Friday, April 13, 2012
OVER 40 NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES TO RECEIVE SETTLEMENT IN TRIBAL TRUST LAWSUITS
FROM: DEPARRTMENT OF JUSTICE
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Attorney General Holder and Secretary Salazar Announce $1 Billion Settlement of Tribal Trust Accounting and Management Lawsuits Filed by More Than 40 Tribes
WASHINGTON – Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today announced the settlement of lawsuits filed by 41 federally-recognized tribes against the United States, in which the tribes alleged that the Department of the Interior and the Department of the Treasury had mismanaged monetary assets and natural resources held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the tribes. The announcement followed a 22-month-long negotiation between the tribes and the United States that has culminated in settlements between the government and tribes totaling more than $1 billion.
These settlements resolve claims dating back more than 100 years and will bring to an end protracted litigation that has burdened both the plaintiffs and the United States. Ending these long-running disputes about the United States’ management of trust funds and non-monetary trust resources will allow the United States and the tribes to move beyond the distrust exacerbated by years of litigation. These settlement agreements represent a significant milestone in the improvement of the United States’ relationship with Indian tribes.
“These settlements fairly and honorably resolve historical grievances over the accounting and management of tribal trust funds, trust lands and other non-monetary trust resources that, for far too long, have been a source of conflict between Indian tribes and the United States,” said Attorney General Holder. “Our commitment to tribes is the cornerstone of the Department of Justice’s policies and initiatives in Indian Country, and these settlements will enable the tribal community to pursue the goals and objectives they deem to be appropriate while marking another step in our shared future built upon mutual respect and strong bonds of trust between tribal governments and the United States.”
“These important settlements reflect President Obama’s continuing commitment to ensuring empowerment and reconciliation for American Indians,” said Secretary Salazar. “It strengthens the government-to-government relationship with Tribal nations, helps restore a positive working relationship with Indian Country leaders and empowers American Indian communities. I want to commend Attorney General Holder, our Interior Solicitor Hilary Tompkins and other key officials who were involved in the long negotiations leading to these historic agreements. I look forward to working with Tribal leaders to further strengthen our government-to-government relationship based on mutual respect and a shared concern for the proper management of tribal trust assets and funds.”
The Department of the Interior manages almost 56 million acres of trust lands for federally-recognized tribes and more than 100,000 leases on those lands for various uses, including housing, timber harvesting, farming, grazing, oil and gas extraction, business leasing, rights-of-way and easements. Interior also manages about 2,500 tribal trust accounts for more than 250 tribes.
Starting in the fall of 2009, lawyers for many of the tribes with litigation pending against the United States wrote to President Obama and asked the administration to engage in expedited settlement discussions with their clients. In April 2010, Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli, Assistant Attorney General of the Environment and Natural Resources Division Ignacia Moreno, Interior Department Solicitor Hilary Tompkins and Treasury Department General Counsel George Madison met with attorneys for the tribes, and the parties embarked on a settlement process that the tribes termed the “Settlement Proposal to Obama Administration,” or “SPOA,” which led in part to today’s announcement.
In addition to the SPOA process, the Departments of Justice, Interior and Treasury have been engaging in other settlement processes involving other litigating tribes. Those processes have been both positive and productive, resulting in the past settlement of other tribal trust accounting and management cases and the processes will continue for other ongoing cases. The United States is committed to resolving the trust accounting and trust management claims of the tribes in a manner that is fair, honorable and reasonable to the tribes and the United States.
Under the negotiated settlement agreements, litigation will end regarding the Department of the Interior’s accounting and management of the tribes’ trust accounts, trust lands and other natural resources. With monies from the congressionally-appropriated Judgment Fund, which is used to pay settlements or final judgments against the government, the United States will compensate the tribes for their breach of trust claims, and the tribes will waive, release and dismiss their claims with prejudice. The parties have agreed to information sharing procedures that will strengthen the management of trust assets and improve communications between tribes and the Department of the Interior. The settlement agreements also include dispute resolution provisions to reduce the likelihood of future litigation.
The sum total of the settlements with the 41 tribes is approximately $1.023 billion.
The 41 tribes are:
1. Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation
2. Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians
3. Blackfeet Tribe
4. Bois Forte Band of Chippewa Indians
5. Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of Colusa Rancheria
6. Coeur d'Alene Tribe
7. Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy's Reservation
8. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
9. Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes
10. Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Reservation
11. Hualapai Tribe
12. Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians of Arizona
13. Kickapoo Tribe of Kansas
14. Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians
15. Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe Indians
16. Makah Tribe of the Makah Reservation
17. Mescalero Apache Nation
18. Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
19. Nez Perce Tribe
20. Nooksack Tribe
21. Northern Cheyenne Tribe
22. Passamaquoddy Tribe of Maine
23. Pawnee Nation
24. Pueblo of Zia
25. Quechan Indian Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
26. Rincon Luiseño Band of Indians
27. Round Valley Tribes
28. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
29. Santee Sioux Tribe
30. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation
31. Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians
32. Spirit Lake Dakotah Nation
33. Spokane Tribe
34. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of the Fort Yates Reservation
35. Swinomish Indian Tribal Community
36. Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians
37. Tohono O'odham Nation
38. Tulalip Tribe
39. Tule River Tribe
40. Ute Mountain Ute Tribe
41. Ute Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation
NEW SUPER SCIENCE RADIATION DETECTORS
SWORD model of helo based detector with source aboard a small vessel
Software for the Optimization of Radiation Detectors (SWORDs)
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is committed to securing the country against radiological and nuclear threats. To help further this mission, DHS Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) is constantly working to develop smarter and more cost effective ways to address these security threats and maximize resources and expertise from across the federal government. The Software for the Optimization of Radiation Detectors (SWORDs) program enables faster development and evaluation of nuclear detection equipment at a lower cost.
The Technology
The DNDO-sponsored SWORDs program supports the development of software that simulates real-world operational environments. The easy-to-use interface, with flexible design and layout components, enables laboratories to evaluate and optimize the performance of radiation detectors without having to run multiple costly field tests. This software provides an environment for simulating gamma-ray background radiation, nuisance sources, and targets of interest. SWORDs can generate a large selection of source and background emission models, as well as object models including specific detectors, airborne detector platforms, and even advanced prototype stand-off imaging systems.
As a supplement to the program, DNDO began an initiative in early 2012 to produce validated simulation models of existing detection systems. DNDO is running comparisons between software test results and real-world studies, helping to build confidence in the accuracy of the computer models.
Current Status:
The Naval Research Laboratory has recently released the newest version of SWORDs through the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC) for use by the nuclear detection modeling community. DNDO is also collaborating with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) to integrate SWORDs, DTRA-sponsored operational models, and a Los Alamos National Lab software package for simulating nuclear processes.
HOW OCEAN ACIDIFICATION CAUSES LARVAL OYSTER FAILURE
FROM: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Oysters at hatcheries in Oregon are showing the effects of ocean acidification.
Credit: OSU
Ocean Acidification Linked With Larval Oyster Failure in Hatcheries
Increase in ocean acidification led to collapse of oyster seed production at Oregon hatchery
April 11, 2012
Marine researchers have definitively linked the collapse of oyster seed production at a commercial oyster hatchery in Oregon to an increase in ocean acidification.
Larval growth at the hatchery declined to a level considered by the owners to be "non-economically viable."
A study by the scientists found that increased seawater carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, resulting in more corrosive ocean water, inhibited the larval oysters from developing their shells and growing at a pace that would make commercial production cost-effective.
As atmospheric CO2 levels continue to rise, this may serve as the proverbial canary in the coal mine for other ocean acidification impacts on shellfish.
Results of the research are published this week in the journalLimnology and Oceanography, published by the Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO).
The research was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF)'s Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES) Ocean Acidification solicitation.
"Studies funded by NSF's SEES Ocean Acidification solicitation are well-positioned to determine the specific mechanisms responsible for larval mortality in Pacific Northwest oyster hatcheries," said David Garrison, program director in NSF's Division of Ocean Sciences.
"This is one of the first times that we have been able to show how ocean acidification affects oyster larval development at a critical life stage," said Burke Hales, an Oregon State University (OSU) chemical oceanographer and co-author of the paper.
"The predicted rise of atmospheric CO2 in the next two to three decades may push oyster larval growth past the break-even point in terms of production."
The owners of Whiskey Creek Shellfish Hatchery at Oregon's Netarts Bay experienced a decline in oyster seed production several years ago and looked at potential causes, including low oxygen and pathogenic bacteria.
Alan Barton, who works at the hatchery and is a co-author of the journal article, was able to eliminate those potential causes and shifted his focus to ocean acidification.
Barton sent samples to OSU and to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory for analysis.
The results clearly linked the production failures to the CO2levels in the water in which the larval oysters were spawned and spent the first 24 hours of their lives. That first day is a critical time when the oysters develop from fertilized eggs to swimming larvae and build their initial shells.
"The early growth stage for oysters is particularly sensitive to the carbonate chemistry of the water," said George Waldbusser, a benthic ecologist at OSU.
"As the water becomes more acidified, it affects the formation of calcium carbonate, the mineral in shells. As the CO2 goes up, the mineral stability goes down, ultimately leading to reduced growth or to mortality."
Commercial oyster production on the West Coast of North America is a 273-million-dollar industry each year. It has depended since the 1970s on oyster hatcheries for a steady supply of the seed used by growers.
In recent years, the hatcheries that provide most of the seed for West Coast growers have suffered persistent production problems.
At the same time, non-hatchery wild stocks of these oysters also have shown low recruitment, putting additional strain on a limited seed supply.
Hales said that Netarts Bay, where the Whiskey Creek hatchery is located, experiences a wide range of chemistry fluctuations.
The researchers believe that hatchery operators may be able to adapt to take advantage of periods when water quality is at its highest.
"In addition to the impact of seasonal upwelling, the water chemistry changes with the tidal cycle and with the time of day," Hales said. "Afternoon sunlight, for example, promotes photosynthesis in the bay. That production can absorb some of the carbon dioxide and lower the corrosiveness of the water."
