon Enterprise Solutions. "Under the GSA’s Wireless FSSI agreement, federal agencies will benefit from a broad array of advanced mobility solutions, including machine-to-machine and data services, powered by the reliability, speed and reach of Verizon’s 4G LTE network. These services will help agencies boost productivity and accelerate information sharing."

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY MAKES REMARKS WITH ETHIOPIAN FOREIGN MINISTER TEDROS

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Remarks With Ethiopian Foreign Minister Adhanom Tedros After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
African Union Headquarters
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
May 25, 2013

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much. Good morning, everybody. It’s my privilege to be here at this special celebration of the 50th anniversary of the African Union and its predecessor organization. And I’m very, very pleased to have just met with Prime Minister Hailemariam, and I’m happy to be here with the Foreign Minister Tedros who we have met previously and had a chance to talk. And I think there are several key components of our relationship that I want to highlight.

First of all, we are working very closely on economic development, economic issues, bilateral trade issues. And the Prime Minister expressed his hope appropriately that the United States will in fact become more engaged, that the private sector of the United States will become more engaged in Ethiopia. We talked about some of the ways that that could happen. The Africa Growth Opportunity Act – the AGOA Act, as we know it – is one important component, and there will be a conference we hope in August, providing the dates remain firm, that will focus on this economic development. We also support Ethiopia’s accession to the WTO, and we are going to work with Ethiopia in an effort to try to help that transition.

The second area is the area of peace and stability, in the region particularly. Ethiopia has been a very strong partner, a very important partner in efforts with respect to Sudan, South Sudan, and Somalia. I worked very closely with former Prime Minister Meles, who – I came here to Addis Ababa, we worked on the issue of the comprehensive peace agreement and the referendum and moving South Sudan to independence. And we worked on the questions of Abyei and the two areas. We talked about that now and we both agreed that the situation between South Sudan and Sudan remains tense. There was work to be done, and we are going to continue to work in order to do – to address those challenging issues of Abyei, Blue Nile, South Kordofan, and the relationship between the North and the South.

I’ve mentioned previously, but I haven’t necessarily said it to the press here, I will be appointing a special envoy to Sudan and South Sudan shortly, and we look forward to engaging with our friends here in Ethiopia on efforts to try to bring greater stability to the region.

We are particularly grateful to Ethiopia for their initiative, a very important initiative in respect to Somalia. It is fair to say that the Ethiopian initiative, together with American help and support, has helped to reduce the threat of ultraviolence, and it has helped significantly to be able to produce a new opportunity for governance. And it is governance now that is the greater challenge, rather than the al-Shabaab threat.

Finally, I just raised the question – the third pillar of concern and of relationship is that of building democracy and of protecting human rights. This is a critical component. As everybody knows, we believe very deeply that where people can exercise their rights and where there is an ability to have a strong democracy, the economy is stronger, the relationship with the government is stronger, people do better, and it’s an opportunity to be able to grow faster, stronger, by rule of law. We want to continue to work with our friends in Ethiopia as they work hard to try to improve any number of initiatives with respect to those concerns.

So I’m delighted to be here. This is a very special moment. Ethiopia is not only the host, but the Prime Minister wears the hat of president of union and we’re honored to be here with him sharing this very important moment. And Mr. Foreign Minister, thank you. Appreciate it.

FOREIGN MINISTER TEDROS: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you so much, talking about this very important day for Africa in general, and for Ethiopia in particular. And I would like to also share with you that we have had very useful discussions on the areas that the Secretary already had mentioned – on the economic front as it had say, that should be the focus, especially in our future relationships. And we’re very grateful for the AGOA summit that will be conducted in Ethiopia August 12-13. We hope that will strengthen the trade and investment relationships between the U.S. and Ethiopia.

And in addition to that, we have had, as many of you know, relationships on social, political, defense, and security points. If we take, especially the social one, Ethiopia is the beneficiary of their foreign (inaudible). And that opportunity has been using Ethiopia in a unique way. Not only we have used the three foreign (inaudible) opportunities to save lives, but we used it to build our system also to better fight for the future. And I would like to express how grateful we are for this very generous support from the government and people of the United States. It’s really made a difference in Ethiopia.