The researchers also found that larval oysters showed a delayed response to the water chemistry, which may cast new light on other experiments looking at the impacts of ocean acidification on shellfish.
In the study, they found that larval oysters raised in water that was acidic, but non-lethal, had significantly less growth in later stages of their life.
"The takeaway message here is that the response to poor water quality isn't always immediate," said Waldbusser.
"In some cases, it took until three weeks after fertilization for effects from the acidic water to become apparent. Short-term experiments of just a few days may not detect the damage."
The research was also supported by NOAA and the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association.
Other authors of the journal article include Chris Langdon of OSU's Hatfield Marine Science Center and Richard Feely of NOAA's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory.
-NSF-
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency that supports fundamental research and education across all fields of science and engineering. In fiscal year (FY) 2012, its budget is $7.0 billion. NSF funds reach all 50 states through grants to nearly 2,000 colleges, universities and other institutions. Each year, NSF receives over 50,000 competitive requests for funding, and makes about 11,000 new funding awards. NSF also awards nearly $420 million in professional and service contracts yearly.
PAHO SPEECH BY HHS SECRETARY KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
FROM: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESPAHO Healthy Aging Conference
April 12, 2012
Washington, DC
Good morning and welcome.
For more than a century, the Pan American Health Organization has been a driving force behind many of our region’s greatest public health achievements, from reversing the spread of infectious diseases to improving nutrition, sanitation and access to clean water. And thanks to this kind of progress people are living longer and generally healthier lives than ever before.
In 1980, there were 378 million people in the world aged 60 or older. Three decades later, that figure has doubled. By 2050, it is projected to reach 2 billion -- with older people at about 22% of the global population, outnumbering children under 14 for the first time in human history. And these gains have not been limited to industrialized countries. The most rapid and dramatic demographic changes in the Americas are happening in low- and middle-income countries.
These trends represent a triumph of global public health, modern medicine and economic development. And yet they also pose new challenges.
As people live longer, the shape of our families is changing. Adult children are caring for their aging parents, while raising their own families. Many of us work well past the “traditional” retirement age, by need or by choice, stretching our care giving capacities even further. And these shifts have begun to put new pressure on our countries’ health care systems and social safety programs, pushing policy-makers to find new ways to make limited resources go further.
We also know that as we live longer we’re more likely to develop multiple chronic non-communicable diseases. In the past more people died at younger ages from infectious diseases, accidents, and violence. Today, more and more of the world’s population are living long enough to face cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s.
Each year, chronic diseases kill 36 million people worldwide. That’s more than 3 out of every 5 deaths, robbing families and communities of loved ones and costing our economies billions. Many of these diseases like diabetes, stroke, and respiratory disease are projected to affect even more people in the years and decades to come.
For years, our region has helped shape the international conversation about non-communicable diseases -- from the 2007 Declaration of Port-of-Spain -- to the resolution tabled by Trinidad and Tobago on behalf of the Caribbean Community that ultimately led to last year’s UN General Assembly High-Level Meeting.
Now the rest of the world is joining the conversation. And that’s critical because we still have a long way to go if we want to turn the tide on chronic disease. These threats recognize no national or political borders. They touch countries in every corner of the globe and at every stage in development.
So our challenge today is to prepare and respond. The good news is that we know what it takes to build communities where older citizens are not seen as a burden, but as experienced and engaged partners. And the work we do to support healthy aging also presents us with an opportunity to reshape our communities to promote better health at every age.
In the United States, we have embarked on an ambitious agenda to shift the focus of our health care system from waiting for people to become acutely ill to investing in prevention to keep them healthy in the first place.
In 2010, we passed a historic health reform law that improves access to the preventive care people need to stay healthy and the screenings they need to detect diseases early. And we’ve taken big steps to help seniors afford the cost of their medications.
We’re also working with doctors and hospitals to share their best methods for improving their patients' health. Sometimes seemingly small things, like following up with a patient after she's been discharged from the hospital and helping all of her doctors better communicate with one another, make the biggest difference. And we're helping best practices like these spread to every corner of the country, so that everyone has access to the best care possible, no matter where they live.
But we also recognize that ensuring access to quality, affordable care is only one part of the job. Health also happens outside the doctor’s office – in neighborhoods, workplaces and community centers.
Just as important are the steps we can take to engage older people as we do this critical work: involving them in the design, execution, and leadership of programs for seniors -- and refuting any notion that as people age they have less to contribute or become helpless. Our growing population of older people is also increasingly diverse. Respecting this diversity is key to maintaining social connections, reducing isolation, and increasing people’s choices.
Ultimately, what drives our approach is a philosophy that says simply: “Nothing about them without them.”
And you can see it in successful initiatives like Stanford University’s Chronic Disease Self-Management Program -- built on more than two decades of federal research. The program recognizes that older people with chronic diseases should be more than just recipients of care. They should be key decision-makers in their own treatment.
So through workshops in community settings like senior centers, libraries, and at faith-based organizations, older people with a wide array of conditions come together to learn, share and build the skills they need to manage and improve their own health – from exercise and nutrition, to stress management and communicating with their health providers. At HHS, we’ve invested $27 million in grants to help communities implement these proven approaches.
The evidence shows that this program not only improves patients’ abilities to manage their own health, it has also improved health outcomes and even reduced health care costs. It is no wonder that the Stanford program is now available in at least 15 countries around globe.
What this kind of program tells us is that keeping older people healthy yields enormous dividends. When more people can participate more fully and contribute to society, everyone benefits.
And this is where we have an important opportunity to work together to share our best ideas and tools to keep our populations as healthy, productive and engaged as possible.
The United States is committed to learning from our partners across the region and around the globe. The more we work together, the faster we will be able to test new strategies, learn what works, and implement them in our own communities.
One of the striking aspects of my trips outside our country is how much eagerness there is to work together on health issues. When it comes to trade or foreign policy, there are often areas of strong disagreement. But when the discussion turns to tackling our biggest health challenges, there is a broad consensus that nations must work together. And when we do work together, we all benefit.
Healthy aging is an issue which aligns the interests of the countries around the world. A healthier world is one in which every nation will have more productive workers, longer lives, and more vibrant communities.
Too often when we talk about global aging, we talk about its costs. But by keeping our seniors healthy and engaged we have begun to write a new story, where every older person gets the dignity and independence they deserve and every nation thrives.
THE MAN WHO ALLEGEDLY PONZIED THE FAITHFUL
FROM: SEC
Washington, D.C., April 12, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a self-described “Social Capitalist” with running a Ponzi scheme that targeted socially-conscious investors in church congregations.
The SEC alleges that Ephren W. Taylor II made numerous false statements to lure investors into two investment programs being offered through City Capital Corporation, where he was the CEO. Instead of investor money going to charitable causes and economically disadvantaged businesses as promised, Taylor secretly diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars to publishing and promoting his books, hiring consultants to refine his public image, and funding his wife’s singing career.
The SEC also charged City Capital and its former chief operating officer Wendy Connor, who lives in North Carolina and along with Taylor received hundreds of thousands of dollars from investors in salary and commissions.
“Ephren Taylor professed to be in the business of socially-conscious investing. Instead, he was in the business of promoting Ephren Taylor,” said David Woodcock, Director of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office. “He preyed upon investors’ faith and their desire to help others, convincing them that they could earn healthy returns while also helping their communities.”
According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Atlanta, Taylor strenuously cultivated an image of a highly successful and socially conscious entrepreneur. He marketed himself as “The Social Capitalist” and touted that he was the youngest black CEO of a public company and the son of a Christian minister who understands the importance of giving back. He authored three books and appeared on national television programs, and promoted his investment opportunities through live presentations, Internet advertisements, and radio ads. For instance, Taylor conducted a multi-city “Building Wealth Tour” during which he spoke to church congregations including Atlanta’s New Birth Church and at various wealth management seminars.
The SEC alleges that Taylor and City Capital offered two primary investments: promissory notes supposedly funding various small businesses, and interests in “sweepstakes” machines. In addition to promising high rates of return, Taylor assured investors that he had a long track record of success and that investor funds would be used to support businesses in economically disadvantaged areas. A portion of profits were to go to charity. Taylor devoted considerable time to denigrating traditional investment vehicles such as CDs, mutual funds, and the stock market, labeling them as “foolish” and “money losers.” He told audiences they could make far greater returns using their self-directed IRAs for investments in small businesses and sweepstakes machines offered by City Capital.
In reality, according to the SEC’s complaint, more than $11 million that Taylor and City Capital raised from hundreds of investors nationwide from 2008 to 2010 was instead used to operate the Ponzi scheme. Investor money was misused to pay other investors, finance Taylor’s personal expenses, and fund City Capital’s payroll, rent, and other costs. City Capital’s business ventures were consistently unprofitable, and no meaningful amounts of investor money were ever sent to charities.
The SEC’s complaint seeks disgorgement, financial penalties and permanent injunctive relief against City Capital, Taylor, and Connor as well as officer and director bars against Taylor and Connor.
ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER SPEAKS AT E-BOOKS PRESS CONFERENCE
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the E-books Press Conference Washington, D.C. ~ Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Good afternoon. Today I’m joined by Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division Sharis Pozen, and Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen, to announce the Justice Department’s latest progress in protecting American consumers from anticompetitive harm, ensuring fairness in the marketplace, and making certain that cutting-edge technologies are available at the lowest possible price.
In recent years, we have seen the rapid growth – and the many benefits – of electronic books. E-books are transforming our daily lives, and improving how information and content is shared. For the growing number of Americans who want to take advantage of this new technology, the Department of Justice is committed to ensuring that e-books are as affordable as possible.
As part of this commitment, the Department has reached a settlement with three of the nation’s largest book publishers – and will continue to litigate against Apple, and two additional leading publishers – for conspiring to increase the prices that consumers pay for e-books.
Earlier today, we filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, against Apple and five different book publishers – Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster. In response to our allegations, three of these publishers – Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster – agreed to a proposed settlement. If approved by the court, this settlement would resolve the Department’s antitrust concerns with these companies, and would require them to grant retailers – such as Amazon and Barnes & Noble – the freedom to reduce the prices of their e-book titles. The settlement also requires the companies to terminate their anticompetitive most-favored-nation agreements with Apple and other e-books retailers.
In addition, the companies will be prohibited for two years from placing constraints on retailers’ ability to offer discounts to consumers. They will also be prohibited from conspiring or sharing competitively sensitive information with their competitors for five years. And each is required to implement a strong antitrust compliance program. These steps are appropriate – and essential in ensuring a competitive marketplace.
Beginning in the summer of 2009, we allege that executives at the highest levels of the companies included in today’s lawsuit – concerned that e-book sellers had reduced prices – worked together to eliminate competition among stores selling e-books, ultimately increasing prices for consumers. As a result of this alleged conspiracy, we believe that consumers paid millions of dollars more for some of the most popular titles.
During regular, near-quarterly meetings, we allege that publishing company executives discussed confidential business and competitive matters – including Amazon’s e-book retailing practices – as part of a conspiracy to raise, fix, and stabilize retail prices. In addition, we allege that these publishers agreed to impose a new model which would enable them to seize pricing authority from bookstores; that they entered into agreements to pay Apple a 30 percent commission on books sold through its iBookstore; and that they promised – through contracts including most-favored-nation provisions – that no other e-book retailer would set a lower price. Our investigation even revealed that one CEO allegedly went so far as to encourage an e-book retailer to punish another publisher for not engaging in these illegal practices.
In advancing this critical investigation, I’d like to thank Attorney General Jepsen and Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott – along with our partners at the European Commission – for their hard work and close cooperation. Today’s action sends a clear message that the Department’s Antitrust Division continues to be open for business – and that we will not hesitate to do what is necessary to protect American consumers.
I am grateful for the outstanding leadership that Acting Assistant Attorney General Sharis Pozen has provided in this matter. Not only has she ensured a seamless transition in the Division’s senior leadership, she has proven that vigorous enforcement will remain its hallmark. I also want to commend her dedicated team, and thank each of the attorneys and investigators who worked so hard to make today’s announcement possible. Although this matter remains in its initial stages, it’s clear that, in all of you, the Department – and the American people – could have no stronger team of advocates.
At this time, I’d like to turn things over to Sharis, who will provide additional details on today’s action.
FEMA WARNS TO WATCH OUT FOR SPRING STORMS
FROM: FEMA
SEATTLE, Wash. -- As the days get warmer, we look forward to gardening and playing outdoors. But this is also a time to be aware of the threats of Mother Nature. If you live in the mountains or in Alaska, you know that spring ice break-up can cause major problems. Those living in the rest of the Northwest can expect lots of rain, with an ever-present threat of severe storms and flooding.
It only takes a couple of inches of rainfall to create a potential for flooding, and with the snow pack at high-than-normal levels, some communities could be seriously threatened.
FEMA Preparedness and Mitigation experts have several recommendations to help people get ready for the challenges of April showers.
First and foremost on the list is to get flood insurance. The average cost of flood insurance is about $750 a year. You do not have to live in a flood plain to get flood insurance. In fact, the rates for lower-risk properties are correspondingly lower. It’s a good idea to buy insurance now, while the sun is still shining, because there is a 30-day waiting period before a policy can take effect. When the waters are rising, it’ll be too late to purchase a policy.
Other steps you can take to protect your family and your property include:
Make sure downspouts carry water several feet from your house to a well-drained area. About 2,500 gallons of water will come from a 1,000 square foot roof with one foot of snow depth across the roof. This much water may cause problems if allowed to drain next to the house.
Anchor your fuel tanks. An unanchored tank in your basement can be torn free by floodwaters and the broken supply line can contaminate your basement. An unanchored tank outside can be swept downstream, where it can damage other houses.
Have a licensed electrician raise electric components (switches, sockets, circuit breakers and wiring) at least 12" above your home's projected flood elevation.
Place the furnace and water heater on masonry blocks or concrete at least 12” above the projected flood elevation.
If your washer and dryer are in the basement, elevate them on masonry or pressure-treated lumber at least 12” above the projected flood elevation.
Plan and practice a flood evacuation route with your family.
Ask an out-of-state relative or friend to be the "family contact" in case your family is separated during a flood. Make sure everyone in your family knows the name, address, and phone number of this contact person.
SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON AT WHITE HOUSE CONNECTING THE AMERICAS CONFERENCE
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the White House Conference on Connecting the Americas
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Eisenhower Executive Office Building
Washington, DC
April 12, 2012
Thank you all, thank you. I am delighted to have a chance to address you today. I know you’ve had a busy and active set of encounters and discussions. But it is a special treat for me to be here. I thank you, John, for that introduction, because you and many in this audience have held fast to a vision of partnership in the Americas even when some people may have had a hard time seeing it or understanding it, because it is so important that we keep our eyes on the horizon about what is possible and continue to work toward achieving it.
It was that potential which inspired 18 years ago the very first Summit of the Americas. I remember it very well when my husband announced in this building – somewhere but not in this brand new conference center – that the United States would host the first-ever gathering of democratically elected leaders from throughout the Western Hemisphere. He talked then about our “unique opportunity to build a community of free nations, diverse in culture and history, but bound together by a commitment to responsive and free government, vibrant civil societies, open economies, and rising living standards for all of our people.”
Well, that opportunity that was spoken about 18 years ago has really been born into reality. The people and the societies of the Americas have done so much to realize it. And that may be exemplified by the place where President Obama and I will head tomorrow for the sixth Summit of the Americas. I think that if we look back on the work we have done through the last years to support Colombia, it’s quite remarkable where Colombia stands today.
Now, first and foremost, of course, the credit goes to the heroic effort of Colombia’s people and government, but it’s had steadfast U.S. support. And so leaders from the entire hemisphere will gather in Cartagena with an agenda focused not on how we overcome a threat, but how we seize a unique opportunity.
As much as our hemisphere has changed, it is not alone in that experience. The world has changed so much, and we have to do a very honest assessment about where the United States stands in our efforts to realize the potential of these partnerships.
Before President Obama traveled to Brazil, Chile, and El Salvador last year, I did address the issue of what I called “the power of proximity” because the Americas drive our prosperity. They buy more than 40 percent of our exports – three times as much as China. They provide more than half our imported energy. They are home to a growing number of global players with a central role in building new architectures of cooperation that defend our interests and our values. Their record of democratic development has global resonance at a time when democratic models and partners are needed more than ever. And our historic and deepening interdependence gives the Americas a singular importance to our people, our culture, and our society.
So harnessing that power of proximity is one of the most strategically significant tasks facing our foreign policy in the years ahead. I think the same can be true for our neighbors, because the power of proximity runs in both directions, and we together must harness it. We must turn the Americans, already a community of shared history, geography, culture, and values, into something greater – a shared platform for global success.
That has been the principle behind the Obama Administration’s focus on building equal partnerships, and it will be the message that the President takes to the Summit. We will look to translate our strategic vision into concrete steps. As our Colombian hosts have shown, those steps must be all about building connections among our governments, our businesses, our markets, our educational institutions, our societies and citizens.
Now, when we think about connecting the Americas, we start with our shared agenda for competitiveness and innovation. After all, this hemisphere is home not just to the United States’ biggest trading partners, but also to the dynamic emerging economies. Brazil and Mexico are projected to become top-five global economies in coming decades. Countries like Colombia, Chile, Peru, Uruguay, Panama have found recipes for strong growth. That has major implications for jobs right here. U.S. exports in this hemisphere were up 24 percent last year. President Obama set a goal of doubling exports in five years and we are well on the way to doing that. But what it means for Latin America and the new middle class is that half of all households are now in the middle class. That number could grow to three-quarters within 20 years.
Our free trade agreements and economic diplomacy capitalize on this two-way market. Thanks to the FTAs we ratified last year with Colombia and Panama, as John said, our trade partnerships run uninterrupted from the Arctic to Patagonia. We have signed a slew of agreements on economic cooperation and investment with Brazil and others. The Trans-Pacific Partnership that we are negotiating includes Chile and Peru. It’s also received strong interest from Canada and Mexico.
What’s notable is not just the scale, but the makeup of hemispheric trade. It consists of value-added products that create jobs and drive innovation. Production and design span borders, like the LearJet, which a Canadian company builds in the United States with Mexican-manufactured parts. This is high-quality trade, and high-quality trade means competitiveness for all of our companies.
Now, that’s good, but it’s not good enough. For when we compare ourselves to the most dynamic global regions, we still have a ways to go. The Inter-American Development Bank estimates that hemispheric trade is only half of what it could and should be. There are still too many barriers, whether uncoordinated regulations or inadequate infrastructure, that limit our potential. And in the face of rising competition, especially from Asia, we have to up our game.
That should begin with building new, more productive ties among entrepreneurs, companies, and markets. In Cartagena, we’re joining with business leaders to create a sustained private sector effort that will coordinate with and complement the work of governments. We’re intensifying our focus on small- and medium-sized enterprises, especially those started and run by women. They account, after all, for 90 percent of Latin American businesses and two-thirds of Latin American jobs, yet they have little access to the tools, financing, and partnerships that could help them thrive. In the United States just 1 percent of small and medium-sized enterprises access global markets. So by building links among these businesses, we can turn them into engines of job growth and prosperity.
We also have to do better when it comes to the technology that makes connectivity possible. This hemisphere’s young people have embraced technology and new media in huge numbers. But their ambitions have not been matched by the infrastructure and access that can drive real progress. Broadband costs more than three times more in Latin America than the OECD average. That’s a serious drag on development. So we’re going to try to leverage technology to enhance opportunity.
And as you look at innovation, we need to consider it in the long-term, and that means the hemisphere has to do more to provide better financing, deeper ties between scientists and institutions. We require more private initiatives like the announcements from Boeing and GE that they will establish research and technology centers in Brazil. We have to empower all of our citizens to take advantage of the new economy.