And we had also we had (inaudible) very frank discussions on either issues, and Secretary said democracy is our priority. We’re committed to democracy, but as a national democracy. We really need strong cooperation and working together with the U.S. And we had, as we have said, discussed on regional issues – regional peace and security, Sudan and South Sudan. And on Somalia, I think he said it well, so I don’t want to add on that. But I would like to thank the Secretary for his decision to assign an envoy (inaudible) working (inaudible).

So finally I would like again to thank to the historic and very strong partnership we have with the U.S., and I hope it will grow even stronger in the future and look forward to working with you very closely as it does so much good.

SECRETARY KERRY: Likewise.

MS. PSAKI: The U.S. question will be from Scott of VOA.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, the Nigerian Government says its broken up some Boko Haram groups in the North, yet there are concerns remaining about gross human rights violations by Nigerian security forces. What’s your message about striking a balance there? And on Sudan and South Sudan, the oil is flowing again, but there remain the other issues between Khartoum and Juba, so how do you help resolve them?

And Mr. Minister, in light of the attacks in Niger, what is the African Union doing along with the international community to try to come up with a strategy to secure the broader Sahelian region against the spread of terrorism? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much. Well, Boko Haram is a terrorist organization and they have killed wantonly and upset the normal governance of Nigeria in fundamental ways that are unacceptable. And so we defend the right completely of the Government of Nigeria to defend itself and to fight back against terrorists.

That said, I have raised the issue of human rights with the government, with the Foreign Minister. We have talked directly about the imperative of Nigerian troops adhering to the highest standards and not themselves engaging in atrocities or in human rights violations. That is critical. And the balance comes by having strong leadership – leadership from the civilian government, leadership that flows through the forces that are there. We’ve talked about it directly.

To their credit, the government has acknowledged that there have been some problems and they’re not – they’re working to try to control it. It’s not easy; very complicated, and wide open spaces, very ungoverned, very, very difficult – very complex territory and terrain and very challenging enterprise. But always, we all of us try to hold the highest standards of behavior. One person’s atrocity does not excuse another’s. And revenge is not the motive; it’s good governance, it’s ridding yourself of a terrorist organization so that you can establish a standard of law that people can respect. And that’s what needs to happen in Nigeria.

With respect to --

QUESTION: Sudan and South Sudan.

QUESTION: On the Sudan-South Sudan, you are absolutely correct. There are very significant border challenges, but they’re bigger than that. In South Kordofan and Blue Nile, you have people who for a long time have felt that they want their secular governance and their identity respected. And they don’t want independence. They are not trying to break away from Sudan. Unfortunately, President Bashir is trying to press on them, through authoritarian means and through violence, an adherence to a standard that they simply don’t want to accept, with respect to Islamism and a rigidity with respect to their identity. So that’s the fundamental (inaudible).

And what is critical here, in my judgment, is for President Bashir to respect what the people in South Kordofan and Blue Nile are trying to achieve. Now it’s more complicated because you have the SPLM-North that has received support from the South, and that makes the North feel like the South is instigating some of what is taking place. So we need to resolve those differences. And that’s the work of an envoy and my work over the course of these next months, working with our friends here. We’ve always been very focused on and helpful in trying to reduce the violence.

Abyei presents a special challenge, obviously. And I think we agreed that it was critical that Abyei be able to have a referendum with the appropriate Miseria – that is the Miseria who actually live in Abyei and have residence there year round, not the migrant Miseria – that they be able to vote together with residents and then to decide the future.

I think North and South are in a very delicate place right now. It is important to build on the peace process, the comprehensive peace agreement, to build on the new independence of the young state, and to put the focus and energy on the people and on developing the future, not on fighting the issues of the past. That’s our challenge, all of us, and we are certainly going to continue to work at it.

FOREIGN MINISTER TEDROS: Thank you. On the terrorism issue, especially Niger and the Sahel, as you know, we have now experienced terrorism. It is now serious threat to Africa, and we had experience in this region and certainly (inaudible). And what’s happening in Niger is not isolated incidents. We have to see it in relation to what has happened – what’s happening in Mali and the whole south of Niger. And when it’s experienced in Africa on how to tackle that, we support of course from governments like U.S. and we will address it within that framework based upon the experience we have. But have to consider it as a serious issue, and fight it aggressively.

MODERATOR: (Inaudible) now it is (inaudible) question to the Ethiopian side. Let me invite (inaudible).