That brings me to the second area where we need to connect more: education. America’s record in education is really commendable, but our record in exchanges in education throughout the hemisphere leaves a lot to be desired. We need to leverage the skills of young people. Building those connections will be key to that. When President Rousseff met with President Obama earlier this week, they advanced our joint commitment to educational exchanges under our 100,000 Strong in the Americas and Brazil’s Science Without Borders. These are initiatives that will send thousands of students to train in universities in one another’s countries throughout the hemisphere. Now businesses have to do their part because they have to help us develop the skilled workforce that we seek and we will try to build those private sector partnerships in Cartagena.
We’ll also build connections in a third area: energy. Now, massive oil finds are being developed in Brazil while countries like Colombia and Canada are expanding production. And new methods have unlocked natural gas everywhere from the United States to Argentina. Smaller countries like Trinidad and Tobago are gas refiners and providers. And the progress is as striking in green energy, whether it’s Mexican advances in energy efficiency, Chilean innovations in geothermal, or the work on bio-fuels we’re doing with Brazil.
We’ve made energy a priority of our foreign policy and in February I signed a historic trans-boundary oil agreement with Mexico. We started high-level energy dialogues with producers. And just this week, President Obama and President Rousseff agreed to collaborate on deep water oil and gas operations. Under the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas, launched by President Obama at the Summit of the Americas in 2009, we have leveraged already more than $150 million in government investment to support more than 40 initiatives.
There’s no doubt the Western Hemisphere is capable of producing cleaner, cheaper, more reliable energy to support growth here and globally, but in order to do that, we have to build a truly hemispheric network of our energy sectors. Connected markets would bring economies of scale, stable supplies, efficiency, and more use of renewables. That work we will also launch in Cartagena. And we will do what we can to help create a future of sustainable, affordable energy for all in the Americas.
Now progress within the hemisphere gives the Americas a new global profile. When I talk with foreign ministers – I’ve just finished the G8 ministers meeting here in Washington – whether I’m talking climate change or global growth and trade or nonproliferation, U.S.-Latin America relationships really matter to these global issues.
Peru and Chile have become key partners in the Pacific. Colombia is leading on citizen security globally and, with Guatemala, is one of our closest current partners on the Security Council. Uruguay contributes the most per capita to peacekeeping of any nation in the world. Costa Rica aims to become the first carbon-neutral country. Canada is one of our most important allies in diplomatic and security efforts. And nearly every country in the hemisphere stepped up to support Haiti.
This global activism carries tremendous strategic benefits. And at the summit, it is time to add an outward looking dimension to our connections, because our global engagements will be crucial to our success in the hemisphere. Now being global partners, I will hasten to say, does not mean we’ll always agree; that’s not the case. But it reflects a faith that even when we disagree, convergent interests and values give us important shared objectives in the world.
Now President Obama and I have said many times that this will be America’s Pacific century, and we are focused on the broader Pacific. But remember, the Pacific runs from the Indian Ocean to the western shores of Latin America. We see this as one large area for our strategic focus. That’s why we’re working with APEC; that’s why we’re creating the Trans-Pacific Partnership. We recognize the mutual benefits of engagement between the Americas and the rest of the Pacific.
Our global partnership also extends into the G20, which includes Argentina, Brazil, Canada, and Mexico, which will host the next meeting in June. And Mexico has been a leader in the climate change negotiations from Copenhagen to Cancun to Durban. Chile has joined Mexico to become the second Latin American member of the OECD and others are lined up to follow.
When I go to Brasilia next week, my conversations there will center on the major challenges of our day from Syria and Iran to growth and development. And I will join President Rousseff to co-chair a meeting of the Open Government Partnership, a joint effort to foster transparency and accountability among 54 governments, and a quarter of them are from Latin America and the Caribbean.
So we have an affirmative agenda that is forward-thinking and outward-looking. It reflects what we can do together in this hemisphere. But at the same time, we must be clear about where we can and should do better. We cannot afford to be complacent. So we have to commit to further progress against exclusion and lack of opportunity. Yes, the region has come a long way, thanks to a lot of smart social and economic policies. I applaud the work that has been done on many of the quite pioneering programs of conditional cash transfer and so much else. But the gap – the inequality gap – is still much too large. So we have to focus on economic policies that will close that gap. And we have to pay particular attention to women and indigenous and Afro-Latin communities, so that they, too, are part of the future we envision.
We have to protect democracy. It’s no accident that this hemisphere’s successes have come along with a nearly complete embrace of democracies. The Inter-American Democratic Charter enshrines democracy as a fundamental responsibility of governments and a right of all citizens. So we have to strengthen the capacity of the Organization of American States to defend democracy and human rights.
And of course, we have to address crime and insecurity. From the start of this Administration, we’ve have made it clear that the United States accepts our share of responsibility for the criminal violence that stalks our neighbors to the south. We tripled funding for demand reduction for illegal drugs to more than $10 billion a year. We strengthened the Merida Initiative in Mexico, the Central American Citizen Security Partnership, the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, our ongoing assistance to Colombia.
And our support is focused not just on helping security forces track down criminals; we’re working to address the root causes of violence, from impunity to lack of opportunity, to build accountable institutions that respect human rights and enhance the rule of law. Courts and prisons, police and prosecutors, schools and job-training centers, and building those partnerships with political leaders, but also with businesses and with the elite, who have a special obligation to help confront these challenges. I really applaud the progress that President Perez Molina has made in Guatemala, in just the first few months of his tenure, in tax reform. The fact that so many of the wealthy in Latin America have not paid their fair share of taxes is one of the reasons why the services that are necessary to protect citizen security, to enhance educational opportunities have not been available.
I understand the frustration in the region is high; the progress is viewed as being too slow. We have launched very open and frank dialogues with our partners to find ways that we can be of more assistance in supporting the reform efforts that are necessary.
But ultimately, a lot of this comes down to the connections between people. We have to be willing to do everything we can imagine to forge those connections. We have a lot of them already: blood and family, language and culture, history and geography, but there’s a lot more we can and must do. And we should act even when governments are not willing to partner with us.
In Cuba, for example, the hundreds of thousands of Cuban Americans who have travelled to the island since we eased the way for them early in this Administration are our best agents for change. They’ve already helped bring about some promising developments, especially in the economic arena. So we have to work to unleash the potential that we see in our hemisphere. And it truly is an exciting opportunity for the United States and equally for all the nations of the hemisphere.
When President Obama and I went to that first of his summits three years ago, it was exciting because I remembered the first summit that we had in Miami. I’m old enough to remember a lot of those things these days. (Laughter.) And I remember the generational look of that summit when, frankly, my husband was about the youngest leader, as I recall, or looked like it anyway. (Laughter.) Whereas now, there are young leaders with new ideas who are working hard on behalf of their country. There are women elected president, something which you know I think is a great advance. (Laughter and applause.)
And so the whole picture is one of great promise and opportunity and excitement, so I know that both the President and I are excited about going back to the summit. We’re sure there’ll be some surprises, as there always are at such large events. But more than that, there will be a palpable sense of the connections between and among us. And to me, that is worth everything – to build on those connections, to connect us in a way that really provides what we are all seeking, to help people live up to their God-given potential, to enshrine the values and habits of democracy, to lift people who have a generation or so before been mired in illiteracy and poverty into the middle class. It doesn’t get any better than that. This is the time for the Americas. And we have to do more to reach out to convince our own fellow Americans of that opportunity, and we have to – those of us in government or in academia or business or NGOs – be partners in making these connections real.
I’m looking forward to the work ahead, and I thank you so much for your interest in the abiding partnerships here in our hemisphere. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Thursday, April 12, 2012
G-8 FOREIGN MINISTERS CONDEMN NORTH KOREAN MISSILE LAUNCH
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
G8 Foreign Ministers Statement
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 12, 2012
Following is the text of a statement released on behalf of the G8 Foreign Ministers:
Begin text:
We, the G-8 Foreign Ministers, condemn the launch by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), which is a violation of UN Security Council Resolutions 1695, 1718, and 1874. Sharing the view that the launch undermines regional peace and stability, we call on the DPRK to abstain from further launches using ballistic missile technology or other actions which aggravate the situation on the Korean Peninsula. We are ready to consider, with others, taking measures responding to all activities of the DPRK that violate UN Security Council Resolutions, and calling for appropriate response by the United Nations Security Council. We urge the DPRK to meet its international commitments including those under the 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks; comply with its obligations under all relevant UN Security Council resolutions, in particular by abandoning all its nuclear weapons and its existing nuclear and ballistic missile programs in a complete, verifiable, and irreversible manner; cease its uranium enrichment activities, which violate UN Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874; and take concrete and irreversible steps toward denuclearization.
NORTH KOREAN MISSILE LAUNCH A FAILURE ACCORDING TO NORTHERN COMMAND
FROM: AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Northcom Acknowledges North Korean Missile Launch, Failure
By Cheryl Pellerin
WASHINGTON, April 12, 2012 - North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command officials acknowledged today that U.S. systems detected and tracked a launch of a North Korean TaepoDong-2 missile at 6:39 p.m. EDT.
The missile was tracked on a southerly launch over the Yellow Sea, according to a statement issued from Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado.
Initial indications are that the missile's first stage fell into the sea 102.5 miles west of Seoul, South Korea, the statement says. The other two stages were assessed to have failed and no debris fell on land, it says.
"At no time were the missile or resulting debris a threat," it says.
"Despite the failure of its attempted missile launch," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said in a statement tonight, "North Korea's provocative action threatens regional security, violates international law and contravenes its own recent commitments."
The action is not surprising given North Korea's pattern of aggressive behavior, he added, but any missile activity by North Korea is of concern to the international community.
"The United States remains vigilant in the face of North Korean provocations, and is fully committed to the security of our allies in the region," Carney said.
President Barack Obama "has been clear that he is prepared to engage constructively with North Korea," the press secretary said, adding that the president "has also insisted that North Korea live up to its own commitments, adhere to its international obligations and deal peacefully with its neighbors."
North Korea will only show strength and find security, Carney added, "by abiding by international law, living up to its obligations, and by working to feed its citizens, to educate its children, and to win the trust of its neighbors."