QUESTION: Thank you. From (inaudible). It is understood that Ethiopia (inaudible) 12 years. How do you comment this? How can (inaudible) this success you have got to (inaudible)? Another question: The peacekeeping process is very difficult. What will be your assistance to this process?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me begin on the peacekeeping first. Yes, it is expensive and we know that. And we are providing assistance and we will continue to provide assistance. I think Ethiopia feels as if it needs more assistance. We understand that. Let me express my gratitude on behalf of not just the American people but everybody who benefits and cares about peace is grateful to Ethiopia. Ethiopians have put themselves on the line in order to fight against terrorism and to fight for peace. And I believe that we owe Ethiopia support and assistance in order to help them do that.

With respect to the economic growth, we would love to have Ethiopia’s economic growth. Ethiopia’s one of the ten fastest growing countries in the world. It’s up in the double digits in growth. It’s really quite an extraordinary story. And so I think the United States needs to – our private sector businesses need to focus on Ethiopia and recognize the opportunities that are here and hopefully we can encourage more companies to come here and be engaged and help take part in this.

But I think the future’s being defined by countries like Ethiopia, the future of Africa, which we are celebrating in this 50th anniversary meeting today. There’s been an enormous transition in the last 50 years. There are many more democracies and many more transitions to democracy, and many more peaceful places than there are violent ones and dictators. It is changing, and it is changing in a way that is strong so that lots of countries – Russia, Brazil, China, Japan, others – are investing and moving to take advantage of the economic possibilities of growth and development in Africa. The United States has been behind on that, and we need to change that.

QUESTION: We have time for one last --

QUESTION: Excuse me.

FOREIGN MINISTER TEDROS: What time is the Secretary (inaudible) – for second time there (inaudible) and we apologize for that because we have to run.

SECRETARY KERRY: We have to run. Seriously, the Foreign Minister only has about 68 countries to deal with. (Laughter.) Thank you both.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS AT FOREIGN AFFAIRS TRAING CENTER

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks to the Foreign Service Institute Overseas Security Seminar
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
George P. Shultz National Foreign Affairs Training Center
Arlington, VA
May 20, 2013

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much. I know you’re really upset that I came here to break the normal monotony and routine of this seminar. There will be no test, but I’m really happy to spend a few minutes with you. And Nancy, thank you very much, Madam Ambassador, for your wonderful stewardship of the FSI. You’re doing a great job, and it was a great pleasure for me to be able to join you at the graduation of the A-100 class just the other day, Elvis impersonator and all. It was fun.

I’m glad to be here with Under Secretary Pat Kennedy, who does such an extraordinary job at implementing all of our efforts with respect to our embassies, consulates, and facilities around the world, and who has been much on top of this agenda, and our chief of security for the entire State Department and AID, Greg Starr. Thank you very much for being here with us. We appreciate it enormously.

One of things that I have learned – not just in the few months I’ve been Secretary, but in the years that I was on the Foreign Relations committee – is that you can train men and women for the assignments that you’re going to take on when you leave here – and FSI does that exceedingly well, and some of you have been through that before; I know we have some senior officers here, and we have people not just FSO but from other agencies here who have been out in the field previously – but the fact is that – and I think you know this – no training here, none of us who stand up here and talk to you, can teach the special instinct that brings you all here to a life of public service and particularly to carrying America’s message and efforts, our values abroad. That really comes from you. It comes from your sense of yourself as Americans; it comes from your understanding of who we are as a country, and from the direction that we need to move in and from the challenges that face us on this globe. Your dedication to our country and your determination to make the world better – these are the singular traits of very special people who are America’s face to the world in ways that so many of our fellow citizens will never know or understand.

A little more than 100 days ago now, I was privileged, honored to become your colleague and join the State Department, and join the State Department family – which is what it is – when I took the oath of office and began my service as Secretary of State. The oath that I swore is the exact same one that you swear. It is also the same one that our Ambassadors take, and it is the same one that people in the military and others take, people who wear uniform but are on the frontlines, just as you are on the frontlines.

We all of us solemnly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. But with that oath, I assure you – and I think you understand this – we also pledge to defend and support each other. I want you to know that every day that I am privileged to be in this position, I have no greater priority and no greater responsibility than ensuring that we do all that we can within reason and capacity to protect you.