A spokesman for the Korean Committee for Space Technology announced March 16 that North Korea would launch a long-range Unha-3 rocket between April 12 and 16.
He said the rocket would carry a North Korean-made Kwangmyongsong-3 polar-orbiting observation satellite to mark the 100th birthday of the late President Kim Il Sung on April 15.
SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON GIVES FORRESTAL LECTURE AT NAVAL ACADEMY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Forrestal Lecture at the Naval Academy
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Annapolis, MD
April 10, 2012
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much. Thanks for that warm introduction, Zach. Thank you Jordan, who will be helping to moderate the questions at the end of my remarks. Vice Admiral Miller and Captain Clark, thank you for the very warm welcome that you have given me. I also want to recognize a long-time friend, the governor of the great state of Maryland, Martin O’Malley. And I understand that we have delegates from the Naval Academy Foreign Affairs Conference, from schools literally around the world, including some Fulbright scholars. So let me welcome all of you as well. I just hope they don’t make you climb Herndon before you leave the academy. (Laughter.)
And Midshipmen, thank you for taking this time away from your studies. (Laughter.) You’ll take just any excuse. (Laughter.) And Plebes, I’m sure you’d rather be sleeping. (Cheering and applause.) And Youngsters, well, you’re still just glad you’re not Plebes. (Cheering.) And Second Class, you’d rather, I’m sure, be catching up on some homework. (Cheering.) And Firsties, you’re already dreaming of throwing your cover in the air and putting all this in your rearview mirror. (Cheers and applause.)
But to one and all, it is such an honor for me to be here this evening. Now, I am fortunate to know and work with quite a few graduates of this academy and to call many of them my friends, including the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Retired Admiral Mike Mullen, and Admiral Harry Harris, class of 1978, who travels the world with me and is here with me tonight. And as I was signing the guestbook for the lectures, I know you recently heard from my former colleague, Senator John McCain, who, by his own admission, was nowhere near the top of his class, but that didn’t stop him from becoming a genuine American hero and a great colleague and travelling companion during my years in the Senate.
Now, I received a note, an email, from another graduate I know, just in the last day, who had heard that I would be coming here to the academy. And he wanted me to understand how this academy prepares you not just for military service, but for citizenship and life. Carlos came to Annapolis after fleeing Cuba as a child with his parents, who both worked two jobs to make a new life in America. The naval training he received helped him eventually become the first commanding officer of a guided missile destroyer, and his study of strategy and diplomacy landed him a job as a White House fellow.
But that’s not all. He used what he learned in, yes, electrical engineering classes – and I know how much you all love those – to start his own small business that now employs 50 people. The academy’s emphasis on integrity and character led this first-generation American to get involved in his own community and even to make a run for local office. In his email to me, he said, “My life would not be what it is today if it were not for the United States Naval Academy. Annapolis taught me to always strive in my own small way to make a positive difference in the lives of others because it is the right thing to do.”
Now, that is not only a wonderful sentiment for an individual’s life, but also for our country and our country’s future. You see, we need you to become leaders who can use every tool and every bit of training to make contributions across a wide range of disciplines. The challenges of the 21st century are blurring the lines between defense, diplomacy, and development, the three Ds of foreign policy. So we need officers who can fight wars, negotiate agreements, and provide emergency relief all at once. Call it the smart power Navy. That’s what Annapolis is preparing you for, and that’s what your country is counting on.
And as we consider this future, let us also remember our past. This is the Forrestal lecture, named for the first-ever Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal. He helped create the modern military and reorganize the government for the Cold War. And throughout his career, he championed the Navy as a pillar of America’s global leadership.
Now, that was not always a popular position. After World War II, many Americans would have been happy if we just retreated behind our borders. But Secretary Forrestal was part of an extraordinary generation of leaders who realized that Americans’ interests were inextricably linked to the fortunes of people everywhere. In 1946, he noted in his diary that the Soviets believed that the post-war world should be shaped by a handful of great powers acting alone. But “the American point of view,” he wrote, “is that all nations professing a desire for peace and democracy should participate.”
In the years that followed, the United States and its partners constructed a new international order – an architecture of institutions, norms, and alliances that delivered peace and prosperity across what was then called the Free World. We saw old rivals like France and Germany feeling secure enough to reconcile and break their cycle of conflict. We watched as increasing economic integration raised standards of living, as fundamental freedoms became enshrined in international law, and democracy took root and thrived.
Now, today, no totalitarian empire threatens the world. But new actors are wielding increasing influence in international affairs. And emerging regions, especially the Asia Pacific, are becoming key drivers of global politics and economics. As a result, the post-war architecture is in need of some renovation. Still, amidst all this change, two constants remain. First, a just, open, and sustainable international order is still required to promote global peace and prosperity. And second, while the geometry of global power may have changed, American leadership is as essential as ever.
Now, I have said that the 21st century will be America’s Pacific century, just like previous centuries have been. And today, I want to describe briefly the diplomatic, economic and military investments the United States is making in a strong network of institutions and partnerships across the Asia Pacific. This vast region, from the Indian Ocean to the western shores of the Americas, is home to half the world’s population, several of our most trusted allies, emerging economic powers like China, India, and Indonesia, and many of the world’s most dynamic trade and energy routes.
Surging U.S. exports to the region are helping drive our economic recovery here at home. And future growth depends on reaching further into Asia’s growing consumer base and expanding middle class. Indeed, the shape of the global economy, the advance of democracy and human rights, and our hopes for a 21st century less bloody than the 20thcentury all hinge to a large degree on what happens in the Asia Pacific.
Take a look at this month’s headlines, and it shows the challenges and opportunities that the region presents. As we meet here tonight, North Korea is readying a long-range missile launch that will violate UN Security Council resolutions and put its neighbors and region at risk. Now this new threat comes only weeks after North Korea agreed to a moratorium on nuclear and missile testing. The speed of the turnaround raises questions about Pyongyang’s seriousness in saying that it desires to improve relations with us and its neighbors. This launch will give credence to the view that North Korean leaders see improved relations with the outside world as a threat to the existence of their system. And recent history strongly suggests that additional provocations may follow.
So we are working around the clock with South Korea and Japan to strengthen our alliances and sharpen our deterrent. As President Obama said in Seoul last month after visiting the demilitarized zone, the commitment of the United States to the people of the Republic of South Korea is unshakable. We will also work with Russia and with China. They both share a strong interest in the stability of the Korean Peninsula and will join in sending a message to the North Koreans that true security will only come from living up to commitments and obligations first and foremost to their own people.
Yet at the same time, Burma offers a meaningful opportunity for economic and political progress. For decades, that Southeast Asian nation has been locked behind an authoritarian curtain while many other countries in the region made successful transitions to vibrant democracies and open markets. The United States, supporting these transitions, has been one of our defining efforts in the Asia Pacific from South Korea to the Philippines to Thailand to Indonesia. In fact, I’m often a little frustrated that people forget how hard it was for those four countries to make their transitions. They went through all kinds of military dictatorships and coups and instability. And so we have to continue to have the patience and persistence to nurture the flickers of progress that I saw when I visited Burma, the first visit by a Secretary of State in 50 years. Of course, it is still too early to say how this story will end. But just nine days ago, the long-imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize winner, Aung San Suu Kyi was voted into parliament.
Much of the history of the 21st century is being written before our eyes. And a quick glance at Burma and North Korea shows that we have a deep stake in how that history plays out. So from our first days in office, the Obama Administration began directing America’s foreign policy to account for the Asia Pacific’s growing importance. I broke with tradition and made my first overseas trip there as Secretary. President Obama has traveled to the Western Pacific four times. We stepped up our engagement with countries and institutions in what I call forward deployed diplomacy. And we’re not turning away from our old friends and interests in other parts of the world. Our relationships with European and NATO allies who are, after all, our partners of first resort, remain indispensable for our work around the globe. And we need to deepen our engagement in the Asia Pacific region in coordination with them.
So just as we are not losing old friends, we are not seeking new enemies. Today’s China is not the Soviet Union. We are not on the brink of a new Cold War in Asia. Just look at the ever expanding trade between our economies, the connections between our peoples, the ongoing consultations between our governments. In less than 35 years, we’ve gone from being two nations with hardly any ties to speak of to being thoroughly, inescapably interdependent. That requires adjustments in thinking and approaches on both sides. Geopolitics today cannot afford to be a zero-sum game. A thriving China is good for America and a thriving America is good for China, so long as we both thrive in a way that contributes to the regional and global good. Let me go one step further. We will only succeed in building a peaceful, prosperous Asia Pacific if we succeed in building an effective U.S.-China relationship.
So our aim is to build mature and effective institutions that can mobilize common action and settle disputes peacefully, to work toward rules and norms that help manage relations between peoples, markets, and nations, and establish security arrangements that provide stability and build trust. I am well aware that some in Asia fear that a robust American presence and our talk of architecture and institutions and norms is really code for protecting Western prerogatives and denying rising powers their fair share of influence. The argument goes that we’re trying to draw them into a rigged system that favors us. Well, that is just not the case. We agree that regional and international architecture cannot remain static. Rules and institutions designed for an earlier age may not be suited to today.
So we need to work together to adapt and update them and even to create new institutions where necessary. But there are principles that are universal and that must be defended: fundamental freedoms and human dignity; an open, free, transparent, and fair economic system; the peaceful resolution of disputes; and respect for the territorial integrity of states. These are norms that benefit everyone and that help all people and nations live and trade in peace. The international system based on these principles helped fuel, not foil, the rise of China and other emerging powers such as India and Indonesia. Those nations have benefited from the security it provides, the markets it opens, and the trust it fosters. And as a consequence, they have a real stake in the success of that system. And as their power grows and their ability to contribute increases, the world’s expectations of them will rise as well.
But some of today’s emerging powers in Asia and elsewhere act as selective stakeholders, picking and choosing when to participate constructively and when to stand apart from the international system. And while that may suit their interests in the short term, it will ultimately render the system that has helped them get to where they are today unworkable. And that would end up impoverishing everyone.