On my very first day as Secretary, the same day that I took that oath, a suicide bomber in Ankara, Turkey, killed a local guard named Mustafa Akarsu. I’ve met his family. I spoke at a memorial service for him in which we dedicated a beautiful fountain because his name means "flowing waters." And now there are flowing waters at our Embassy forever in memory of him. Mustafa had guarded the gates of that embassy for 20 years, and on February 1st, he moved in to challenge an intruder who was just walking in the door, and that is where he gave his life. He did so bravely, acting quickly to save the lives of others.

In Kabul, not too long after that, I met Anne Smedinghoff, a brilliant, brave, confident young woman from outside of Chicago. She would have come right here to be part of this training this summer, preparing for her next difficult post. But a week and a half after she helped to organize my visit to Kabul, she was gone, taken in yet another heinous terrorist attack as she was killed while delivering books to schoolchildren.

So I am acutely aware of the very real challenge that we face and the very real risks that we take around the world. I think of them every single day. I know all of you are deeply aware of these challenges too. You can’t help but be as you think about where you may be going and what you may be asked to do. And I am enormously appreciative, and President Obama shares a deep and abiding respect for and understanding of what you undergo and the challenges you undertake. We are enormously appreciative of the fearlessness that you somehow muster as you confront these challenges.

In the shadows of the attack in Afghanistan and Ankara, and of course last year’s terrorist attack in Benghazi which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, we all understand, it is indelibly imprinted on us, how important it is to protect our people in our facilities. And that is why as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I held both classified and unclassified briefings to make sure that we understood what went wrong and to do all we could to ensure it would never happen again.

That is why as Secretary of State, I am committed to implementing every single one of the recommendations in the report of the Accountability Review Board and doing more. That report makes it clear that our work will never be done, and we can never eliminate every last risk, but we can never stop working to mitigate those risks as much as possible.

So right now, even as we sit here, Pat Kennedy and I and Greg are working to upgrade our capacities. We’re bringing on more security personnel, we’re enhancing our training. We’re putting more Marines at our high-threat diplomatic posts, and we’re making sure that their first responsibility is protecting our people, not just classified materials. We’re working more closely with the Defense Department, with our partners, linking our embassies with various military commands to make emergency extradition more central to our military mission. We’re upgrading our facilities, and we’re building new embassies and consulates. And we’re making sure that the concern about safety and security always gets the attention that it needs and deserves.

But in addition to doing what we’re doing in order to be safe abroad, we as a nation need to engage in a larger conversation about the inherent dangers of diplomacy, ever mindful that we undertake them clear-eyed and we undertake them for a reason. And we must remember this conversation that we need to engage our country in is not a new one. The dangers of diplomacy are not unique to this moment in time. Serving in our diplomatic missions didn’t become dangerous that night in Benghazi. This is not a new phenomenon. Indeed, the reason that we continue to do this work is embedded in our DNA as Americans. It is part of our patriotic, pioneering character.

The memorial wall in the lobby of the State Department – which Vice President Biden and I stood at just a few days ago as we unveiled the additional names that have been added to it – that wall in the State Department bears 244 names, including Anne’s, and Chris Stevens’s, and Sean Smith’s, Glen Doherty’s and Ty Woods’s. But I ask you to remember today, and I ask Americans to remember today, that most of those 244 gave their lives long before September 11th of 2012, or even September 11th of 2001. The first plaque on the wall in Foggy Bottom is dedicated to a man named William Palfrey, the Consul General to France, who was lost at sea when the Constitution that we swear to defend was still a decade away from even being written.

The wall honors those that we lost in Beirut and Bosnia and Baghdad, in attacks like that on our embassy in Nairobi in 1998 and on our officers in far capital cities, those we lost as they served in perilous regions even in peaceful times. And though we can’t count all of their names, the wall also honors the families and the loved ones of those who serve and sacrifice in faraway places.

As some of you may know, my father was in the Foreign Service when I was a young man. We were stationed in Berlin when I was 11 years old, in the aftermath of World War II. The streets were still piled with rubble. Troops stood on either side of the line that divided East from West. I remember seeing Hitler’s bunker protruding up from where it had been exploded. And everyone, all the soldiers, were anxiously gripping their weapons wondering whether some hostility might break out. The crossings were dangerous. And the families were often trying to escape from East to West, to a more promising life – the life that you, we, represent. It was dangerous time, and it became even more dangerous when the wall went up and people tried to get across that wall to find freedom and liberty.