History shows us that a strong regional architecture can bring to bear incentives for cooperation and disincentives for provocation and problematic behaviors. But this kind of architecture does not just spring up on its own, just as NATO and other aspects of the post-World War II architecture didn’t just happen. It takes consistent effort, strong partnerships, and crucially, American leadership. And that is, at core, what our strategy in the Asia Pacific is all about. All of our actions – diplomatic, economic, and military – are designed to advance this goal. Let me offer three examples about how it works.
First, President Obama’s attended something called the East Asia Summit this past November. The East Asia Summit is a gathering of the heads of state of all kinds of the nations in the region to grapple with the biggest challenges and pursue comprehensive solutions, whether it’s on nonproliferation, disaster response, or maritime security. But no U.S. President had ever attended before. And President Obama’s decision to participate capped three years of intensive engagement with institutions like ASEAN, the Association of South East Asian Nations, and APEC, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, and reflected our support for the East Asia Summit as the region’s premier forum for discussing political and security issues.
Having an institution like this can make a difference. Take the South China Sea. It connects many of the region’s nations, some of whom have competing claims on its waters and islands. Half the world’s merchant tonnage flows through the South China Sea, so the stakes for maritime security and freedom of navigation are very high. The United States has no territorial claims there, and we do not take sides in territorial disputes. But we have always been a seafaring nation, and we have an abiding interest in protecting the seas and respecting international law and promoting the peaceful resolution of disputes that arise out of navigation.
Trying to settle complex disputes like this bilaterally, one-on-one, was a recipe for confusion and even potentially confrontation. There were too many overlapping claims and interests, and the concerns of some countries were being elevated while others were being diminished. But when President Obama joined his fellow leaders at the East Asia Summit, they were able to support a region-wide effort to protect unfettered access to the South China Sea, work toward developing a code of conduct, and respect the legitimate interests of all claimants to ensure that disputes were settled through a consensual process based on established principles of international law.
Now, it was a reminder that, for certain issues, there’s no substitute for putting the relevant players in the same room and letting giving them a chance to begin to exchange ideas and work towards sorting out problems. In cases like this one, smaller countries then can be sure their voices are heard. And larger countries, which have a significant stake in broader regional stability and security, can pursue solutions to these complex challenges. That’s what an effective architecture permits.
Here’s a second example, which demonstrates how strong rules and norms matter in people’s lives. As part of that same trip last November, the President built momentum for a new far-reaching trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership that we are negotiating with eight other countries in the Asia Pacific region. This agreement is not just about eliminating barriers to trade, although that is crucial for boosting U.S. exports and creating jobs here at home. It’s also about agreeing on the rules of the road for an integrated Pacific economy that is open, free, transparent, and fair. It will put in place strong protections for workers, the environment, intellectual property, and innovation – all key American values. And it will cover emerging issues such as the connectivity of regional supply chains, the competitive impact of state-owned enterprises, and create trade opportunities for more small-and-medium-sized businesses.
These kinds of rules help level the playing field for all countries and companies. And when the competition is fair and the rules are transparently known and there are systems to enforce them, American businesses can out-compete and out-innovate anyone in the world. Now of course, the rules only work if they’re known and enforced, which is why this Administration continues to bring suits against violators of trade norms and to speak up against abuses.
And on the subject of norms and rules, let me add that the United States is increasingly concerned about the growing threat to our economic and national security posed by cyber intrusions, particularly the theft of intellectual property and classified material via cyber means. Because the United States and China are two of the largest global cyber actors, establishing clear and acceptable practices in cyberspace is critical. And I was delighted to hear from Admiral Miller that the Naval Academy is introducing a cyber course that will be – begin to not only educate you about the opportunities and challenges in cyberspace, but help prepare you as part of what will certainly be an essentially function of our defense.
Now we will continue to be very candid about this and clear-eyed in addressing the harms and risks that have evolved over the past few years. At the State Department, we are attacked countless times every single day. Actually, our defenses aren’t breached, but sometimes people, for whatever reason, decide they want to dump national security material into the public domain. So we have to think figure out how to deal with the human factor while we build up our technical expertise.
My third example will be familiar to many of you, because it deals with how strong alliances and partnerships – especially our military cooperation with militaries around the world – saves lives, builds trust, and advances our interests. For decades, the United States military and our enduring alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand have underwritten security and stability in the Asia Pacific. Every day, the Navy has some 50 ships, hundreds of aircraft, tens of thousands of sailors and Marines in the Pacific at any given time. And the Navy’s role is growing, as evidenced by President Obama’s new Defense Strategic Guidance.
Each year, United States Navy ships and sailors and Marines participate in more than 170 bilateral and multilateral exercises and conduct more than 250 port visits in the region. One of my favorite port visits was of the USS McCain to Vietnam. This allows us to respond more quickly and efficiently when we need to work together with partners, such as responding to natural disasters in one of the most environmentally volatile and vulnerable areas in the world.
I hope you know and are proud of the Navy’s efforts after the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear crisis in Japan last year. The 7th Fleet had developed a close partnership with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force over many decades, so we were able to work hand in hand, delivering food and medical supplies, conducting search and rescue missions, evacuating the injured, and so much more. After the operation was over, I had the chance to visit with the crew of the destroyer USS Fitzgerald when we were both in Manila, and they told me how all that preparation and partnership had paid off.
To maximize our ability to participate in these kinds of efforts all over the Asia Pacific and to meet an increasingly diverse set of security challenges, the United States is moving to a more geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable force posture in the region. We are sending Marines to Australia for joint training – the first six-month rotational deployment arrived in Darwin last week. We are deploying state-of-the art ships to Singapore. We are modernizing our basing arrangements with allies in Northeast Asia.
We’re also working hard to reduce the risk of miscalculation or miscues between the American and Chinese militaries and to try to forge a durable military-to-military relationship. Our navies already work together to combat piracy off the Horn of Africa. But we can, we should, and we must do more together. We also hope to strengthen the newly established Strategic Security Dialogue, which brings American and Chinese military and civilian leaders to the table to discuss sensitive issues like maritime security and cyber security.
Here’s the bottom line, which I think is worth remembering as you work, study, and prepare for your futures in the Navy and the Marine Corps: The extraordinary service and sacrifice of America’s men and women in uniform makes a difference in the lives of people all over the world. In this region, it made a difference in the lives of those people in the Japanese community rescued from the floodwaters, or to the Singaporean sea captain protected from pirates, or the Korean family shielded from aggression. When it comes to ensuring stability and security in the Asia Pacific and beyond, there is simply no substitute for American power. Only the United States has the global reach, the resources and the resolve to deter aggression, rally coalitions, and project stability into diverse and dynamic areas of danger, threat, and opportunity.
Now this is not 1912, when friction between a declining Britain and a rising Germany set the stage for global conflict. It’s 2012, and a strong America is welcoming new powers into an international system designed to prevent global conflict.
We have come through a long decade of war, terrorism, and recession. And these continue to be difficult days for many of our fellow Americans. But America still has the world’s largest economy with the most productive workers, the best universities, the most innovative companies. Our military is the finest in the history of the world, far outclassing any rival. There is no other nation that boasts a global network of alliances and partnerships that can project force on every continent and in every ocean.
And just as importantly, no other nation can bring disparate countries and people together around common goals. I see it when I travel across Asia and the world: American leadership is respected and required. Now yes, this is because of our military and our material might, but it’s more about our values and our commitment to fairness, justice, freedom, and democracy. Our record may not be perfect, but the United States consistently over history seeks to advance not just our own good, but the greater good. And this is part of what makes American leadership so exceptional. There is no real precedent in history for the role we play or the responsibility we have shouldered. And there is no alternative.
But our global leadership is not a birthright. It has been earned by each successive generation, staying true to our values and living up to the best traditions of our nation. In the years ahead, it will be up to you and your classmates to carry this important work forward.
One of the enduring memories of my own childhood is listening to my father talk about his service in the Navy during World War II. He was a chief petty officer, responsible for training thousands of new recruits at Great Lakes Naval Station outside of Chicago before they shipped out to sea, mostly to the Pacific theater. He never forgot how it felt to watch those young men get loaded onto troop trains heading for the West coast, knowing that many would never return home. He never lost his sense of duty or his belief in our exceptional country. And after he died, I received letters and photographs from so many of the sailors who he had trained and who had served with him. Even all those years later, they shared a deep and abiding faith in our nation and the work we must do in the world.
One day soon, you, too, will leave this place and board ships, submarines, and aircraft bound for distant seas. Some of you will sail the Atlantic, renewing old bonds and defending old friends. Others will head to the Pacific to face the challenges of a new time. Wherever you go, you will represent the pride and power of this great nation we cherish. And you will embody our hopes for a freer, more peaceful, and prosperous world.
But before you head out into that world, I think you need to make some more memories here at home. So with the approval of the superintendent and the commandant, I am pleased to grant an uncharged overnight for plebes and an uncharged weekend for upper class midshipmen. (Cheers and applause.)
Thank you. Thank you for your service to our country. Good luck and Godspeed. (Applause.)
Forrestal Lecture at the Naval Academy
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Annapolis, MD
April 10, 2012
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much. Thanks for that warm introduction, Zach. Thank you Jordan, who will be helping to moderate the questions at the end of my remarks. Vice Admiral Miller and Captain Clark, thank you for the very warm welcome that you have given me. I also want to recognize a long-time friend, the governor of the great state of Maryland, Martin O’Malley. And I understand that we have delegates from the Naval Academy Foreign Affairs Conference, from schools literally around the world, including some Fulbright scholars. So let me welcome all of you as well. I just hope they don’t make you climb Herndon before you leave the academy. (Laughter.)
And Midshipmen, thank you for taking this time away from your studies. (Laughter.) You’ll take just any excuse. (Laughter.) And Plebes, I’m sure you’d rather be sleeping. (Cheering and applause.) And Youngsters, well, you’re still just glad you’re not Plebes. (Cheering.) And Second Class, you’d rather, I’m sure, be catching up on some homework. (Cheering.) And Firsties, you’re already dreaming of throwing your cover in the air and putting all this in your rearview mirror. (Cheers and applause.)