So this conversation is not new. But I believe it is more important than ever today. When we think about and grieve about and honor the bravery that we see in your predecessors and in your peers, we cannot at the same time wonder why or be surprised that there is danger. If we are going to bring light to the world, we have to go where it is dark. That is the meaning of service, and that is what American diplomacy has always been about.

Which is why I want to underscore a very important part of this ongoing conversation: how to keep our people safe overseas, and how to minimize our foreign policy – maximize our foreign policy in order to strengthen America.

If you are going to represent the United States in countries to which you’re about to travel, you just need to be accessible to the people on the ground. And every time you do reach out, every time you touch a citizen in another country, every time you carry the face of American values – the values of America – whatever kind of communication you have, you are making our country stronger. You are building the future.

We need to remind our fellow Americans – we are engaged with the rest of the world because that is in our vital interest. We have to be there. Because when we’re there we get things done. We protect the future. And we’re not – as we have too often learned of late – the vacuum will be filled by those whose goals are vastly different from ours.

We put ourselves on the line because it’s in our interest to do so. Because that’s the way we protect others from attacking us, because that’s the way we make sure we that we don’t have to send our kids to war, and that’s the way we build connections with other countries so that we can work together to solve problems that can only be solved across borders, transnationally, by reaching out and joining the global community.

We have to show up in places that no one else wants to go. And when we succeed there – building a safer city, forging a stronger trade partnership, helping a child to grow up understanding what America truly stands for rather than learning from a hateful propaganda package or false ideology – when we do that, our interests are advanced, our values are upheld, and the risks that we take are worth it.

Now, skeptics might try to suggest to you that it’s not worth it. They’ll tell us, "Stay inside the embassy," or even "Stay in the cities and stay out of countries where you’re not safe." My friends, that’s no way to advance our interests. That is not what America stands for. We cannot do the work we need to do to make the world safer, to build rule of law, to build the future, by hiding. We can’t do this work by staying away. We will never overcome threats by shrinking away from them. In countries with weak rule of law and dysfunctional governments, we have an interest in helping people to build a stronger democratic institution, to take advantage of opportunity and create the futures that they choose for themselves. Indeed, those are the very places where we have the most to gain.

Every day I get reports – from Greg or from Pat or from the intelligence community – about various threats that we’re facing. And there will be times when I decide that the threat in a certain place is great enough that we need to adjust our approach and take extra precautions, at least for a while. And we do, and we have. That’s the reality. But those will be the exceptional cases. Retreating behind the wire cannot be the way that we do business.

So I’ve got news for you today and I have news to share with America: We will not pull back. We’re going to keep practicing what my father called "foreign policy outdoors," working directly with men and women around the world, from government officials and local leaders to civil society groups and ordinary people on the street. We’re going to build the people-to-people relationships that help foster trust and understanding between cultures. And we’re going to make that sort of engagement even stronger.

Chris Stevens understood that. He enjoyed and respected the people that he met, whether it was in this country or abroad. When he was just 17 years old, he went to Spain with the American Field Service, and he then lived in the Atlas Mountains of Morocco as a volunteer English teacher with the Peace Corps. In fact, one young student of his became a teacher because of English – because Chris Stevens touched that young man at a point in his life. Wherever he went, he made lasting friendships that were built on mutual respect. When Chris Stevens strolled down streets and greeted strangers with a friendly American smile, Libyans got a glimpse of the best of the United States – a decency and a respect for others regardless of race, religion, or cultural belief.

Chris was fortunate for the chance to live around the world, as I consider myself to have been, and as you are. Most people don’t have the opportunity to do what you do – spend time abroad, meeting people of another language and culture and history and sharing it with them, deeply immersed in their lives.

But today we also have digital bridges to connect different cultures – and I don’t just mean Facebook and Twitter. The State Department’s Educational and Cultural Affairs Bureau runs a virtual exchange program that connects teachers and students in the United States with their counterparts in the Middle East and North Africa. These students are working together online, learning from each other about their cultures and history, and they’re forging lasting relationships.

So I’m excited to tell you that we are right now working closely with Chris Stevens’s family on a public-private virtual exchange that we’re going to call the Chris Stevens Youth Network. And we believe this can lead to the largest ever increase in people-to-people exchanges between the United States and the Middle East and North Africa. And we believe it will also dramatically increase the number and diversity of young people who have a meaningful cross-cultural experience – the same experience that Chris, and I think all of you understand is so important.

These are the kind of connections that actually led Libyans to go out into the streets of Benghazi after the attack spontaneously. Tens of thousands carrying signs, thanking the United States – they went out there not to shout terrible things about America, they went out there to mourn Chris’ death and celebrate democracy, to say "thank you" to Chris and America.

After World War II, during that time that I was growing up as a young person in Berlin and elsewhere, I watched our country invest in other people and in the future. In the Marshall Plan, the Truman Doctrine, NATO, the Fulbright Program, we watched Germany, Japan turn into powerhouse allies of the United States today. We watched countries like South Korea, which was under siege, which for years received aid from the United States, now become a donor country, giving aid to other people to follow in the example that we set. All of this has been geared towards understanding, and that’s what we have to continue to do today.

America’s interests demand that we not shrink from the world stage. We cannot retrench or retreat. We cannot do our work only from behind bricks and barbed wire. We have to be out there where people are.

In fact, we have to think creatively about expanding our tools and our capabilities so that we can address the issues that drive young people to despair and ultimately terrorism. What happened in Tahrir Square and what happened in Tunisia when a fruit vendor self-immolated himself, and when those young kids Tweeted each other and communicated via text messages – when they did that in Tahrir Square, they weren’t the result of some ideology. They weren’t the result of a religious extremist enterprise. They were young people trying to reach the future that they’ve seen here and in other parts of the world. That was a generational revolution, expressing the aspirations of people for a better future.

Diplomacy and security need do not have to be tradeoffs. President Obama has worked to strike a balance that ensures the outreach and engagement necessary to advance our policies and our interests in accordance with security measures necessitated by the threats to U.S. interests. Later this week, President Obama will discuss our counter-terrorism strategy, and he will discuss this balance which the Administration has sought to strike.

But friends, the challenges of the 21st century are just plain more complex than they were in the latter part of the last century. And the fact is that the opportunities that we face are greater than any that we have encountered in our history. I am convinced of that. You’re here at FSI because you believe the United States must continue to play a leading role. So we need to make the case for what we must do.

We need to show the American people that diplomacy and development efforts are worth investing in, because they pay such huge returns to us in jobs, in our economy, in safety, in protection of the environment, in relationships with people, and in the security of our nation. We need to hold all of our elected officials accountable for making these efforts a priority, and that includes the Congress.

This is a Congress that reminds us all the time that they’re a coequal branch of the federal government, and they should because they are. But that means Congress needs to play a role on the world stage as well, not just investigating, but leading – leading on the Stevens Exchange Program, leading on the Middle East, providing the resources, and the support, and the investments to make the risks we take today worthwhile, that help us build that safer and brighter future, a more prosperous future.

Overseas, we need to keep deepening the relationships, the friendships, and forging the relationships that will benefit the American people around the world. I think there isn’t one of you sitting here who doesn’t understand these principles because that’s why you’re sitting here.

You live them abroad and you will. And here at home, we have an obligation to share them with our fellow citizens, because they need to be part of this journey, even though they may never leave their hometown to do so.

So that’s why I came here this morning, to emphasize and underscore that we are determined to stand up for our values, our interests, and our futures. Because those values and interests – justice and freedom, opportunity for all people – they have always been a beacon for people who aspire to a better life. This is what history has shown us – after World War II, during the depths of the Cold War, and that remains true today.

So we’re going to continue to be out there, not just because that defines us as Americans, but because we know that’s how you build a world that respects human rights, dignity, promotes rule of law, and ultimately fosters opportunity for those burgeoning populations of young people – more and more of them under the age of 30 – the dominant majority components of populations across the Middle East and elsewhere, all of whom need jobs and need a future. Our democracy will be strengthened when our allies are strong, and when we engage with their governments as well as with men and women in all walks of life.

So my friends, when you leave here, proud as you are to be part of this great enterprise, join us. Let’s tell this story. Let’s do so proudly. And as you never forget why you take the risks that we do, I want you to know that none of us – not Pat, not Greg, not myself – nobody charged with the responsibility will ever stop fighting for you and for the resources that you need to be able to undertake this great enterprise.

Thank you for being part of it, and thank you for being willing to share some thoughts with me this morning. Appreciate it. Thank you. (Applause.)