But to one and all, it is such an honor for me to be here this evening. Now, I am fortunate to know and work with quite a few graduates of this academy and to call many of them my friends, including the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Retired Admiral Mike Mullen, and Admiral Harry Harris, class of 1978, who travels the world with me and is here with me tonight. And as I was signing the guestbook for the lectures, I know you recently heard from my former colleague, Senator John McCain, who, by his own admission, was nowhere near the top of his class, but that didn’t stop him from becoming a genuine American hero and a great colleague and travelling companion during my years in the Senate.
Now, I received a note, an email, from another graduate I know, just in the last day, who had heard that I would be coming here to the academy. And he wanted me to understand how this academy prepares you not just for military service, but for citizenship and life. Carlos came to Annapolis after fleeing Cuba as a child with his parents, who both worked two jobs to make a new life in America. The naval training he received helped him eventually become the first commanding officer of a guided missile destroyer, and his study of strategy and diplomacy landed him a job as a White House fellow.
But that’s not all. He used what he learned in, yes, electrical engineering classes – and I know how much you all love those – to start his own small business that now employs 50 people. The academy’s emphasis on integrity and character led this first-generation American to get involved in his own community and even to make a run for local office. In his email to me, he said, “My life would not be what it is today if it were not for the United States Naval Academy. Annapolis taught me to always strive in my own small way to make a positive difference in the lives of others because it is the right thing to do.”
Now, that is not only a wonderful sentiment for an individual’s life, but also for our country and our country’s future. You see, we need you to become leaders who can use every tool and every bit of training to make contributions across a wide range of disciplines. The challenges of the 21st century are blurring the lines between defense, diplomacy, and development, the three Ds of foreign policy. So we need officers who can fight wars, negotiate agreements, and provide emergency relief all at once. Call it the smart power Navy. That’s what Annapolis is preparing you for, and that’s what your country is counting on.
And as we consider this future, let us also remember our past. This is the Forrestal lecture, named for the first-ever Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal. He helped create the modern military and reorganize the government for the Cold War. And throughout his career, he championed the Navy as a pillar of America’s global leadership.
Now, that was not always a popular position. After World War II, many Americans would have been happy if we just retreated behind our borders. But Secretary Forrestal was part of an extraordinary generation of leaders who realized that Americans’ interests were inextricably linked to the fortunes of people everywhere. In 1946, he noted in his diary that the Soviets believed that the post-war world should be shaped by a handful of great powers acting alone. But “the American point of view,” he wrote, “is that all nations professing a desire for peace and democracy should participate.”
In the years that followed, the United States and its partners constructed a new international order – an architecture of institutions, norms, and alliances that delivered peace and prosperity across what was then called the Free World. We saw old rivals like France and Germany feeling secure enough to reconcile and break their cycle of conflict. We watched as increasing economic integration raised standards of living, as fundamental freedoms became enshrined in international law, and democracy took root and thrived.
Now, today, no totalitarian empire threatens the world. But new actors are wielding increasing influence in international affairs. And emerging regions, especially the Asia Pacific, are becoming key drivers of global politics and economics. As a result, the post-war architecture is in need of some renovation. Still, amidst all this change, two constants remain. First, a just, open, and sustainable international order is still required to promote global peace and prosperity. And second, while the geometry of global power may have changed, American leadership is as essential as ever.
Now, I have said that the 21st century will be America’s Pacific century, just like previous centuries have been. And today, I want to describe briefly the diplomatic, economic and military investments the United States is making in a strong network of institutions and partnerships across the Asia Pacific. This vast region, from the Indian Ocean to the western shores of the Americas, is home to half the world’s population, several of our most trusted allies, emerging economic powers like China, India, and Indonesia, and many of the world’s most dynamic trade and energy routes.
Surging U.S. exports to the region are helping drive our economic recovery here at home. And future growth depends on reaching further into Asia’s growing consumer base and expanding middle class. Indeed, the shape of the global economy, the advance of democracy and human rights, and our hopes for a 21st century less bloody than the 20thcentury all hinge to a large degree on what happens in the Asia Pacific.
Take a look at this month’s headlines, and it shows the challenges and opportunities that the region presents. As we meet here tonight, North Korea is readying a long-range missile launch that will violate UN Security Council resolutions and put its neighbors and region at risk. Now this new threat comes only weeks after North Korea agreed to a moratorium on nuclear and missile testing. The speed of the turnaround raises questions about Pyongyang’s seriousness in saying that it desires to improve relations with us and its neighbors. This launch will give credence to the view that North Korean leaders see improved relations with the outside world as a threat to the existence of their system. And recent history strongly suggests that additional provocations may follow.
So we are working around the clock with South Korea and Japan to strengthen our alliances and sharpen our deterrent. As President Obama said in Seoul last month after visiting the demilitarized zone, the commitment of the United States to the people of the Republic of South Korea is unshakable. We will also work with Russia and with China. They both share a strong interest in the stability of the Korean Peninsula and will join in sending a message to the North Koreans that true security will only come from living up to commitments and obligations first and foremost to their own people.
Yet at the same time, Burma offers a meaningful opportunity for economic and political progress. For decades, that Southeast Asian nation has been locked behind an authoritarian curtain while many other countries in the region made successful transitions to vibrant democracies and open markets. The United States, supporting these transitions, has been one of our defining efforts in the Asia Pacific from South Korea to the Philippines to Thailand to Indonesia. In fact, I’m often a little frustrated that people forget how hard it was for those four countries to make their transitions. They went through all kinds of military dictatorships and coups and instability. And so we have to continue to have the patience and persistence to nurture the flickers of progress that I saw when I visited Burma, the first visit by a Secretary of State in 50 years. Of course, it is still too early to say how this story will end. But just nine days ago, the long-imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize winner, Aung San Suu Kyi was voted into parliament.
Much of the history of the 21st century is being written before our eyes. And a quick glance at Burma and North Korea shows that we have a deep stake in how that history plays out. So from our first days in office, the Obama Administration began directing America’s foreign policy to account for the Asia Pacific’s growing importance. I broke with tradition and made my first overseas trip there as Secretary. President Obama has traveled to the Western Pacific four times. We stepped up our engagement with countries and institutions in what I call forward deployed diplomacy. And we’re not turning away from our old friends and interests in other parts of the world. Our relationships with European and NATO allies who are, after all, our partners of first resort, remain indispensable for our work around the globe. And we need to deepen our engagement in the Asia Pacific region in coordination with them.
So just as we are not losing old friends, we are not seeking new enemies. Today’s China is not the Soviet Union. We are not on the brink of a new Cold War in Asia. Just look at the ever expanding trade between our economies, the connections between our peoples, the ongoing consultations between our governments. In less than 35 years, we’ve gone from being two nations with hardly any ties to speak of to being thoroughly, inescapably interdependent. That requires adjustments in thinking and approaches on both sides. Geopolitics today cannot afford to be a zero-sum game. A thriving China is good for America and a thriving America is good for China, so long as we both thrive in a way that contributes to the regional and global good. Let me go one step further. We will only succeed in building a peaceful, prosperous Asia Pacific if we succeed in building an effective U.S.-China relationship.
So our aim is to build mature and effective institutions that can mobilize common action and settle disputes peacefully, to work toward rules and norms that help manage relations between peoples, markets, and nations, and establish security arrangements that provide stability and build trust. I am well aware that some in Asia fear that a robust American presence and our talk of architecture and institutions and norms is really code for protecting Western prerogatives and denying rising powers their fair share of influence. The argument goes that we’re trying to draw them into a rigged system that favors us. Well, that is just not the case. We agree that regional and international architecture cannot remain static. Rules and institutions designed for an earlier age may not be suited to today.
So we need to work together to adapt and update them and even to create new institutions where necessary. But there are principles that are universal and that must be defended: fundamental freedoms and human dignity; an open, free, transparent, and fair economic system; the peaceful resolution of disputes; and respect for the territorial integrity of states. These are norms that benefit everyone and that help all people and nations live and trade in peace. The international system based on these principles helped fuel, not foil, the rise of China and other emerging powers such as India and Indonesia. Those nations have benefited from the security it provides, the markets it opens, and the trust it fosters. And as a consequence, they have a real stake in the success of that system. And as their power grows and their ability to contribute increases, the world’s expectations of them will rise as well.
But some of today’s emerging powers in Asia and elsewhere act as selective stakeholders, picking and choosing when to participate constructively and when to stand apart from the international system. And while that may suit their interests in the short term, it will ultimately render the system that has helped them get to where they are today unworkable. And that would end up impoverishing everyone.
History shows us that a strong regional architecture can bring to bear incentives for cooperation and disincentives for provocation and problematic behaviors. But this kind of architecture does not just spring up on its own, just as NATO and other aspects of the post-World War II architecture didn’t just happen. It takes consistent effort, strong partnerships, and crucially, American leadership. And that is, at core, what our strategy in the Asia Pacific is all about. All of our actions – diplomatic, economic, and military – are designed to advance this goal. Let me offer three examples about how it works.
First, President Obama’s attended something called the East Asia Summit this past November. The East Asia Summit is a gathering of the heads of state of all kinds of the nations in the region to grapple with the biggest challenges and pursue comprehensive solutions, whether it’s on nonproliferation, disaster response, or maritime security. But no U.S. President had ever attended before. And President Obama’s decision to participate capped three years of intensive engagement with institutions like ASEAN, the Association of South East Asian Nations, and APEC, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, and reflected our support for the East Asia Summit as the region’s premier forum for discussing political and security issues.
Having an institution like this can make a difference. Take the South China Sea. It connects many of the region’s nations, some of whom have competing claims on its waters and islands. Half the world’s merchant tonnage flows through the South China Sea, so the stakes for maritime security and freedom of navigation are very high. The United States has no territorial claims there, and we do not take sides in territorial disputes. But we have always been a seafaring nation, and we have an abiding interest in protecting the seas and respecting international law and promoting the peaceful resolution of disputes that arise out of navigation.