 

HRH ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING MEETING

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

U.S. Intervention Remarks at HRH Illegal Wildlife Trafficking Meeting
Remarks
David M. Luna
Director for Anticrime Programs, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
London, United Kingdom

May 21, 2013
Your Royal Highness, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon.

I first want to thank Her Majesty’s Government and His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales, and His Royal Highness, the Duke of Cambridge, for their leadership in combating wildlife trafficking, and for bringing together a wide variety of perspectives in this forum. It is only through collective action that we can protect the world’s wildlife sanctuaries and help impacted communities achieve a secure and sustainable future.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hosted a high-level event on the issue last November, which mobilized the international community in a call to action. She noted that wildlife trafficking, like other forms of illicit trade, relies on porous borders, corrupt officials, and organized criminal networks, all of which undermine our collective security and prosperity. Secretary of State John Kerry similarly supports robust action and partnerships to combat the illegal trade in wildlife and to strengthen law enforcement cooperation across borders against illicit networks engaged in this activity.

Trafficking in wildlife is not a benign activity. It is a criminal threat that requires a criminal justice response. Time is our enemy as we work to save endangered wildlife and our world heritage.

In many parts of the world, we are witnessing the involvement of dangerous criminals in what used to be considered a conservation issue. By some conservative estimates, the illegal trade in wildlife is worth $8-10 billion each year.

Traffickers are drawn to the high profit potential and low risk of detection and prosecution.

Park rangers are frequently outmatched by well-equipped poachers; in fact many park rangers have been killed while trying to protect their parks and the wildlife that roam freely in them.

We are committed to helping our partners fight back and prevent greater insecurity and destabilization.

We have taken a comprehensive approach to this issue; not only for the purpose of conservation, but also from a security perspective that requires a strengthened law enforcement and criminal justice response.

In April 2013, the UN Crime Commission adopted a resolution introduced by the United States and Peru entitled, "Crime prevention and criminal justice responses for illicit trafficking in protected species of wild fauna and flora." This resolution advocates for a comprehensive approach to combat wildlife trafficking, notably by encouraging member states to designate wildlife trafficking as a "serious" crime, thereby unlocking the ability of governments to utilize the international cooperation tools contained within the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. We also applaud the UK as G8 host this year and welcome the efforts of the G8 Roma-Lyon Group to address wildlife trafficking.

The Department of State has been engaged on the diplomatic front to raise the profile of wildlife trafficking as a criminal concern in bilateral and multilateral fora including: APEC, ASEAN, East Asia Summit, U.S.-China Joint Liaison Group on Law Enforcement Cooperation, and the G8 Roma-Lyon Group. We are also developing innovative public-private cooperation through cooperative platforms at the OECD and the World Economic Forum to combat illicit trade including wildlife trafficking, human trafficking, counterfeit medicines, narcotics, and other emerging threats.

The Department of State has also provided regional law enforcement training targeting supply and demand regions for wildlife trafficking at the International Law Enforcement Academies in Gaborone and Bangkok.

By placing wildlife trafficking within the context of our broader goals of combating corruption, dismantling transnational organized criminal networks, and promoting the rule of law, we can leverage our respective political will and capabilities to enforce our laws, prosecute wildlife traffickers, and repel poachers before a slaughter, and punish illicit actors whose criminal intent is to pillage, profit from, and destroy our ecosystems, habitats, and communities.

We believe the experience of the regional Wildlife Enforcement Networks holds promise for a concerted effort to strengthen enforcement and prosecution. These networks – linking law enforcement and environment officials, prosecutors, and policy makers and supported by donors and NGOs – combat wildlife trafficking through training, capacity-building, and information exchange. USAID has invested $17 million since 2005 to support ASEAN-WEN’s and South Asia WEN’s efforts to combat illegal wildlife trafficking through the initial ASEAN-WEN Support Program, the current ARREST Program, and INTERPOL’s Project PREDATOR. The United States has provided more than $7 million since 2005 to support wildlife conservation in Central America and the Dominican Republic, including funding for the Central American Wildlife Enforcement Network (CAWEN). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provides $10 million annually for wildlife protection throughout Africa and Asia targeting elephants, rhinos, great apes, and marine turtles. Funds are used to prevent poaching and to improve investigation and prosecution of wildlife crimes.