Trying to settle complex disputes like this bilaterally, one-on-one, was a recipe for confusion and even potentially confrontation. There were too many overlapping claims and interests, and the concerns of some countries were being elevated while others were being diminished. But when President Obama joined his fellow leaders at the East Asia Summit, they were able to support a region-wide effort to protect unfettered access to the South China Sea, work toward developing a code of conduct, and respect the legitimate interests of all claimants to ensure that disputes were settled through a consensual process based on established principles of international law.
Now, it was a reminder that, for certain issues, there’s no substitute for putting the relevant players in the same room and letting giving them a chance to begin to exchange ideas and work towards sorting out problems. In cases like this one, smaller countries then can be sure their voices are heard. And larger countries, which have a significant stake in broader regional stability and security, can pursue solutions to these complex challenges. That’s what an effective architecture permits.
Here’s a second example, which demonstrates how strong rules and norms matter in people’s lives. As part of that same trip last November, the President built momentum for a new far-reaching trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership that we are negotiating with eight other countries in the Asia Pacific region. This agreement is not just about eliminating barriers to trade, although that is crucial for boosting U.S. exports and creating jobs here at home. It’s also about agreeing on the rules of the road for an integrated Pacific economy that is open, free, transparent, and fair. It will put in place strong protections for workers, the environment, intellectual property, and innovation – all key American values. And it will cover emerging issues such as the connectivity of regional supply chains, the competitive impact of state-owned enterprises, and create trade opportunities for more small-and-medium-sized businesses.
These kinds of rules help level the playing field for all countries and companies. And when the competition is fair and the rules are transparently known and there are systems to enforce them, American businesses can out-compete and out-innovate anyone in the world. Now of course, the rules only work if they’re known and enforced, which is why this Administration continues to bring suits against violators of trade norms and to speak up against abuses.
And on the subject of norms and rules, let me add that the United States is increasingly concerned about the growing threat to our economic and national security posed by cyber intrusions, particularly the theft of intellectual property and classified material via cyber means. Because the United States and China are two of the largest global cyber actors, establishing clear and acceptable practices in cyberspace is critical. And I was delighted to hear from Admiral Miller that the Naval Academy is introducing a cyber course that will be – begin to not only educate you about the opportunities and challenges in cyberspace, but help prepare you as part of what will certainly be an essentially function of our defense.
Now we will continue to be very candid about this and clear-eyed in addressing the harms and risks that have evolved over the past few years. At the State Department, we are attacked countless times every single day. Actually, our defenses aren’t breached, but sometimes people, for whatever reason, decide they want to dump national security material into the public domain. So we have to think figure out how to deal with the human factor while we build up our technical expertise.
My third example will be familiar to many of you, because it deals with how strong alliances and partnerships – especially our military cooperation with militaries around the world – saves lives, builds trust, and advances our interests. For decades, the United States military and our enduring alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand have underwritten security and stability in the Asia Pacific. Every day, the Navy has some 50 ships, hundreds of aircraft, tens of thousands of sailors and Marines in the Pacific at any given time. And the Navy’s role is growing, as evidenced by President Obama’s new Defense Strategic Guidance.
Each year, United States Navy ships and sailors and Marines participate in more than 170 bilateral and multilateral exercises and conduct more than 250 port visits in the region. One of my favorite port visits was of the USS McCain to Vietnam. This allows us to respond more quickly and efficiently when we need to work together with partners, such as responding to natural disasters in one of the most environmentally volatile and vulnerable areas in the world.
I hope you know and are proud of the Navy’s efforts after the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear crisis in Japan last year. The 7th Fleet had developed a close partnership with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force over many decades, so we were able to work hand in hand, delivering food and medical supplies, conducting search and rescue missions, evacuating the injured, and so much more. After the operation was over, I had the chance to visit with the crew of the destroyer USS Fitzgerald when we were both in Manila, and they told me how all that preparation and partnership had paid off.
To maximize our ability to participate in these kinds of efforts all over the Asia Pacific and to meet an increasingly diverse set of security challenges, the United States is moving to a more geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable force posture in the region. We are sending Marines to Australia for joint training – the first six-month rotational deployment arrived in Darwin last week. We are deploying state-of-the art ships to Singapore. We are modernizing our basing arrangements with allies in Northeast Asia.
We’re also working hard to reduce the risk of miscalculation or miscues between the American and Chinese militaries and to try to forge a durable military-to-military relationship. Our navies already work together to combat piracy off the Horn of Africa. But we can, we should, and we must do more together. We also hope to strengthen the newly established Strategic Security Dialogue, which brings American and Chinese military and civilian leaders to the table to discuss sensitive issues like maritime security and cyber security.
Here’s the bottom line, which I think is worth remembering as you work, study, and prepare for your futures in the Navy and the Marine Corps: The extraordinary service and sacrifice of America’s men and women in uniform makes a difference in the lives of people all over the world. In this region, it made a difference in the lives of those people in the Japanese community rescued from the floodwaters, or to the Singaporean sea captain protected from pirates, or the Korean family shielded from aggression. When it comes to ensuring stability and security in the Asia Pacific and beyond, there is simply no substitute for American power. Only the United States has the global reach, the resources and the resolve to deter aggression, rally coalitions, and project stability into diverse and dynamic areas of danger, threat, and opportunity.
Now this is not 1912, when friction between a declining Britain and a rising Germany set the stage for global conflict. It’s 2012, and a strong America is welcoming new powers into an international system designed to prevent global conflict.
We have come through a long decade of war, terrorism, and recession. And these continue to be difficult days for many of our fellow Americans. But America still has the world’s largest economy with the most productive workers, the best universities, the most innovative companies. Our military is the finest in the history of the world, far outclassing any rival. There is no other nation that boasts a global network of alliances and partnerships that can project force on every continent and in every ocean.
And just as importantly, no other nation can bring disparate countries and people together around common goals. I see it when I travel across Asia and the world: American leadership is respected and required. Now yes, this is because of our military and our material might, but it’s more about our values and our commitment to fairness, justice, freedom, and democracy. Our record may not be perfect, but the United States consistently over history seeks to advance not just our own good, but the greater good. And this is part of what makes American leadership so exceptional. There is no real precedent in history for the role we play or the responsibility we have shouldered. And there is no alternative.
But our global leadership is not a birthright. It has been earned by each successive generation, staying true to our values and living up to the best traditions of our nation. In the years ahead, it will be up to you and your classmates to carry this important work forward.
One of the enduring memories of my own childhood is listening to my father talk about his service in the Navy during World War II. He was a chief petty officer, responsible for training thousands of new recruits at Great Lakes Naval Station outside of Chicago before they shipped out to sea, mostly to the Pacific theater. He never forgot how it felt to watch those young men get loaded onto troop trains heading for the West coast, knowing that many would never return home. He never lost his sense of duty or his belief in our exceptional country. And after he died, I received letters and photographs from so many of the sailors who he had trained and who had served with him. Even all those years later, they shared a deep and abiding faith in our nation and the work we must do in the world.
One day soon, you, too, will leave this place and board ships, submarines, and aircraft bound for distant seas. Some of you will sail the Atlantic, renewing old bonds and defending old friends. Others will head to the Pacific to face the challenges of a new time. Wherever you go, you will represent the pride and power of this great nation we cherish. And you will embody our hopes for a freer, more peaceful, and prosperous world.
But before you head out into that world, I think you need to make some more memories here at home. So with the approval of the superintendent and the commandant, I am pleased to grant an uncharged overnight for plebes and an uncharged weekend for upper class midshipmen. (Cheers and applause.)
Thank you. Thank you for your service to our country. Good luck and Godspeed. (Applause.)
U.S.-CHINA COOPERATION ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 11, 2012
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 11, 2012
The United States and the People’s Republic of China held the 8th Joint Working Group Meeting of the U.S.-China Ten Year Framework (TYF) for Energy and Environment Cooperation April 9-10 in Washington, D.C. Dr. Kerri-Ann Jones, Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, and David Sandalow, Assistant Secretary of Energy for Policy and International Affairs, co-chaired the meetings on behalf of the United States. Vice Chairman Zhang Xiaoqiang from the Chinese National Development and Reform Commission led the Chinese delegation. The two sides assessed ongoing collaboration and exchanged views on emerging issues, including low-carbon sustainable communities.
Established in June 2008, the TYF facilitates the exchange of information and best practices to foster innovation and develop solutions to the pressing environment and energy challenges both countries face. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, and Chinese State Counselor Dai Bingguo participated in the July 2009 signing of the Memorandum of Understanding to Enhance Cooperation on Climate Change, Energy, and the Environment, which expanded the role of the TYF and established a new strategic dialogue on climate change.
Agencies in each country implement the TYF, which includes seven action plans: on protection of air, water, wetlands, nature reserves and protected areas, and transportation, electricity, and energy efficiency. In addition, public-private “EcoPartnerships” contribute to TYF goals. There are currently 15 EcoPartnerships between U.S. and Chinese organizations, with several new partnerships in the planning stages. The expansion of EcoPartnerships will encourage U.S. and Chinese stakeholders to build capacity and commitment to sustainable economic development at the local level.
U.S. agencies involved in the TYF include the Departments of State, Energy, Commerce, Interior, Transportation, and Agriculture, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Trade and Development Agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Participating agencies for China include the National Development and Reform Commission, the State Forestry Administration, the National Energy Administration, and the Ministries of Finance, Environmental Protection, Science and Technology, and Foreign Affairs.
PAKISTAN PARLIMENT APPROVES GUIDELINES FOR REVISED TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT WITH US/NATO/ISAF
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Pakistan Parliamentary Review
Press Statement Victoria Nuland
Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 12, 2012
We have seen that the Pakistani parliament has approved its “Guidelines for Revised Terms of Engagement with USA/NATO/ISAF and General Foreign Policy.” We respect the seriousness with which parliament’s review of U.S.-Pakistan relations has been conducted.
We seek a relationship with Pakistan that is enduring, strategic, and more clearly defined. We look forward to discussing these policy recommendations with the Government of Pakistan and continuing to engage with it on our shared interests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)