We continue to work to strengthen existing partnerships and build support for a global system of regional wildlife enforcement networks (WENs) to improve enforcement effectiveness, coordination, and cooperation. In March 2013, the Department of State sponsored the first meeting to convene all the existing WENs, plus countries that may create WENs in their regions, on the margins of the CITES Conference of Parties-16 held in Bangkok, Thailand. We have actively supported the development of new regional WENs in Central Africa and the Horn of Africa to share cross-border information and to conduct exchanges. Staying ahead of these illicit networks will take a global effort, with all of us working collaboratively across sectors, governments, and organizations.

The United States stands ready to work with our partners both bilaterally and multilaterally, with civil society and the private sector, to combat these threats. We must be bold, decisive, and fight networks with our own networks.

Through collective action and a multi-sector approach, we can constrict the global illegal economy, downgrade the threat posed by poachers, and help communities nurture transformative and sustainable markets, moving their economies into the investment frontiers of tomorrow and safeguarding their human capital, national assets, and natural resources.

LMI AND FLM MEMBER STATES MEET IN BRUNEI DARUSSALAM

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Lower Mekong Initiative and Friends of the Lower Mekong Senior Officials Meetings in Brunei Darussalam

Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
May 24, 2013
　

Senior officials from the Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI) and Friends of the Lower Mekong (FLM) member states met in separate meetings May 23 in Bandar Seri Begawan on the margins of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum Senior Officials Meeting (ARF SOM). The members of LMI are Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, and the United States. The members of FLM are Australia, New Zealand, the European Union, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, and the United States.

The meetings were co-chaired by the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs’ Acting Assistant Secretary of State Joseph Y. Yun and USAID Regional Development Mission for Asia Deputy Mission Director Carrie Thompson. These meetings provided an opportunity for senior officials to deliberate on the recommendations from the third and fourth LMI Regional Working Group meetings and to prepare for the up-coming sixth LMI and third FLM ministerial meetings, July 1, 2013.

Senior officials approved changes to the LMI Plan of Action and affirmed their commitment to closer collaboration with ASEAN through the Initiative for ASEAN Integration.

The ministerial meetings for both the Lower Mekong Initiative and the Friends of the Lower Mekong will be held July 1, 2013 in Bandar Seri Begawan on the margins of the ASEAN Regional Forum Ministerial Meeting.

FIFTH WIDBAND GLABAL SATCOM SATELLITE LAUNCHED FROM CAPE CANAVERAL

 

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla. (May 24, 2013) – In the second launch in just nine days for the U.S. Air Force, United Launch Alliance (ULA) successfully launched a Delta IV rocket carrying the fifth Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS-5) satellite at 8:27 p.m. EDT today from Space Launch Complex-37. Wideband Global SATCOM provides anytime, anywhere communication for the warfighter through broadcast, multicast, and point to point connections. WGS is the only military satellite communications system that can support simultaneous X and Ka band communications. Photo by Pat Corkery, United Launch Alliance

FROM: U.S. AIR FORCE

Fifth Wideband Global SATCOM Satellite Launched

5/25/2013 - LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE, El Segundo, California -- The U.S. Air Force's fifth Wideband Global SATCOM spacecraft (WGS-5) was successfully launched on a United Launch Alliance Delta IV launch vehicle at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., on May 24, the first step in its journey to expand satellite communications services to the warfighter.

Over the next several months, the satellite will undergo orbit-raising activities to reach geosynchronous orbit and on-orbit testing to verify nominal performance and prepare the satellite for operational use. Ultimately, the satellite will be controlled by the U.S. Air Force's 3rd Space Operations Squadron at Schriever Air Force Base Colo. WGS-5 should enter operations by the end of 2013.

"WGS continues to meet user requirements and provides the highest capacity of any DoD communications satellite," said Mr. Luke Scab, chief Wideband SATCOM division, MILSATCOM Systems directorate. "WGS is a vital piece of the MILSATCOM enterprise consisting of WGS, Defense Satellite Communications System, Advanced Extremely High Frequency System, Minstar, and terminals providing diversified communications services to soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen around the world. This continued success is due to the hard work and dedication from the combined government and industry team."

The Space and Missile Systems Center, located at Los Angeles Air Force Base, Calif., is the U.S. Air Force's center of acquisition excellence for acquiring and developing military space systems including Global Positioning System, military satellite communications, defense meteorological satellites, space launch and range systems, satellite control network, space based infrared systems, and space situational awareness capabilities.